The Press.
London, England, 1858-06-19 00:00:00

THE PRESS, JUNE I'9, 1858.

In 1851 .. 14 containing 1,411 Signatures.
1852 .. 20" 1,041
It
1853 .. 112 " 12,660
lt
1854 .. 697 " 82.9611
1855 .. 1,599 " 149,512 41
1856 .. 144 " 12,075
1857 .. 10 " 1,379
This very week a poll has been taken on a
proposed Church-rate in St. Clement Danes'
parish, one of the great parishes of Westminster,
and the numbers were :
For the Rate
Against it
In this state of things it cannot he said that
the alleged expediency, so far as it is grounded
on the unpopularity of Church-rates, is at all
made out.
The argument of the stout and stubborn Dis-
senter—that Church-rates are unjust and un-
scriptural—has at least sufficiency about it. That
is, if it were true—if it could be proved—it would
be fatal to Church-rates. But the plea of expe-
diency—the plea that the Church would do
better without Church-rates than she can with
them—is hollow and fictitious. It is a sham ;
and our indignation is naturally aroused when we
find more stress laid, in such journals as the
Times, upon this pretended argument, than upon
the more weighty objections of the political
Dissenters.

TIIE NEW COLONIAL SECRETARY.
" llotitim virtue facile tlixeris—magnum libenter."

THERE are certain public characters who, even
though personally unknown to us, so engage
our regard and confidence in one capacity, that
we cannot help wishing and hoping the best for
their success in another, though totally dis-
similar. Our favourite living authors are not
always such men. We know too little of them,
or too much. Sometimes the individuality of
the writer is wholly lost in his book. Some-
times, again, there are unmistakeable traces of
levity, for instance, or of laxity of principle,
which scarcely interfere with our admiration of
the work—perhaps even heighten our amuse-
ment, yet limit our trust in the author. All the
reading world were on the happiest terms with
SYDNEY SMITH, but very few would have liked
to see him a Bishop. The least prudish of the
fashionable ladies who used to sigh over " Yes
and No" and " Matilda " would hardly have
recommended Lord NORMANDY to represent
English morals abroad. Twenty years ago Sir
E. B. Lyrros, though popular as a novelist,
would not have been generally welcomed as a
Minister. His abilities were unquestioned ; but
there would have been doubts as to his discretion.
A quick eye for abuses, a contempt for hollow
conventionalism, a generous sympathy with the op-
pressed, would have been held but insufficient war-
rants for his possessing the clear discrimination, the
practical sagacity, above all, the hearty nationality,
requisite for the ideal of a British statesman.
But, happily, his countrymen have now learned
to know and to trust him better. Like one of
those generous wines that mellow with age, and
lose only their harshness while they retain their
flavour and their cordial warmth, he has gained
in geniality without losing in raciness. The
author of " The Caxtons " has the sympathies
of Englishmen as well as their admiration ; is
not a favourite only, but a friend. And, wide
as is the difference between the qualities requisite
for success in authorship or oratory, and those
demanded by the high administrative functions
on which Sir E. B. Lvrrox is now entering, we
believe that his appointment is regarded by a
great majority of the public with hope and
pleasure, rather than uneasiness or distrust. These
favourable impressions have, we doubt not, been
deepened by the perusal of the new Colonial
Secretary's speech at Hertford. Finished in ex-
pression, moderate in tone, kindly and genial in
feeling, equally remote from mock modesty and
from empty self-exaltation, it not only delighted
the mingled audience to whom it was addressed,
but has been admired and approved by thou-
sands, even of those who politics might have
been expected to prejudice them against the new
member of a Conservative Cabinet. Ilis
allusions to the hereditary connection of
his family with the electors of Herts—so
appropriate to the place and time—his simple
narrative of office renounced and accepted, of

579

ambition and love of repose successively subor-
dinated to duty—his acknowledgment of the
courtesy of highminded opponents, and his recog-
nition of the past services of statesmen who have
unfortunately worn out their popularity, had a
value beyond that of mere eloquence, and
breathed the true spirit of a high-bred English
gentleman. He touched on the French and
Neapolitan difficulties--on reforms past and to
come—in fact, on all the leading political ques-
tions of the day, without exultation, where
exultation might have been excusable—without
bitterness, where it was difficult not to feel
bitterly. Finally, his tribute to the merits of
Mr. DISRAELI contrasted most nobly with the
language of many politicians of the day—
Liberals (!) of the exclusive Whig cast—who
regard a self-raised man of genius with the sort
of aversion felt by a New York abolitionist for a
" nigger."
Such was the speech which a weekly con-
temporary has assailed, not with criticism (for
he is happily tender of the high character of his
journal for literary discrimination), but with
that ingenious and studied sarcasm which he re-
gards as the great engine of political reforma-
tion, aided by a liberal allowance of mere
abuse ! The very heading of the article,
"The New Phase," is to suggest the fair and
rational conclusion that, if Mr. DISRAELI speaks
severely of opposition tactics on one occasion, and
Sir E. B. Lvrrox courteously and forbearingly
of a distinguished neighbour on another totally
different, not only are both speakers worthy of
the harshest reprobation, but the head of the
Government—alius et idem—is undergoing a
political transformation by proxy. Starting thus,
the writer speaks of the address of Sir E. B.
Lyrrox as "an imposition," " preternaturally
dull," " deliberately absurd," " a whole vat of
dulness," &c., &c. No taunt is spared, from the
ridiculous imputation of plotting to be stupid, to
the impertinent charge of "shabby gentility,"
and the outrageously (let us hope " preternatu-
rally") vulgar allusion to our illustrious author's
obligations to his publisher !
Nempe hoc assidue Will not the Saturday
Review once speak civilly and charitably of some
public man, even though guilty of " Derbyism,"
just by way of a change ? Surely the editor
might have shown, unblamed, some sympathy
with the of a man of letters, albeit a
Minister of the Crown. We press this question
the more earnestly, because the article against
which we have now entered our protest concludes
with an apparent reference to a similar previous
protest which we ventured to record against
the unsparing bitterness of our contemporary's
political comments. At the close of " The New
Phase " the writer remarks—" Some of our con-
" temporaries complain that the Saturday Review
" has not ranged itself under the banners of
" some one or other of the rival politicians who
" are struggling for power and place." He then
proceeds to insist. in very happy phrase, on the
right of private judgment, and to claim for him-
self the office of a judge, and not a partizan.
Now, we beg leave for ourselves to observe that
our complaint was not of the kind referred to
in the above extract. We complained not of
impartiality, but of indiscriminate virulence.
True. we said that it was expected of a journalist
that he should have some faith and some charity ;
that he should recognise in public life men—ay,
and bodies of men—who deserve his confidence
in general, and his lenient construction when
their course appears questionable. But these
words do not imply that journals " should sur-
" render themselves with implicit confidence "
to politician A or B ; nor (which is more to our
present purpose) do they at all express the
"gist" of our remarks on the political "slash-
ing " of the Saturday Review. Had our object
been controversy, instead of friendly suggestion,
we might, no doubt, have dwelt on the close
connection of political preferences with poli-
tical principles. and on the probability of a
journalist finding in the British House of
Commons some man or men with whom he is
generally at one on public questions. This how-
ever was not, and is not, our point. We can well
understand that the present state of parties may
afford an opening for the new experiment of a
journal standing equally aloof from all sections of
public men ; nay more, that such a journal may
render to the public high, if not the highest
service, by maintaining its strictly judicial