The Sun.
London, England, 1852-02-25 00:00:00

FEBRUARY 253 1852.

added, does the Duke of Richmond. The note of pre-
paration has already been sounded for the forthcoming
war. The electors of Marylebone and Finsbury—that
is the very snug parties of gentlemen who somewhere
or other assemble now and then to pass resolutions, pub-
lish manifestoes, and terrify Ministers—have met as
usual to protest against a change which seems from their
tone to have come rather suddenly upon them. As
they place the Whigs and the Conservatives under a
common anathema, and are far more horrified at the
ghost of the new Reform Bill than at the presage of Pro-
tection, we arenot prepared to state the particular plan of
operations with which they intend to recommence
the session. An evening contemporary, which seems es
much astounded at these events as the metropolitan po-
liticians we have mentioned, is pleased to hear that
whatever doubt exists on this subject (that is, the future
course of the new Cabinet) will be rhssipated immediately
after the re-election of the new Ministers by the intro-
duction of a resolution pledging the House of Commons
to free trade." On the other hand, the inhabitants of
Manchester, who are at least as thorough free-traders as
those of Marylebone, or as our energetic contemporary,
have resolved not to renew the League till there shall
appear some occasion for it, but simply to empower the
Council of the last League to watch the proceedings of
the new Administration, with some very proper hints as
to what may be expected should the new Premier ven-
ture to re-open the great question. On the side of the
new Government, and in its supposed interest, there is
an equal variety of announcement. In the familiar
columns of one judicious contemporary we already see
the watchword "Death or Protection," and the public
are assured that Lord Derby and his colleagues are
prepared to risk all their magnificent prospects, as
well as the safety of the empire, next week, or
to-morrow, if possible, on an express demand for a
good duty on corn. To such as are still hesitating how
to gFeet•tne new Administration, that is, whether with
a brief tolerance, or with instant defiance, we beg to re-
peat the views we have already expressed on this sub-
ject. There are two motives for political action, and
only two, that apply to the present question,—the first,
political feeling; the second, a calculation of the public
advantage. Now, is there a peremptory call on any
man's conscience to drive the new Ministers at once
from their places, and, with that view, to compel them
to declare themselves in advance of their present con-
victions, and months, if net years, before they are likely
to compromise themselves? It may be a sacred duty to
answer a question, but we cannot conceive it a sacred
duty to ask one, especially when the object is to make a
man belie himself, or hamper himself; to do wrong
either in ene way or another. We see no " call "in
the matter, except that mission which the proverb
assigns to fools, of 'asking questions which
the wisest may find it difficult to answer.
A just suspicion always attaches to gratuitous measures,
and nothing can be so gratuitous as to ask a qu.estion
simply because it will be disagreeable to answer it, and
to hasten a decision which will require time to make it
as it ought to be made. The second motive applicable
to the subject is the public convenience. But where is
the possible advantage to the community at large of '
driving the new Government from power, without reason-
able notice, by a species of forcible ejectment? Why
should we grudge tweeter or thirty new hands a little
taste of office? The nation surely is not specially
interested in conferring a perpetual monopoly of
power on a small clique, consisting of a few
noble families, respectable as they are, and
valuable as their services have undoubtedly
been. On the contrary, it is an advantage to
all parties, to the nation at large, to the whole
of the Legislature, and particularly to those who
have something, like political prospects of their own,
that all monopolies should ba broken up, and that all
sections of the political world should have a fair chance.
If Mr. Bright would like to be Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, he is far more likely to have it after a year or
two of Mr. Disraeli than after a long and exclusive high
Whig or high Tory prescription. Some one has observed
that there are only four men in the new Cabinet who
have been in a Cabinet before. Why not? There is all
the more chance now for those who have not been in a
Cabinet. If nobody is to be in a Cabinet who has
not already been in a Cabinet, or if new Ministers
are only, to be made at the rate of one in fire
years, political promotions, and, we will add,
political progress, will be very slow. Give the.
Conservatives a chance, for the sake of the public,
if not for their own. But does the convenience of the
public peremptorily demand a dissolution? Should Lord
Derby be thrown into a minority by a factious vote, he
would have no alternative but to dissolve the Parliament
at once, in order to pick up the Government seats, and
the gain which there would inevitably be in several
counties and open boroughs. But it would be to the advan-
tage, we will not say the security, of the nation, that at
this juncture it should be plunged into the animosities
of a general election, and the great cause of agriculture
versus manufacture once more re-opened with increased
bitterness? Most certainly it would not. The best
thing that can happen to us just now is, that the new
Government should have a fair trial, and we do not
know any law of political morality that should make a
little wise forbearance a positive sin.