The Press.
London, England, 1855-03-10 00:00:00

224

broadcloth. In accordance with this doctrine
Mr. RICARDO would at once remove every re
striction upon Russian commerce. He would
cease to blockade any one of her ports, and he
would allow at the same time the full impor-
tation into her dominions of British lead,
gunpowder, Lancaster guns, or any other en
glues of war, for he would, by a stroke of his
pen, abolish the right of search as a barbarous
remnant of the dark ages. He would carry
out, in short, the free-trade theory to its
utmost limits, regardless of all consequences,
but profoundly convinced at the same time
that it must be attended with unspeakable
advantages to the whole civilised world, and
more especially to that country which has the
wisdom to adopt it first.
NAPOLEON I. once observed, that although
an empire were made of adamant, the political
economists, if freely allowed to reduce their
theories to practice, would break it in pieces
with inconceivable rapidity. Of the justice
of this remark Mr. RICARDO'S pamphlet is a
striking proof. Yet we must admit that the
line of argument he has adopted is at least
intelligible and consistent, which is more than
we can say for the theory of Lord GRANVILLE
and his colleagues. On the one hand they
blockade the Baltic ports; on the other they
allow Russian produce to be freely imported
into this country in neutral bottoms. The
result is, that we pay about 50 per cent. more
for the flax, and hemp, and tallow which we
obtain by means of this indirect traffic than
we should pay if we received these articles
direct from Russia. It is estimated that the
additional cost of Russian produce to this
country during the past year has been upwards
of two millions sterling, which sum has been
divided between the traders of Russia and
Prussia, in addition to their ordinary profits.
No wonder, therefore, that Russia has not yet
wearied of the war. No wonder that Prussia
preserves a neutrality which many of our con-
temporaries denounce as fraudulent, but which
our anomalous policy gives her every motive
to maintain. That policy, notwithstanding
the explanations of Mr. CARDWELL and Lord
GRANVILLE, must appear wholly unintelligible
except to those who profit by it. In the course
of the late debate in the House of Peers, Lord
BERNERS complained that, in spite of the
measures taken for the destruction of the
commerce of Russia, as much of her produce
reached this country since hostilities began as
previously. This point was warmly contested
by Lord GRANVILLE, who referred to the latest
Board of Trade returns to show that there
had been a considerable falling off in the
amount of her imports. What, then, does
this Noble Lord want ? If he seeks to
cripple the Russian trade, why, in the
name of common sense, allow the indirect
traffic ? if he does not seek to cripple it,
why maintain the blockade of the Baltic and
Black Seas ? Escape from this dilemma is
impossible ; and it is with justice that Mr.
RICARDO complains of the irreconcileable con-
tradictions involved in the maritime policy of
the Coalition, and to which their successors
cling with such affectionate regard. To us it
has ever appeared that no graver error has
been committed in the conduct of this disas
trous war than by sparing the commerce of
Russia, which is entirely at our mercy, and
upon which her credit and her financial capa-
bility of prolonging the contest entirely

" CABINETS REVIEWED."
AT a time when the country is being favored
with dissolving views of various confederations
called by the name of Governments, and the
question whether a Government, properly so
called, is in existence must be solved, not from
any act of Ministers, but by watching the
daily announcement of some new and unex-
pected appointment, or desertion, or some
new attempt and failure, the attention of the
public is usefully recalled to the events of the
last few years by an able pamphlet under the
title of " Cabinets Reviewed," written by Mr
W. EDMONSTONE LENDRICR. The marvellous
impudence with which the Aberdeen Coa.
lition took advantage of their predecessors'
measures, both of home and foreign policy,
which most of the Coalitionists had previously
with factious bitterness endeavoured to defeat,