The Press. — London, England, 1856-01-12 00:00:00

Mr, course. That he was sincere in his purposes is now as generally acknowledged as that he was rash in his designs, and inconsiderate as to his means. He was the dupe of 'dema gogues, the plaything of mobs, and the sport o f a Celtic democracy, wild, vain, and unpfucti cal in its ambition, and volatile in Its superficial passions. To be the thief of such a population was a mission for which Mr. O'Brien was never adapted. He had not the charm of brilliant eloquence, nor had he any of the wit or humour indigenous to the Irish soil. Neither had he the practical talents re quired for organisation : his intellect was speculative, his knowledge was derived from books, not from observation, and his general views of life were those of an accomplished country gentleman, neither tamely con ventional nor daringly original, It was said of him once that, "Whatever were " Mr. O'Brien's follies in public, he was a " very good man upon paper." His parlia inentary speeches were not listened to with attention, but they Sometimes read well in the journals; and his letters in the newspapers, without the inflation of Irish rhetoric, were smooth and logical comoositions. These two volumes on " The Principles of Government" corroborate those traits of cha racter. There is nothing trivial, fanciful, or absurd in their contents. They exhibit sus tained calmness of mind and a reasonableness of view upon all questions. The Irish subject is not intruded in the text, and there are only one or two cursory allusions to it. Some of our readers will be surprised when we tell them that many of the opinions of these vo lumes may be safely accepted by the gentry of England. The work, it appears, was begun during the author's " exile' in Australia, and was com posed without reference to books. Hence all the questions are discussed from the point of view suggested by " the general principle." At a certain time, when a political public is dominated too much by routine, we do not object to politicians leaning strongly upon `principles." But there is an imposing and seductive use of the word " principles " against which we should guard. Scotch pro fe ssors have a knack at serving up comiiithiplaces dig guised in quasi philosophical language, and beggarly truisms are sent forth to flaunt in the flowing robes of the academy. It would, doubtless, be a rank heresy in morals to doubt that there are real principles hi politics. The biography of statesmen, like the history of nations. records that there are certain immu table rules which cannot be violated. But we apprehend that the fundamental principles of Government can be stated in a small space; and in a country like England, where freedom exists as a grand social fact, legalised by law and hallowed by national traditions, the solu tion of all the great questions will turn more upon practical than on abstract considerations. Sound general views of law or medicine will not alone make an efficient barrister or physi cian: there must be closeness and specialty of knowledge. The lawyers have a maxim which may also be applied to a mere speculative politician,—" Duhius versatur in generalibus." Unless there be decided originality of thought, works of mere " principles " in polities rarely contain aught that is practically useful. Blue Books have crushed the race of system mongers. In the first of these volumes Mr. Smith O'Brien treats of an immense variety of sub jects. He devotes his opening chapters to the origin of Government, and propounds his main views on it in the following way : We should never forget that theoretical ideas must be modified according to circumstances, in their application and that a form of government which is admirably adapted to the genius and requirements of one people, may be wholly unsuitable for another. Peculiarities of national character, traditional ideas, feelings, and habits, as well as local circumstances of various kinds, must be taken into account in moulding the political institutions of each country. A constitution which produces the happiest re• sults amongst a community of Americans would lead to nothing but confusion if c on f erre d u p on an A s i at ic popula tion accustomed to despotic rule. A charter—a paper constitution—however perfectly devised, never gave, nor ever car, give, liberty to a people who are indisposed to exercise self government. Time, country, race, are the media through which political abstractions have to pass ; and at au early stage of the social process, a THt PRtSB. Solon or Lyturgns, or a Washington and Jefferson, would find that mere general views give way to the realities of life—" ce grand mot des eirconstances," as Mine. de Stael was fond of saying. In ascertaining what is exactly practicable, in suiting his measures to the time and people, are the special functions of the elevated politician. The philosopher in his book or professor's chair can only indicate the ends—the statesman must strivo to procure the means which conduct to the object of Government. Mr. O'Brien is evidently not a practical man. His volumes are a mass of truisms. Yet we must admire the candour which pervades the work. The following remarks are excellent : In a well•constituted State every individual ought to be made to feel that he owes duties not only to his family and to himself, but also to society ; and the performance of such duties as he is qualified to undertake ought to be assigned to him. One of the noblest characteristics of the political institutions of Great Britain has been this allot ment of several of the functions of civil administration, — such as those of magistrate, grand juror, mayor, and town councillor, juryman, guardian of the poor, churchwarden, harbour commissioner, member of Parliament, privy coun cillor, &c.