On this page

• Departments (2)
  • 
  • 
• Text (5)

  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.

  • 

    Untitled Article

  • 

    Untitled Article

  • 

    Untitled Article

  • 

    RIGHTS AND PRECEDENTS.

  • 

    PETVATE POLICY OF THE COUET.

• 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.

    Untitled Article

    THE muph-talked of letter m jiegent to the Prince Consort" of England , a copy of which has somehow been ' surreptitiously obtained by the French Empebob , whose acts and motives it unceremoniously dealt with , is only another proof , though certainly a startling one , of the extent to which a system of foreign , and domestic politics is carried on in the highest quarters , for which the recognised Ministers of the Crown are not held responsible . It is , of course , very convenient for noblemen and gentlemen occupying parliamentary station to be able to shirk in this way constitutional accountabilitybut it is a very bad thing for the country that they should be suffered to do so ; for it is , in fact , the establishment of a secret ,

    capricious , and arbitrary influence in the most vital affairs of the nation—an influence which no great or patriotic Minister would tolerate for an hour . At home , we have the favourites and minions of the Court daily thwarting the policy of the administration , not only with impunity , but with ostentatious encouragement and reward . Lord Abercorn votes against Ministers on questions of moment , yet he retains his place as Prince Albert ' s Groom of the Stole . * Lord Grey ringleads the Opposition to the ministerial measure of Reform ; and his brother , Sir Charles Gre y , not only retains his place as confidential private secretary to the Prince Consort , but the colonelcy of the 3 rd Regiment of Foot is conferred upon him—as hateful and disgusting a job as ever was perpetrated in the worst of times .

    Lord Noemanby ' s exploits need not recapitulation ; yet his brother is retained in his place as Private Secretary to the Queen , and every opportunity is seized on for ostentatiously marking the social favour in which he and his fellow confidant in the secret correspondence of the Palace are held . Lord Clarendon , not satisfied with having a brother and a brother-in-law in the Cabinet , hopes , by compliance with the whispered wishes of the Court , Jp wriggle ^ iims elf back into Downing Street once more : so he refuses to vote witk the Government on the Paper Duty , and , matters not being as yet brother is trans

    quite right for his return to power , his younger - lated from the See of Carlisle—to which he was only elevated the other day—to th&fat fold of Durham , which ranks nextto London in tlie statistics of Episcopacy . And so throughput every branch of administrative patronage , the friends of the people , the favourites of the nation , and those who have deserved well of the country , are compelled to stand by , while the obeisant tools of irresponsible authority are everywhere encouraged and rewarded . All this is bad enough , but it is at least known and obvious j and if people are mean enough to submit mutely to its roni ^ w « iifl i . iiflyliiAvfi .. biit themselves to blame . It is otherwise

    with regard to foreign affairs . Public diplomacy as conducted in oiir time is hard enough to bear , Heaven knows ; but manifold , as are its blunders and its jobs , it is nothing when compared with the private diplomacy of complotting palaces and conspiring dynasties . This is the old resource of monarchical reaction , and a most formidable one it is . It is not enough that the royal houses of England and Prussia should be doubly united by ties of marriage , as they are

    said to be soon likely to be ; it is not enough that on every public and legitimate occasion national respect is shown by the national authorities in this country for air that Prussia loves to honour , while in return similar consideration is shown by Prussian Statesmen and politicians for all that we most love and reverence in England , Nothing will do but an illegitimate intermeddling , by means of clandestine correspondence between certain high Personages themselves , —and a precious mess they

    seem likely to make of . it . Even in the interchange of sympathetic fears and hatreds regarding thoir Imperial neighbour , whom they despise as a parvenu even m ore than they detest him as an apprehomlcd aggressor , they do not ^ seem to know how to avOid being overlooked or overheard , lhere is , no doubt , something sinister and shabby in the system of esplqu-&ge which put Napoleon III . in possession of the intercepted letter . But is there nothing to be deprecated or despised in the

    system which keeps up elaborate and ostentatious pretensions of friendship with a neighbouringCourt ,. while interchanging , secretly , vow a of detestation , and epithets of personal abuse ? The alleged demand for explanations by the Frencii Ambassador at Berlin hns been contradicted in a semi-official way , and' 'for -might wo know or care there may have been no foundation whatever to this portion of the story . But tho existence of the letter from the Prince Repent to the Prince Consort , in which tho Imperial ally of both is spoken of as iv brigand , has not and cannot be denied : and tho Minister , whether Prussian or English , who affects to look on unconcerned , will one day have much to answer for .

