By_G^

^aii-

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

TORIES,
WHIGS AND RADICALS.

THOUGHTS

PRESENT STATE OF PARTIES

PUBLIC AFFAIRS:

IN ANSWER TO

A LETTER ^Y E. L. BULWER, ESQ. M.P.

LONDON :
ROAKE AND VARTY, 31, STRAND,
42. 1834,

LONDON :
ROAKE ANB VAETY, 31, STRAND.

PREFACE,

There is much in these sheets, which I am
sensible has been already before the public in
various shapes ; and I am not at all anxious to
claim merit which is not my own. In particular,
I have been anticipated in a part of ray argu
ment by Mr. Serjeant Spankie, in a Letter
which seems to me to combine the energy of
Erskine, with the philosophy of Burke. But
at the present moment, it is so important that
truth should be set forth, that I shall not fear to
repeat it after wiser and abler men.

B 2

TORIES, WHIGS AND RADICALS,

Sir,
The letter which you have done the public
the honour to address to them, is a very remark
able phenomenon; for considering the circum
stances under which it was written, it was hardly
credible that a person, even of your slender
capacity, should not have been spirited up to the
production of something better. You and your
faction are in your agony. You have now to
measure your strength with the aristocracy of
England, whom you have insulted and oppressed ;
with the commercial and agricultural interests of
the community which you have cheated, and were
proceeding to destroy : with the wealth, the in
telligence, the education ofthe country. If you
are beaten now — and beaten, disastrously, igno-
miniously beaten, I am convinced you will be —

your importance and presumption are extin
guished for ever. That you should feel how-
desperate is your coodJiion, is in no respect
remarkable. But that you should manifest your
resentment by such a pamphlet as you have
written, was perhaps not to be e;^pected, "An
ger," says Lord Bacon, " makes fools witty, but
keeps them poor," It appears to 1 eep radicals
poor, without endowing them with the coasola-
tory compensation of wit, Jt is a difficult thing
to read your letter without feelings of extreme
disgust and contempt. You have thought fit to
use terms of insolent and scornful derision to
wards the greatest and highest men of the land,
which however are harmless, because they are
ridiculous ; but they sbow the spirit by which
you are actuated. Viewed in this light, your
letter is of value. It must show the most stupid
that your party are influenced by the basest of
motives, by selfish ambition, by the most bare
faced and outrageous personal animosity. You
have thought proper to put a speech into the
mouth ofthe King, which, as far as the animus
goes, is a libel. It is clearly intended lo de
grade the dignity, to insult tbe honour, of royalty.
The extreme stupidity of the thing will no
doubt be its protection against justice. But if
the king needed any confirmation of the hatred,
and bloody malignity entertained for him by

your faction, this letter has certainly furnished it
in abundance. No king could surrender him-
selF into the hands of such avowed enemies. You
are determined lo make the gulf betwixt radi
calism and the throne as broad as possible, I
thank you for the policy. The danger was, lest
the mind of the sovereign might be beguiled into
the fatal error, that the preservation of his crown
was compatible with an alliance with jacobinism
and treason.
But really, sir, we may fairly ask, upon what
ground does such a person as yourself presume
to insult your king? You are a petit litterateur
of very small calibre. You have received more
money, in return for poorer trash, in tbe shape
of books, than any man recorded in tbe register
of bookseller's backs. I must refer you to Mr.
Westmacott's catalogue raisonne of tbe books
from which you have borrowed, without acknow
ledging, all the little merit which the works called
your's contain. Tbe daily and hourly pulfs of
your books with which your employer nauseates
the public, are tbe disgrace of literature. No
man, who felt for the dignity of letters, could
condescend to dun the public for the support of
liis pen. Your name has driven Rowland's Ma
cassar Oil out of the field. It has put Day and
Martin to the blush, Wright with his cham
pagne is but a poor proficient in tbe art of puff-