—to the unpaid service of independent citizens. Although it May be argued that these services would have been more effectually performed by paid officials dependent upon the central Government, yet, even if this point were conceded, the advantage would be dearly purchased by a sacrifice of that manly and self relying spirit which is gene rated by the exercise of social duties of a public nature, and which is the best guarantee for the preservation of a nation's liberty. Again, no Conservative can object to the following general remarks on aristocracy in England. Nothing can be more true or reasonable, but there is nothing novel in them:— In a country where an aristocracy has long existed, whose names have been associated with the great achieve ments of its history, it is iu vain to attempt to eradicate the disposition which will naturally exist to accord to them a degree of respect that is withheld from those who possess no such hereditary title to public homage. This feeling is not only natural to man, but, when disconnected from servility and adulation, is highly commendable. The hope that such homage will be secured throughout all ages has been one of the most powerful—and not the least honour able— incentives that have impelled great men to noble nndertaki,igs ; and if such sentiments be justifiable, in its application to the descendants of illustrious men, bow much more natural and legitimate is it when displayed towards distinguished characters whilst alive. The most confirmed democrat feels no jealously, when he sees such men as Lord Chatham, the Duke of Wellington, Lord Gough, Lord Denman, Lord liroughaui, Lord Lyndhurst, or Lord Campbell, in the Legislature of his country. That place is theirs by virtue not of popular favour or of royal caprice—it is theirs by right. In a discussion on the late Sir Thomas Talfourd's Copyright Act, we recollect the present Earl Stanht pe and the late Sir Robert Inglis expressing a regret that the peerage had not been opened to first-rate literary talent. Conferring the titles, however, would be useless unless estates or large pensions were given to " keep them up " ; and time is required to setiits seal on the greatness ofliterary talent, unlike the acts of generals or admirals, the value of whose exploits can at once be decided. - - - On universal suffrage Mr. O'Brien •writes not at all unlike a Conservative : What portion of the population ought to enjoy the privi lege of choosing representatives? It may be conceded as a general principle that it is de sirable that every man in the community should participate in all civil rights, capacities, and privileges enjoyed by his fellow-citizens; but if the circumstances of a population be such, that the establishment of universal suffrage would have the effect either of causing revolution, or of placing undue power in the hands of an individual, or of enabling an oligarchy to overrule the independent intelligence of the country, a statesman should pause before he yields to the suggestion of an abstract principle in favour of what appears to be a realisation of democratic power, but which may, in truth, become the means of introducing arbitrary government. There have been but few countries in which the labouring population have possessed sufficient know ledge of political science to enable them to form correct and independent opinions respecting public affairs. They have, therefore, naturally placed their confidence in those who have appeared to them best entitled to their favour; and thus the votes of thousands have often expressed only the opinions of a single individual. In such a state of society it is manifest that the reasoning intelligence of the country would be more fully represented if the franchise were limited to those who are qualified by education to form enlightened opinions respecting political questions, than if it were granted t) every, adult of the population. The usurpation by Louis Napoleon of autocratic power in France, and the ratification of that usurpation by the French people voting under universal suffrage, screened by the ballot, affin ds an illustration which shows that iu stitutions the most democratic in form are not always thoie Which are..most,inximed. a with the true spirit of. liberty. In this case we have seen yery large mrijotity of the electori 41 (above six millions otit of seven millions) voluntarily stir= rendering their national liberties to the will of a single man. It may be doubted whether such would have been the result of au appeal to the intelligent and independent middle classes of the French nation. History supplies many other examples which show that the lowest class of the population have often been prompted to abdicate their political rights, and have invested a favorite leader with arbitrary power. - - The work abounds in similar passages, just, and without passion, but wan ti ng nove lty o f thought and brilliancy of