On this page
-
Text (2)
-
Eebruaot B, 1855.] TSIIiEABm 1U
-
" THE STRANGER" IN PARLIAMENT. [Tho resp...
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
To The Duke Op Newcastle. My Lorjd Dukb,...
Mr . Gladstone were proposing a real educational measure in the abolition , of the newspaper stamp . A « Peelites , Lord Aberdeen and you—with the knowledge gained by the Earl of Lincoln—may refial attention to the feet that you are the only party who succeeded in governing Ireland . You were Colonial Secretary during the time that Canada became affectionate—you completed the conquest commenced by General "Wolfe—Australia is prosperous , and the West Indies content . It is Peelite policy which is the governing policy of Great Britain . But , charged with failure as Statesmen and Administrators , you aud your colleagues of your party have not succeeded in the war . That is the accusation you have to face .
Tour party did not rush into the war ; you at least estimated as statesmen its difficulties . You had not precluded alliances in the war by insulting the Emperor of the French , like Sir Charles Wood , or sneering at the Emperor of Austria , like Lord John Russell—who also commenced the Brisish suspicion of Louis Napoleon by turning out the colleague who , perhaps prescient , perhaps only polite , was eager to recognise the new Imperator . And you had not increased the difficulties of a future peace by speeches like those of Lords John Russell and Palmerston , wherein they denounced the Czar , the one as a barbarian , the other as a liar . Whatever the
horrors of the war , your caution had seemed to anticipate them ; and whatever the good fortune of your position , with French and German alliances , and the isolation of Russia , it is to your foreign- "policy that the acquisitions are to be traced . And your statesmanship , in the war , is not to be criticised apart from that of the Emperor of the French . If you are failures , so is he . You did not stay on the shores or !" the Bosphorus and Black Sea and admit an Austrian occupation of the Principalities , without his company and his leave ; and with him- ^ -perhaps because of . his desperate and dy ing Marshal—you went to the Crimea . He . a great military power ,
has not been complete in his military calculations ; Ae calls ~ out a reserve ; Tie enlarges a foreign legion . Can he be a great statesman , while Lord Aberdeen ' s Government is such a failure ? Now , as to your conduct as an administrator , I do not see that you are to blame . The system required that the Minister of War should be a Parliamentary chief . You depended upon military men : —if they have misled you , and mismanaged , say so , and tohy they have mismanaged . You did your work . You picked the only possible General . You sent but a
great army You are . sending , out . _ great _ fqrces . You sent out stores in abundance . For the civilian Minister of a commercial nation , you did miracles . If tho blame of partial failure does not lie at your door , it is your duty to yourself , it is due to your country , to say where the blame does lie . If the fault of a system , denounce—destroy it . If of men , name them . Recount to Parliament what you have done to modify the system and obtain men . You have created an Order of Merit . You have thrown open commissions to the valiant of the ranks .
Turn now from the defence of yourself to the defence of your Government . Tho . defence I have sketched will be pronounced adequate by all my readers . And if you would dare—and as a desperate man you ought to dare—that line of defence , you would make yourself the leader of that great , as yet unorganised party , which is eventually to supersede Whig Lords , Tory Lords , and conspiring Coalitions . The public holds ( and I rejoices in a
conclusion so largely logical ) that it is the incapacity of the governing aristocracy which renders war a dangerous game for England . But it may bo suggested that it is the peculiar character of our public which constitutes us a nation incapable of consistent heroism in war . This character is exemplified in the sacrifice of a Ministry because of tho loss of an army—because the exploits of our admirals and generals arc disproportionate to the expectations fomented by the national vanity .