8
ing, compared with you and your master. And
what are your works ? The drunken adventures
of a blackguard fellow, whom you are so well
acquainted with honourable feelings and man
ners, as to call a " gentleman ;" — the history of
a cut-throat ; it being the praiseworthy object of
your book to make a murderer a very interesting
character. Just in the same way the execution
of the worst felons is sure to excite the sympa
thies and sorrows of waiting-maids and milliners.
Indeed your performances are generally adapted
to the feelings and understandings of this des
cription of people. In the meantime, I am not
aware that there is in all your volumes a single
word in support of virtue ; as for religion, of
course that is out of the question. And you are
the person who take upon yourself to speak in
sultingly of the King and the Duke of Welling
ton ? If the dignity and weight of satire is to be
measured by the insignificance of the slanderer,
certainly your letter may be safely disregarded.
But the truth is, I believe it contains as much
as can be said against the present government,
though that is but very little. Nor can we ap
preciate the probable mischief of falsehood, by
a simple consideration of its enormity. It may
be as well therefore to consider what you have to
say, which, apart from your attempts at jocularity,
which really are imbecile and contemptible be-

yond your usual decrepitude of wit, and also
setting aside your occasional puffs of yourself,
and your admiration and wonderment at the
profundity of Lord Melbourne's learning, may
be reduced to this— that the people have power,
and will not give it back ; that Sir Robert Peel
cannot govern the people, as he is a Tory, and
the people can only trust Radicals and Whigs.
That the "people^ having obtained power,
will probably keep it, no one will deny. This
power, however, may be so wielded, as to become
a scourge too great to be endured, and the peo
ple will find refuge iu a despotism against their
own cruelty. But it is right that we should un
derstand our terras before we dispute ; other
wise, we shall be disputing about nothing. You
say the people have had power given thera by
the Reform Bill. This is only true oi apart —
and, in many respects, a very subordinate and
inferior part — ofthe people. For by the people^ I
understand the whole community. I understand
the terra to erabrace the highest and the lowest
of ranks— the king and the peasant— the noble
and the mechanic. Any definition short of this,
is insufiicient and absurd. For upon what prin
ciple will you exclude any Briton, whether sove
reign or subject, from the pale of the people ?
Where will you begin ? Where will you end ?
The great error of the Reform Bill was the ten

10
pound franchise clause. By this, the lower
orders have been put in direct antagonism with
the higher. It was not simply that a new and
enormous power was put into their hands, but it
was extorted from the aristocracy, under cir
cumstances which taugiit the people to make a
vindictive use of it. They were told, that the
red'ess of their grievances was henceforward to
be in their own power. They were summoned
to the hustings to revenge themselves for the
wrong of centuries ; legislation, therefore, was
thenceforward to be carried on, not by the im
plied and practically most efficient combination
of all interests, as in tbe old House of Commons,
but by the direct physical opposition of brute
force and poverty, against all the other elements
of which the community exists.
There are many errors, which if a Tory were
caught embracing, what word could be adequate
to the expression of Radical scorn? But tbe
mighty and astounding error of tbe Whigs,
namely, that the people of England consist of
the ten-pound householders ; this proposition
which goes to prove, that the part and the
whole of a thing, are identical ; this is an error
which can only be maintained with impunity by
the wisdom of Whigs. It follows, from what I
have stated, that, even though Sir Robert Peel
should lose the confidence of tbe ten-pound

II
householders, he would not, therefore, necessa
rily lose the confidence of more than an item of
the many elements of which the nation is com
pounded, )t is troe. he may be beaten in tbe
Commons, but Lord Durham would inlalliblv be
beaten every where else. You say, the govern
ment thereby, would be put in abeyance.
True : whose fault is that? Tbe fault of the
Tories, who warned the Whigs of the unutter
able folly of their Reform, or of the Whigs,
who turned a deaf ear lo the admonition, though,
in their refusal to be guided, they cut a road to
their own ruin?
If ever there was a folly in legislation utterly
at variance with every principle of philosophy,
it was tbe passing of the Reform Bill. It is the
most amazing act of legislative ignorance the
world ever saw. It was an attempt to transfer
supreme power to the dregs of a community,
which had flourished for centuries under mo
narchical and aristocratic principles and govern
ment. It was a deliberate endeavour to bring
the lowest and highest ranks into deadly col
lision. All the power exerted in so mighty an
empire, by opinion, by education, by intelligence,
was totally overlooked, or thrown overboard.
All idea of amalgamating tbe infinitely diver
sified interests and classes of tbe community,
was, in ignorance or wickedness, left entirely out

