The Press. — London, England, 1856-09-13 00:00:00

866 made by the late Mr. FREI/ERIC LUCAS before the " Irish Corruption Committee," and the scandals of the Coalition," if less fatal, were far dirtier than the blunders of the War office. Isolated as his Grace is now from all parties, the Duke of NEWCASTLE tkaals to tut the striking prophecy of Mr. Dtstikitu, that all the noblemen and gentlemed who commit ted themselves to the Aberdeen Coalition would lose chavitetcir. What do hie fortnef flatterers say and think of the Duke of NEW CASTLE NOW But let us try and derive some advantage from reflecting on the fate of the Duke of NEWCASTLE. His Grace's unfortunate career teaches the great lesson, that politicians should not desert their natural connections. By his an tecedents, and his acknowledged predilections, the Duke of NEWCASTLE belonged to the Con servatives, and in an unlucky hour for himself his Grace grasped at the honours of leader ship in another party. He placed himself be tween two fires, without having the stamina of character that could have stood in such a position. He might have passed through po litical life with a creditable name, if his ambi tion had not been so ridiculous. He was neither an orator, nor a successful chief of party, and the way in which he reeled before Lord ;lons RUSSELL deprives him of sympathy from those who like to see an Englishman ex hibiting vigorous self-assertion on proper occasions. In those parts of his address at Sheffield where his Grtice discussed politics he ap peared to think that ha made a successful point in disparaging the claims of " party." He forgets that his remark can he retorted on himself and his friends. They were only too successful in disorganising the natural work ing of Parliament, and their labour ended in discredit for themselves and the public ser viee. They were justly punished for their temerity, and their fate ought to be a warning to others. Recollecting, also, that the leader of the House of Commons, during Lord DEasv's Administration, had directed special attention to " social reform," it is rather cool in his Grace to speak about that great subject, as if it were mooted now for the first time in 1856. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND AND THE CONSERVATIVES. IN the observations we have previously made upon this subject we have endeavoured to . confine ourselves as strictly as possible within the limits prescribed to us by the title of our article. The Church of England, and that alone, has been uppermost in our thoughts—and if we have led any one to sup pose that we have any other design beyond that of stimulating the Anglican clergy to a consideration of the present state of politics, we hasten to assure him of his mistake. There are persons who seem to think it im possible to raise a discussion on the Church without Maynooth being at the bottom of it. But Maynooth is but an exceptional and tem porary difficulty, about which the Church of England as a body has no very decided opinion. Nor has it legitimately anything whatever to do with our estimate of the rela tions which exist between the clergy and laity of this country. The question there at issue by no means runs parallel with the contest between High and Low Churchmen in Eng land, which is the only one we have had occa sion to consider in the course of our preceding articles; for many of the High Church party, of by no means the most moderate school, are as warmly opposed to that institution as Mr. SPOONER himself could be—witness such men as Bishop Btommtn and Mr. SEWELL. And, indetd, it is almost a necessary deduction from the High Church theory that wherever the Church of England is established by law Roman Catholics should be treated as heretics. We merely mention the existence of this senti ment to show that if any one imagines we avoid committing, ourselves to the agitation against Maynooth out of deference to the High Church party. or that we treat the High Church party with respect for the sake of dis- THE PRESS. arming hostility to Maynooth, he is most egregiously and inexcusably mistaken. We have all along been mindful only of the ancient alliance betty an the Church of Eng land and the Tory or Conservative party, which is one of the leading facts of modOth English history, which his been greatly bete• ficial to both, and arhlli we ardently long td see restored. And we have sought to combin4 parties In the Chatth in favour of a Conserva tive policy, nut by Ignoring doctrinal difter onces, but by endeavetring to show that these are not incompatible With political union. We do not seek to underrate the importance of theological controversies. We have no sym pathy with those who affect to be above such luestions. We think meanly of that man who dislikes his neighbour to possess strong con victions, simply because his own are weak ; and because the earnestness of the former is a standing reproof to his own indifference, and a standing admonition to conquer his own aversion to inquiry. But there is a species of tolerance widely different from this careless and thoughtless vacuity, and grounded on the general fallibility of the human intellect, which leads a rational man always to bear in mind the possibility of his being in the wrong. This moderation of mind, which logicians call the formido oppositi, may coexist with as high a degree of moral certainty as is necessary for ease of conscience, without impelling us to a crusade of extermination against all who hold opposite opinions—not because we doubt our own convictions, but because the limited range of the human faculties forbids us to assert dogmatically that no one else must doubt them. The difference between those who represent the more exclusively authoritative element, and those who represent the more exclusively Protestant element in the Church of England, is precisely one to be regarded in this spirit; more especially as it does not involve any saving points of faith. Both parties have found the Church large enough to hold them for three hundred years. Neither have as yet thought it necessary to call for the excommu nication of their rivals. The worst they have thought of one another has been that too great