The Press.
London, England, 1854-01-28 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

E

84

'\

THE PEELITES.---No.III.
TO THE EDITOR OF "THE PRESS."

SIR,—It was a considerable feat to graduate in the school of Peel
without a licet migrari from the school of Aquinas; in other words, to
superadd the teachings of the Leaguers to the traditions of the
Fathers ; but it is more important if such an attitude was not merely
transitory, but is the normal phase of a political history.

Mr. MACAULAY insists on the unremitting combat of Oromasdes
and Arimanes, the genii respectively of permanence and of change. It
is an ingenious compact to stand by Ormuzd in respect of meal, and
by Ahriman in respect of malt—to battle for the one on Sundays and
Saints'-days, and for the other on week-days—to flatter the ruck of the
middle classes in a temporal, while you damn them in a spiritual,
sense. It is so exceptional a case that I have had to look wide for a
parallel, though I have one at last. When BOSWELL was testing the
great Moralist's credulity, he put the case of an apparition which
assumed indifferently the shape of a teapot or a leg of mutton.
" Sir," said Doctor JOHNSON, " the story wants congruity." To my
mind the case of the Peelites equally wants congruity ; and if it were
not true it would be equally incredible.

In the ethical vacuum which is described as Constitutional
History such combinations do not appear to have been favoured.
The " antiquated imbecility" of BURKE referred the permanence of our
polity to the combined Conservative influences of Aristocracy and
Religion. To the Peelites belongs the discovery that one of these is
sufficient. They were all qualified to be curates, and so appreciate the
influence of the Church. They were not all, nor even the most of them,
aristocrats, and so depreciate the influence of aristocracy. They even
combine a zeal for the former with hostility to the latter, develop into
Radicals as they have dwindled into Revivalists, and become slipshod in
politics, because in religion they are too straitlaced for the sympathies
of constituencies. I perceive that you reproach them with forming
part of a Coalition—forming part of that which they individually
reproduce—and here I conceive you are unjust. In respect of dis-
cordant principles and opinions every Peelite is at liberty to coalesce,
for every Peelite is himself a Coalition.
The obligation he is under to deceive impartially all who trust in

him is an incident of his position ; but it is not the less a part of his
nature ; and it is no more culpable than a squint or a palsy. He is
himself aware of this liability, and does not disguise it. When I com-
plained to my friend Fusbos, that complacent Peelite, of the presence
of Sir WILLIAM MOLESWORTH in a " Conservative" Cabinet, he reminded
me of the grocer to whom a customer complainingly showed a beetle
in a pot of his honey. " Certainly it does appear to contain a foreign
element," said the grocer, affably ; and Fusbos, with a shrug, made me

much the same answer, on which account I dubbed him "un epicier a
son insu." The rest of my Peelite friends I find just as indifferent to
the double dealing which is a necessary incident of their composite

I might refer for proof of this indifference to the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER, but his case is so illustrative that I may consider it
separately. There is my friend Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT, who, as every-
body knows, is the incarnate Nemesis of political inconsistency. Who
will forget the tones in which he lisped his indignant scorn at the
predicament of the late Ministry ? Yet Mr. HERBERT, now one of the
promoters of a Democratic Reform Bill, made this avowal, according
to Hansard, in 1846 :—" I am not one of those who wish to see the
constitution of this counttoy :rendered more democwatic than it is.
I cannot think the public mind wishes it to be more democwatic than
it is. I think late events have teather shown that the mantles of
despotic kings who disgtcaced the world have fallen upon democwatic
tcather than upon tempetcate or mixed governments. * * * I have no
wish to see the awistocwatic element weakened in our constitution." The
utterer of this sentiment is now prepared for a " larger measure" than
would please his colleague Lord PALMERSTON, a measure which is in-
tended to weaken the aristocracy ; but, unconscious of his droll posi-
tion, he complacently enjoys, as he comes up from Wilton, the
reported approval which is promised him by the sly Republicans of
Manchester.
When a Peelite is competent to discern his true position, he can
open his eyes wide enough if you give him a shake or two. After
Mr. OSWALD was turned out of Ayrshire, in proposing Mr. CARDWELL
at the election of 1852, he made this frank avowal :—" I have stood as
long as I could in the unenviable position of a Peelite, and it is like
sitting between two stools. I will tell you what I think is indispensably
necessary for this country. It is, that the Liberal Conservatives should
drop their name of Conservative at once, and frankly, as I do now."
His companions have not yet imitated this frankness. Facsimiles
in pet to of the Coalition of which they are part, they retain the larger
half of their principles in a state of suspension. But examine them
closely—give them a shake—apply any political test, and the political
precipitate is—DENOCRACY.—I remain, sir, your humble servitor,

JOHN OF THE FUNNELS.

,uw-
i