12
of the question. The people — meaning thereby
the rags, the ignorance, the refuse ofthe mob —
were set up in insolent and undisputed tyranny
over the wealth, the wisdom, the power of a
mighty nation ! And this reduction of a com
munity to chaos and mutual collision, was called
Reform ! The men who effected it were assur
edly either the most wicked or the most stupid,
that ever abused the confidence of a people.
If they intended to raise, upon such a basis, a
.scheme of government which themselves were to
control, they are simpletons only to be matched
in the land of fools. If they intended to de
molish the whole frame of society, simply be
cause they would rather destroy every thing,
than be themselves coraparatively nothing, they
are criminals whose guilt can only be paralleled
out ofthe register of hell. There is no other alter
native. Their refuge is either in their folly or their
wickedness. Any alteration in any branch of
the public economy effected by the creatures of
such a reform, is, in its nature, a conquest : it is
violent usurpation, not harmonious concession.
There is but one chance of saving the country. If
the better portion of the middle ranks lend them
selves to the schemes of the Radicals, tbe go-
verment is subverted — civil war is proclaimed.
But if they should fortunately understand their
own position and interest — if by providential

13
wisdom they shall be taught that the Radicals
mean nothing — will be satisfied with nothing —
hort ofthe entire demolition ofthe whole fabric
of the state, of King, Lords, and Commons, (for
they despise the House ofComraonsno less than
the House of Lords, but the season is not yet
coff e for saying so,) the state may yet be saved.
The present is the moment for their declaration
of adhesion to the one side or the other. They
must be for or against. The Whigs, by their own
furious bickerings — their plots and intrigues —
their base and infamous squabbles for place —
have overthrown the feeble framework of their
own power, and declared themselves unable to
govern the affairs of the nation. The King
therefore is compeUed to apply to the Tories.
For the Radicals united with the Whigs, could
not carry on the government — how then could
the Radical section alone maintain it? — Sir R.
Peel is in fact the only man to whom the country
can look for a chance of preservation. The
possibility of his carrying on the government
in the House of Comraons as at present consti
tuted, is the problem now to be solved. You,
Mr. Lytton Bulwer, have settled the matter in a
few words, by stating the impossibility of any
Tory minister's living a day in the lower House ;
and also the impossibility of any measure of
Reform being carried by those who heretofore

14
resisted the Reform Bill. In fact, you have the
stupidity to acknowledge, that the Radicals will
accept no Reform at the bauds of the Tories ; —
not because they disapprove the particular
measure, but because it is granted by particular
men. The patriotism of the Radicals, therefore,
consists in this — that they will be reformed,
provided tbey can thereby keep themselves in
power ; but on no other condition. It is pos
sible you may have acted in accordance with the
l»nown opinions, if not in obedience to the abso
lute dictation, of the rump of a faction. But
that any person short of an idiot could so openly
proclaim the baseness of his motives to the
world, was really bard to believe, until your
letter proved it possible. You say that the
Whigs alone can carry a Reform measure. I
hold the very reverse to be the truth, which I
think is capable of demonstration, A govern
ment is strong or weak, in proportion as it re-
piesents the interests, opinions and feelings, and
possesses the confidence of the various ranks,
orders, and sorts of people, of which tbe nation
consists. This is self-evident. For a go
vernment which represents only a section of
the national interests, must always act against
a majority. It may conquer, it cannot govern.
Its reforms are insolent dictation — not beneficent
legislation. It must be feared, and hated, and

15
suspected : it cannot be beloved. It has no
permanent interest to rest upon— no settled
scheme of policy lo guide it. It must temporize
and vacillate, or it must bully and deceive.
The Whig government showed by its conduct
what was sufficiently clear to every man without
such external proof — that they were but a mi-
vority. They truckled to all parties in succes
sion, and were suspected and despised succes
sively by all. By the Coercion BiU they secured
tbe Tories; but by mutilating and depriving it
of ils main efficiency, they disgusted that party,
at the same time that they by no means satisfied
the revolutionists. The House of Lords were
induced to consent to the Irish Church Tempo
ralities Bill, on the assurance that the measure
was lo be final. But circumstances requiring
that a sop should be thrown to the Cerberus of
Ireland, Lord Brougham issues an Irish eccle
siastical commission, and of a measure thus
executed in defiance of every principle of honour
and good faith, no defence was ever attempted —
and certainly the Whigs showed their wisdom
in this — for no explanation can prove falsehood
to be truth, and no government can stultify a
people into the belief that dishonour and fraud
are respectable, because, they emanate from the
woolsack. There was no interest which the
Whigs dared thoroughly to uphold, or manfully

