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

THE PRESS, MAY 1, 1858.

420

THE WEEK..

A MEETING of Members of the House of Commons friendly to the pre-
sent Government, was held, by Lord DERBY'S invitation, in Downing-
street, yesterday afternoon. It was attended by 189 Members, and
the apologies of those unavoidably absent, on Committees of the
House, and other engagements, augmented the number practically to
about 230 or 240. The principal topic adverted to was, the anticipated
proceedings on the India Bill. Since Lord HARRY VANE'S resolution to
postpone legislation would operate as a negative on the Government
proposals, it must be treated as tantamount to a vote of want of con-
fidence. Not that its success would involve the necessity of resigns•
tion; but that it certainly would betoken an absence of confidence on
the part of the House. This motion, therefore, as far as was consis-
tent with individual engagements, required to be resisted.
Allusion was made to one or two other subjects. Lord DERBY
complained, not unreasonably, of the conduct of the leading members
of the late Government on two recent occasions. When Lord PAL-

nzairroE, last year, opposed and defeated Mr. LOCKE KING, he was
mainly indebted for his triumph to the support frankly afforded him
by the Conservatives. This year. when the same motion was brought
on by the same gentleman, Lurd PALMERSTON stayed away, and Lord
JonE RUSSELL, having often before opposed Mr. KING, now declared in
his favour ! Thus the Whig Leaders desert the ground on which they
had stood for seven years past, merely for the party purpose of caus-
ing a Conservative defeat. Still worse was their conduct on the occa-
sion of Mr. MorisELL's motion. This was the only positive proposal of
the Government which had mot with a negative, and yet the Govern-
ment, in bringing it forward, was merely carrying out the plans of the
last Administration. Those plans were extant in the handwritings of
the late Ministers ; and yet, when they were brought forward by
the present Government, those very Ministers actually voted against
them !

Some observations were added on the Church-rate question, the
Oaths Bill, &c., and the meeting, which was marked by great
unanimity, broke up. There are, however, some few Conservative
members, who, having voted with Mr. BARING in February last for
postponing Indian legislation until nest year, will not now reverse
their votes. These will vote with Lord HARRY VANE ; but it is not
anticipated in any quarter that his Lordship's motion will be carried.
While we write, we learn that the motion has been rejected by
447 votes against 57 ; that the House of Commons has gone into
Committee; that the first Resolution has been adopted without a
division ; and that the whole question seems now in a fair way for a
settlement.

The House of Lords has rejected the clause in the Oaths Bill,
which gave a special exemption to the Jews, by an increased majority.
Last year the Peen present who voted for the Bill were 91; those
against it, 109—majority, 18. This year the Peers present, in favour
of the clause, were 80 ; against it, 119—majority, 39. This is a marked
increase.

It is now rumoured that if the Peers persist in this vote, Sir R.
RITHELL will move a resolution of the House of Commons to seat
Baron ROTHSCHILD, and that Lord JOHN RUSSELL will support it.
Sir R. BETHELL is at all tames a most unsafe guide, and we shall
feel some wonder if Lord JOHN ventures to embark in a vessel steered
by him. But we deeply regret to say, that although we have given his
Lordship due praise, in our first article, for the " pluck " which he
often manifests, we cannot say one syllable in vindication of his steadi-
ness or consistency. Like Sir R. PEEL, he has been, all his life,
gradually yielding to democratic pressure. He began by warmly
espousing " Protection," and objurgating " Free Trade." In 1841 he
Game out as a " fixed-duty man ;" and in five years more he had fallen
into the " total repeal" folly.
As to Reform itself, for many years he maintained that the settle-
ment of 1832 was final and conclusive. About 1846 he began to falter
a little; in 1850 he expressed to a friend his fear that he might be com-
pelled to take up the Reform question again :—iu 1852 he actually
produced a measure; and now he is said to be prepared to go great
lengths.

