The Press.
London, England, 1857-03-21 00:00:00

THE LAST LIBERAL DUPE.

How conies it that at the very time when
Lord PALMERSTON appeals to the country for a
seven years' vote of confidence in his Admi-
nistration, facts of the most dainnatory kind
transpire, proving the falsehood and treachery
of that system of foreign policy which his
adherents pretend is to excuse all the blots
and blunders of his domestic Administration?
Can any one take up the papers of the day,
and fail to observe that his own acts are light-
ing against him?

We have alluded in another article to the
case of Naples. If it be not true that the
Premier was willing to enter into an engage-
ment with France to repress the free action
of the Neapolitan people, and to bombard
Naples should a Republican Government be
established—why are not the suppressed pa
pers made public? What reason can there be
ter their concealment, if Lords PALmEasToN
and CLARENDON are not afraid or ashamed to
disclose their proceedings ?
On another most important point of their
Italian policy not the slightest uncertainty
exists. It is well known how the English
Cabinet encouraged Sardinia to expect assist-
ance against Austrian ascendancy in Italy.
The inconsistency of such professions when
the English Cabinet was drawing closer its
relations with that of Austria was manifest ;
but that a British Government after the part
taken by Piedmont in the war against Itu,sia,
and atter the recorded declarations of Lord
CLARENDON in the Paris Protocols, could deli•
berately intend to sacrifice Sardinia to the
Austria❑ alliance, seemed too monstrous for
beiief. Now, what are the facts?

For some mouths past the relations betweer.
Austria and Sardinia have assumed a threat-
ening, if not directly hostile, attitude ; and
exactly as Lords PiamEasToN and CLARENDON
have drawn closer the ties of their Austrian
alliance has the opposition between the Cabi•
nets of Vienna and Turin become more
menacing.
Ic his speech in the House of Lords on
Monday, Lord GRANVILLE referred with com-
placency to the improved and stiengthened
relations of this country with Austria. IVe
give the Noble Lord's own words :

With regard to Austria, while I confess that we have no
right to claim any particular merit to ourselves fur the
friendly character of our relations with that Power, yet I
may refer to it as an agreeable consideration, that, at the
very time our relations with her have been strengthening
and improving, the Enopern. of Austria has been giving
encouragement to a more liberal system of government in
his Italian dominions.

The just commentary on that remarkable
statement is bupl.lied by a telegraphic
announcement in the Times of yesterday :

SARDINIA AND AUSTRIA.

VIENNA, Thursday, March 19, Noon.
Count Pear has received eiders to quit his post, if he
cannot obtain from the Turin Cabinet the satisfaction
demanded.

In other words, Austria will take the first step
to a declaration of war against Sardinia, unless
her arbitrary demands be complied with and
her supremacy be recognised, at the very
moment when, according to the express decla-
ration of the Ministerial Leader in the House
cf Lords, it is " an agreeable consideration"
that our relations with Austria are "strength-
" ening and improving."

THE PRESS.

egrrtSpOlatlltt.
THE CHINA QUESTION.
TO TEE EDITOR or '6 THE PRESS."

Sir,—There is one feature of the China
question which seems to have been overlooked
by speakers in both Houses. I mean the risk,
should we succeed in the military objects of
the war, of so weakening and disorganising
the Chinese empire as to produce in those
regions of the world a diplomatic complica-
tion similar to that from which we have just
escaped in the case of Turkey.
It is impossible to doubt that the war of
18-10 did much to shake the stability of the
Tartar dynasty. By it the military prestige
of the ruling race was destroyed in the eyes
of its subjects : the treasury was exhausted ;
to repair that exhaustion money had to be
extorted from the people; and offices which
had hitherto been reserved as the rewards of
merit (though of merit tested after a pedantic
fashion) were openly sold to the highest bidder.
Thus external weakness and administrative
corruption went together; the desire to rebel
became stronger at the same time that the
spectacle of weakness presented by the autho-
rities justified an expectation that rebellion
might prove successful. The result is a civil
contest, of which the issue yet remains doubt-
ful ; one thing only being certain in regard of
it—namely, that the conquering party will
require many years of repose to reconsolidate
its power,—a power, in any case, necessarily
obnoxious to a large minority of the people.
Is it the interest of England to throw still
farther into confusion a nation so circuit'.
stanced ? I assume that the idea of territo-
rial acquisitions in China is not seriously en-
tertained by any Englishman resident in
Europe, although with a part of the Indian
press that idea has found favour. What we
want is simply facility of trading ; and be it
observed, that when a trade has once been
set free, it tends, like water, to enlarge for
itself the channel in which it flows. Access
to, and courteous treatment from, the highest
native authorities, we are entitled to demand :
every demand beyond this is superfluous,
tending perhaps to gratify national pride, but
not to promote national interests. But other
Governments have relations with China
besides our own. I say nothing of the Ame
ricans, since their form of polity is ill suited
for the conquest and retention of distant de-
pendencies ; and with a practically unlimited
power of extending their dominion south-
wards, there seems no reason to anticipate
that they will attempt to imitate our proceed-
ings in India by founding an Asiatic empire
of their own. But the case of Russia is
different. Her territory borders on that of
China. Her desire and determination to
extend that territory in some quarter is noto •
rious. It is certain that she cannot extend it
in the direction of Europe. In Central Asia
there is no land worth conquering, except as I
stepping stone to more remote acquisitions.
China is precisely that part of th 3 world best
suited for the furtherance of her aggressive
designs. The Chinese empire is not yet in-
cluded in the diplomatic system of Europe. It
is remote from the great centres of political
power—London, Paris, Washington. It is
accessible from Russia, and from Russia only,
by land. The annexation of a million of square
miles in Tartary, if the moment be judiciously
chosen, will cause less sensation in England
than the accidental arrest of a British subject
by Italian or Austrian police. In fact, the free
navigation of the Amour was actually gained,
and with it the possession of a vast territory
on the northern bank of that river, without a
rumour of the transaction reaching Europe. I
do not hesitate to say that, looking at the
policy of Russia, at the geographical position
of China, and at the present situation of that
empire, the conquest by a Russian army of
the northern half of it is an event not beyond
the limits of possibility. Exclude the chances
of interference by France, England, America,
and the possibility would become a certainty.
"But," I may be told, "such interference would
certainly take place." Probably it would ; and