16
to overthrow. The manufacturers were Mr.
Poulett Thompson's especial favourites : yet the
assessed taxes were not removed, because the
Whigs dreaded the agricultural interest. On
the other hand, the Malt Tax was not repealed,
because the Whigs stood in awe of the manu
facturers. Their imbecility, and fear, and per
plexity, compelled them to rescind to day what
they decreed yesterday. They were driven to
make up, by fraud and chicane — by tricks and
dishonesty — for the absence of real substantial
power. In the mean time, they had severed the
monarchy from the aristocracy. They had cut
away from the throne its main and fundamental
support. The King, under the dominion of the Whigs,
has never appeared in his House of Lords, ex
cept in the ungrateful character of the foe of his
natural and firm allies.
In fact, the Whig government was neither
more nor less than an entire subversion of the
old relations of the several orders of the state.
Their imbecility in every thing but mischief
arose from their position. Supposing they had
been very wise and profound men, instead of being
what they undoubtedly are, most shallow and
ignorant — yet they could not have governed the
country. A government that can only exist by
proposing the alternative to the crown of demo-

17
lishing the aristocracy, or carrying its measures,
is an oppressive and intolerable tyranny, a des
potism ofthe worst kind — it is despotism without
security ; but it is not a government, as far as
that word is to be considered as different from
conquest. But the truth is, that the late minis
ters were beyond all comparison the most in
capable set of men that ever pretended to govern
any country.
Nothing but the frenzy of Reform could
have sustained such men in power for a single
day. Ever since Lord Stanley's party left
them, they have not bad ability sufficient to
govern a vestry, much less an empire. It really
is amazing to think that such men did not
manage to effect more mischief than tbey did.
There is not one man amongst the late ministers
even of mediocrity of ability. Even if we
stretch a point, and include poor Lord Grey, we
must still be permitted to assert that they have
but one man even of tolerable intellect. With
regard to Lord Brougham, he must be con
sidered as a genus per se. He has become " a
riddle^'' to Mr, Bulwer; but he has become the
scorn of every one else, I should wish to speak
of him with gentleness, out of respect for his
rank. But it is a hard thing to forgive the man
who has done so much to degrade the honour of
the peerage — who has systematically insulted

18
and bullied the most exalted individuals of that
noble House, of which he has been the disgrace
and reproach — whose presumptuous eagerness
in the amendment of law is only equalled by his
ignorance of the subject, — a man who has
brought down the peer to the level of the me
chanic — a man who, holding the highest dignity
which his sovereign could confer, has united
with it the vulgarity of the pot-house, and the
ravings of an itinerant demagogue. I could wish,
for the honour of the English peerage, for the dig
nity of English law, I could wish such a man were
proved to be non compos mentis. Passing from
him, it is really painful aud humiliating to re
flect by what a set of imbeciles we have been
governed. There is not even power enough of
speaking to keep them above contempt. Lord
Spencer's perplexed and confused rigmarole,
which the Whigs believed to be clear state
ments — Lord Palmerston's empty affectation,
and consummate incompetence, added to the
drawback and disadvantage under which every
speaker must labour, who is sensible he is ad
dressing an audience that have been the eye
witnesses of his multifarious tergiversations and
undisguised baseness — Lord J. Russell's pain-
ful and ridiculous presumption, by which alone
he makes up for the hesitation of ignorance, and
the absence of energy — Mr. P. Thompson —

19
but no ; there is a degree of imbecility and cox
combry, of which it is impossible to speak with
temper, — and such are the men who have been
governing this country in the most critical of times!
That there should be a vestige left of any of
our institutions —that the innate strength of the
country has been able to resist all the mischief
which such a knot of incapables might have in
flicted, is matter of deep congratulation and
surprise ; but it is not so easy to explain. The
principle of evil, when once set at work, is so
speedy in action — and fools are so apt to mis
take temerity for decision, and boldness in error
for vigour of judgment, that an incompetent
government will probably do more mischief in a
year than a wise cabinet can repair in twenty.
Fortunately, there is in the very idea of wicked
ness, a large proportion of elementary and
essential folly. Wickedness of opinion is stu
pidity of opinion, exactly as wickedness in
action is folly in action. Hence it happens,
that bad men are not always so raischievous as
they might be, because their necessary want of
sense hinders them from finding out the best
way of accomplishing their ends.
The self-destruction committed by our late
rulers is, on every account, a most critical
and momentous event. The battle between
tbe principles of good and evil has now com-
c 2