Fer several years he has stood firm on the Church-rate question ;
this year he shows signs of giving way. Mr. Locits Kum's motion he
has steadily resisted for seven years past; this year he advises its
adoption! In short, Lord JOHN seems to think that Lord PALMERSTON
stands in his way as to any alliance with tbo Conservative party ; and
that, therefore, Messrs. BRIGHT and RORBUOK must ho his allies in any
future arrangement. If this bo the state of the case, he may make a
compact which will be as bad, or even worse, than the Lichfield-houso
Compact; which proved the means of embodying and organizing the
Conservative party.

The Times has declared that the present Government has encoun-
tered "no factious opposition." This is a definite statement, and
invites definite inquiry. If it is true, we can only say that the supporters
of the late Government have been the most unfortunate of men. They
have not been factious, but, owing to uncontrollable accidents, they
were compelled on Monday last to support a motion brought in by a
subordinate of Lord PANMUBK, condemning the policy which the late
Secretary at War had inaugurated, and his deputy had endorsed, and
which Ministers, deputy, and party, had they occupied the Ministeiial
benches, would alike have been prepared to defend. The fact that they
either voted against it, or abstained from voting at all, when it devolved
on their opponents to carry it out, is only a proof of ho w much the Whigs
are superior to public opinion, and how little they regard what may be
thought of themselves when the cause of their country, as they say, is
at stake. With similar courage on the following night did they either
support or abstain from opposing another very important measure
which they had vigorously opposed last year, but of which the lapse of
twelve months had induced them to take a different view. Careless of
the construction that ill-minded people might place upon their
conduct, they openly evinced their approbation of Mr. Loess Km by
tacitly denying their own words of this time last year, and of Mr. Mos-
SELL'S petition by proclaiming the folly of their own measure devised
not three months ago. We should not put a harsh interpretation on the
conduct of great men. There was once a famous person of his day of
whom the poet well wrote :

How Henley lay inspired beside a sink,
And to mere mortals seemed a priest in drink.

Uninitiated people mistook his inspiration for drunkenness, and Po we
sadly fear that by people who do not read the Times the inimitable
self-sacrifice of the Whigs will be mistaken for faction. Vulgar minds
are apt to consider faction the doing for our own private ends what we
have often declared to be injurious to the public interests : and con-
demning for the sake of regaining power what had received our sanc-
tion before we lost it : to connive in opposition at measures which we
resisted in office for the sake of embarrassing our successors ; and to
accept the assistance of political opponents on a particular question
to maintain our own position, while we refuse it to them in turn when
the same question is at stake. We say the Palmerstoniaus have
been the most unfortunate of men in having been driven
from the purest motives to adopt a course of action which
bears so close a resemblance to faction. We think this ought to
be made quite clear to the people. They hate factious conduct,
and if they once fancied that Lord PALMERSTON had been acting in this
manner, and that these were the arts used to discredit Lord DERBY'S
Government, it might really be excessively injurious to the Noble
Lord the ex-Premier. We know there is a kind of silence which pro-
ceeds from consciousness of innocence. But we think, in this case,
the Noble Lord had better condescend to clear himself. Of the merits
of the question at issue between Mr. MONSELL and General PEEL, or
rather Mr. MoNsEnt. and Lord PANMURE, we have already expressed our
opinion. We don't particularly admire the change which Mr. MON.
SELL'S petition intercepts. But though we so far like the result of the
motion, we cannot say we envy the position of the public men who
brought it about.

The schism in the Liberal " denomination " (it can scarcely b
called a " party ") still continues, and is not likely to be closed up
It is well to have a thorough knowledge of the causes that break the
Liberals into so many fragments, because we are convinced that
these causes lie much deeper than is supposed by hasty observers,
and we cannot endorse the views which the Times of Tuesday takes of
this remarkable state of things. It is there said :
In the present divided state of parties, and the fatal predominance ofjeslous
feelings, nobody can lead. Several smaller factions, finding themselves precluded from
power, have settled into a purely obstrnotive policy.