prominence was given to particular doc trines, or that the operation of certain Church or dinances was erroneously explained, but neither have ever supposed that anything taught by their opponents was actually dangerous to salvation. But the difference between Con servatism and Liberalism does involve the very existence of our ecclesiastical institu tions. Why then should the clergy refuse to unite upon an essential point because they differ upon a non-essential one? First secure your institutions, we would say to them, and then return to the discussion of doctrines. But do not act like the Greeks who occupied their whole time in ecclesiastical disputes whilst the Turks were storming their battle ments. Further, we should remember that these religious differences, be they great or small, ought not to affect the relations of the Church with the Conservative party ; for in the ranks of the latter Churchmen of all opinions may be found. The triumph of Conservatism would not represent the triumph of any parti cular set of Church doctrines, but the inte grity of the whole Church. If anything were to be lost by either party through the success of Lord DERBY'S policy, the case would be dif ferent, but by the ascendancy of that policy they have all to gain and nothing to lose. Spiritually thelChurch would not be worse off than she is at present, while her temporal po sition would be carefully guarded and strength ened. We are not calling upon any party in the Church to sacrifice anything for the sake of supporting political Conservatism. We do not require a compromise. We simply wish for the present to let well alone. We have already pointed out that each party in the Church cannot expect to have a Cabinet of its own construction. The security of the Church of England must rest on the same foundation as the security of our political fabric, in the com prehension, that is, of widely different classes of opinion. It is to the want of a just percep tion of the advantages to be derived from this system, and to the false opinion that auy corn- SATURDAY, bination among those who differ on a single point is a dereliction of principle, that France owes so many of her late troubles, and America her pteeilili 011011. If, indeed, any new question had arisen In the Church, there might be more reason for chhvertifig theological views into a political test. But now that the agita tion of the last trialty /airs has begun to subside, and the Chitteh *Comparatively quiet upon points of doctrine, It is no unfavorable time lid call upon het , ss a body to direct her attentldti more exclusively to the aspect of political affairs—to consider whether her duty does not just now invite her rather to aid in the conservation of our institutions, than to the agitation of spiritual differences, and whether her wisest course for the next few years does not lie ;more in a practical than in a specula tive direction. IRISH CENSUS REPORT, THE Return from the Irish Census Commis sioners is a showy document, exhibiting a great range of results, which arc more appa rent than real. It strikes us, on the whole, as being overdone, when we remember that the enumerators were the constabulary and the coast guard, who are reported as having been entirely successful, " without having re " course to the compulsory powers given " them by the statute." That statement at once suggests how extraordinary have been the changes in Irish society. In former periods (circa 1835, and later) there were three sets of persons visiting every house, and private per sons were tormented with the inquisitorial character of the census-takers, owing to the jealousy between the Protestant and Roman Catholic populations, and the anxiety of par tisanship to swell their numbers. " Commis sioners." now-a-days. are familiarised to the Irish, and in some quarters we suspect that political indifference has taken the place of previous jealousy and distrust. The fact that the Irish constabulary has been applied to the purposes of this investigation is an inte resting one, and adds further proof of the utility of that fine civil force. In some parts of the Report we think that the reference to particular causes may be dis puted, as indeed must often be the case in documents of this kind. For example, it is stated that " In 1841 there were 64 . 7 per cent. "of the entire area occupied by arable land, " and in 1851 there was 71.1 per cent., showing " an increase of the arable land of 6.4 per cent." The Commissioners then say—" This speaks " favorably for the industry of the people, not "swithstauding the great diminution of the po " pulation between the two periods." That inference is loose and unscientific. Without any reference to " the industry of the people," we should have been quite prepared, d priors, for such a result. Because one of the strong est effects of the famine and exodus was to injure, and in some respects to destroy, large classes of small shopkeepers in country towns and rural districts. Shops were de serted, and farms taken; and just as commer cial business declined in country towns, in the same proportion did agriculture increase. The bargains bought in the Encumbered Es tate Courts, and the reduced rents, also con tributed to this result, and by natural causes forced " the industry of the people " into that particular direction. Many other assertions in the Re port would challenge criticism. " In the whole of Ireland," says the Report, " there has been a decrease of the rural popu " lation to the extent of fifty-three persons to " the square mile of the entire area, and of . " one hundred and four to the square mile of arable land." There must, we suspect, be some error in the data for that calculation, more especially as the Commissioners record the difficulty in ascertaining what is, or not, cultivated land in Ireland, " where there are " large tracts of mountains uninclosed, used " for grazing cattle, which to the ordinary ob " server appears as unreclaimed." An error, or series of errors, resulting from " the " ordinary observers" of the constabulary, would derange the conclusions of a Quetelet. Accuracy is the virtue of' statistics, and observing that " the industry of the people"