20
menced ; hitherto the fight bas been all one
way. A very short tirae will determine whe
ther we are to be handed over to revo
lution and ruin, or shall still be allowed to
enjoy the peace of law, and the possession of
property. The temper of tbe nation seems eminently
favourable. The people show no disposition to
resist or control tbe choice of the crown. All
tbe radical meetings have been signal failures.
In fact, the late ministers were essentially un
popular — tbey represented no one but them
selves — tbey were detested in power, and are
despised in defeat. There is no pretence
for remonstrance with the crown. The late
ministers abdicated because they could not
rule. It is absurd to pray the king to rein
state a cabinet who have ceased to exist, not
because tbey were dismissed, but because tbey
were compelled to confess that tbey were at
variance. Their extinction was not the King's
doing : he had no alternative. A cabinet,
which had no definite policy to recommend on
the most vital questions of state — which was
divided, as it was known to be, even without
confessing it ; whose very existence was divi
sion, for the alliance of Lord Lansdown noto
riously gave confidence to one party, whilst the
character and principles of Mr, Ellice gave as-

21

surance to another ; a cabinet, in short, in
which there were as many different opinions as
persons, could give no guarantee of a fixed
course of policy to the King or the country ;
and certainly its protracted, though precarious
existence, is a much more reasonable subject of
wonder than its tardy commission of suicide.
What course Sir R. Peel may think fit to
pursue, under the circumstances which have
called him to tbe rescue of his country, it would
be unbecoming and presumptuous to conjec
ture. But I may be permitted to say, that a
defeat in the House of Commons is not so pro
bable an event as some persons, in the supre
macy of their wisdom, affect to consider it.
Sir R, Peel has shown himself no enemy to
sound and wholesome reform in times past. His
reform of the Penal Law is the wisest reform
that has yet been made. His passing of the
Catholic Bill, and the sacrifice of his private
opinion to public considerations, certainly proved
him to be no obstinate and headstrong enemy
to reform, whensoever its necessity was appa
rent, and he considered there was more danger
in withholding than granting the measure.
Sir R. Peel comes to the helm of government
backed by a high reputation for integrity and
ability. The great commercial and agricultural
interests have entire confidence in his sound

22
sense and experience. The crown and aristo
cracy are safe under his guidance and protec
tion. Sir R, Peel may introduce reforms into
the church with safety ; nay, the church will
gratefully accept his correction. For the clergy
are not anxious for the perpetuation of admitted
abuses, which impair their efficiency, and gain
thera that reproach and obloquy which is due to
the legislature rather than themselves. The
clergy will humbly and contentedly accept such
a reformation of their body, as Sir R. Peel and
the Duke of Wellington shall think fit to recom
mend ; but they will not consent to be insulted
and robbed, under pretence of being reforraed.
They are not so foolish as to trust the good in
tentions of Lord Durham, or Mr. Ellice ; they
are not so blind as not to see that men, whose
hatred of the church is never elsewhere dis
guised, will show no mercy or justice to
wards them when they are in their power. They
are not such dolts as to fancy that any faith can
be expected from men who have deceived all
parties, and are trusted by none. But let the
church have an assurance given them, that the
crown, the aristocracy, the general body of the
wealth, the education, the intelligence of the
country, consider a particular measure of reform
to be essentially useful and necessary for their
better government ; and I feel persuaded it

23
will offer no obstacle to the wishes of the
cabinet. But if the clergy are called upon to
submit to spoliation, merely to satisfy the ravings
of democrats — if they feel assured that a mea
sure called Church Reform is in reality church
ruin — if they are convinced that peither the
crown, nor the nobility, nor the more enlight
ened portion of the community demand such a
measure, then they will resist it to the utmost
of their power.
In any reform of any branch of the state
economy. Sir R. Peel will, no doubt, proceed on
safe grounds. Under him we shall know friend
from foe. The wolves and the sheep will stand
at their natural distance. There will be no dogs
palled in, for the destruction of both, under
pretence of alliance for one. O'Connell will not
be proscribed one day as a furious firebrand and
erabraced the next as a charming friend. Mr.
Hume with his tail will not be abusing the
minister to-day, and waiting at his levee to testify
his admiration of him to-morrow. We shall
not have a Coercion Bill passed to imprison or
hang the great rebel of Ireland one moment, and
the same worthy man requested to remove what
he thought objectionable in the same Bill the
next. Nor is it the least advantage, that he
shall have real power of oratory on the side of
government in the House of Commons. No

