The Press.
London, England, 1856-09-27 00:00:00

r 4.1
OW

ar that the pro • ,••••„.1,,.
e is hypoed •
t what is I • • d
o Governitp
icy and d •'loleictsl
s leading lc. • :1
ie Govern
*-••
dangerousimikilterpg
Noitoiimmumsooo,l.: r••• :NA' 1 j

914

this, or in some other, manner an independent
opposition is always easily manageable.
When NAPOLEON declared, as the result of
his expel knee, that every man had his price,
he did not imply that every man was corrupt,
but that, in dealing with individuals, every
man had some special object et heart, and
that, by conceding the object, which might be
honest and laudable in itself, you gained the
man. A Minister cannot now secure the votes
of members by inviting them to a banquet and
by having a 1001. note folded within each
napkin. The mode of influence has changed,
but the motive to corruption on one side, and
the liability to temptation on the other, sub-
sist under PALMERSTON as strongly as under
WALPOLE. This is what the " independent "
members themselves declare.

In these times, when Centralisation is
making rapid advances, and must, in spite of
the warnings of political seem, advance fur-
ther still—when the power and patronage of
the Government have risen to such a height
as to bring very large and influential classes
completely under its influence—can we expect
that any effectual check will be imposed on it
by independent opinion either in Parliament
or in the Press ?

It is to Party alone that can be trusted the
duty of scrutinising the acts of Administration,
of watching its policy, of exposing its errors.
Unless the Party in Opposition is bound
together by the honourable ties of political
connection—unless its members repudiate
with the indignation of high and honourable
minds all attempts to separate them—unless
they are above the sordid meanness of making
terms for themselves or their friends with the
Government—unless they have the noble spirit
which binds them for good or ill to the banners
un dor which they have enlisted, no opposition to
a Government possessed of such immense and
continually increasing administrative patron-
age as the British Government of this day is
practicable. One political connection will be-
come rooted in the country too firmly to be
overthrown. It will triumph over the Sovereign,
and scoff at the independent opinion which it
knows so easily how to manage. It will employ
corruption as the easiest agency of Govern-
ment, and " make things pleasant" by under-
mining the foundations of public liberty.
From the representatives of purely popular
constituencies we expect no resistance to a
system which they must think works ad-
mirably. But there is a class in this country
which in all stages of our history has proved
itself incorruptible. That class is the English
Gentry. If the tendency of our day towards
what may be termed governmental autocracy
is ever to be successfully opposed, it must be
by their aid. The Reform Bill has diminished
but it has not destroyed their influence.
Their spirit is indomitable. It was checked
under the despotism of CROMWELL, but
Freedom abode by their hearths waiting for
happier times. It was kept down by the long
reign of the Whigs on the accession of the
house of Hanover; but it woke to overthrow
a system which, from its sordid and exclusive
sway, had become intolerable. And it is to
the same spirit that we look now to maintain
the genuine healthy principles of Party and to
join in manly opposition to the servile in-
fluences which, but for such a check, will sap
the great principles of the English Constitu
tion, by establishing the ascendancy of a single
political connection over Throne and Parlia-
ment, the Press and the People.

SIR JAMES GRAHAM AFTER DINNER.
WE have been much amused at the way in
which Sir JAMES GRAHAM this week has
illus-
trated the points of his most peculiar character.
His speech at the agricultural dinner in the
north wns, like all his orations, carefully pre-
pared, and yet maladroit in its matter. A
shrewd brother baronet, and near neighbour,
Sir I. (?) MAXWELL, seems to have previously
" poked some fun" at makers of " cut and dry
speeches," for Sir JAMES, on rising, adopted the
hint, and professed to be ready to speak
extemporaneously. But, though we recollect
Sir JAMES GRAHAM for many years, we never
beard him address any audience without
careful preparation The impromptu fait a

THE PRESS.

loisir is the kind of rejoinder in which he
excels ; and it is a strange thing that he so
often says something awkward, since he is
always so stddiously deliberate in his prepa-
rations.

He showed to hia brother agriculturalists,
as he has often done in the House of Com-
mons, that the ars odare artem is not amongst.
his many elaborate accomplishments as a
speaker. A more natural orator, and one more
capable of speaking extempore, would have
carefully avoided " Montesquieu," after the
solemn asseveration that he would eschew the
" cut and dry." But, though Mr. Lofty told
the world on Thursday that " MONTESQUIEU
is nearly a forgotten writer (!j,' Sir JAMES
GRAHAM could not find it in his heart to " cut "
the author of the " Spirit of Laws," though,
in the art of " cutting,' the annals of Patrlia-
mentt show that Sir JAMES GRAHAM has had
few superiors. Accordingly, he brought out
before his brother squires and agriculturalists
the quotation which he had so carefully
" potted" from MONTESQUIEU. The text-writers
on politics—as his speeches and writings on
" Corn and Currency " testify—have long been
carefully studied by Sir JAMES GRAHAM ; but
he does not apply their principles with much
skill.

For example, a statesman of his experience
ought to have known that MONTESQUIEU,
though a brilliant author, was not a compe-
tent judge about the reasons which developed
English agriculture, and that attributing to
" freedom" its principal source was an exalt
geration. MONTESQUIEU was an " Anglo-
maniac," and he was a propagandist of liberal
views in Government, but he had not attended
much to " sociology." He was, beyond doubt,
what Boaxs called him--" a genius with a
" penetrating aquiline eye ;" but he was too
much of a system-monger. The practical
character of the English people had more to
do with the superior agriculture of England
than " freedom ;" and its climate, as the poli-
tical economists acknowledge, was peculiarly
suited for raising farm stock of every descrip-
tion, from draft horses down to barn-door
fowls.