For tho purpose of assailing yon , in tho debate of last Monday , several speakers seized upon points of invidious comparison in tho parliamentary career of your ancestor , the borouglnnongering Pallium . Fairly interpreted , all these points are' in your favour . " They turned out tho Ministry and they Bared the army , " aaid Sir Bulwer Lytton . Who turned
out the Ministry ? The very classes arid men who had forced Wajpblefrom a peace policy ! But wliy did they turn out the Ministry ? Because Admiral Byng had lost his presence of mind ; and because a lordly general—the Earl of Loudoun—was found too old ! . In a . "word , because the Ministry was not allowed time to redeem , casual disaster . But a comparison between the House of Commons of that day and the House of Commons of this day cannot surely be intended . In the first place , the Duke of Newcastle and the Duke of Bedford of that day had the majority in their pockets . In the next place , Pitt was brought in by an intrigue . Some-people suspect that the circumstances are but slightly changed : but surely , even to ruin . you ,, none of your class would support that suspicion by-such a parallel .
Who is the Pitt now ? "I can serve the country , and no one else can , " said Pitt . A comparison between the Ministry of the Duke of Newcastle and that of the Earl of Aberdeen is absurd . The Duke of Newcastle based his Ministry on the exclusion of all but abject courtiers and subservient Whigs . The Earl of Aberdeen coalesced all the first statesmen of the day—he bought in all the Pitts , and to say that his Ministry fails is to say the intellect of the governing class fails .
But was the change of Ministry productive of success ? In a short time Pitt was found out proposing to redeem Minorca by the sale of Gibraltar to Spain 1 So dangerous is a " vigorous" Pitt , or a clever Palmerston ! And he had his Sebastopol—his Baltic cafcnpaigh ! For the public clamour rose against him when the fleet and army returnedj baulked , from Rochefort . Popular impatience was illustrated by a singular alternation from mourning to joy . One day a despatch arrived from before Quebec , stating that Wolfe ' s army was at its last g . asp . Was not this a case for a committee of inquiry ? But three
days after another despatch arrived : Quebec was taken—England was in ecstasies—Pitt was again , popular . In all the subsequent cases of disaster 4 t was the Ministry which had invariably to suffer from the vicissitudes of war , or the incapacities of Generals . The last instance is in the Sikh campaign . There was a panic because Lord Gough had suffered a check ; Sir Charles Napier , was applied to in a panic ; and yet Sir Charles Napier was not necessary . In the retreat of Sir John Moore , the Govern- ' ment was shaken . When Wellesley was retreating behind the lines of Torres Vedras the Government
was shaken . All such instances suggest that the momentary disgrace of a Ministry , or r Minister , is often unjust ; the general lesson is that a people , entering ¦" ¦ ~' wW , "'" 1 hTust ~ learn "' ' * pa'tience . If your Grace could have announced the fall of Sebastopol when you met Parliament , you would have been popular until the next reactive disaster . Thus , when the army was sailing from Varna for the Crimea , your ability in organising so grand' an armada was extolled , as it deserved ; and after the battle of Alma you were the greatest of War Ministers . You will have this consolation—as the war is likely to be a long one—that you will leave your successor , not only in office , but in unpopularity !
The political chaos in which this great empire is now risked is consequent upon the monopoly of Government by one class , which class is degenerated in over-civilisation and degraded by two centuries of political vice . Our Queen must seek safety by resorting to the men who make the life of the nation . But tho " intellectual vulgar" could not yet do without a lord ; and if you give them party prestige , they will give you the premiership . Your class has crushed you ; will you help us to crush your class ? NoN-Er . ECTon .
Eebruaot B, 1855.] Tsiiieabm 1u
Eebruaot B , 1855 . ] TSIIiEABm 1 U
" The Stranger" In Parliament. [Tho Resp...
