on every public question, much less on practical details of protection or taxation. "Bear and forbear" must be the motto of their union, if they are to unite at all; and without uniting cordially they must be powerless to effect even the objects on which they are agreed, and will fall an easy prey to the less scrupulous alliance of unprincipled opponents. We are tempted, therefore, to smile at those who, in questions of finance, would leave the party to which they belong on a dispute as to the odd sixpence, or who, in a season of such imminent danger as that which we are now passing through under the Reform Bill, would try to realize the boast of the worthy Welshman, whose family in the time of Noah's flood kept aloof from the ark, and had a boat of their own.

But assuredly it is no more than justice to the Conservative party to say, that never in the history of party politics was there less room for complaint on this score than has arisen since their accession to power.

In

the midst of many changes, some of them of an untried and startling nature, and rendered more alarming by artful devices to misrepresent their effects, the Conservative party have kept together with an exemplary fidelity and prudence, which was only to be expected from men of high principle and enlightened views. The agricultural members, more especially, have displayed a remarkable degree of moderation and good feeling. Apprehensive as they obviously have been that the measures of Government were likely to be injurious to their interests, urged on by the panic which had spread among some of their constituents, and assailed by taunts and reproaches from malicious opponents for submitting to be deceived by their leaders, they have, with no noticeable exception, pursued the course which their own dignity and duty marked out for them. They neither suppressed the feelings of alarm which they honestly entertained, nor allowed those feelings to transport them beyond the limits of a judicious and temperate opposition to the Government measures, or induce them to withdraw their general support from an administration which they knew to be able and desirous, if any one was, to save the country and constitution from the vital dangers which so recently threatened them, and from

which they cannot yet be said to have finally escaped. So far from wishing that the complaints of the agriculturists as to the details of the recent enactments should have been withheld, or that they should have shown a blind and indiscriminate confidence in all that Ministers did, we believe that the course which they pursued has been right and expedient, by proving at once their independence and their discretion, and by showing the difficulties of the subject, and the impossibility of any more extensive alteration of the law, as well as the danger of any renewed attack on interests so powerful in themselves, and so intimately interwoven with the general prosperity of the country.

On the other hand, the firmness of the Government in resisting the views of so large and formidable a portion of their best supporters, has won for them the highest honour, and has impressed the nation with a deep conviction of their energy of purpose, and of their earnest desire to hold the balance even between opposite classes of the community. For the first time since the Reform Bill was passed, we see a Ministry standing in the dignified position of an impartial arbiter of contending opinions and interests. In Ireland, their gentle and equitable sway has dispelled at once the supposed difficulties of their situation, has discouraged violence and virulence on every side, and has rallied round them the loyal and peaceable of all classes and creeds. In England, their measures have left no room for triumph to any section of society, have produced no undue exaltation of one class or depression of another, but have dealt out to all an even-handed

distribution of varied advantages, "here a little and there a little," calculated to teach mutual compromise and conciliation, to unite the moderate and practical of all parties in a reasonable adjustment of extreme demands, and to illustrate the invaluable truth, that the true interest of each department of industry and property is identical with the interest of the whole.

Let us shortly, then, review some of the benefits which the country has already gained during the by-past parliament

1. The Crown has been fully preserved in its privileges, and protected from the danger of encroachment, or from the unpopularity to which it was exposed by unconstitutional advice. The Church has been left unassailed by further attacks on its existence or rights, and has been placed in that condition of outward security, which will best conduce to the discharge of its internal duties. The House of Commons has been brought into harmony with the other branch of the legislature. The Ballot has been defeated by an increased majority, and organic changes generally are "looking down."

2. Public credit and confidence have been restored without a single addition to the burdens of the poor, and with every prospect of relief to the middling classes, and to the commerce of the country.

3. The principle of agricultural protection has been formally recognised in its most effectual and least objectionable form, and established on its true basis, that of the general welfare. If some abatement of their profits has thus been brought about, it has not involved a greater sacrifice than was necessary at so critical a time, navis levandæ causa, and has probably purchased for the agriculturists a greater security in future, by intrenching them in a more defensible position.

4. The principle of colonial protection has in like manner been recognised; a circumstance of the utmost importance to our national prosperity, and an essential distinction between the present Government and their predecessors. We regard the declaration of Parliament on this subject as of great importance at the present time; and as affording another decisive test of the superior wisdom of the present Ministry, and their strong sense of national interests and sympathy with national feelings, as compared with their predecessors. That in all taxation a reasonable preference should be given to our own countrymen, whether in the colonies or in the mother country, seems a proposition so clear in principle, and so inevitable in practice, as scarcely to admit of controversy. It could only enter into the heads of vicious theorists to call in question so obvious a truth; and yet, by the vote on Lord Howick's motion against differential duties, the members of the late Government are solemnly pledged to an opposite doctrine, and have thus

shown themselves on a point of fundamental policy at open variance with public opinion, as expressed by a large majority in Parliament, composed of men of all parties in ordinary politics. Apart from many considerations of strict justice, the homely adage that "blood is thicker than water," finds an echo in every breast. We think of the friends who, in every quarter of the globe, are living under the blessed protection of the British Crown, and we grudge not that, even at some apparent cost, we should encourage their industry and promote their welfare. Their prosperity, we know, is our own, and the poorest artisan can feel both pride and interest in the preservation of that colonial empire, to which he or his may yet be indebted for an asylum in adverse circumstances. To realize the true principle of making the colonies an integral part of Britain, may be impossible in existing circumstances; but the nearer we approach to it, the more we shall consult not only the ascendency of the British name in every part of the world, but, along with that ascendency, the advancement of civil order and Christian civilization, which our own country is so eminently destined to illustrate and extend.