MorrEscaumu was a most awkward instance
for Sir JAMES GRAHAM to have chosen for
the display of his study of political authors.
For example, Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, with ill-
dissembled complacency, that "he contem-
" plated with vast satisfaction the various
" measures of his political life." We shall not
discuss those measures; but does Sir JAMES
GRAHAM recollect what MowirEseuixo wrote
about the animating principles of Dupotisms,
Republics, and Monarchies? " Fear is the
" principle of a Despotism, Virtue of a
" Republic, and Honour in a Monarchy." Now,
was the way in which those measures alluded
to by Sir J. GRAHAM were brought about
always reconcileable with " the honour " of the
advisers of the Crown? Catholic Emancipa-
tion and Free Trade were both carried in a
style calculated to shock the traditionary
notions of "honour" common to the gentle-
men of England. We recollect how, in 1846,
Sir JAMES GRAHAM affected to regret the
manner in which Free Trade was conceded,
and how he admitted that the mode of passing
it would weaken confidence in public men
His own speeches about " the dismal sound of
" the factory bell," seemed to read like cross-
readings with his bitter " know-the-reason-
why " harangues. The people of England,
whatever flippant persons may assert to the
contrary, are not satisfied with results merely.
They like to have them reached in a way com-
patible with "honour." In that respect, at
least, they illustrate the remarks of MONTES-
QUIEU.

It is rather late also for Sir JAMES GRAHAM
to have commenced the study of MONTES-
QUIEU. It is a pity that, when the case
of the Bundler° Brothers was pending, Sir
JAMES GRAHAM did not quote " Montesquieu "
on "freedom," for the benefit of Lord ABER-
DEEN and the Post•office authorities. " Cheer
" old ELDON—for he never ratted," cried the
mob at Oxford, as Mr. EMERSON records. Our
democracy does " honour " to the animating
principle of " Monarchy," but the report of the
proceedings at the Carlisle agricultural dinner
states that Sir JAMES GRAHAM, " without wait-
" ing for a single cheer," rose to speak. We

SATURDAY,

should like to "know thu reason why" ho
rosc so fast.

It is plain that the postprandial is not the
school of eloquence in which one of Sir JAMES
GRAHAM'S heavy, though undeniable abilities,
is suited to excel. lie was not more success-
ful amongst his neghbours than at the Reform
Club dinner to Sir C. NAPIER. Let him leave
after-dinner speeches to geniuses like Ser-
geant MURPHY.

ROMAN CATHOLIC ENCROACHMENTS.
THAT considerable uneasiness exists at the
present time about the progressing influence
of the Roman Catholic interest in this empire,
cannot be denied by any one acquainted with
English society. Nor can it be gainsaid, in
presence of facts to which we shall direct at-
tention, that there are abundant grounds for
being dissatisfied with the disproportionate
official patronage bestowed on the Roman Ca-
tholics by the party now in power. The sub-
ject is one which can be illustrated without
polemical acrimony, and we shall introduce no
elements of bitterness into its discussion.
Firmly convinced of its great social and con-
stitutional importance, we approach it without
the least animosity towards the Roman Catho-
lic community.
That in consequence of the appointments
made by the Government the Roman Catholic
influence has vastly increased in Ireland, will
scarcely be denied even by Roman Catholic
partisans This onesided exercise of patron-
age is obviously of far greater importance than
the question of Maynooth ; and one of the
practical objections against the Maynooth agi-
tation is that it takes attention away from a
far more serious aspect of Roman Catholic in-
fluence. Let us endeavour to rectify this
injurious dispersion of the strength of Pro-
testant public opinion, and concentrate it on
a subject which has not received sufficient
notice from the English people.
- . -

.
About the principle on which Roman
Catholics should be admitted to the honours
and advantages of office there ought to be no
dispute. We fully acknowledge that by the
Relief Act of 1829 Roman Catholics are entitled
to an amount of patronage proportioned to
their normal circumstances of talent, social
position, and personal aptitude. But it is no
special merit to be a Roman Catholic. Because
a man goes to mass, and reverences priestly
authority, he is not therefore, as some per-
sons suppose, a superior person to his Protes-
tant competitor for any office ; and yet, after
looking at the prodigious official influence
granted to the Roman Catholics, and after
contrasting the limited number of their Peers
and gentry with the social station of Protestants,
it would really appear as if there was a settled
policy in certain quarters to undermine the
Protestant interest in Ireland, and swamp it
under Roman Catholic ascendancy. It
is no secret that the Roman Catholics boast
that their creed is " the rising political religion
"in Ireland." They say that if a man be a
Roman Catholic, and a moderate one, he will
probably be promoted by the Conservatives
(if in office) to show that they are not
intolerant; but that, whether moderate or
violent, whether he be a gentleman or an
agitator, he is certain to be supported and
encouraged by the Liberals.
The late Chief Baron WouLvE (an eminent
Roman Catholic) has supplied us with a prac•
tical rule for measuring the disproportionate
influence given by the Liberals to Roman
Catholics. Whea the Conservatives objected
to municipal corporations in the great towns
of Ireland as tending to place Protestant pro-
perty under the dominion of a Romanist
majority—" Not so," said Mr. WOULFE iu Par-
liament ; " the influence will be in a propor-
" tion compounded from the ratios which the
" superior property, position, and education of
" the Protestants bear to the Catholics." So it
ought to have been; but when the system was
tried it was found that the Roman Catholics
were as exclusive as the old condemned Pro-
testant ascendancy of the last century. The
consequence was, that a new division of the
municipal wards in Dublin and the provincial
towns was made by Act of Parliament, so as to
insure something like fair play to Protestant
influence and property.

i'il