SATURDAY,

on that fact I base my argument. Where is the
wisdom of weakening a Power which you may,
within a generation, be called upon to
strengthen and protect? We are doing at this
moment with China what we did with Turkey
when we destroyed the Turkish fleet at
Navarino. The results of that " untoward
event" are now clearly seen. Sinope was one
of them. Must former experience always he
lost upon us ? Are we always to act from
passion, and never from policy?
Out of evil, by skilful use of opportunities,
good may be brought. This war will have
answered one useful end, if it leads us
seriously to consider the necessity of estab•
lisping an organised diplomatic system beyond
Europe, as well as within it. Let France,
England, the United States, and Russia, if she
will join—the foul Powers really interested in
Chinese affairs—agree on a policy by which all
shall pledge themselves to abide. Let the in-
tegrity of the Chinese territory be guaranteed,
as is that of Turkey. Let every case of alleged
wrong by the Chinese Government be decided
by the four Powers jointly, acting on that
Government, and not by the representative of
any one of them singly. And as regards the
existing civil war, let all four agree to observe
a strict neutrality, in fact as well as in name.
Thus, and thus only, may we arrest for the
future such disreputable transactions as that
which has given rise to the present quarrel.
To terminate that quarrel will be almost
useless, if we leave in existence the causes
which have brought it about.

ONE OF THE MAJORITY OF MARCH 3RD.
London, March 18, 1857.

A CONSERVATIVE PROGRAMME.
TO THE EDITOR OF " THE PRESS."

Sir,—l believe there is a general feeling among
Conservatives in favuur of a political programme
containing a definite and explicit statement of the
practical political opinions entertained by the Con-
servative pasty. I need not state that I have no
authority to set forth suc'i a programme, yet I feel
at the same time that it is a desideratum, and that
it would be of great advantage in the approaching
appeal to the country. But the drawing up of a
confession of political faith which would in any way
deserve the name of a party programme is attended
at present with peculiar difficulties.

In the first place, the opposite party profess the
most motley creed which has ever in the history of
England been held by any body of public men acting
in common—a fact at once verified and illustrated in
the person of its political chief, Lord Palmerston,
who, after having professed most political opinions,
now expresses convictions in direct opposition to the
historical creed of his own party. Now, an Opposi-
tion programme must state opinions contradistin-
guished from those held by the Ministerialists ; but
how is this to be done when it is impossible to state
what Ministerial opinions are ? In the second place,
it cannot be denied that this is a transition period,
when the old party opinions are undergoing a gradual
and unavoidable modification to adapt them to the
extensive changes which have been introduced, not
only in the Constitution, but in the general frame-
work of society ; and as this process is still going on,
the attempt to stereotype political opinion into party
forms is premature.
It is, therefore, with a full appreciation of the
perhaps insuperable difficulties in the way of a full
solution of the problem at the present moment, that
I venture to suggest the heads of a confession of
political faith, which may at least serve as a prepara-
tion for that more complete programme which time
may develop into a permanent bond of union for the
Conservative party.

