Page images
PDF
EPUB

THE MANCHESTER MOVEMENT.

"MORE states have been ruined by faction than have fallen before the sword of the conqueror." Such was the observation of one of England's wisest moralists; and the temper of the times is such as to give it great significance. For, in the movements which have taken place immediately before and since the assembling of Parliament in the unscrupulous, bitter, and almost unprecedented attacks directed by a portion of the press against her Majesty's present Ministers we can detect nothing else than the spirit of absolute faction. Absolute, and yet unmeaning, since, in the present case, even the usual pretexts for opposition are awanting. There is, as yet, nothing at issue between the policy of Ministers and the feeling of the country. Not one single point in the Speech delivered from the Throne has been, or can be, selected as a substantive ground for opposition or amendment. That system of commercial policy which was inaugurated six years ago, is not to be disturbed. That resolution, at which Ministers have arrived after careful and mature deliberation, has been communicated to the country with a distinct assurance that it shall, in no way, be infringed. What specific measures may be proposed with regard to fiscal arrangements, is, at the moment we write, absolutely unknown. But we are assured that such measures are prepared, and that they will immediately be submitted to the House of Commons. Ingenuity itself can lay no direct charge at the door of Ministers-even suspicion can hardly be hinted at; and yet even now, both within and without the walls of Parliament, faction is hard at work, in order to prevent, if possible, even the disclosure of the Ministerial schemes.

This cannot arise from a conviction that the measures of Lord Derby's Government are likely to be distasteful to the country. Were it so, the surest method to destroy the Ministry would be to allow them to develop their schemes. After all that we have heard about bottles of smoke, and

not

conjurers, and such pitiable trash as even Sir James Graham was ashamed to retail, surely it would be worth while, were it only for amusement's sake, to have waited for the fantastic apparition. It could not be long delayed-it was not intended to delay it.

But, as time drew on, the very painful idea seems to have occurred to more than one of those facetious prophets, that the disclosure, when it did arrive, might be in entire accordance with the feelings and That cerwishes of the country. tainly was a consummation which they were deeply interested to prevent; and hence the present factions movement, to which the sound sense, honour, and interest of Great Britain are alike opposed.

It is not in the least degree surprising that those who were the leaders of the Free-Trade party should insist on this-that before the actual business of the Session commenced, Ministers should distinctly and unequivocally avow whether they intended to propose a return to the Protective policy, or to adopt the present system, and work it out fairly and conscientiously. For that purpose, Parliament was summoned to meet before Christmas, and the declaration has already been made. But it appears that such a declaration will not be held as satisfactory. Action is not sufficient for some of our modern Liberals-the thumb-screw must be applied to the mind. Nolens volens, the man who believed in Protection as a sound principle must not only cease to advocate it, after the verdict which the country has pronounced, but he must deny every separate article of his faith, and confess himself to have been utterly in the wrong. And no saving clauses are to be allowed him. He is not to be permitted to allude to anything which has taken place between 1846 and the present-to the Australian and Californian gold discoveries, which have obviated the hideous errors of the Currency Restriction Acts-or to the unparalleled emigration consequent upon Free Trade,

which has occasioned a scarcity of labour. He must become absolutely a hypocrite to himself. Such was the tenor of Mr Cobden's speech at the preliminary political banquet at Manchester; and such, taking the cue from him, is the present language of the faction. To say that no such recantation will ever be made, is simply to assert the honour of English gentlemen. There are at this moment many men who question the policy of the Catholic Emancipation Act, but who nevertheless acquiesce in its provisions without any idea of repealing it. But these Manchester dictators have no wish that opinion in this country shall be free. They are not one whit more tolerant than the officials of the Inquisition; they want to have a Test Act, to which mere subscription will not suffice. And what is their object? Not to secure the safety of the policy which they advocated-for they have the fullest assurance on the part of the Government that nothing will be done in any way to disturb that policy;-not surely to gain a triumph, for theirs is the triumph, however gained: their object is simply this-to break down the present Government upon any pretext; because they are apprehensive that the wisdom and beneficial nature of its measures may render them so popular as to retard the advancement of the revolutionary schemes of which Manchester is the hotbed, and which have long been matured and prepared by the chiefs of the democratic confederacy.

