The Press.
London, England, 1857-11-07 00:00:00

THE PRESS, NOVEMBER 7, 1857.

tools of the Company there. He is also the
Premier who destroyed the Anglo-Indian
press ; who refused compensation to the
Indian sufferers ; who has sanctioned the
alsification of all our sources of intelligence
from that unhappy country; who has saddled
it with Lord CANNING and with Mr. VERNON
SMITH ; and who has authorised and is
responsible for all the blunders that these in-
capable instruments of his have made.
With such a catalogue of sins of his own to
fling in his face, wo are not surprised to hear
that the Company are Inclined to snap their
fingers at Lord PALMERSTON, and that he is
already beginning to think discretion the
better part of valour, as is his custom
on all occasions when he is boldly met.
Meantime, we look anxiously for what con
corns us more than these intrigues—the
news that is coming to us by the approaching
mail.

THE ORANGEMEN OF IRELAND.
WE cannot possibly overlook the fact that the
recent movements initiated by the Orangemen
in the north of Ireland are of a most dangerous
character. We should much regret if the
Protestant strength of Ireland wasted itself in
intestine feuds, and we most earnestly depre-
cate any course of conduct which would cause
permanent division amongst the Irish Protes-
tants. We must, also, caution the leaders of
the Orange body to beware how they may be
playing the game of the enemies of the
Protestant Church. Intriguing Ministerial-
ists and levelling Radicals are most anxious to
make Orangeism a bugbear with the English
public. They are determined to make capital
out of the revival of Orangeism, and they exult
in the attempt to revive an institution which
recalls an exploded system of government in
Ireland.

Sixty years ago, and later, the Orange
institution had a decided local utility. A
large portion of the Protestants of Ireland
had become infected with the revolutionary
mania of those times. Jacobinism had deeply
tainted the north of Ireland, and in no part of
the island had the " Umited Irishmen " such
formidable supporters as in Ulster. The
" United Irish Society " was confessedly one
of the most fearful conspiracies of modern
times. It united some Churchmen, many
Presbyterians, and swarms of Romanists in
one tremendous league against the Nlonarchy
and the Empire. Its founders invoked the
national passions of Ireland with extraordinary
intensity, and all means were employed of
exasperating the popular passions. Protes-
tants of rank and influence, and professional
men with high prospects, allowed themselves
to be carried away with the revolutionary
frenzy of those days. Lord EDWARD Faz-
e ERA I.D. the Honourable SIMON BUTLER,
BEAUCHAMP BAG): NAL HARVEY, ARTHUR
tYCONNOR, the SHEARSES, the EMMETT%
WILLIAM NEILSON, and many more, were all
Protestants, and several gentlemen of birth
and station were hanged as traitors from 1797
to 1803.

In such terrible times, with the French
Revolution raging abroad, we can understand
bow the authorities of those days tolerated
the Orange institution as a counteracting
cower to the secret confederacy of the United
Irishmen. Ireland had an absentee aris-
tocracy ; the Established Church in those
days was not filled with a resident clergy of
such high moral character as now minister at
her altars ; and the social system was en-
dangered in various directions. In those times
the policy of the Orange institution was ob-
vious and intelligible, in spite of its inherent
taint of being unconstitutional.
But with the Imperial Union a great change
took place. With the extension of our power
in India a demand was made for an enlarged
army, which was recruited largely from
Ireland ; and iu order to carry the Union it
was necessary to have an arrangement with
the Roman Catholics of Ireland. But to pre-
serve and cherish Orangeism, and at the same
time to advocate "Emancipation" would have

been absurd and impossible. Authority,
gradually declined to sanction " Orangeisin;
and the institution stood condemned in the
general opinion of the Conservative body of
the empire, and was dissolved nearly twenty
years ago. Is it not most inopportune and
inexpedient to dream of reviving it ?
To the general argument against the revival
of Orangeism we have little to add to the
masterly argument of the Dublin Daily
Express. There are, indeed, many considera-
tions which, we think, must disincline Con-
servatives from sanctioning a revival of such
a peculiar institution. Is it not on account of
its secrecy that we all dislike the " Vote
by Ballot "? Is not the Conservative
argument against " Ballot" always pointed
to the constitutional right of publicity ?
The Judicature exercises its duties in open
court; the jurors and the accused face
each other. Parliament does not close its
doors, like the Orange body, and the records
of what occurs there circulate freely round the
land. Even the visitors of the Queen's pri-
vate Court are proclaimed aloud, and it is not
too much to say that a system of secret
politics is utterly abhorrent to the British
Constitution. It is enough to cloud the influ-
ence of all those who take part in delibera-
tions which cannot bear the light.

