The Press.
London, England, 1858-05-29 00:00:00

THE PRE S S, MAY 29, 1858.

As to the particular point aimed at in Lord
LUCAN'S amendment, it is almost beneath a
serious argument. A certain oath is prescribed
by a statute of wore IW 4 century standing.
The opt jqn of or hi lwqt courts of Law has
been tiAgi, and the Sim and extent of that
Vath him beep attic defined. And now a
eer aclolly row to se that all this shalt
le, not ',pealed, b (pose ! That the oatt
may be (riot shall hp) Rin a certain way la
the House of Lords, jA certain other way
in the House of Comiliew. Was there ever such
conthsion ? If the House of Lords should consent
to such a motion, it will be precipitated into a
blunder as bad as that of Balaklava. It will ride
down from its present safe position into a storm of
contempt and ridicule almost as terrible as the
storm of bullets which poured from the Russian
batteries!

The Lords could do nothing worse than to set
up a practice of their own—a way of reading the
law differing from the way adopted in the Com-
mons. But such an absurdity would be short-
lived. The moment a Hebrew Peer made his
appearance—if such a person should ever ap-
pear—that moment the Peers must conform their
practice to that of the other House. The exclu-
siveness pretended in the amendment is nothing
more than a pretence ;—in short, a sham!

In fact, Lord LUCAN'S amendment gives up
the whole question, and recants the vote of April
without the least ground for doing so. The
question is, how a Hebrew, elected M.P., can be
admitted into the House of Commons. For many
years the Lords have said, " We cannot alter the
" laws of England merely to gratify Mr. ROTHS-
" CHILD." By the amendment now proposed,
the Peers would wholly relinquish the ground
they have so long maintained—would open the
house of Commons to those who have hitherto
been excluded, and whom, in April last, they
declined to admit—and would merely, for
form's sake, retain the barren privilege, that, if
a Jewish Peer should be ever made, they would
consider whether they would alter the law for his
benefit or not !

This petty, sidelong way of surrendering, with-
out appearing to surrender, is not soldierly, to
say the least of it. We are glad to receive an
assurance that Lord DERBY'S Government are no
parties to it. We trust that the members of the
Cabinet who sit in the Upper House will let this
be thoroughly understood. If the scheme is
Lord Luc 's own, and if Lord SHAFTESBURY
shall be so ill-advised as to support it, upon
those two Noble Lords let all the honour or dis-
honour rest. We cannot believe that the majo-
rity of the House of Lords—especially after all
that has lately occurred will accept such
leadership.

THE " SATURDAY REVIEW" ON
" PATRIOTISM."

WE have ever held with the Roman senate of
old that it is a great virtue "not to despair of the
"common weal." Among the errors of states-
men and the delusions of multitudes, we honour
those who still believe that the country is sound
in head and heart ; cannot long be duped, and
will not be degraded. And the more general this
belief:; the more, in our view of the subject, will
love of country abound. Thinking thus of
Patriotism, we should not in general look to see
its growth much promoted by disquisitions in the
Saturday Review. A knot of clever young colle-
gians cannot instil it through satirical " leaders,"
however enlivened by figures of rhetoric, or
adorned by the richest varieties of illustration.
The trained pantologist may draw his decorative
material from sources as various as

Swart Moses by the Coptic Sea,
Plato, Petrarca, Livy, and Raphael,
And Eastern Confutzee ;
but he will only amuse or astonish, without in-
structing. His highest success will be to awaken
regret or indignation. But even these are some-
thing in their proper place, and assuredly the
events of last week had furnished both the occa-
sion and the material for calling them forth.
Her Majesty's Opposition (!) had attempted a

great political crime, though the attempt did
but issue abortively in a blunder. They had
discarded privata goscrygagg go public decorum
—ay, cvel the silatitiost draptries of faction—
to for a discredited olique (ID the nation they
had to deg e. five was indeed a
great cippottinity to **tram the virus of party
pith Ow ipilicrial gi) patriotism—a place-
hunting Whig with an honest Englishman. Our
satirical contemporary might have been as mer-
ciless as usual, without being unjust; and when
our eye fell on an article appropriately headed
" Our Enemies at Home," we regarded the title
as a promise rather than a threat, and were
prepared to see the lash laid on con
amore, without wasting pity on the thick-
skinned culprits. Perhaps we were hard-
hearted and deserved disappointment : it cer-
tainly came, whether deserved or no. The
weekly scourge of petty offences and feeble
delinquents could not rise "to the height of that
" great argument." All that its " talented
contributor" could learn from Mr. CARDWELL'A
defeat, or teach its readers in connection there-
with, amounted but to this, that military operations
are marred by official sympathy with our wisest
commanders—that the amour-propre of a
Governor-General is indissolubly bound up with
our national weal—and, finally, that Lord ELLEN-
BOROUGH has simply played the traitor, and the
House of Commons been guilty of misprision of
treason.

To any lover of unsparing, well-turned cen-
sure the rest of our contemporary's "slashing"
article must have afforded a dainty treat. Quid
non intus habet p What does it not include in its
sweeping range ? Starting from the general
thesis (so expressive of English sympathies and
the truest love of fatherland) that a true patriot
is now as rare in England as a nightingale north
of the Tweed—that the spirit of CHATHAM lives
but in the dreams of old romance—in brief, that
the sacred flame of patriotism in this laggard age
is fed only with the pages of the Saturday
Review, the writer proceeds to lay about him
with the rigour, if not with the justice, of a
Rhadamanthus. RUSSELL at Vienna, his name-
sake in the Crimea (Times correspondence),
ROEBUCK'S committee, and the Peace Con-
ference, BRIGHT on emigration, and LEWIS on
the government of India—all are lashed alike as
un-English and unpatriotic.