Those who are in the secret of the real League existing against the venerable institutions of England, were never so deeply mortified as when it was announced to them that Lord Derby-in the fulfilment of his duty as the first adviser of the Crown, and yielding to the force of circumstances, which clearly showed to his masterly and experienced mind that it was not advisable that an internal struggle so very serious as this should be prolonged-was resolved to take the result of the general election as conclusive upon the question at issue between Protection and Free Trade, and to shape the future measures of the Government accordingly. The

only account he had to settle was with those who had confided these interests to his hand. And it is most creditable to the agricultural interest of Great Britain that we can say, generally, that the course which Lord Derby has taken has met with their approval. Some there are, no doubt, who are opposed to any surrenderbut what kind of surrender is this which Ministers have made? Not one of opinion, certainly; for Lord Derby has distinctly and emphatically disclaimed anything of the kind. It is simply a yielding to the force of circumstances, which no human power could control. It implies nothing more than acquiescence in an inaugurated policy, against which an appeal was taken to the country, considered, and definitively refused. Therefore, to the country party, though defeated, there is no loss of honour. To them belongs the grace, which vulgar minds cannot appreciate, of relinquishing the contest when further resistance could be followed by no practical result. Free Trade has become an unopposed system, not because the bulk of the Conservative party are convinced of the soundness of the principles upon which it professes to be founded, but because they were convinced that by longer continuing the struggle, the dignity, the authority, and even the safety of Britain might be imperilled. And, setting faction aside, it is impossible to conceive a more noble or instructive spectacle, than that of a great political party, with enormous interests confessedly at stake, bowing in acquiescence to the verdict of the nation constitutionally obtained, and sacrificing, to the public tranquillity, the assertion of what it considers to be its claims.

And yet it is this very sacrifice which has so much incensed the Faction! They, with a principle which they professed to hold dear, would much rather that Lord Derby and the Protectionists had remained stubborn, and, even after the election, maintained the war à l'outrance. They have got everything that they wanted to get at least in so far as commercial measures are concerned-and yet they are not satisfied. They say that nothing will content them short of the

degradation of their opponents. Our only feeling of degradation is, that we have been forced into collision with such miserable condottieri, who, never having felt a generous emotion themselves, cannot appreciate one in others. But we must look a little more closely than this. The motive of such men usually lies deeper than the surface, for there are profound schemers among them; and, if we mistake not grievously, we shall be able to detect some trace, at least, of their real object, which, as we have already said, is to pave the way for the introduction of revolutionary schemes.

Their wish is to bring the Ministry into contempt, by getting them, in some way or other, to avow a fundamental change of opinion. Of that, no diligent peruser of the organs of public opinion, who understands the private history of the press, can entertain a doubt. For the last month or two the favourite artifice has been to impress upon the agricultural constituencies the notion that they were "betrayed." For this end no exertion has been spared. It is somewhat startling to read in journals, which, a year ago, were full of sneers, or worse than sneers, touching "the agricultural mind," "the Hawbuck tendencies," "the horse-shoe impressions," and "the chivalry of the smock-frock," long articles, protesting to the said Hawbucks that their cause has been infamously betrayed—that Lord Derby (who, being a Minister at the time, refused to go along with Peel in his rapid change of opinion) is influenced now by exceeding lust of power-that some of the leading gentlemen in England have been engaged in a conspiracy to keep up agitation for the most paltry and selfish purposes; and a deal more to the same effect. Now, in some cases, we believe, these articles are written conscientiously enough. The able authors are merely judging of others by themselves. They, too, have their ambition; but they are peculiarly liable to form a totally false estimate of that position which they suppose to be so enviable, that they do not hesitate to assume that men would make any sacrifice, even of their honour, to retain it. Very little, indeed, do they know of public life. Apart from the honourable ambition