24
speaker bas approached Sir R, Peel in the re
formed House, Lord Stanley is tbe only man
capable of answering him ; and Lord Stanley
will grievously disappoint the just expectations
of an indulgent public, who have formed perhaps
rather an exaggerated opinion of his abilities,
tiiough certainly they have not overrated his
sense of honour, if he is ever found opposing
Sir R, Peel. I do not say that he should join
him, even if he were invited ; this must be de
termined by his own unblemished and unim
peachable purity of motive. He must surely
see that the time is come when the question is
not between Lord Grey and Lord Melbourne, but
between national preservation and ruin. The
country is directing an anxious and1 feverish
look toward the men who form Lord Stanley's
party. Yet tbey have a plain course before
them. They separated from Lord Grey, Tbey
would have scorned to sit on tbe same bench
with a majority of Lord Melbourne's crew of
demagogues and infidels, Tbey cannot up
hold tbe political friends whom they con
scientiously renounced. They cannot fly into the
arms of O'Connel, If tbey stand aloof,
tbey represent only themselves ; they wilfully
cut away from under their feet all political im
portance. I see nothing but an adhesion to Sir
R, Peel which can gain tbem credit in tbe opinion

25
of the world, for consistency ; and dignity in
their own opinion, for doing that which the dis
interested love of their country demands.
To return frora ray digression,— O'Connell can
in no respect be called a debater. He is much too
ignorant a man ; in fact, there are very few more
ignorant in the House of Commons — to answer
a profound and statseraanlike speech. When
ever he ventures beyond coarse invective, or
vehement declamation, he sinks much below me
diocrity — fortunately his extreme vulgarity of
manner will always be a sufficient obstacle to bis
gaining any real power over a legislative assem
bly, where there is any representative left of the
English gentleman. Who Sir R. Peel's cabinet
coadjutors in the House of Commons may be,
no oue but himself can say. But in such a
leader as himself, a party has an immeasurable
advantage over even a strong opposition; much
raoreover the respective tails of Lord J, Russell,
Hume, and O'Connell, Mr, Pitt may be said to
have conducted the government, in the House of
Commons, single-handed against the most
powerful opposition a minister ever had to fight.
The most hostile must admit that a comparison
may be more fairly instituted between Sir R.
Peel and Mr, Pitt, than between Lord J. Russell,
or Mr. Littleton, and Mr, Fox,
The character of the country is, after all, con-

26
cerned to a certain degree in the figure which
its ministers cut in parliament. No man, for
instance, who had the misfortune to be present
when Lord Palmerston gave such explanation
as he had to give, to Mr. Shiel on the subject of
Turkey, but raust have felt deeply humiliated.
The knowledge that many of the most distin
guished diplomatists of Europe were eye-wit
nesses of the imbecility of that pompous cox
comb, must have irapressed the most senseless with
a solemn pity for the degradation of England.
It is consolatory to know that if Sir Robert
Peel reinstates only his former colleagues in
office, he will secure a dignified and powerful
support. But still, whatever his intellectual
superiority might be, if he has not superiority
of votes, he is no better off than if he had
back the whole team of our late imbeciles
for assistants, I suppose, and trust, that he
will meet tbe present House. A dissolution
would imply, I think, an unreasonable distrust.
As yet, the House has shown no symptom of
resistance. It will be just and wise to try it.
If Sir Robert Peel comes forward with a scheme
of moderate and safe reform, and the Coramons
beat hira, he will have put thera clearly in the
wrong, and will appeal to the sense of the coun
try by a dissolution, with increased advantage
and power.

27
But I very much doubt whether the present
House of Commons are at all anxious to be
dissolved. No man, having the luck to be in
parliaraent, will spontaneously return himself to
the scrutiny of his constituents, oftener than is
needful. Very frequent recourse to this sort of
questioning is inconvenient and expensive. And
indeed I think that nothing but the strongest
case of necessity should induce a minister to dis
solve parliament one hour before the extinction
of its natural term. The legal length of parlia
ments is one ofthe main stays ofthe constitution.
It is the best chance left for something that will
approximate to independence in our legislators.
Had the Whigs commenced their work of ruin
by repealing the Septennial Bill, we should by
this time have been in the midst of civil
war. The great body of men who supported
Lord Altborp in the House of Commons, are
divisible into two sets — the Radicals and the
Whigs. The first section is comprehended by
Mr. Hume, and his own immediate kind of crea
tures, — such as Roebuck, and other animals of
that sort. They are men without attainments,
character, or influence. The far larger portion
of the Whigs consist of the old adherents to
Opposition, such as it was, in its better days ;
men who, in an evil hour for themselves and their