Such are some of the advantages which the current session of Parlia ment has practically secured, and on which it is impossible for the most insensible among us to dwell without gratitude and satisfaction. We have only, we trust, to pursue the career thus begun, and above all, to observe the golden rule of "not too much," to secure the good-will of the nation as now constituted, and to raise our native land to as high a point of prosperity and moral superiority, at home and abroad, as she has attained at any former period.

When we think of these things, a reflection arises which seems likely to impress strongly the minds of all reasonable men, of whatever political opinions.

In April 1835, Sir Robert Peel was driven, by a coalition of Whigs, Radicals, and Repealers, from the office of Prime Minister, which he bad shortly before assumed, and in which, after an interval of about seven years, he is now reinstated. Has the country, in any of its interests, gained or lost by the change which then occurred? Has the interval of Whig rule been the source of advantage or detriment to any or every class in the community? These are questions not of curiosity only, but of serious importance, as enabling us to borrow from the past a strong and steady light to lead us through the future.

The slightest examination must show, that the result of the displacement of Sir Robert Peel in 1835, has not only not been beneficial to the public interest that the Whig interregnum of seven years has not merely been lost for every good purpose-but that to these sources we can directly trace most of the aggravated evils to which we have since been subjected.

"Hoc fonte derivata clades,

In patriam populumque fluxit."

In the first place, the factious proceeding which then displaced Sir Robert Peel had its origin in a falsehood; in the fraudulent assumption of an abstract principle, which was put forward when it was likely to be useful, and abandoned when it was found to be inconvenient. The triumph of the party who used that pretext was not even available to carry out their avowed object. The success of the appropriation principle was not secured by the success of its promoters. It was speedily rejected by parliament, and then thrown aside with the same cool assurance as some fortunate upstart cuts an unfashionable friend who has been serviceable to him in former days. No party were gainers by that result. The minds of men were merely unsettled, without being satisfied, on either side. The friends of the church were alarmed, while its opponents were in no degree benefited.

In the next place, the fraud by which the Melbourne ministry thus attained office was followed out to the end in their subsequent retention of it. The appropriation clause, in its rise and fall, was a type of their whole policy. Promise without performance, place without power, were the proverbial characteristics of their position, as viewed both by friends and foes. During the long period for which they remained a ministry, it is scarcely possible to point out a single measure, accomplished by them, that could confer benefit on a single individual beyond their own circle.

But, as already said, the period of their ascendency was not a mere blank. It was filled with many events and transactions of a most disastrous kind, and involving consequences that we shall long feel. The power of their opponents, indeed, operated as a negative on any legislative measures of a noxious character. But many sins, both of omission and commission, must be laid to their charge, in matters for which the executive can alone be efficient, and are alone responsible..

In finance, it is enough to say that no attempt has been made by the Whigs to exculpate themselves from the charge thus pointedly brought against them by Sir Robert Peel :

"In the year 1836, you, the then Ministry, found the affairs of the two great empires in this state. In this country the surplus of income over expendiditure was £1,376,000; in India, £1,556,000. You then entered on the performance of your duties with a net surplus of about three millions. How have you left matters? You say I overrate the difficulties. You found a surplus of three millions; you left a deficit of five millions. There is a deficiency on the 5th April 1842, in the finances of the United Kingdom of £2,570,000, in the revenue of India of £2,430,000; you, therefore, on quitting office, left a deficit which it is my duty to attempt to supply, of five millions. The difference in the finances of the country, from the time you undertook office to the day you quitted it-the difference against this country and against its credit, is no less than eight millions per annum." - (Spect. p. 363.)

The gross deficiency on our own revenue for the period of Whig domination is at least ten millions.

In our foreign and colonial relations, we are indebted to the Melbourne ministry in these very heavy obligations among many others1. The rebellion in Canada. 2. The invasion of Affghanistan. 3. The war in China.

4. The growth or increase of serious misunderstandings with France and America, involving a constant apprehension of impending war, and a corresponding necessity fora war establishment.

These are some of the blessings which have arisen from the popular cry of "keep the Tories out." We

appeal to the common sense and honesty of Whig, Radical, or Chartist, to say now, if any mischiefs comparable to these are likely to have ensued had the "Tories" been let in.

But we fear that we must also lay on Whig shoulders no light load of responsibility for even the more serious evils which have afflicted us in the form of domestic distress. We shall not be so presumptuous as to say that all our commercial and manufacturing suffer ings have sprung from their misgovernment, or could have been averted by a different policy. On the other hand, we do not literally adopt the exclamation of the poet

"How small, of all that human hearts endure,

That part which laws and kings can cause or cure!"