in many cases the duty-of serving the country to the uttermost of their abilities, there is little in the life of a Cabinet Minister, or even an inferior member of the Government, to make it desirable. That man of public mark and ability, who can, with a safe conscience, decline entering into the turmoil of political life, may account himself most happy. It is not only the sacrifice of his domestic leisure and quiet which is required of him, but too often that of those objects which from boyhood he may have regarded as constituting the happiness and glory of his future life, and which he must now abandon so soon as he enters the dreary field of politics. But the charge is absolutely untrue. Here are the words of Lord Derby, recalling what absolutely did take place during last Session, when Ministerial explanations were required: "On the great question involved in those principles, without disguising my opinions, I declared, for myself and for those who did me the honour of acting with me-I will not say whether the declaration was wise or unwise, worthy or unworthy of a British Ministerbut I declared I should be guided by the sense which the community at large might express through its representatives, and that I should not bring forward any measure in accordance with my own views, if I found that it was not supported by a large majority of the country, for I thought that the question ought to be finally closed at the earliest period." If no such statement had been made by, or on the part of Lord Derby, his supporters might, undoubtedly, have had good reason now to object to his acquiescence in a policy to which they were thoroughly opposed. In that case, there might have been at least a plausible pretext for preferring this charge of treachery. But Lord Derby had nothing to conceal. His language was as unequivocal as that of man could be; and every elector throughout the country was aware, that upon the issue of that contest the predominance of one or other of the great principles depended. From first to last, we recognise in the conduct of Lord Derby nothing save that inflexible sense of duty which is so eminently characteristic of the man.

Summoned to conduct the government of this great country at the crisis when the Whigs had confessed themselves to be absolutely incompetent to the task, his first business was to consider how the government could be carried on. Between the supporters of the Free-Trade, and those of the Protective principle, there was still a large difference of opinion. It was necessary, therefore, that one or other should give way. In a matter of so much moment as this, what wiser, better, or more constitutional course could be adopted than the appeal to the country which was made in the course of the bygone summer? Of the strict propriety of such a course we are fully convinced by the experience of the last few years; for we hesitate not to say, that had a late deceased Minister allowed the sense of the country to have been taken at the time when he first avowed his own change of opinion, a very great deal of the subsequent agitation would have been spared. He did not do so, and it is to that circumstance mainly that the delay in the final settlement of the question must be ascribed. however, it is settled, in so far as Now, any question of the kind can be. We are certainly entitled to retain our doubts as to the wisdom of the verdict, but we are bound to acquiesce in it; for in a commercial country such as this, one fixed line of policy must be adopted by the Government, otherwise the whole affairs of the nation would fall into inextricable confusion. But it is said on the other side-"You who were the strenuous opponents of that commercial policy have no right to adopt it." Is it the wish of those who use such language that the agitation should be further prolonged? Or do they mean simply to say that acquiescence in any great national arrangement is not enough, but that the acquiescing party, though otherwise the most capable and powerful, is for ever to be debarred from taking an active share in the conduct of political affairs? It would appear almost as if the latter view were that entertained by the extreme section of the Radicals; for we cannot read Mr Villiers' notice of motion, made, as Mr Cob

[Dec.

den tells us, at his especial request, without perceiving at a glance that it is intended less to secure the continuance of Free Trade, than to embarrass her Majesty's Ministers. On the other hand, the amendment of which the Chancellor of the Exchequer has claration of the course which Minisgiven notice, is a frank and free deters are resolved to pursue; for it declares that unrestricted competition being adopted after due deliberation, is the principle of our commercial is the duty of Government unresystem. This House is of opinion it servedly to adhere to that policy on those measures of financial and adcircumstances of the country, they ministrative reform which, under the may deem it their duty to introduce."