illustration. Yet the following reflection reads with originality of effect, when we recollect the antecedents of the writer. It is extremely applicable to the Whigs, with their spurious syhtein of real intimidation and pretended " democracy " : The use of mob-influence is the most dangerous mode of invading public freedom that a designing Minister can adopt, because it overthrows liberty in the name of liberty itself. Let us suppose, for instance, that a wicked king or Minister were desirous to extinguish the legislative freedom now enjoyed by the British nation. He would probably fail in his design if he were to resort to what the French call a coup d'etat, and attempt to suppress by force the meeting of Parliament. He would command a much greater chance of success if he were to propose ultra democratic measures which the Legislature would certainly reject, and thus bring to his support the intimidation of a mob. A Legislature divested of the support both of the executive and of the people is nothing more than a small assembly of individuals, in themselves *holly powerless. The British Parliament has frequently lost for a time the confidence of the public, but it has on such occasions been sustained by the physical power which is placed under the command of the executive. Were that support withdrawn, mob-intimidation mightwholly paralyse its pro ceedings. Calm deliberation is at an end, when it is inter rupted by the roars of a multitude. The proceedings of the different legislative assemblies which were convened in France, during the progress of the French Revolution of 1789, sufficiently testify the results which must ensue if mobs be allowed to interrupt the deliberations of a Legis lature. It is not easy to say what course of proceeding ought to be adopted by a legislative assembly when the executive refuses to aid in preserving order throughout its deliberations. Perhaps the most prudent course, and that which will best conduce to the preservation of public liberty, is to refuse altogether to proceed to business until perfect tranquillity shall be restored. The " spirit of a gentleman " is visible in the following remarks on promotion in the army, and the patriotism of a military aris tocracy is well observed upon : It is undoubtedly desirable that the arrangements of the army and navy shall be such as to attract, rather than to repel, young men who possess the advantages of rank and of wealth. It is a great safeguard to a country, not only against foreign enemies, but also against domestic usurpers, that its armies should be filled with persons whose circum stances and connections in life are such as naturally attach them to the maintenance of national freedom. It is far easier for an usurper to win the support of men who have nothing to rely upon but their military pay than it would be for even a Wellington to make the military aristocracy of the British army subservient to the designs of his per sonal ambition. A military career has been considered in all ages the most honourable sphere of exertion for young men of spirit, whose circumstances render them indepen dent of the drudgeries of life ; and it is surely better that the young aristocracy of a country should employ them. selves in inertial exercises or achievements, than that they should give themselves up to effeminate pleasures. In opening the highest gradations of the army and nary to merit and ability, in whatever rank these qualities may be found, it is apprehended by some that the tone of manners would be lowered by the introduction of vulgarity. It is our belief that grounds for such apprehension would not exist, if educational as well as professional attain ments were made a test upon which promotion should depend. It is found that barristers sprung from the lowest ranks of society take their place beside the most refined members of the aristocracy of Great Britain without in flicting upon the order to which they have been introduced by their abilities any disparagement through vulgarity o manners. f Mr. O'Brien's " exile " gave him an oppor tunity of witnessing the effects of transporta tion as a secondary punishment. He is in favour of its continuance; and the subject is of such importance that we shall give at length his whole view upon it: — Of late there has been, amongst political philosophers, a general disposition to decry thintiportation as a means of punishment. This disposition has been strengthened, if not created, by a keen perception of the evils which result to an adolescent community from the continued introduc• Lion of criminals of the worst class into its bosom. These evils are so obvious, that nothing but the most reckleiti selfishness could bare induced the Government of Great Britain to continue to pour into the Australian colonies a stream of pollution, long after those colonies had ceased to bear the characteristics of merely penal settlements. The loyalty of the colonies was so severely tested, that probably open resistance would have ensued if the cessa tion of transportation had not at length been proclaimed in time to soothe the increasing indignation of the people, and to undermine the organisation to which that indigna tion had gkeit rise. But the merits or the demerits of transportation, its system of secondary punishment, ought not to be tri upon such an issue as that which presented itself '