On this page
-
Text (2)
-
896 THE XEADBB. fNo. 370, SaitiR t>W
-
ENGLAND AND THE UNITED STATES IN CHINA. ...
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.
Statistics 03? The New House. Speculatio...
also refrained from counting as Liberals any members , however Liberal in their recent professions , who voted generally-with the Conservatives in the late Parliament . Nor has a past support of Lord PAJ / MEitSTOiron the China ; . question ,, nor a promised general support to his Ministry , induced us to forget the marked distinction between men ready to -vote for reforms of the franchise and for the
further application of civil and religious liberty , and men Unwilling , through fear of the " democracy , " to give into their hands any extended power . The Liberal party , thennumbering it from Lord Palmjshston to Mr . Townsend , from Lord John Hits sell to Mr . Koebttck—numbers 382 . The next question is , How are the party united ? Are there any disloyal men who refuse to acknowledge Palmekston ? Are there
Legitimists , Orleanists , and Bepublictins plotting with similarity of means , but with three distinct objects , against the Naioleois" of English politics ? Each of tlie three French parties has its counterpart in the House . There is Lord John U-ttsselTj in exile , the Legitimist chief of the historic and traditional "Whig party . There is Sir Jaues Gbauam , who acts Orleanism to the very life , now appealing to his old "Whig associates , now calling the [ Radicals liis friends . And there is Mr .
Roebuck representing the [ Republicans , who object With equal acrimony to the reigning monarch and . to the two pretenders . Sir James Grab : am' s section consists mainly of himself ! , for we cannot calculate onanymemt ) er of the House as a Grahannte * ; Mr . Sidney Herbertwill , it is said , shortly join the Ministrj-, and Mr . Gladstone will be , in the language of the orchestra , cieJief d ' attagxie of the Opposition . Mr . Hoebuck represents a section that may number eight . He represents
a party of [ Radicals who chafe at the perpetual leadership of men of family and who have a fixed idea that all men who had grandfathers must be aristocratic and used up . In this section , to-swell it up to eight , we must count the Peace party , not yet extinct—for we have Mr . Henry Pease ( is it the pilgrim who having softened his own head according to the old recipe for jneasant penitential travelling , went to Petersburg to tell [ Nicholas not to " be naughty ?) , and Mr . Charles Gilpi ^ , who with true English spirit anticipated ( in a
pamphlet published at Iris shop and once read "b y Palmeestok to a laughing House ) how the poor French would be " done again" when , greatly to tlieir chagrin , we should refuse to receive the compensation they would remorsefully offer after having battered down our unresisting cities . Putting Uussellites , pure "Whigs , "Radicals , Peace men , and Sir James Graham altogether as a " band of rebels in the Liberal camp we cannot count them as more than twenty , leaving Lord Palmer-Stoit a faithful following of 302—more than a majority of the whole House .
The Conservatives , roughly speaking , number 262 , "but there are serious divisions even in this shattered army . Firstly , there arc at the very least 40 of tho party who have pledged themselves not to offer a general opposition to Lord Palmerston . Among these may bo counted Mr . Mti / ks , Mi-. Milnes Gaskell Lord Blandioudand
, , other moderate Conservatives . Some of these men have even formall y acceded from the party ( Lord Bt , un >* o * i > , for instance , who in 1852 fought so iiercely at Middlesex against Bernal Osboune , now receives circulars from Mr . Hatter and not from Sir William Jolmto ) . Then there arc about 20 Conservatives who are separated from the
party not that they love Conservatism less but that they dislike Dishakli more They are represented by Mr . IJuntinck , who led the secession in tho late Parliament , and by
such men as Mr . ELen ' dai . l , of East Cornwall Then there are some of the party who are too Liberal to act with Mr . Disraeli in maintaining an obstructive Conservatism . Thus , giving to Mr . Disraeli the men calling themselves Conservatives who have not openly seceded from the party as an Opposition , we find that his followers number 200 . Were Lord Paxmerstoi * to propose some extremely Liberal extension of the franchise ,
or some very sweeping Eeform of the Church , Mr . Disraeli might lead into the lobby the 262 nominal Conservatives , but not otherwise j bufc even in that case the question would be carried by the Liberals by a majority of 100 . Lord Palmeestox has thus a majority equal , if not superior , to Peel ' s majority of 91 , in 1841 . But the majority is for ' Lord Palmerston as a Liberal Minister . If lie
again oppose instalments of Eeform , he will ( at least after this year ) find himself forced to connect his thirty or forty official followers with the Conservatives , and even then he will be beaten . He cannot again enact the division on Locke Kino's motion . The present Parliament is more decidedly Liberal than the last . Take the Ballot , for instance it is the opinion of men not sanguine as to those matters , that there is an actual majority in the House for the Ballot . We do not think so ; our own calculations of the . members returned do not bear out this result .
