The Press.
London, England, 1858-03-27 00:00:00

THE PRESS, MARCH 27,1858.

they made certain representations to the
people in 1812 —lBis which have been since
proved to be wholly false. They told the
people that the aristocracy taxed the bread for
their own personal profit. They told them
that corn was selling at 28s. the quarter in
other countries ; and that if our ports were
opined, it must be greatly cheapened here.
They lifted up, everywhere, a large loaf and a
small one—the first, the Free-trade loaf, which
they desired to give the people ; the other,
the Bread-taxer's loaf. the loaf of the Protec-
tionists, which they generally represented as
of about half the size of the other. By these
representations, they raised a popular cry,
and carried Free Trade. But these fictions
now return upon themselves. The people
have not forgotten the orations of 1842-1815;
nor can they remember them without ob-
serving, at the same time, that nut one of
those promises has been realized.
The apologists of the League seem to imagine
that we can have no other object in exposing
the quackeries of 18-12-5, titan that of " pre-
" paring the way for a return to Protection."
Now, we have again and again disclaimed any
such view, and our arguments do not so
" prepare the way." When we admit, and in
fact assert, that the opening of the ports has
not lowered prices, and has not ruined the
farmers, is it not obvious that our statements
are far more likely to make men content as
they are, than to lead them to seek for a return
to Protection? And if we are then asked what
our object really is, we reply, " Simply to
do justice."
We have witnessed for several years past
the false and unreal view of the results of
Free Trade which almost everywhere prevails.
The fact is, that the gold-mines of California
and of Australia, discovered since the Corn-
law controversy, have so deranged all previous
calculations, as to favour the pretence that
even for the Australian gold we are indebted
to Free Trade.

Amidst all this, the perpetrators of all the
folly of 1840 have boasted fur twelve years past
of their absolute wisdom, and of their vast
superiority to " the blinded advocates of Pro-
tection." During all these years have we sub-
mitted to the constant assumption, that
because the Protectionist party was beaten in
1846, it must, be taken to be certain that that
party was in the wrong; and that the success
of the Leaguers proved them to be the only
" enlightened statesmen of their day."
Now, why should we submit to all this as-
sumption of superiority, when the facts are on
our own side; and when it is only necessary
to take a little trouble, in order to show that
the whole case of the Free-traders was hollow
and unreal? The practical usefulness of the
exposure can hardly be questioned. Many of
the actors in this delusion are still alive and
amongst us. Nay, we sometimes are insulted
by the impudent pretence, that the having taken
a part in abolishing Protection must b a suffi-
cient title to public confidence ! Does not
such an outrage on common sense justify all
that we have done, and show it is, even now,
advisable to let the truth be fully seen? Does
it not teach us the necessity of estaldishing
the important fact that Lord DERBY and his
friends, when they withstood Sir ROBERT
PEEL in 1846, were not the senseless bigots
that they are often represented ; but were,
in fact, nothing more or less than Eng-
lish gentlemen, honestly contending, in their
proper spheres, for that which is now abun-
dantly proved, by twelve years' experience, to
have been the TRUTH?

THE CABINET AND THE HOUSE OF
CONINIONS.
IN the present state of affairs a Con-
servative Cabinet has a most useful
public duty to discharge. It asks the House
of Commons for support on the broadest
public grounds. I: promises measures, and
seeks to be tried by its performances, and
seeks only as a favour that due time may be
given for the preparation of ito plans for legis-
lation. Members of the Cabinet who were

298

decried in 1852 have since then proved the
sagacity with which they had been chosen by
Lord DERBY. Sir JOHN PAKINGTON, Mr. WAL.
rocs, and Mr. HENLEY have all taken high
places in Parliamentary estimation, and the
most hardened factionist would not impugn
their ctuinent fitness for their posts. General
PEEL is universally respected, and in recent
years the new Secretary for War has given
repeated proofs that the Gallant General had
many of the qualities required for Parlia-
mentary life. The Premier is aided also
by his most accomplished son, and there
is no doubt but that Lord STANLEY is hailed
by a great mass of opinion as being the most
remarkable of the young statesmen of the age.
At once philanthropic and uractical, with
benevolent instincts and a keenly practical
turn of mind, the desires of Lord STANLEY will
nut exhale in speculative dreams or senti-
mental aspirations, but will be concentrated
on solid purposes. Many of the qualities
which marked Lord GRENVILLE are to be found
in Lord STANLEY. The same strong love of
public labour, the same facility in acquiring
solid knowledge, arid the same tendency to
try public questions by the standard of
severely intellectual law rather than a mere
routine, are characteristics common to Lord
GRENVILLE and to Lord STANLEY.

A Cabinet so composed cannot but have
special fitness for dealing with the social
questions of the time It is n6t a clique, nor
a coterie, nor a cousinhood. It represents the
active talents of the Conservative party. " I
" am free to say," said AL. OSBORNE, " that the
" Noble Earl has constructed an Administra-
" tion which, as far as the personal characters
" and abilities of the Members of the Govern•
" ment are concerned, is equal to any Adnai-
" nistration I have seen in this House," and
the Member fur Dover has sat in Parliament
since 1841.