But the root of the schism lies much deeper than the merely per-
sonal grounds of " jealous feelings " hinted at there. The fact is, that
one must study closely the feelings and prejudices of the Liberals
" out of doors," in order to understand the alienation of so many
popular Members of Parliament from the banners of Lords PALMERSTON
and JOHN RUSSELL. There still remains, though hanging loosely
together, a considerable following for the "non-party Free-traders.
A large portion of the commercial classes is attached, more or less, to
this particular denomination, and they are not interested in mere
political manoeuvres. Social prosperity, and the general well-being of
the industrial portion of the community, are the objects dearest to them.
In such times as we are living in, it would be scarcely possible for the
most gifted orators to awaken their passions. The Parliamentary
representatives of this important section of society are not zealous
partizans now-a•days, whatever they might have been in former
periods ; and they do not want to be made mere playthings in the hands
of the Whig leaders. There is another class in the Liberals " out of
doors," which is of a totally different kind, and whose tone of thought
is not without significance. The Whig gentlemen of England would
be intensely zealous as partizans, but that they have been utterly disi
gusted with the exclusive manner in which the official patronage. of
the Whigs has been given to Cavendishes, Greys, and Howards, with'
out end. Those Whig gentlemen may not be great territorial lords,
but they have aristocratic pretensions of their own, and they think
that their importance in the Liberal connection has not been duly
appreciated by the Whig oligarchy, while at the same time they feel
not a little jealous of so many popular seats being held by pure conk

rw•r

mercialists of the ultra-Free-Trade section. Then, again, in the
general body of the Parliamentary Liberals, there is a wide divergence
of opinion on the very primary principles of
." Constitutional Govern-
ment." There can be no more interesting political problem than that
involved in the question, " Must you have vigorous political adminis-
tration, in order successfully to carry on the affairs of the empire, and
to supply a policy ; or can you trust to the decisions of the floating
" public opinion of the time, to popularmeetings, to newspaper articles,
" and to the talk of political clubs, looking for a satisfactory result to
" the action of those diverse elements in the Legislature ?" Upon this
great subject every sound Conservative has his mind firmly made up.
The Conservative respects public opinion, but his political faith is in
the free institutions of England, and in government by " Queen,
Lords, and Commons." A vast portion of the Liberals have no rooted
faith in government by institutions, and they are only too ready to
confound transient clamour with "public opinion." They run after
"popularity," and they think that it must decide every question. But
on this point a highly respectable portion of their party dissents from
the enthronement of an ephemeral " popularity." At one time it was
" popular" with the Liberals to cheer for " Catholic Emancipation,' and
to subscribe to " O'Connell Tributes ;" and at another time it was
"popular" with them to vilify Cardinal Wlsemati, and to prosecute
Irish agitators. The sensible men of the Whigs do not take the exag-
gerated views about the worth in government of mere " popularity."
There is thus, it cannot be denied, a Conservative Liberalism and a
Radical Liberalism. Of the former school a highly intellectual expres-
sion will be found in the interesting work of Earl GREY, and sometimes
it finds a thoughtful utterance in the better speeches of Lord Joan Rus-
sell. The difference between these two schools of " Liberalism" splits
the connection to a greater extent than can be easily imagined by
those who have not closely watched the operation of political causes.
Foreign Affairs also contribute to loosen the bonds between the
various sections of the Liberals; and it is worth recollecting that the
Liberals have always had a strung tendency to split upon the Foreign
Affairs. The most ruinous schism that ever took place in their party
was on the question of policy upon the first French Revolution. The
Conservatives all stood together, and were joined by many Liberals.
In 1809, when the Government was weak, the Liberal Opposition
broke up by dissensions about the "Peninsular War ;" and again in
1815 as to the propriety of going to war with NAPOLEON after his return
from Elba. In our own time Lord PALMERSTON was a fertile source of
bickering and internal discussion in the Whig party even during his
Foreign Secretaryship. One portion of the Liberals are active in
their sympathies with the revolutionists of the Continent, and they
would like a " spirited " or intermeddling policy, in which John Bull
should dictate to other nations how to manage their affairs. The other
section is more cautious and reserved in its views, but this fund a-
mental difference is of great importance at the present time. To these
various considerations, and to these broad and pervasive causes of dis-
sension, add " the fatal predominance of jealous feelings " alluded to
by the Times, and we are fairly entitled to ask what chance is there of
any unity being likely to take place amongst the Liberals? We
believe that there are permanent sources of dissension amongst them
shin would render any Ministry formed from them liable to sink at any
moment. Surely what has happened to Lord PALMERSTON'S Cabinet
would be likely to occur to any other Liberal Government !

