The Press.
London, England, 1858-03-13 00:00:00

THE PRESS, MARCH 13, 1818.

proves what kind of a Reform Bill would have
been introduced by him if he had ever brought
forward one at all. It is not likely that the
inhabitants of that little borough, returning
two representatives, would have viewed his
career with much satisfaction if it was to lead—
as if he had introduced a Radical Reform Bill
it must have led—to the disfranchisement of

themselves. Indeed, we perfectly well re-
member the late Mr. CROKER, at the time of
the last general election, expressing his great
amusement at the use made by the candidates
addressing Liberal constituencies of Lord
PALMERSTON'S name. He said that for his
part he was glad to see him in power, because
he know him to be as sound and thorough an
old Tory as he was himself; bus he was quite
at a loss to understand what the advocates of
reform and progress could mean by proclaim-
ing themselves as his followers, seeing that he
was the last man in the world to give effect to
their views. It was not very likely, we thought
at the time, that so shrewd an observer should
have been mistaken in a man he had known
all his life ; and we imagine that the represen-
tatives of the constituencies referred to are by
this time thoroughly convinced of their mistake.
But of all the exhibitions of this eminent
performer in the art of political sleight of
hand, we do not know of any more conspicuous
than the position he has been pleased to
assume in regard to the India Bill. We are
sure that none of our readers will be imposed
on for an instant by the pretension his Lord-
ship has set up, as the inaugurator of the
policy of transferring India to the Crown ; for
they must all remember that the first check
that was given to the Company was given by
the Conservative leaders in 1853, ably and
honourably supported as they were by most
of the independent Liberals under the leading
of Mr. BRIGHT. From that day to this, though
there has been little done in Parliament—for
the apathy of that assembly on the subject
was a fatal obstacle in the way—the labours
of the Conservatives and their organs have
been unceasing, and to these may be mainly
attributed the present advanced state on this
subject of the public mind. When, for in-
stance, during the past four years, has this
Journal ever ceased, whether in season or out
of season, to proclaim the errors of the Minis-
terial and Directorial policy towards India—to
show the folly and cnme of annexation, the
abominations of the torture system, the evils
of the judicial and police system, and the
ruinous and fatal nature of the system pur-
sued in regard to land ? Who, on all these sub-
jects, have expressed themselves more loudly
and more clearly than we have done ? And
who more openly declared that the abolition
of the Company was essential to reform ? If
the public have now arrived at just notions on
these points, there are none who can claim to
have had a larger share in forming its opinion
than ourselves. Nor has another quarterly
pelio Heal been idle which, though uncon-
nected with party, yet supports Conservative
views, and from the pages of which the late
Ministers appear not only to have borrowed
their scheme (a scheme not improved,
though, in the transfer), but also
most of the arguments on which it
was based. But while the Conservative
press was thus labouring on behalf of
Indian Reform, what was the line that the Pal-
merstonian organs invariably took ? Why,
they supported every abuse ; they resisted to
the uttermost every change of system ; and till
they found that they must sacrifice either the
Company or their places, the government of
India by the Directors was declared to be the
wisest, the purest, the most siugie-minded and
the most beneficent that the world had ever
seen. Then to be sure the Premier and his
followers at once turned round, and nothing
could equal the ridicule and abuse heaped by
them on the Company's head.
Timeo Danaos Bona ferentes is an old saying,
and it is not surprising that the Conservatives
as a body mistrusted reforms from such un-
scrupulous hands. Lord PaLat EASTON'S change
of mind could not have been adopted from
conviction ; and India is too important to be
made a shuttlecock to serve party ends.
Nothing could be clearer than that the change of
plan on the Premier's part was a mere party
move ; the object being, by adopting the policy
of hits rivals, to gain a vast amount of power

and patronage for himself. At the same time
it was felt very questionable whether addi-
tional power could be safely intrusted to an
Indian Minister admittedly so incompetent as
Mr. VERNON SMITH. When, therefore, the
highest living authority on Indian matters, the
Earl of ELLENBOROUGH, declared in his place
in Parliament that on special grounds relating
to the disturbed state of India the time for the
change was inopportune, it is not very surpris-
ing that the majority of the Conservative body
should have felt inclined to defer to his view.
cial difficulties in the way of immediate
change which were entitled to some weight.
It was known that no one had less sympathy
with the Directorial system than Lord ELLEN-
BOROUGH, while at the same time no one knew
more completely the [precise limits of their
powers, and the vast nature of those that
might be wielded by an efficient President of
the Board of Control. No one, moreover, had
formed juster notions of the nature of the
revolt from the outset, or predicted more,
clearly the course that it would run. No ones
in fine, was more perfectly master of the whole
question in all its bearings and details.
It cannot, therefore, be imputed either as
an error or as a crime to the Conservatives,
that they should under the circumstances have
bowed with few exceptions to an authority
the very highest that exists upon Indian affairs.
To construe their opposition to the late Premier
upon this point, under circumstances so grave,
into inconsistency on their parts, is a mere
perversion of language ; as it is to attribute
to them the adoption of Lord PALMERSTON'S
Indian policy, when it is clear that the policy
of placing India under the Crown was in fact
taken by Lord PALMERSTON from their organs
and themselves. This policy he had opposed as
long as he was able ; he only adopted it when
he saw that it must triumph to the utter dis-
comfiture of himself. It is not surprising,
therefore, that the real authors of it should
have objected to see what they intended for
the salvation of our empire perverted, as it was
clear it was about to be, into the means of fur-
nishing an additional fund of corruption to "Sir
GEORGE HATTER( and of power to a Minister
so incapable of using it as the Palmerstonian
President of the India Board, Mr. VERNON
Smrra. If any justification of the course that
Conservatives took wore requisite, it would be
found in the disclosures of the Butt Com-
mittee and in the scramble that took place for
1 all the scraps of Ministerial patronage
left undisposed of till the last moment of Lord
PALMERSTON'S clearing out. By their vote on
the India Bill they but asserted the principle
which the House of Commons has since so
effectually affirmed, that the Palmerston Admi-
nistration hal ceased to command the confi-
ience of the country, and that it was impos-
sible. therefore, to intrust larger powers,
whether in India or in England, to its hands.

