The Press.
London, England, 1858-10-09 00:00:00

THE PRESS, OCTOBER 9, 1858.

however arbitrary and despotic may be the form of its
Government, a very considerable number of persons who
are in their hearts attached to free institutions, who look
to England as the bulwark of free institutions in Europe,
and fur that reason they would be unwilling to take part in
a war with this country. There is, unquestionably, a body
of persons who represent what might be called the high
church party of France,—the ultra-Catholic party—who,
from its repugnance towards this country on account of its
Protestant religion, and also from their dislike of its
liberal principles and free institutions, regard us with
feelings of auimosity, and probably, on that account, might
be favourable to a war with this country. There is also, no
doubt, in the army a large number of persons who, perhaps,
partly trom the love of military glory, paitly from recollec-
tions of former transactions and military events in France,
and partly from those feelings which pervade many armies
—the love of war,—would be favourable to a contest with
this country. In my opinion, however, so far as I can
judge, if any active desire for a war with this country is en-
tertained by France. it is very much confined to those two
limited chases to whibh I have alluded. I admit it is in-
currbent upon us to keep our eyes fixed on the preparations
which have been made at Cherbourg, and not to allow our
national defences to sink into a state which would prevent
us front protecting our shores from a foreign invader, but
et the same time it does not become us to give way to any
exaggerated alarm, or consider that we are called upon to
make any vast, or even extraordinary, expenditure for the
purpose of guarding against what, when it is swelled to the
dimensions which I see it has assumed in some speeches
reported in the papers, appears to me to be extravagant bud
unreasonable. With these remarks as to the possibility or
not of our requiring the active assistance of the army and
navy—hoping, and not doubting, that they will hereafter,
if their services should be called into action, show that
distinguished bravery and energy by which their conduct
has been marked on all previous occasions, and feeling
confident that they will prove equal to any exigency that
may /arise, but at the same time hoping the exigency
may not arise, but that they may long be permitted to enjoy
their laurels in peace, I beg to propose to you " The health
of the Army and Navy."
On the health of the right lion. baronet being
proposed by Mr. WARREN, who passed a high
eulogium on the manner in which he had fulfilled
his duties when Chancellor of the Exchequer,
Sir G. C. LEwis acknowledged the compliment,
and briefly addressed himself to the advantages of
agricultural associations. He then alluded to his
connection with the late Administration :
The proposer of my health was kind enough to advert to
my connection with the late Administration, and although
this is a meeting from which political party topics are
banished, and I would not say a word which could in any
way offend the feelings of persons who might differ in
politics from myself, yet I may he permitted to observe
that looking back to the conduct and character of that
Administration—looking to the state in which this country
was when Lord Palmerston acceded to office, the state
in which the army was placed, the condition of that army,
and the uncertainty of the issue of the contest in which it
was engaged within any limited period-1 cannot but
think that that Government may congratulate itself upon
the manner in which that frightful struggle was terminated
and by the conditions of the treaty which was signed at
Paris. I also think, in looking back on the event of the
late war with China, whatever difference of opinion may
exist with respect to the conduct of our agents at Canton—
I have no wish to revive a subject which gave rise to such
angry feelings and so much animosity, but I say that ail
persons, whatever may be their political opinions, must
concur in regarding the treaty which has recently been
made public as a great advance in ourcommercial facilities,
and as having settled a question of great difficulty, and on
which all persons who look to the progress of our affairs in
the East have admitted to be an object of undoubted policy
to the country—namely, the opening of China to English
and European enterprize.
On the question of Parliamentary Reform Sir George
thus spoke :
Well, gentlemen, there is another subject which, looking
not backwards but forward, might naturally suggest a few
remarks at this moment, and which, having formerly been
a subject of the most intense party interest and violent
party contests, seems now to have become one of those
questions upon which all political parties are agreed. I
refer to the subject of Parliamentary reform, for f observe
from the reports of some late meetings of a similar descrip-
tion to that at which we are assembled to-day it has been
virtually announced by some of the Ministers that they
contemplate, at all events, proposing in the next session of
Parliament a measure of Pai liamentary reform as a
Government proposition. Well, if that party of which the
Administration now in office forms a portion proposes a
measure of Parliamentary reform, that of itself must be
taken as an indication that Parliamentary reform is
no longer a party question, inasmuch as in former
times they were connected with a party opposed to Parlia-
mentary reform. 1 inay say this much without trenching
upon political controversy, that those who propose a mea-
sure of Parliamentary reform at the present moment must
propose it with a view of remedying some distinct mischief,
some defined political evil. They must have a distinct
view of some evil which they propose to remove. Now, I
would ask those who propose at the present moment to
bring forward a systematic plan of Parliamentary reform to
state distinctly abet is the exact evil they propose to
remedy? Those who proposed .the Reform Bill of 1832
bad, I believe, in their minds a distinct conception of the
evils which they proposed to remedy, and the country had
also a clear notion of those evils. At that time there were
large towns in this country which were wholly unrepre-
sented ; such towns, for instance, as Leeds, Birmingham,
and Manchester, bad no representatives. Some of the