28
country, endeavoured to build up their own power
on the ruins of the constitution. But they are
not conscientiously, and at heart, desirous of
perverting the name of Reform to the destruc
tion of society. I believe that much more vio
lence is spoken in the House of Comraons than
is felt by tbe speakers. This indeed is one of
the many evil consequences of the Reform Bill ;
that it degrades the character of public men — a
man, who represents a ten-pound borough can
hardly be honest, I do not see how this great
body of Whigs can refuse to support any scheme
of reform propounded by Sir Robert Peel. But
if they should be tempted to league themselves
with tbe principles of revolution, their opposi
tion will be personal and factious. It will be
resistance to the monarchy, when no pretence for
resistance remains. Their own leaders have vo
luntarily declared their inability to continue tbe
conduct of the state. Is the country to be without
a government because the Whigs cannot agree
in ruling it ? If, then, Sir Robert Peel is driven
to a dissolution of parliament in consequence of
unjustifiable resistance, bis position will be evi
dently and materially strengthened. It is diffi
cult to understand what rank or description of
persons, above tbe lowest, would oppose him.
Every opportunity which the nation bas bad for
the last twelve months of showing its feeling.

29
has been eminently conservative. The chancel
lorship of both universities, and the stewardship
of one, have fallen vacant. Yet no Whig- can
didate for either could be found. This is a
pretty strong proof of tbe feeling of tbe edu
cated classes. Sir George Murray's return for
Perth, added to Sir John Campbell's defeat
at Dudley, would have warned any ministers,
not totally infatuated, of a prodigious change
in public opinion. Especially it should have
warned tbem to be cautious of meddling with
the Church, for Sir G. Murray was returned
by Presbyterians, and Sir J. Campbell was
beaten by tbe church. Even Mr, S, Rice,
holding, as be did, one of tbe highest offices
under tbe crown, and enjoying deservedly a
character for vigour in the cabinet, could hardly
manage, by dint of government influence — and, I
speak advisedly, most barefaced and outrageous
bribery,— to beat so well-known a Tory as
Sir E. Sugden, Tbe sort of argument he made
use of with the higher description of consciences,
may be illustrated by the fact that a Mr. Fisher,
an attorney of Cambridge, has just been pro
moted, by Mr. S. Rice, to a colonial situation.
What chance could such a man have at Cam
bridge, if out of office ? But to come to more
definite interests ; for instance, the agricultural.
Witness the Gloucestershire election. And in

30
Lord Spencer's own county, there has as yet
beeu no Whig candidate found ; and if such a
rara avis should be caught, it will be infaflibly
only to be plucked. Indeed, how can a farmer,
in his senses, wish the restoration of Mr. P.
Thompson ? Tbe nonsense of free-trade has
beeu talked till it is understood. The attempt
to force free-trade on England would neces-
sarfly ruin the farmer, Unless this truth were
disputed by certain sages, it really seems too
clear to admit ofthe possibility of contradiction-
The object of free-trade is to enable the con
sumer to purchase bread cheaper ; and this it
would effect, and therefore a vast quantity of
land, which now barely remunerates the farraer,
would necessarily be thrown out of cultivation.
Hence the ruin of ranch individual farraing ca
pital ; the depreciation of agricultural interest
universally; the increase of pauperism and crime;
and the loss to the manufacturer of his agri
cultural market. Nor would the mischief end
here. Supposing that, by the destruction of
agricultural capital, the revenue were dimi
nished to the annual amount of one million— and
I am stating a round sum, much below what
the probable damage would be — this defi
ciency raust be made up by increased pressure
of taxation on the remaining capital ofthe coun
try. Hence will arise more extended emigra-

31
tion, greater distress, greater difficulty of col
lecting the revenue, and, in a word, an accu
mulation of evils, of which it is more easy to
foresee the necessary existence than to prescribe
the limit or remedy. O ! but, say your poli
tical economists, if you buy cheap corn of the
Prussian, he will take your manufactures in re
turn. Supposing this were true, this does not
obviate the ruin of capital and its attendant
evfls, which would be the confessed consequence
of a free-trade in corn. But it is not true. There
could be only one reason for the Prussian taking
your manufactures ; and that is, if he found it
very advantageous. But it never can be as ad
vantageous for a merchant to buy in a dear
country, like England, and sell in a cheap coun
try, like Prussia, And whatever opinion the
merchant might have, bis government would feel
themselves bound in policy and conscience to
protect their own manufactures, and would take
good care that foreign articles did not displace
and ruin their native markets. If you choose to
make yourself dependent on a foreign country
for corn, you may ; but it is too much to expect
such a reciprocity of folly on their part, as to
render theraselves dependent on you for manu
factures to the ruin of their own interests— and
aU this merely to oblige you, and work out your
absurd theories. The more I think of free-trade,