Mr. Csian's Bill for procuring agricultural statistics, meeting the
fate of every similar measure that has been introduced into the House
of Commons since 1837, has been rejected. The advantages to be
derived from securing a return of the number of acres cropped on the
let of June in each year with wheat, barley, clover, hops, &c., we can-
not perceive. Will the number of acres sown be any criterion of the
quality and quantity of the crop ? Undoubtedly they will not ; yet
what is the argument put forth by Mr. BASS in support of the measure?
" If," said he, " I found 3,000,000 acres had been cultivated with
"barley one year, while in the year previous scarcely 2,000,000 had
"been planted, instead of sending my agents abroad to buy barley,
" I should keep them at home." We wonder that no one suggested to
the Hon. Member that to carry out his theory, in these free-trade days,
it would be necessary for him to procure an acreage return of the
cropping of the whole world. It is said that all the Governments of
the Continent, with the exception of Spain and Turkey, possess such
returns, but can we depend on them? Might not a Government, when
famine was about to be sore in the land, send forth its agents to buy
corn, and at the same time declare that the harvest was ar. average
one? But we believe that it will ever be impossible to calculate from
area of land sown in June what the harvest will be in September.
Statistics, to be of use, must be reliable and precise. One thing, how-
ever, we think is quite clear,—that if the probable produce of the soil
cannot be estimated with certainty in England, neither can it be com-
puted in Scotland or Ireland, and therefore the sooner the
grants for these services, amounting to something like 7,0001.
a year, aro withdrawn, the better. We are glad to find
that the President of the Board of Trade did not listen to the argu-
iment insinuated by some of the supporters of this Bill, " that no harm
was likely to come from the measure ; therefore, 10,0001. might be
voted annually to carry out its provisions." It is high time that a
stop
.be put to the present system of making small grants whenever a
prima-facie case can be made out in support of' them by " our own
rtcporter," or any other fidgetty member. Any crotchet with a scientific
mge has been able of late years to secure a grant of public money, and
this, too, at a period when our soldiers were dying for want of proper
barrack accommodation, and our War Ministers were obliged to screw
and b pinch in every direction. We recommend the House of Commons
to ear in mind the old adage, "Take care of the pence; the rounds
will take care of themselves."

IRISH MELODIES.

THE LAST OF IRELAND'S WRONGS.
BY ONE OF THE " GLORIOUS MINORITY."

Air—"F_rto go bragb."

Friends ! Pathriots ! Irishmen ! whisht, while I'm tellin'
The Parliament news, fit to blister my tongue !
Oppress'd and outvoted, my bosom is swellin'

At Erin's worst grievauce—the Saxon's last wrong ;
They poison'd the praties, and brought us the famine.
With out-male and pig-male the boys they'd be crammin
And set them to work, if they thought they'd be shammin.—
But what was all this to the tax on Potheen ?

We argued and bluster'd—we whined and we wrangled—
The House was too stubborn to lead or to drive ;
With brogue and with blarney for voters we angled,
Yet couldn't catch one but a poor thirty-five !
Bad luck to Disraeli's statistic oration,
His solemn appales to " the sinse of the Nation,"
His "fair distribution" and " equalization "
He's laid on a thuuderin tax on Potheen !

Time was, when each feast set the cudgel in motion,
When we christen'd each Saint's day with pure mo
Or mix'd " the materials " with tipsy devotion

In the name of St. Kevin or Brian Boru I
But now we may hang up the useless shilelagh—
Must pray to the Saints without toasting them daily,
And stint the ten tumblers we tippled so gaily ;
For the could•hearted Saxon has tax'd our Potheenl

In spite of St. Patrick and Cardinal Wiseman,
The Isle of the Saints shall be blighted and bann'd,
And that mur►.herin' villain, the Saxon exciseman,
Go huntin' for stills thro' a desolate land !
But faix, that same huntin' he'll find rather risky—
The sons of Green Erin tho' paeeful are frisky,
'no' lovers of law, they are lovers of whisky,
And it's thim that 'll fight in the cause of Potheen !