may be the language they hold, has Not one of the Radicals, whatever thing will be done subversive of the the slightest apprehension that anyFree-Trade principle. They are chagrined, and even disappointed, that the contest has not lasted longer, because their game has always been to array classes in hostile opposition to one another, so that, by engendering suspicion and discontent, they might the better arrive at their aims. To see the people happy and contented the hopes of your ardent Friend of is by no means the consummation of Liberty. On the contrary, he wishes to see them discontented, and does his peaceful harvest. best to make them so, for his is not a The suppression, party strife, is to such a man a seritherefore, of any great element of his chance of provoking agitation for ous loss; because it lessens materially ulterior measures. it may not be supposed that we are And in order that writing vaguely, or sketching out views for our opponents which exist only in our own imagination, we shall refer specially to the oration of Mr John banquet. We are always glad when Bright, delivered at the Manchester Mr Bright appears as a speaker, bethat systematic caution which other cause he is not gifted with much of agitators display, and is apt, in his glimpses of the future as it appears to fervour, to give us some interesting his prophetical eyes. when speaking from the same platIn particular, form as Mr Cobden, he invariably

tries to outstrip that democratic champion. He has not yet forgotten the "testimonial," of which, probably, with some reason, he thinks he ought to have received a share; and, accordingly, he never loses an opportunity of outbidding the other in popularity. On this last occasion he was peculiarly vehement; and, strange to say, the vials of his indignation were poured upon the House of Commons. His views are worth attending to.

"The fact is that, as an industrial people, we carry the aristocracy on our backs. Under your representative system, Manchester, Glasgow, and Birmingham are dwarfed in the House of Commons to the size of Harwich, Thetford, and Totness, and the whole population, and all the electors of these three boroughs, are very much smaller-nay, do not even approach near-to the population of a single ward in this borough of Manchester. I am of opinion that where there are population, industry, wealth, and intelligence, if we have a free constitution at all, there must be power; and if this be not granted, then, I say, that our constitution is a sham, and our representation is an imposture. I am not anxious that we should have other great movements for great objects. I myself have had so much of political agitation, that nothing but the most imperative and overwhelming sense of public duty would induce me to connect myself with anything farther of the kind; but I do believe that we owe it to posterity, as to ourselves, that we should learn a lesson from this great movement which is about to terminate; and that we ought, if we can, during our generation, to make the course of our children, and of their children, easier in procuring such political ameliorations and changes as the circumstances of the country may require. The patriotism of our day does not consist in the destruction of monarchies or the change of dynasties. Our fathers wrested the institution of an annual Parliament from unwilling and despotic monarchs. it ours-and I speak to those who can do it if we will it—be it ours to wrest a real House of Commons from a haughty nobility, and to secure the lasting greatness of this nation on the

Be

broad foundations of a free Parliament and a free people!"

After separating the chaff from the grain, and setting aside the mere rhetorical common-places, Mr Bright's argument, in so far as we can comprehend it, appears to be this: If it was wise to remove the Corn Laws in 1846, it was unwise to have imposed them in 1815; and all the while that they lasted, an act of injustice was committed. If the House of Commons had been a properly constituted body, the Corn Laws would have been long ago repealed. But such

was

not the case; therefore, the House of Commons is a sham and an imposture, and "it is our duty"that of Bright & Co.-"to wrest a real House of Commons from a haughty nobility." The objection to the present House of Commons is that it is too slow and deliberative: Mr Bright wishes to see legislation proceed with the speed of a high-pressure engine. We are not called upon to argue that point now; nor need we remind Mr Bright that it was from that very identical Manchester, in which he was speaking, that the cry for protection in favour of native manufactures first proceeded. We accept his words as a clear indication of the ulterior objects of himself and his party, of which they do not intend to lose sight; and such being the case, we can easily comprehend why the final settlement of the question, by the abandonment of further debate, is anything but agreeable to the secret junta of Manchester. In the first place, they have at present nothing which they can hold up as a practical grievance to justify their aggressive designs. We are rather inclined to think, from the tendency of certain late exhibitions by their active pioneer, Mr Bright, that the Established Church of England will be selected as their first object of attack; but that enterprise may prove a difficult one, and it has not as yet been declared. In the second place, they now see, pretty plainly, that a permanent union with the Whigs is out of the question. That only could have been effected in consequence of a protracted resistance to Free Trade, in which case the Manchester party would have been entitled to make, and would probably have made,

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »