The Press.
London, England, 1858-05-01 00:00:00

THE PRESS, MAY 1,1858.

fall into company with a gentleman, and to
know, in a moment, by his countenance, that
he is, beyond all doubt, the descendant of an
old Eastern patriarch, who lived and died in
Chaldea and in Canaan, some 3,800 years ago ?
The fact is, that all the above passages of
Scripture, which are read to us once or twice
in each year in the lessons of our Church, are
full of wondrous meaning—unless, indeed, we
prefer to assert that they have no meaning
at all.

However, we have here described the two
leading ideas which at present divide Con-
servatives on this question, and which it
ought to be every good man's wish to reduce,
as soon as possible, into harmony and union.

Correspanence.

"LEVELLING," AND MR. BRIGHT'S

BIRMINGHAM LETTER.
TO THE EDITOR OF "THE PRE SS ."

Sir,—Every thing has its price. The blessings of
civilization are not gifts ; they are bought by labour
and sacrifice, and, like unto all precious things
associated with and inseparable from the existence
of society, they require continuous watchfulness.
That the institutions, laws, and interests of a nation
should demand the attention of the active minds of
the age is, considered by itself, a very desirable
feature; it is, however, not less desirable that the
various projects promulgated should be subjected to
discussion. In the last age there existed a class of
politicians opprobriously, but aptly, designated
" levellers." They did not by any means contemplate
an agrarian equality; they only meant the abroga-
tion of certain privileges enjoyed by a favoured few,
and the establishment of something in fact, if not in
name, resembling a republic. The successful revolt
of the American colonists, followed by the French
revolution of 1789, created a discussion of principles
throughout Europe which quickened thought, and
long afterwards left certain sediments in British
society ; among these was the theory of "levelling.
I had hoped that changed times and circumstances
had dissipated the notion of "levelling" es a means
of national improvement. It was therefore with
astonishment that I observed lately that the mantle
of the " levellers " had fallen upon the shonlders of
Mr. Bright, and that there exists the possibiiity of his
appearing in that character before his constituents in
Birmingham. " Levelling" is a mechanical pro-
cess, and may without much ,difficulty be under-
stood. " Separate the Church from the State, and
bring down the Churchman to an equality with
the Dissenter—that is political levelling." What
then ? Those who go to chapel and meeting-house
are just as particular about the rights of Chapel
property as are Churchmen about Church property.
Allow the Church to retain her property, and the
" levelling " will not make any very great difference
to the position of parties. " Turn the bishops out
of the House of Lords." Be it so. Legislation in
the Upper House will not consequently be more
democratic than it is now. The Lord Spiritual is
generally as watchful of the interests of the working
men as the Lord Temporal. "Take the property
away from the Church." Very well. Give the pro-
perty thus taken to the squire ; the rector generally
spends as much of his income in his parish as any
other resident. That step will fail to ameliorate the
condition of the working men. "Appropriate the
Church property to national purposes." Realize
this object, the distribution of the annual income of
the Church will do very little towards alleviating
the wants of the many. A word on the " rights of
property." Can the trustees of chapels, the owners
of lands or of mills, show a more valid title to pos.
session than the Church ? For the present an
answer is not pressed fir ; let the " levelling " pro-
ceed. " Abolish the House of Lords ; it is a house
of obstructives." Just so. Dukes and lords, with
or without titles, will continue to possess the heredi.
tat), acres, and a few of them will find their way
into the ouse of Commons; the remainder will
follow the pursuits most congenial to their position,
tastes, habits, and desires, very much, in all impor-
tant respects (legislation apart), as they now do.
Jews will then sit in Parliament; but as pauperism
was not materially influenced in the City by London
having a Jew for Lord Mayor, cateris paribus, the
admission of Jews to Parliament will not operate
very powerfully on the homes and hearths of the
working men. " Wipe out the National Debt."
Most admirable, particularly in the absence of the
House of Lords, and with the Jews to assist
in legislation The question of property again

413.

intervenes, and possibly the fundholder may
not be enabled to establish a better claim to
dividends than the Church to her lands. " There is
no need for standing on trifles ; the Crown had better
be got rid of and its property confiscated !" " Confis-
cated;' that is the word. A convention is held in
Birmingham to consider the propriety of removing
the seat of government from London. A Lancashire
delegate rises and avers that he is of opinion that
the proposed change ought to be carried out—that
he likes it very well. In Lancashire fashion, he
gives a description of his own life, and, being from
Rochdale, he refers to two generations of the Brights.
John's father began the world with very humble
means, and died wealthy, a virtuous old man. John
and his brothers, having a good start, and being of
prudent and thrifty habits, have increased the family
riches. Reasonably enough, it occurs to several
delegates that, under all the institutions complained
of, the Brights have made fortunes—that the most
striking inequality in Lancashire is to be found in
the riches of a few millowners and the poverty of
their "hands"! " Levelling " might then proceed
in another direction. Long before these changes,
and others which it is not necessary to name, could
be effected, there would be no talk of emigration
from Birmingham! War would be the nation's
trade, and gunmaking at a premium ! Nations, not
by any means under the influence of the " Peace
Society," would be wishful to sack th 3 sea girt isle
of her riches (it is to be hoped the invaders would
not be sumeesful), and to make her the appanage of
a foreign Crown ! Mr. Bright's proposal of perma-
nently improving the condition of the people by a
reduction of national expenditure is ridiculous. In
the absence of all the "levelling" surmised, any
reduction of taxes would be trifling. The realization
of the changes suggested would be a revolution with-
out a remedy. A reduction of taxes, so far as the
national wants will allow, is certainly very well in its
way—the saving rather than the spending of a na-
tion's substance. As a remedial measure for
low wages and lack of employment, a reduc-
tion of taxes is next to powerless. To lead
the working men to hope for an important and per-
manent improvement in their condition by reduced
taxes and changes in the form of government in
this country is absurd. Those who know the United
States are fully aware that the luxurious habits of the
wealthy Americans are often above those of the
same class in monarchical England ; that the principal
safety-valve of the Government and the people in the
Republic has been an increased and continuous
agricultural development. Neither the form of
government, nor the low taxation of the United
States, has saved the population from suffering and
destitution. These ev►ls have been mitigated in
America because of the peculiar social arrangements
of that country—the conditions under which labour
has been applied, and the products of labour and
land distributed. Mr. Bright may exhort his con-
stituents to leave England, or resolve on vigorously
assisting him to change the G3vernment, and reduce
the taxes. Should the working men accept the
former alternative, it will he proof that they distrust
the efficacy of his remedy ; if the latter, then, under
the operation of " unrestricted competition," they
will, assuming his desires to be realized, live to
repent of their confidence. Mr. Bright commits the
mistake common to all his predecessors of the
" levelling " school: he and they have begun at the
wrong end. To "level" downwards seems at first
sight desirable, particularly to those who fancy
they have nothing to lose by the process. More
ample reflection would show even the working
men that to " level " advantageously, the better
and safer course is to level upwards. To raise
the poor, rather than to humble the rich;
to give to universal humanity dignity, rather
than to workmen a change of masters ; and, by the
first-named process, to produces homogeneity of inte-
rests among the various classes constituting an old
and varied State. This Conservative kind of " level-
ling " is seldom a theme of popular oratory ; its
merits, at a glance, are not sufficiently apparent to
gratify the multitude. In it, notwithstanding, lies
the real safety and welfare of the many ; it is, pro-
perly understood, the only real progrt,ss —evolution
and security in contradistinction to revolution with-
out improvement. There is as much political as
worldly wisdom in the maxim of Tacitus, " Intuta
quse indecora" (those things that are unseemly are
unsafe).—l am, sir, your obedient servant,
FAIR TRAM
April 20th, 1858.

CASINST COUNCILS were held on Saturday and
Thursday at the official residence of the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, in Dorning.streeL The Ministers
present were :—The Earl of Derby, the Marquis of
Salisbury, the Earl of Hardwicke, the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, Mr. Secretary Walpole, the Earl of
Maltnesbury, Lord Stanley, General Peel, Sir John
Pakington, the Earl of Ellenborough, the Right Hoo.
J. W. Henley, and Lord John Manners.

■