DUTY OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS
AmososT the beneficial consequences of the
anti• Palmerston course followed by the House
of Commons, one of the most important re-
sults will be that of restoring that illustrious
assembly to its rightful place in the estima-
tion of the country and the world. A delusive
idea had got abroad that the House of Com-
mons had no will of its own, and that it had
lost its elasticity and freedom of action under
the deadening influences of successful elec-
tioneering. It was supposed that the House
of Commons would not turn upon Ministerial
authority, and that it would not trust itself to
encounter the arts of placemen grown grey in
office. The manner in which the House has
vindicated the national feelings, while hum
bling the arrogance of Lord PALMERSTON, has
given a noble example that the Commons of
England are not degenerate in spirit, and that
the menace of a Minister or the interest of a
party will not prevent it from its free expres-
sion of opinion or fully exercising its rights.
The House has acted boldly towards power;
it now remains for the Commons to act with
wisdom for the country. It has overthrown
the Palmerston Ministry by its own act, the
responsibility of which will not be shrunk
from by the Commons. The question, there-
fore, arises, how shall the House deport itself
towards the new Cabinet; and every patriotic
Englishman will anxiously hope that the
House will act with a grave and politic circurc-

244

spection before endorsing the vindictive pro-
posals of Oppositionists just hurled from office
by the will of the Commons itself. There are
many important considerations which, it may
be hoped, will not be forgotten at the present
time.
First amongst these is the point that the
House has full time for deliberation. At this
crisis there is not the least necessity for any
precipitate action on the part of the House
of Commons. It is not the end of a session,
nor is it an expiring Parliament, nor is there
any urgent domestic question that must be
immediately settled. The present time, the
relations of the House of Commons, and the
expectations of the country are utterly unlike
the eventful years of 1832 or 1846, or the crisis
of the Crimean war. In these columns we
pointed out to our readers, in the last autumn,
that with respect to domestic politics the even-
tualities resembled the memorable year 1834,
when Parliament witnessed the spectacle of
the Grey majority rapidly breaking up. We
told our readers that the alleged fact of " a
" great Palmerston majority" could not be
relied upon, and we well knew that" the jobbery
of Liberalism " was with rapid success intro-
ducing the dry rot into Palmerstonianism.
Like unsound timber, the late Ministerial sys-
tem has crumbled on the first Parliamentary

pressure.
It is most unlikely, and it certainly would
be most unwise, that the House of Commons
should threaten the Cabinet with hostility when
it has come into offiee upon the mature opinion
of the Crown, called for by the voluntary act
of the House of Commons itself. Lord DERBY
distinctly stated in his magnificent speech that
on the Saturday when her Majesty had sent to
his Lordship—" I entreated her Majesty to
" take till the following day to consider
" whether she would think it expedient to call me
" to her councils . . . and I felt bound to add
" that if ups full consideration any other person
" would be better qualified " for the task,
" that her Majesty should not for a single
" moment consider my position, interest, or
" feelings, but take the course which upon re-
" Action she might deem most advantageous
"to the country." The House of Com-
mons knows by experience that the august
personage who now wields the sceptre of
British sovereignty is completely and mi
nutely accomplished in the principles and
routine of Parliamentary Government. For
twenty years Queen VICTORIA has ruled amidst
the acclaim of a free people, devoted to her
Crown, and loyal to her person. Her Majes-
ty's sound sense has been invigorated by ex-
perience, and in many an important crisis the
Queen has acted with consummate prudence.
The resolution of the Queen at such a period
as the present is, therefore, not without deep
significance, when it is remembered that the
late Cabinet fell and Lord DERBY'S Ministry
oame into office on a question of foreign
policy, where the national honour was deeply
concerned.
The House of Commons knows well that in
relation to foreign affairs there is much sense
in the political maxim " that the Crown is
" always in office." When a Ministerial crisis
has occurred on a question of foreign affairs,
and when that crisis has been brought about
by the House itself, it will look with interest
and profound attention to the conduct of the
Sovereign. To Lord DERBY'S request that her
Majesty would take time for full deliberation,
we know what was the reply. "On the fol-
" lowing morning I had the honour of recetv-
" ing a note from her Majesty informing me
" that further reflection had fully confirmed her
"in wishing me to accept office." Now we do
not desire to place any strained interpretation
on the acts of the Sovereign ; hut it deserves
to be observed that her Majesty did take the
time for "full reflection," that her Majesty
in writing communicated her gracious wishes
to Lord DERBY, and it appears from the tenor
of the statement from Lord DERRY that her
Majesty's first impressions were " fully con-
firmed ' after mature deliberation. These cir-
cumstances in relation to the just claim of
the Cabinet to a fair trial cannot be over-
looked by a prudent and patriotic House of
Commons.
Under such circumstances it is not likely
that the House of Commons will be so untrue
to its own dignity as to give an appearance of