    Untitled Article

    II is quite clear that when the House of Lords , with the probable connivance of the Premier , rejected the Paper Bill , they . calculated only upon a * conflict with Mr * Gladstonje and the members of the Manchester School' ; ' and those who visited the House of Commons on Friday must have been struck with the careless , flippant way in which a great number of its members were disposed to treat a very serious constitutional question , and one that strongly concerns all persons engaged in manufactures or commerce . The Lords have claimed a power to tax the people , not only without but against the consent of their representatives ; and the confidence which merchants and traders

    have hitherto felt in the power of the House of Commons to deal with fiscal questions has received a rude shock . When the Ministers of the Crown propose the imposition or the relaxation of a tax , it is considered certain that the assent of the Sovereign will not be withheld from the bill necessary to give it effect ; and , so soon as it has passed the House of Commons , the mercantile world has been accustomed to regard the question as settled , and to arrange its purchases , or imports and exports , upon the new basis provided . Theoretically , the House of Lords has possessed the power of rejecting any bill ; and even the Crown , according to abstract theory , might at the last moment refuse to sanction a measure which its own advisers had brought in .

    Our " matchless Constitution" provides no simple and safe remedies for conflicts of authority among its component parts . In America , the veto power of the President , or of the Senate , is bounded by restrictions that take away the necessity for collision ; but in England the people , represented by the House of Commons , conld only bring a refractory sovereign to . his . senses , or prevail against the Hereditary Oligarchy by measures which would throw the whole country into confusion . Two centuries ago , nothing short of an unpleasant surgical operation was found sufficient to reduce ^ monarchy to the liniits ^ f coffimon sense ; and we should not have gained the Reform Bill 6 f ; L 32 , except

    at the cost of a revolution , had not th& sovereign been , prevailed upon to avert , the danger by threatening to swamp the Hxmse of Peers . It is ridiculous to praise a Constitution that contains no provision for the peaceable and orderly solution of practical difficulties , and which is onlyTeept going by compromises and shativs that are discreditable to our age . If the country had been quite quiet , or the majority larger which Lord Palmerston could , lead , the conduct of the Lords Avould have been silently submitted to ; but the people are not quite as apathetic as was expected , and the Premier cannot afford the loss of support that would follow capsizing the Cabinet boat and swimming ashore

    by himself . A committee to search for precedents may mean anything ^—T ^ m . ay-lip ,-n . Jyland _ method-oi abandoning the rights of the people , or a lego-quibbling way of supporting them against a . flagrant and dangerous attack . What it will be , depends inainly upon the attitude of the constituencies , as the book of the Constitution may be read forwards like English , backwards like Hebrew , or perpendicularly like Chinese . It is all very well to look for precedents ; but precedents had a beginning , and if one should be wanted for to-day ,, are we not as capable of making it as any of the worthies of olden time ? The House of Lords was not harmonized with the House of

    Commons at the time of the Reform Bill—the process has taken place by the gradual corruption of the elective assembly , and by making it little better than an ante-chamber for the House of Peers . When the Constitutional right of the Commons was assailed year after year by the Lords in the matter of the Jew Bill , the ' pretensions of the hereditary Chamber were upheld by their relatives and dependants in " the other place , " and by the want of patriotism of the miscellaneous assemblage of jobbers who purchased the M . P .-ship to assist their financial schemes . Our Cabinets are essentially aristocratic and anti-popular in their composition , and possess an immense power over the so-called independent senators , through the extravagant expenditure of electoral contests . What would be thought of a Constitution

    containing an article that the Crown , acting through its ministers , should have the power of fining every member of Parliament from £ 1 , 000 to £ 5 , 000 , or £ 10 , 000 , whenever the body as a whole was not sufficiently obedient to their will P This is , however , the power in the hands of aBritish Cabinet ; ami it is ridiculous to expect honest parliaments while so enormous a means of intimidation is permitted to exist . There are , doubtless , some men in the House of Commons who will not alow themselves to be influenced by these considerations , but they must of necessity bo few ; and , in considering tho practical - course to bo taken in any emergency , the people must not forget that they have to deal with representatives who buy their seats at an extravagant price , and then , for tho sake of preserving the value of the article thov huvc paid for , uniformly refuse to

    Untitled Article

    June 2 , 1860 ] The Leader and Saturday Analyst , 511

    Rights And Precedents.

    RIGHTS AND PRECEDENTS .

    Petvate Policy Of The Couet.

    PRIVATE POLICY OF THE COURT .

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), June 2, 1860, page 511, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2350/page/3/