But the "Ballot may nevertheless ootain majorities , for while its supporters are pledged to support it , there is no party pledged to oppose it . To oppose the Ballot is not even a sine qiia non of Conservatism , although objections to tlie Ballot dwell in many honourable -minds on both sides of the House . It is said by political calculators that , if Lord PalmeBSTON adopt an obstructive Conservatism on the question of Church-rates or the Ballot , he will be defeated in this House , which his supporters fondly call his own , by at least a majority of forty .
896 The Xeadbb. Fno. 370, Saitir T>W
896 THE XEADBB . fNo . 370 , SaitiR t > W
England And The United States In China. ...
ENGLAND AND THE UNITED STATES IN CHINA . What is the actual state of the relations between our Government and the United States ? We have not received any information for some time , ab least from this side of the water ; but we are not without advices from the other side , and they do cause a feeling of uneasiness .- We are uneasy for a very plain and intelligible reason . Nothing can be more essential to the well-being of this country and of the United States , than a
cordial understanding between the two . Wo have tho strongest of . all grounds for knowing that the two commonwealths actually agree on most subjects that bring them into contact with each other , and we also may say , as within our own knowledge , that on subjects which more immediately concern either the one or the other , such ¦ explanations could be given as would completely remove any feeling of reciprocal dissatisfaction . Wo have perfect right to state to our readers that the American Government
is actuated by tho most friendly feelings towards this country . It has a desire to roinovo cveiy cause of misunderstanding , and to promote that increased intercourse which is occasioning so constant an exchange of personal viaifcing , and creating so gigantic an amount of commerce . Wo believe that tho exports of tho United States to this
country exceed their exports to all other countries ; and if our own exports to tho United States aro not exactly in tho same proportion , our fellow-countrymen aro continuall y adding to tho number of tho commonwealth ; a largo and increasing part of our food is drawn from the Union , with many of our luxuries , and tho raw material of a
staple trade . The great difference between the two is , that the United States have a Government which , from , its very consti tution , naturally acts for the benefit of the public ; our own Government does not let the public , or any representative of the public , into its confidence . Its first and avowed object is to strengthen and support itself ; and although it must defer to public opinion , that is a kind of homage that can be " managed . "
The question as to the state of relations between the two countries is immediately called forth by what we hear from the United States respecting the application made by our Government for some kind of - *' . co-operation " in China . 3 N " ow it is the feeling of an important party in this country , that the course taken in China was nothing better than what is commonly called- "" a mess , " and how -when
Lord John Etjssell and an influential section of the Liberal party here have expressed decided disapproval for the Chinese policy Lord Palmerston's Cabinet can have the face to ask for the co-operation of a foreign government not by its very nature bureaucratic , we scarcely understand . At all events compliance could riot have been expected ' . But the American Government , if we are
correct in the inference that "we draw from the Ministerial Union , very naturally ¦ . wishes to be informed lolidt co-operationis practicable ? The United States can have no sympathy with China . " The miserable exclu si veness of that unhappy country can find no advocacy among enlightened men , and , on the score of humanity , it is difficult to feel any great sympathy for people who poison wells and bakeries , who have little regard for human life , and . whose habits , in many respects ^ are semi-barbarous . We kno w , too ,
howannoying and offensive must be the delays and forms and mummeries which surround tie modes of the Chinese in their communications with the ' outside barbarians . ' That to break down the exclusiveness of China , throw open its gates , and let the genial light and heat of commerce penetrate its long-closed avenues , would be for the advancement of civilization and the benefit of the world , cannot well be doubted . And wherever the influence of the United States can be properly exerted to this end , unquestionably it will not be found wanting . " This is answering exactly as we should have ventured to answer ' for the Government
at "Washington ; but the Executive of that country has certainly specific responsibilities which cannot be laid aside . The case is well stated by our Union contemporary : — " As to the ' co-operation , ' which the journal speaks , we confess that we do not quite understand its import . When two governments aro at war , and a third government ' co-operates' with either of the belligerents , ifc seems to us that the latter government is very nearly in a condition of war also . " We understand what war is , and what peace is ; but this ' co-oj > eraliov ? with a belligerent , which strikes the Journal of Commerce as being so harmless as not even to amount to an ' entangling alliance , ' is something of which wo have no definite idea . "
This is extremely just , and we should like to have the official explanation on this side . The Executive of the United States is charged with the duty of preserving for American commerce and Americans in China all the respect and all the facilities to which they aro entitled ; and should they be assailed , the Government of President Buchanan would repel tho assault with promptitude and decision . But the same Government may very justly ask itself whether it would bo perfectly discreet wore it to undertake to act in
conjunction with the close Cabinet of Lord Ialmeustojt , or with the G-overnment of France ? That the leading men of the United States should desire to act in China , so as to assist in promoting a state of things favourable to tho commonwealth of this country , wo aro certain . But it does not always follow that the co-operation with tho Executive of this country would conduce to that end . At all events , the two Executives are accustomed to proceed on principles , and according to rules so different , that it is not desirable for a
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), April 25, 1857, page 12, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_25041857/page/12/
-