975

largest, the most populous, the most wealth}, the most
important towns in the kingdom were unrepresented. On
the other hand, there were certain persons who, by their
power of nomination in small boroughs having scarcely
any electors, were able to return► to the House of Commons
a considerable number of members. Putting these two

things together, observing that there were large towns
which were unrepresented, and particular persons able to
return a considerable number of members, we found that
the House of Commons did not accurately and faithfully
represent the general opinion of the country. Well, that
change was made, and I think it may now be fairly said
that on all great questions, all important subjects, the
House of Commons fur the must pert fairly represents the
general opinion of the country. It may not always be
the faithful exponent of the opinions of particular persons,
or even of particular districts, but looking at it generally it
is, I think, a very faithful exponent of the general senti-
ments of the country. Then, it is said that the circum-
:lances of the times demand a systematic plan of Parlia-
mentary reform. lam not disputing that proposition, but
I only say that any Government which brings, or proposes
to bring, forward a plan of Parliamentary reform is bound
to state distinctly what is the evil they profess to remedy
and what are the defects in our present system which they
intend to remove. I must be permitted to remark that
those persons who think it is possible by some process of
ingenuity to devise a Reform Bill which shall increase
the power of a particular party, which shall throw an in-
crease of influence into the hands of a particular class of
the community, are entirely mistaken in their supposition
that any measure, any contrivance, any device of that
kind will impose on the general intelligence of the country
or influence the decision of Parliament. In my opinion,
in whatever form a Reform Bill may be introduced into
the House of Commons, it will come out of that house a
real Reform Bill, increasing the popular character of the
Legislature. It will give greater weight to the voice of the
people in the councils of the House of Commons, and if
any Government should entertain different views and pro-.
pose a Reform Bill not having that object, in my opinion,
they will not only be grievously disapp-inted in their ex-
pectations, but will attempt to pass off a deception upon
the country. That must, in my opinion, be the necessary
result of any proposal which may be made at the present
time fur Parliamentary reform, and, I will add, that, as it
seems to me, it is the only legitimate basis upon which
such a proposal can be made.

Sir J. WALSH, in proposing the health of the
Chairman, said :
With reference to the great question of Parliamentary
reform, upon which Sir G. C. Lewis has touched, I can
only say that in some respects I sin very much inclined
to arrive at similar conclusions with him. It is nut fur
me at all to predict or venture to prophesy what may be
the course of the present Government on this question ,
but I hope that in any change which they may consider
it necessary to propse they will bear in mind to a cer-
tsin degree those principles which belong to the Conser-
vative creed, and associate those principles as far as pos-
sible with any change they may propose. I agree very
much with what my right hon. friend said, that any change
which is made must, in the present condition and temper
of the country, be in the democratic direction. I cannot
conceive that any Government would be successful in
presenting to the Legislature and the country any scheme
of what we may call reaction, however carefully veiled
and disguised. I believe that the acuteness of our oppo-
nents and the general sense of the country would very
soon detect any latent tendency of that kind. Such an
attempt would be not only unsuccessful, but would be
followed by that discredit and loss of reputation which
invariably in this country attends an attempt to act. a
disingenuous part. One remark I may venture to make
to this assembly, as it is a truth strongly impressed on my
own mind—namely, that it is a very great and prevalent
mistake in the present age to suppose that all reforms, as
they are called, are changes and innovations in the direc-
tion of democratic extension, which is alone by some
identified with the cause of liberty. I believe there is no
greater mistake in politics than to identify those two very
different words and principles—to suppose that democracy
and liberty are synonymous. Pure democracy is not
liberty. We have only to cross the Atlantic and we see a
state of society far more democratic than our own, but
far less free. Any man who has really had a practical
acquaintance with the working of that model republic,
which is so lauded by speculative and theoretical demo-
crats, must arrive at the conclusion that it is not only a
less perfect state of society, but a less free community than
England—that its action is less free, and, above all, that
its thought is less free, for on every side the natives of
that republic are enchained by the despotism of public
opinion itself—the despotism of the inferior intellect dic-
tating to the superior. But if we cross the Atlantic in order
to see what are the effects of a pure democracy on that
liberty it professes to make its idol, we have only to cross
the Channel to see the effect of an attempt to democratise
society which has been formed under totally different
auspices and on totally different principles. The result of
such an attempt is, in the first place, to confuse, in the
second to frighten and alarm, and, in the third, to drive
the whole community, the whole population of the
country, to take refuge in the poser and despotism of
an absolute Government against the dangers and evils
attending the introduction of a pure democracy. Those
two great examples are held up to our e)es in the case
of two great nations, one in our immediate vicinity, and
the other brought into almost daily contact with us ; and
their ctinsidtration, while it will tend to uphold the
system of government adopted by the English nstion,
the people of which generally in the long run dictate to
their rulers the course of policy which it is incumbent
upon them to pursue, should lead us to adopt the grestest
possible precaution iu advancing in the career of democracy,
and to the conclusion that there are dangers ahead—if we