The Sun.
London, England, 1866-03-28 00:00:00

the liberties of Longton and Lane-end, in the Pot-
teries, ' call the attention of the House to the un-
precedented state of distress which oppresses the
manufacturing, agricultural, commercial, and work-
ing classes of society ; they do not pretend to know
the cause of this national calamity, but they feel it
to be a duty incumbent upon them to state to the
House that, unless immediate relief be afforded, the
impending consequences to all classes of the commu-
nity will be dreadful.' The inhabitants of Birming-
ham refer to the' want of employment for labourers,
the general reduction of the wages of labour, the
general deficiency of profit in every branch of
productive industry throughout the country, and
the positive losses which attend the employment of
capital and industry in the most important branches
of trade, together with all the distresses which now
afflict the country !' Gentry, clergy, yeomanry,
and tradesmen of the borough of Warwick state
' that the general distress which prevails among
all the agriculturists of this kingdom has brought
many of the labouring poor into a state of deplor-
able suffering, from the total inability of the far-
mers to employ them.' Manufacturers, shopkeepers,
tradespeople, and inhabitants of the city of Coven-
try ' have for some time past beheld with feelings
of the most painful interest the silent work of de-
struction which is proceeding with such amazing
rapidity among all classes of the agricultural,
manufacturing, trading, and labouring population
of this once flourishing and happy kingdom." That
was England thirty-six years ago, on the eve of the
Reform Bill ' • and everybody who can remember as
far back will be able to add from his own recollec-
tion a crowd of images, facts, phrases, and figures,
all contributing to the same dismal picture. There
was reason to fear in those days. What fear is
there now? Who dreams of marches upon Lon-
don, monster meetings, new constitutions, and
anarchy ? Nobody. ile fear, and one only, oc-
curs to us as likely to haunt the minds of the
classes which in the last generation joined the
working men in their simultaneous cry of suffering
and remonstrance. One fear, one alone, that we
know of, possesses any class of employers likely to
be found in the Birmingham district. It is the fear
of all their working men suddenly presenting them-
selves to demand higher wages for less work, or con-
ditions still more likely to embarrass production and
enterprise. We do not grudge the working man his
higher vantage and his better chance ; but we do say
that be has no occasion, and certainly he shows no in-
clination, to march upon the metropolis and occupy
Palace-yard. And now for the portrait of Parliament,
or, rather, of the House of Commons, by the pencil
of Mr. Bright. Ile say it "is never hearty for re-
form, or for any good measure. It hated the Reform
Bill of 1831 and 1832. It hated the bill which re-
pealed the Corn Law in 1846. It does not like the
Franchise Bill now upon its table. It is to a large
extent the offspring of landlord power in the coun-
ties, and of tumult and corruption in the boroughs,
and it would be strange if such a parliament were
in favour of freedom, and of an honest representa-
tion of the people. But, notwithstanding such a
Parliament, this bill will pass if Birmingham and
other towns will do their duty." Mr. Bright then
proceeds to describe the Tories ; of course, in no
flattering terms, though he has never hesitated to
act with them when it answered a purpose. The
Tories, however, are not the whole of the danger,
nor is it to shut them up, or out, as may be, that
the Midland population is to march to Palace-yard.
The special objects of this attack are " a small sec-
tion of men who do not accept the name of Tory,
but zealously do its work." These combine to form
what Mr. Bright calls several times over " a dirty
conspiracy," and he does not think a " more dirty
conspiracy" has been seen in the House of Com-
mons for many generations, against the bill and
Lord Russell and the popular policy. Mr. Bright, as
if twinged with a recollection or two, finds it neces-
sary to use the comparative. There have been con-
spiracies—aye, " dirty conspiracies," but this he
will have to be more " dirty" than any he ever
knew of. This, then, is the House of Commons.
A dangerous moietyis made up of elements thoroughly
and intrinsically bad, bad in name and in nature,
and of some other element united, Mr. Bright says,
" in a dirty conspiracy." But that does not save the
rest, and it is hard to say whether Mr. Bright deals
more hardly with the conspirators than with the
non-conspirators. The collective house, he argues,
hates the bill, and will not pass it, but for fear of the
men from Birmingham and other large towns. It
can be bullied and frightened into its duty, and in
no other way. Selfish and corrupt, it will not give
up an iota of its privilege and position, except as
beasts of burden are made to do their duty by the
fear of the whip or the cudgel. The House, like
all despots, is suspicious and cowardly. There is
nothing heroic about it. It will not run needless
risks, for it is not animated by a high sense of duty
or devoted to any principle. It has a good worldly
position and plenty of good things, and these it
wishes to keep, but it won't die nor be beaten for
their sake. Mr. Bright says in effect—Parliament
has a deep detestation of the Reform Bill ; but you
have only to shout loud enough and collect in suffi-
cient numbers, and it will pocket the affront, and
pass the bill. Now, we submit that this is not a
correct portrait of the House of Commons. It is
plain, however, that Mr. Bright has let out the true
secret of the course taken by him and his Ministerial
coadjutors. The bill, he admits—he boasts—is not
an appeal to the good sense, the intelligence, and
the patriotism of the House of Commons, to their
confidence in the people, or any such sentiment, for
they possess no such sentiment. But they fear the
people, and it is to this brutish fear Mr. Bright ad-
vises his constituents to appeal. Pass this bill, he
says, virtually to the House of Commons ; pass it,
however incomplete, however irrational, however
preposterous in the order of proceeding ; pass it,
even though it is a leap in the dark, and takes you
instantly out of your depth ; pass it, even though it
hand over the further necessary reforms to a new
Parliament and a worthier constituency ; pass it,
though you gain only a respite from your fears, and
shall have no thanks for your pains, because, if you
don't pass it, the masses will assemble, and it will
be worse with you. We have taken the measure of
your aristocratic quality, and it will flinch in the
crisis. Pass the bill, because you must and will pass
the bill, and we will make you. It is for this bill,
for this policy, on this understanding and this esti-
mate of the powers to be overcome and the method
certain to be victorious, that Mr. Bright has en-
tered into an alliance with Lord Russell. But this,
of course, is not a "dirty conspiracy." It is a "dirty
conspiracy," we are told on this high authority, to
decline absolute confidence in people rho refuse to
show that confidence, who appeal to terror, and who
do not conceal for an instant that fear must be your
only counsellor. The Ministerial, or rather the
super-Ministerial, spokesman admits that the work
itself is dirty, for what can be dirtier than an abso-
tute abandonment of " reason and forethought'at the
blind suggestion of a merely personal danger ? He
tells the house it has dirty work to do. It has to do
what, by its own light, it believes to be wrong, and
what, by the light of common sense, is, indeed,
irrational. But it must do the work, for it is bid,
and has no help. So, as there is dirt on both sides
of the alternative, in Mr. Bright's estimate, and
they who support a Franchise Bill shutting their