32
the more I am amazed at the infatuation of its
disciples. I have yet to learn what would be
the great advantage to the labourer if bread
were cheaper. For, if the price fell materially,
wages would fall also. Neither the manu
facturer nor farmer will give more money for
labour than competition among the labourers
will drive thera to accept. A low rate of wages
is the worst symptom of a bad state. It shows
that the labourer is degraded. He is not many
stages removed from famine and destitution.
He is not an independent, honest yeoman. He
has the expectation and horror of the poorhouse.
The maintenance of a strong, contented, and
brave yeomanry would be cheaply supported at
even a higher average price of bread than we
now pay. The farmer, as it is, can barely gain
a remuneration, and no one can seriously pro
pose a further reduction, without intetiding tbe
ruin of agriculture. There is only one reason
able mode of understanding free trade, and that
is, by considering it equal; a trade in which all
competitors shall meet on equal terms. Such a
scheme would allow for the infinitely various
circumstances under which the various dealers
of all nations could meet on an equality. Such
a trade would be substantially free. But a
system which should give all advantage to the
merchant, who was free from domestic taxation.

33
would be a monopoly in his favour. And no
greater contradiction in terms can be imagined,
than the idea of a free trade where the circum
stances of the traders are not equal. It is to be
hoped, then, that in the event of a dissolution of
parliament, the farmers will sufficiently under
stand their interests, and not give their votes to
any man professing the wild doctrines of political
economy. The arguments which I have used
to tbe agriculturists, apply with equal force to
the manufacturers. The home market is the
only one ou which the manufacturer can rely.
No trade can be wholesome, which depends for
its existence on the caprice of foreign govern
ments. As long as human nature continues the
same — as long as ambition, and love of conquest,
and empire, govern nations, so long will it be im
possible to link communities together in the bond
of political economy. The idea of bodies politic
acting together on any other than selfish principles
— the belief that the various nations of which the
great human confederacy consists, will, or can,
ever act with a general view to the universal in
terests without reference to particular advantage,
is the dream only of a maniac or political eco
nomist, but must ever be the scorn of a reason-
able man, I cannot believe that the manufac
turers will deliberately throw themselves into
the arms of those statesmen, who professedly

34
wish to deprive thera of the home market, upon
the precarious chance of furnishing au equivalent
in the foreign. The possessors of colonial
property can hardly be concerned to see the
downfall of a ministry, under whom their pro
perty has, in all cases, been put in imminent jeo
pardy — in many instances, totally destroyed.
The Whig cabinet could not execute their own
Slave Laws. They rested so entirely on the
fickle favour of an ignorant populace at home,
that they could not take the part of tbe West
Indian proprietor against the slave, however gross
and manifold his injuries might be. No one can
doubt that tbe power which the law gives to Sir
R. Peel will be efficiently used. He can use it
independently. His strength will rest on intel
ligible, stable foundations. In executing the
law, he will enforce the will of a majority ; and
in no other way can laws be executed with effect
and advantage.
Upon taking a general survey ofthe main in
terests of which this vast empire consists, and,
looking to tbe several demonstrations of na.
tional opinion which have been made during tbe
last year, it seems incredible that Sir R. Peel
should fail in an appeal to the sense of the coun
try — should the necessity of such an appeal be
come iraperative. The fury and madness of Re
form is fortunately past. The expectations

35
which had been raised in the popular mind, have
been proved absurd and incapable of realization.
We may reasonably trust that the people of
Great Britain will wisely and firmly support a
minister, who seems, under God's providence, to
be the only man at the present moment capable
of giving them the security of good government
— who will not withhold frora thera the advan
tages of safe and necessary reformation, but will
not allow them, under the pretence and name of
Reform, to be precipitated into the gulf of revo
lution and blood,
December l(t, 1834,

THK END.

LONDON :
RUAKE ANU VARTV, IT. I N ¦ I-H S, 31, STBAKD.

YAl£
BRITISH HSTORY
PRESERVATION PROJECT H
SUPPORTED BY NEH

08561 1680

iS ''