Here is a severe censor admitting the
just pretensions of Lord DERBY'S Cabinet to
conduct public affairs, while the Observer calls
aloud fur the sacrifice of most of the members
of the late Liberal Ministry, and demands
that the Liberal party should look out for new
chiefs to aid Lord PALMERSTON. The Liberals,
it is no secret, have no desire that they should
be used fur the purpose of exalting Lord PAL-
mEasroN or Lord JOHN RUSSELL until the prin-
ciple of a Liberal Cabinet, and an understand-
ing about its future construction, be agreed
upon. Tho Liberals desire " progress," and
they believe that " Cabinet Reform" is a sub-
ject on which Lord JOHN RUSSELL entertains
perverse and narrow views. They know well
that the talents of their connection have never
received fair play from Lord JOHN RussELL,
and that it is a recognised scandal that gentle-
men like Mr HORSMAN and others have been
excluded from the Cabinet because they were
not qualified by matrimonial connection with
" the families ;" and they are also aware that
" the Fox Club " has been specially reor-
ganised for the purpose of rnaintainiug an
ascendancy over the independent Liberals
who haunt the Reform Club.

Under such circumstances the Derby
Cabinet is a positive necessity foi the country.
The exclusive system of Lord JOHN RUSSELL,
from 1846 to 1351, was tried and broke down
twice ; and when Lord DERBY took office in
1852 his Cabinet received no fair trial. The
Coalition next broke down ; and we have seen
the fall of Lord PALMERSTON. Anomalous con-
nections have melted one after the other.
Unity of party and congenial sympathies exist
in a greater degree amongst the Conservatives
than amongst the Liberals. What these
latter gentlemen may do towards the reorga-
nisation of their party, and towards a new
system for constructing Liberal Cabinets, we
cannot say; but, as things are at present, it
is plain that England expects most benefit
from a Conservative Cabinet being in office.
The Queen most deliberately committed the
management of her affairs to Lord DERBYS
Cabinet, and the tone of the great masa of the
Liberals, and the patriotic feeling of the House
of Commons, are all fs.vourable to giving a just
treatment to Lord DERBY'S Cabinet; and all
that has occurred since their entrance to office
has shown how beneficial has been the
change.

294

pott6ings in arliantent.

HOUSE OF LOADS-MONDAY.
EMANCIPATED SLAVES.

Lord BROUGHAM drew the attention of the Govern-
ment to a recent Act of the Jamaica Legislature, the
effect of which, he was informed, would be to reduce
the emancipated slaves to something nearly ap-
proaching the condition of slavery. He hoped that
act had not received the sanction of the Imperial
Government.
The Earl of CARNARVON said the act had not re-
ceived the sanction of the Crown, and wo still
under consideration. Though it was an unusual
course, he should not in this case have any objection
to lay the bill on the table.

EASTER RECESS.

The Earl of DERBY briefly stated that, as there
would be no business before the house to prevent it
following the usual course, he proposed it should
adjourn on Friday next till Monday the 12th of
April. The house would, however, sit to hear ap-
peals on Monday, the 29th, and Tuesday, the 30th
o! March.

The Law of Property Amendment Bill was road a
second time, and, in consequence of objections to
some of the clauses, was referred to a select com-
mittee. _

The Church of England Special Services Bill and
Trustees Relief Bill were read a third time.
The Marine Mutiny Bill and Militia Act Con-
tinuance Bill were read a second time.

AFRICAN TROOPS.

Lord HABDINGE, in reply to a question from Lord
Brougham, stated that there was no foundation for
the report that two military officers were to embark
for the coast of Africa to enlist negraes for service
in the East Indies.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—MoNDAY.
NEW MEMBER.

Mr. WHITESIDE took the oaths and his seat for
the borough of Enniskillen, on his re election since
his acceptance of the office of Attorney-General for
Ireland.

TIIL

General PEEL, in reply to Mr. Mackinnon, said
that it was not the intention of the Government to
embody any more regiments of militia, nor was it
their intention at present to call out any regiments
for drill.

THE ITALIAN

Mr. WALPot.E, in reply to Mr. Bowyer whether it
was true that a body of delegates from all parts of
Italy had been lately holding meetings in London
for the formation of an Italian National League, and
to bring about great political changes in Italy, and
what information her Majesty's Government had on
the subject, hardly knew how to answer the question.
(" Hear, hear," and laughter.) '—
Since the hon. gentleman's notice bad been given he
bad made inquiries with the vi.w of ascertaining whether
there was any truth in the statement that the meetings to
which the question applied had been held, and all he could
say was that he believed no such meetings had taken place.
It was true that Italians did sometimes meet together,
without any violation of the law, in private rooms to confer
on matters of political interest; but with respect to the
particular meetings referred to by the hon. gentleman, the
person supposed to have been at the head of them was not
an Italian but an Irishman. (Laughter.)