But it may be said by the advocates of an
Orange revival, " True, we agree with your
" general views, but have the Romanists no
" secret conclaves, no organised influences in
" the dark? Have they no Jesuits, no frater•
" nities governed by `directors; lio religious
" freemasonry of their own ?" To this we
anwer that the secrecy of the Romish system
is one of the main causes why there exists
such well-founded and patriotic prejudice
against the Church of Rome. It is on account
of the secret mechanism of that Church, and
the way in which its priests and laity are used
as mere puppets, whose wiles are pulled by
invisible fingers, that there exists such un-
conquerable objection to it in the minds of the
people of this realm. Its secret system of do-
mestic espionage (we rejoice that there is not
one English word for the " spy system "j, by
means of auricular confession, is also inex-
pressibly distasteful to the people of this
realm; and why should Orangemen adopt the
means and modus operandi which have caused
such prejudice against the Church of Rome?
But though we see strong political objec-
tions of the gravest character to a revival of
the Orange body, we are strongly opposed
to a system of insulting its adherents, or join-
ing in a cry of absolute proscription against
its ill-judging but well-meaning supporters.
So highly did the present Secretaryfor Foreign
Affairs estimate the value of the Orangemen
in 1848, that Lord CLARENDON, when Vice-
roy at Dublin Castle, was glad to receive
private deputations from them, and to accept
their particular assistance. Money and arms
were given by Lord CLARENDON to the Orange-
men, and though it was denied that the money
was from the public funds, yet the fact is in-
disputable that a most cordial countenance
was given by the Earl Of CLARENDON when the
Noble Lord was alarmed iu 1848. In fact, we
believe that no other person has done so
much for the revival of the Orange institution
as the Earl of CLARENDON.
As Protestants and Conservatives, we think
the revival of the Orange institution both in-
judicious in policy and impracticable in fact.
It could only be effective in a portion of
Ulster, and it could have no utility at all in
Munster and Connaught. Even if got up on
a small scale, it would be used as a great bug-
bear by the enemies of the Church of Ireland;
and we think that the Orangemen would only
be playing the game of their adversaries. But
we shall raise our voices against the plan which
soma (not all) of the present Ministers wish
to pursue towards them ; and in face of the deep
committal of Lord CLARENDON with the Orange
men in 1848, we do not think that the Cabinet
will be so ill-advised as to inaugurate a system
of positive insult and official despotism to the
Orangemen of Ulster. Even the Laily News
has exclaimed against the ungrammatical and
unconstitutional missive from Lord Chancellor
BRADY; and if the present Ministerial crusade
be continued, it is plain to all men that the
recent magisterial appointments of Lord

1075

Chancellor BRADY, throughout the length and
breadth of Ireland, must come under rigid
examination in detail.

TORYISM AND ITS TRADUCERS.
NOTHING is easier than to frame an arbitrary '
definition, and then to deduce perfectly con-,
sistent, yet purely imaginary, conclusions.
The Liberal Cabinet is so well aware of its
own mediocrity that it scarcely affects to claim
the confidence of the country on the ground
of its superior merit. Its policy is never very
zealously defended by any of its abler organs.
The ridicule which attends the efforts of those
injudicious friends who take a contrary course
is, we suppose, a sufficient warning. A far
safer course is the depreciation of opponents ;
and such have for some time been the tactics
of tile more wary adherents of the Whig Libe-
ral connection. They know that the public
will tire in time of the profound PALMERSTON,
the eloquent LEWIS, the quick-witted WOOD,
the patriotic PANMURE, and the modest merit
of ARGYLE—ARISTIDES must not be called just.
too often ; but they know right well that man-
kind is never tired of the opposite extreme,
and we are seldom, therefore, surprised at any
misrepresentations of Tories or Toryism which
we meet with in contemporary journals. Yet
we must confess that for once we have been
astonished—astonished even to admiration—
at the exquisite impudence with which a
recent writer upon the Birmingham Congress
under takes to assure the world that Tories are
never found on the side of social amelioration
—for that is only another name, after all, for
social science. Now, even if we meet
our opponents on their own ground,
and admit that Toryism is synonymous with
absolutist theories of government—which, we
must remember, is the old notion of Toryism in
the public mind— the shallowness of the asser-
tion is pretty manifest. Despotic Governments
have always found the diffusion of material
comfort one of their most powerful auxiliaries.
But denying as we do that Toryism means
anything of the kind, we would beg our candid
critic to look for one moment to facts.
Were not some of the leading promoters of
the Birmingham Congress Tories? Did not
Lord Defter, on taking office in 1852, espe-
cially give out that the work of a Conservative
Ministry would be found to lie in social
reform ? And since that time have not some
of the leading men in reformatory and educa-
tional movements appeared in the Conserva-
tive ranks? If passion and prejudice must
still rule political warfare, let us at least retain
our old English character for truth and
honour. Let us not scatter reckless asper-
sions on whole bodies of mut which we
know, and all the world knows, to be false.
Which no per-version of intellect, no crooked-
ness of perception, can possibly make us
think true—and which it requires consider-
able faith in either the credulity or malignity
of Englishmen to pen and publish. The
affectation of judging all Tories by the
standard of' Sir CHARLES WETHERALL, is just
as disingenuous as it would be in ourselves to
estimate all Reformers by the standard of
Tom PAINE or FEAROUS O'CONNOR.
The truth is, that never was anything more
fallacious than this talk about Tories being
stationary and Liberals progressive. What do
these adjectives mean? We will answer our
own questions by, in the first place, asking
another. What does constitutional govern-
ment mean, and tte English Constitution in
particular? Does it not mean an aggregate of
laws and institutions so nicely balanced as to
afford the maximum of liberty with the mini-
mum of licence, and the maximum of autho-
rity with the minimum of interference ?
or something like it, would, we think, be gent-
rally admitted as a fair definition. Now, the
aim of Conservatives is to keep this machine
together —to hand it down through the suc-
cessive stages of national life with all its parts
entire—to repair it when necessary, but to see
that such repairs are adjusted to the rest of
the machinery and do not impede its opera-
tion. Nay, more, we would go so far as to say
that Conservatives would prefer the con-