" THE STRANGER" IN PARLIAMENT . [ Tho responsibility of tho Editor in regard to theso contributions is limited to the act of giving them publicity . Tho opinions expressed arc those of tho writer : both the Leader and u Tho Stranger" benefit by the freedom which is left to his pen and discretion . ] A crisis generally lasts nino days—tho period to which wonder sustains itself ; and , therefore , there ought to bo no disappointment that last night brought no settlement . As yet only a few speculative Radicals have advanced to the idea of forming a Cabinet out of the House of Commons , under Mr . Gladstone and
without the aid of the ola Xoras , aria the ° pr » cftRWl rumours are therefore still confined to a choice , wira coalition , between the Earl of Tweedledum arid "Viscount Tweedledee . And it illustrates at once bur actual self-government and bur perfect liberty that , fully believing our public opinion is determining who shall be Ministers , we dp nop hesitate" to propound the most ludicrous solutions of the everfihifting party and personal problems of the hour . Jones , of the Pantechnicon Club , has the whole story—fresh every day . Why did Lord John go out : of course the pretext was a fib ? Of course ; he went out because the Queen would not reeal Lord Raglan : it was a Whig intrigue against the Court :
Prince Albert is at the bottom of it , Sir .-Why would not Palmerston join Lord Derby ? Why , Sir , Palmerston know 3 that no Ministry can stand without Gladstone ; and Gladstone is a religious man , Sir , and means to keep a vow he made never to sit in the same Cabin . et with Disraeli : and Lord Derby is a plucky fellow , and won't sacrifice Disraeli , Sir : and it would be an awful shame if he did . Well , who ' s to come in ? Here Jones is less dogmatical : here hisinvention fails : this British citizen confesses that the destiny of his country might not be improperly arranged if Lord Lansdowne , Lord Palmerston , Lord Clarendon , Lord Granville , and Lord Grey were to toss up for the Premiership .
It is so very true , the singular discovery made by Lord Aberdeen , that all these old lords mean precisely the same thing , though now and then Lord John Russell may seek a resuscitation of Whig principles by annoying the Court through the Court General , that we can * afford , even in the thick of a deadlv war , to allow the personal interests of the crisis to employ all our attention . Lord Derby is rebuked by the Morning Cerisormorum for joking at such a moment on the internecine inanities of the late Coalition . But really that is the public feeling of the moment . I never heard the Peers laugh so load
and heartily as they , did at Lord Derby ' s finished though too pre-Raphaelesque " picture of the interior , " Englishmen know that their country is in no danger : already there is a reaction from the partial gloominess under which Mr . Roebuck effected the magic division of Monday night last . The Ministerial crisis , consequent on Tweedledum and Twee dledee falling out , is not a national crisis ; and we ought to be obliged to Lord Derby for a fair jok e * After all , are we not more interested in the inquiry
why Lord John went out , than in the investigation as to who is to come in ? Does not all the conversation of society—at least of London society , which is clubby and cynical , and not provincial—which . i » merely English , earnest , and national—indicate tfcat we are occupied with men rather than with things j that we watch the crisis as Romans watched the gladiators — masses of muscle—representatives of nothing ? And , in that light , there are great interests in the crisis . The most careful of
political students must confess to one or surprises . Surprise at the enormous power possessed by Lord John Russell . His intellect meagre , his character whining , and his conduct in regard to the Duke of Newcastle disgraceful to a gentleman , he ia yet not destroyed—he was enabled to destroy a Government . Why ? Because of his position . He is the head of a great party j and that great party ,, whatever it may think of him , must sustain him , in order to sustain itself . He and Lord Derby are the only two really strong men : as presentable debaters ,, holders of proxies , managers of elections , correspondents with county chieftains , confidants of state secrets , chosen agents of the great families . And , tho
i H the present position of English politics , House of Commons aristocratic , tho middle classes unprepared to take power , these two men only could form strong Governments . Lord Aberdeen , loaning upon tho court , and patronised by Lord John Russell , could construct a Government of capable men , dependent for its success upon its measures . But as we have seen , Lord Aberdeen could not stand an hour , though still supported by the Court , when deserted by tho strength represented in Lord John RusaelL Lord Palmerston is popular—not powerful . So far ,, ho is in tho same position aa Lord Chatham when the Nowcastlo Ministry waa destroyed . But Chatham did not attempt to stand alone on hi « popularity . He kept Newcastle , who owned naif the House of
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), Feb. 3, 1855, page 15, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_03021855/page/15/
-