The Press.
London, England, 1857-06-20 00:00:00

LONDON, SATURDAY, JUNE 20, 1857.

THE malice of faction was rarely more dis-
tinctly seen than in the active propagation of
rumours that there were schisms in the Con-
servative party. Because Sir JOHN PAKINOTON
honourably avowed a change of views on the
admission of Jews into the Legislature, it was
assumed that dissensions existed amongst the
representatives of the Conservative commu•
nity. It is significant that these rumours
have been spread abroad in a week when a favou-
rite measure of the Government escaped defeat
in the House of Lords by the narrow majority
of 5, on a division of 101 to 96, and when on a
practical motion, of which long notice had
been given, Ministers were beaten on the
same night in the House of Commons by a
majority of 10, on a division of 172 to 102 !
We must remind the circulators of such idle
tales that Lord GEORGE BENTINCK was chosen
Leader of the Conservatives in the Lower House,
afterthe clearest declaration from that lamented
statesman of his views on the question ; and
the same thing can be affirmed in the case of
the Right Honourable Gentleman the Member
for Bucks. Like the " Catholic Question," the
subject of the Admission of the Jews into the
Legislature has at no time been made a test of
Party. Lord CASTLEREAGH and Mr. CANNING
led the Tories in the Lower House from 1806
to 1826, though both were for "Emancipation";
and these eminent statesmen acted in a
Cabinet of which the Premier, Lord LIVERPOOL,
and the Chancellor, Lord ELnoN, were actively
hostile to the claims of the Roman Catholics.
So little of a party character had the
Catholic question, that the Quarterly Review
remained silent upon it till 1830, and never
discussed its balance of arguments in any
" uni-lateral sense," to use the phrase of one
of the most noted of its political contributors.
In spite of their differences of opinion about
the Roman Catholics, the Tory party concluded
the war in triumph, and preserved the due
equilibrium in European States. Will any
one contend that differences on a Jewish are
more serious than those on a Romish ques-
tion ?

It is, besides, an entire mistake to suppose
that an absolute conformity on secondary or
sectional political questions was ever required
from the members of the great Conservative
party. That connection was founded after
the Reform Bill, and it stayed the move-
ment from going too far. It gave battle to the
Liberals on the question of the sacredness of
Church property, and it won. It assailed the
Whigs on their financial blunders, and
proved to the country that the Liberals were un-
fitted to conduct the business of the Exchequer.
The whole community pronounced against
them, and accepted the Income Tax in pre-
ference to Whig budgets. On Foreign Policy
the Conservative statesmen impeached the
conduct of Viscount PALMERSTON ; and the
country has adopted the opinions of the Con•

servatives, while the Premier, ever facile and
flexible, has been compelled to modify his
own. When menaced by Irish agitation,
which had, from the fostering patronage of the
Whigs, disturbed the empire, and insulted the
majesty of the Crown, the Conservatives put
the law of the land into execution and van-
quished O'CoNNELL. Andyet while gainingthese
great Parliamentary and constitutional battles,
and exhibiting an unbroken confederacy, there
were several secondary questions on which the
Conservative chiefs dissented from each other,
such as a Municipal Reform for England and
Ireland, the Universities and the Dissenters,
Railway Legislation, and other subjects which
we need not particularise. Such differences
of opinion must always be expected amongst
large political confederations composed of
freemen and gentlemen.
It is only in fundamental views and essen-
tial principles that absolute conformity can
be looked for amongst all the members of a
great party. The Conservatives do not object
to the fair action of public opinion, once that
it is clearly ascertained to be opinion, and not
the senseless echo of clamour. They desire
to be ruled by the ancient institutions of the
realm, because they preserve the State from
the rigidity of absolutism, or the extravagance
of democracy. It is calumny to assert that
Conservatism is opposed to social progress, or
the free development of true public spirit. On
all the great questions cited above the Con-
servatives refused to bend to ephemeral
clamour, and the voice of the country pro-
nounced finally in favour of their prin-
ciples. Who now hears any Radical
outcry about " Reform of the House of Lords,"
or removing the Bishops from the Upper
House ? So, also, on the " Ballot," the Con-
servatives have consistently resisted that un-
English mode of taking the suffrages of a free
people. The Whigs. in reality, coincide in
opinion with them, but only for the aid given
by the Conservatives our electoral proceed-
ings would long since have been "America-
nised," and the foundations of our mixed Con-
stitution would have been shaken.

There will, always, be some exceptional
question presenting difficulties which cannot
be solved by the first principles of Party.
The Jewish question has all that variety of
complicated interests and conflicting claims
on which it might previously be anticipated
that there would be differences of opinion
between members of the Conservative party.
To expect unanimity of view upon such a
subject would be impossible. There are many
" Liberals " in the country who do not coincide
with Lord JOHN RUSSELL upon it; and, exclu-
sively of all political sentiments, there is un-
doubtedly much variety of feeling on the ques-
tion, and even a great portion of apathy in the
community at large.