I give no prominence in my programme to the
peculiar question whic'i led to the defeat of the
Ministry. Adopting with respect to it the simple
and noble language of the legitimate head of thcl
Liberal party in his address to the constituency of
London, I consider it of importance principally as
having, on the one hand, afforded an opportunity to
Lord Palmerston, by his unhesitating adoption of
Sir John Bowring's proceedings, to formally.avow
those principles of international policy which have
been so often alleged by the Conservatives as afford-
ing sufficient ground fur the withdrawal from him of
the national confidence ; and, on the other hand, by
affording the Conservatives an opportunity of enun-
ciating the new foreign policy which they seek to
inaugurate—a policy of conciliation and moderation
governed by a loyal adherence not simply to the
letter, but rather to the spirit of treaties, and seiured
by a real and frank maintenance of the principles of
non-intervention.

But the Chinese tragedy seems to me to demon-
strate the necessity of a new principle in our foreign
policy which I should hope the Conservative party

MARCH 21, 1857.

are prepared to adopt. I mean the principle of
diplomatic publicity, the subjection to parli tmentary
control, and criticisms of questions of foreign equally
with those of domestic policy. If our foreign policy
be truthful and noble, it must in the main gain by
free discussion ; and, although we may occasionally
be oyArreached by subtlety and cunning, this is as
nothing compared to the risk we at present incur of
being committed without our knowledge to the most
serious international obligations, including the tre-
mendous responsibility of actual war solely at the
caprice of a Minister, or of a second-rate politician
acting as our representative abroad.
So much for the foreign policy of the Conservative
party. With respect to its domestic policy, there are
some principles so inherent to its traditions that it is
hardly necessary to state them. A devoted attach-
ment to the Crown and to the Established Churches
has always been part of the creed of the country
party ; but, in order to obviate that vagueness with
which party polities is at present chargeable, it is
necessary to state how the latter of these principles
stands in relation to the prevailing ideas of the time.
What is the Conservative compromise betwixt the
rights of the Establishments and the educational
movement? This question may be answered with
precision by referring to Sir John Pakinron's bill,
which, while it preserves the tutelar attitude of the
Established Church towards the youth of the nation,
provides for the widest diffusion of secular know.
ledge. _ _ _

Sir John Pakington's scheme is recommended
to Conservatives by anotherlea.ling feature—namely,
that the machinery it proposes setting on foot con-
sists mainly of local action. This is a good illustra-
tion of a general principle of Conservatism, which,
differing from the prevailing policy since the Reform
Bill—which has always tried to concentrate all action
in Government boards—seeks to increase and dis-
seminate throughout the country those habits of
transacting local business which have always been
the characteristic of the Saxon race, and which indeed
is the main reason why we have preserved our
liberties, while other nations who have carried cen-
tralisation to perfection have lost theirs.
. .

So far all seems plain sailing ; but what ought to
be the attitude of tbe country relative to electoral
reform?

It is of course no part of the creed of Conserva-
tives to express approval of the system inaugurated
by the Reform Bill. They denounced it at the
time as fraught with evil consequences to the ulti-
mate welfare of the nation. They think their prog-
nostications have not been falsified, and looking to
the absurd anomalies of the system—the \Vest
Riding returning only two members, when twenty
burghs, with an aggregate population not one-fourth
so large, returns forty members—they are not aware
of any logical arguments which can be urged in
defence of its glaring injustice. It is averred, how-
ever, that it was a compromise and ought therefore
to he religiously observed ; and this is so far true. But
the compromise was like that which a footpad
would make it' with a pistol at the head of a belated
gentleman he contented himself with eighty of the
hundred pounds in his pocket—a transaction which
certainly raises no moral barrier against an attempt
to recover the eighty from Oa robber. But there is
another view of the subject not without its force to
Conservatives, and that is, the prescription of twenty-
five years which has since elapsed, and the danger
of organic change. And if others would leave the
matter at rest, these considerations might long deter
the Conservatives from taking the initiative. But a
new Reform Bill is now a fated event, and Conserva-
tives, however unwillingly, must address themselves
to its consideration.

What then are the alterations in the existing system
which the Conservative party should propose? The
letters I have had the honour to address to you on
" Electoral Inequalities" have shown the monstrosi
ties of the 1832 compromise. The Ministerialists
have abdicated the role of electoral reformers ;
they are, strictly speaking, Conservatives, avow-
edly declaring that they wish to maintain the
status quo of 1832. In this, as I have shown in my
letters on "Electoral Inequalities," they are wise in
their generation—they have nothing to gain and
much to lose by opening up that question. But just
for this reason it appears to me that Reform ought to
form the cardinal topic of the political creed of this
new party. We are all the fools of names ; but if it
be shmvn that the reform which is to be advocated is
one not only consistent with justice but eminently
qualified to fulfil the double function of satisfying
public aspirations and of strengthening the really
Conservative interests of the country, we would be
fools if we declined playing the cards which are thus
pla!ed in our hands. But the electoral anomalies I
have exposed may be defended on the ground that
they in some degree correct the necessary injustice
arising from the electoral power being vested by a uni•
form qualification in one and a very limited class of
the nation.

The predominance of the ten-pound householders
I hold to be the great defect of our Constitution, as