Now, we do not deny that our contemporary's
strictures contain a modicum of truth—that Ens-
lishmen often affect a cosmopolite spirit which is
most alien to their real character, or in their love
for publicity at home forget the mischiefs it may
work us abroad. Still, much of the writer's cen-
sure is exaggerated—much out of date—some
absolutely groundless. And, further, we object
to the censor, as well as to the "diminutio
capitis" which he would pronounce on his coun-
trymen in general. " Must crimes be punished
" but by greater crimes and greater criminals ?"
It is an evil thing, Heaven knows, "to make
" political capital at your country's expense."
But is it better to make literary capital in the same
manner ? And what has been the " pabulum" of
the Saturday Review since the commencement of
its brilliant career, but general satire and univer-
sal detraction ? Does it not range over the poli-
tical map of England, from Dan to Beersheba,
and find all barren ? Does it not even now.
while professing allegiance to a vague phrase,
openly proclaim the present hopelessness
of finding " a Ministry that will do"
Does it not deal with public men and their
motives in language which, if generally believed,
would render Government difficult and states-
manship impossible ? Were its political dis-
quisitions trusted as much as they are admired, no
principle could find a living representative, no
Minister a following. All would be distrust ast
home ; and how should we fare abroad ? W e
should stand condemned throughout Europe—on
our contemporary's own evidence—for an utter
lack of that one noble quality which has so often
been admitted in excuse of our arrogance or
oddity. Surely, the least patriotic of English
writers is he who formally announces to the world
the extinction of English Patriotism !

LORD PALMERSTON'S LOYALTY.
TIIAT the political tactics followed by Lord PAL-
NIER.sToN at the present time will receive the
final censure of posterity cannot be doubted
by any one who observes the opinion of
general society. Even as the facts now stand
there is a case against the Noble Viscount of no
ordinary gravity. Let us examine the nature of
the charge which is raised against the Noble
Lord in so many quarters, and we shall see
that England has good cause for congratulation
in the removal of so unscrupulous a politician
from power.

Only three months ago a grave complication
arose in our foreign affairs, and the policy of the
Palmerston Cabinet towards France came before
the House of Commons. On February the 19th
Lord PALMERSTON'S " Conspiracy to Murder
Bill " was discussed, and there were for the
second reading 215 and against it 234, leaving a
majority of 19 against the Government ; and,
after a Cabinet Council on the following day,
Lord PALMERSTON resigned his office, believing
that he had lost the confidence of the House of
Commons; and he accordingly compelled her
Majesty to seek new advisers at a critical
moment, when difficulties were sure to be the
legacies of any Ministry. Let it be remembered
that a Minister is not necessarily bound to assume
that one defeat, or even two, must necessarily be
taken as proofs that he has lost the confidence of
the House of Commons. Mr. Prrr, in 1784,
sustained several defeats and did not resign his
post; and in his short Ministry of 1834-5 Sir R.
PEEL did not throw up power until he had
ascertained by repeated trials that the House of
Commons was against him, and in his place on
the Bth of April, 1835, Sir R. PEEL stated that,
after "four impressive defeats," no other course
was left him—(Hansard's Debates, vol. xxvii., p.
980). Lord PALMERSTON, however, thought that
one "impressive defeat" was enough, and he
retired.
Whether the Noble Viscount was right or
wrong in doing so need not now be debated. If
he were wrong, so much the more discredit
redounds to an experienced statesman making a
political blunder at such a time ; but if he were
right in doing so, then the act of his resignation
in February impeaches the whole of the factious
conduct of the Noble Lord during the last three
months. By his retirement the Noble Lord cast
upon her Majesty the burden and responsibility
of a total change in her .Royal counsels ; and no
sooner was that change effected than Lord PAL-
witsros used every art, and employed all sorts
of resources, public and private, in order to
upset the Ministry which his own errors had
been the means of bringing into power. He
spared no trouble and omitted no practices by
which he could embarrass his successors, who had
the grave task imposed on them of directing
those affairs which had been cast into confusion
by Lord PALMERSTON'S failing to manage the
majority which had been once at -his command, and
which he had outraged by his arrogance. By his
resignation the business of the session was inter-
rupted ; for nearly three weeks the progress of
Parliamentary affairs was suspended, since six-
teen or eighteen gentlemen appointed to office
had to go through their re-election ; and while
it was admitted that the previous year had been
" lost," there was imminent danger that the
current session would also go for nought.
In the meantime the public opinion of Europe
was much perplexed at the sudden downfall of
Lord PALMERSTON, and some of those "foreign
intriguers " (alluded to by the CHANCELLOR of
the EXCHEQUER in his brilliant speech at Slough)
took advantage of the fact in order to spread
prejudice against the free Constitution of Eng-
land. In the saloons of Vienna, and in certain
German and French organs, there were virulent
sneers about " popular fickleness," " uncertainty
of the British Parliament," " wavering demo-
cracy," &c., &c., and a prima-facie case was
affected to be made against the insecurity of an
English Executive ; and even the dignity of a
British Crown.was invidiously contrasted with
the superior certainty of a more fixed and less
constitutional sovereignty. As the facts were
told upon the Continent it cannot be denied that
some of the taunts had effect. The partizans of