We believe that much may be done for human happiness by good legislation, and still more by good administration, though a large part also of our national enjoyments, as well as calamities, are the gift or visitation of God, without special reference to our own wisdom or folly. In so far, however, as the present internal afflictions of the country can be traced to bad government, which it is now the fashion of the Whigs to maintain, the fault must lie with themselves. That the general distress is not the result of Sir Robert Peel's accession to power, is as clear as sunshine. Is it the effect of causes a few weeks or a few months old, or is it not rather to be traced to the seven years' administration which preceded the late change? The country was flourishing when the Melbourne ministry began to govern, and session after session, the speeches from the throne showed any thing but an indication of commercial adversity. We cannot fail to remember, so late as in 1839, the ministerial selection of Mr G. W. Wood as the seconder of the address in the House of Commons, and the glowing picture of increasing prosperity which his speech presented, and which his array of tables and calculations was calculated to set off. Then, and previously, not only were no measures proposed by the Whigs to relieve the commercial interests, but their recent nostrums of altering the corn-laws and sugar-duties were uniformly opposed when suggested by others. In

1838, Mr Villiers' motion for a committee to consider the corn-law, was triumphantly negatived by a ministerial majority, composed of the same men who, in June 1842, supported, as an amendment on the supplies, a motion by the same individual for a committee on the same law, or rather on a new and less restrictive law, "WITH A VIEW TO ITS TOTAL REPEAL," "Don't forget," says Mr Somebody of the League, "that Lord John Russell voted for the committee." We certainly will not forget it if we can help it; and we hope it will be long remembered by the country at large, as one of the most disgraceful concessions to faction that has ever been exhibited by a public man.

Nothing, however, can be more melancholy than the whole history of Whig trimming and truckling on the subject of the corn-laws. While they thought themselves secure in a reliance mainly on English Whigs and Irish Repealers, neither of which classes wished to meddle with the corn-laws, the subject was evaded and discouraged as much as possible; and Lord Melbourne politely hinted at the insanity of those by whom it was agitated. When all things else had failed, an eight shilling fixed duty was resorted to as a last shift. When this proved abortive, and the ministry were ejected, Lord John Russell, who seems so thoroughly to understand the question, proposed the happy expedient of combining an eight shilling fixed duty with an eventual jump to a duty of one shilling! Lord Palmerston was of opinion that there should be no duty at all for protection, but a duty only for revenue-a doctrine which, disclaiming the wish to encourage agriculture, resolves into a bread tax, and which, as Sir Robert Peel observed, would lead legitimately, not to a duty on foreign corn, but to an excise, also, on corn homegrown. Ultimately, when the duty of the day is nine shillings, Lord Howick announces a motion to reduce it for some months to six shillings, and then, abandoning that proposition, he and his Whig allies give their votes for a committee, with a view to total repeal. That men capable of such base compliances or extravagant absurdities, should so long bave been permitted to govern the country, is truly lamentable; but there is consolation in thinking that the permission is not likely to be soon repeated.

If the distresses under which we are now suffering are in any degree connected with the principles of government, the late ministry should have foreseen and averted them while there was yet time. In any view, it cannot be doubted that the evil would have been diminished by timely adoption of whatever measures may be necessary to support public credit, and to expand the national resources. In 1835, when Sir Robert Peel was removed from power by the dishonest assertion of the appropriation principle, he had already announced a line of enlightened and impartial policy, and was rapidly gaining for himself a universal popularity, which was probably the chief inducement to his opponents to arrest an experiment so dangerous to their own ascendency. During the interval that has since elapsed, and that has so foolishly been thrown away, an ample opportunity would have been afforded him for introducing, with the advantage of possessing a surplus income of a million and a half, those relaxations of our commercial system which, even with a serious deficiency, he has found it his duty to propose. The country, at the same time, would have enjoyed, during all this time, the inestimable blessing of a truly pacific policy, both in Europe and in the East; and all that fruitless expenditure of blood and treasure would have been saved, which has resulted from the wasteful profusion and intermeddling ambition of the Whig Cabinet.

If, however, the events that have occurred shall be made use of as a lesson for the time to come, they will be a subject oflittle regret. If the minds of men are thereby weaned from the dangers and delusions of constitutional changes, and turned towards the calm and cau

tious adoption of practical and practicable improvements, the lesson will be well worth its price.

To the Conservative party, the period which they have passed in exclusion from office has been of inestimable advantage, in consolidating their strength, and teaching them how to use it. Nor would they now enjoy the full measure of honour which the present time presents them, if the incapable and unprincipled conduet of their predecessors had not afforded them the advantage of so momentous a crisis, and so remarkable a contrast. The page of history will long record the moral sublimity of that memorable scene, which lately showed us a public man, all but the greatest statesman of his day, rising as first minister of the crown, among the representatives of the wisest and freest nation in the world, and calling on them, amidst the admiring silence or loud applause of the whole assembly, to make a just and generous effort of self-denial for restoring the diminished dignity, the tarnished honour, and the impaired resources of their native land. The effect of that appeal in overpowering opposition, and extorting from the most unwilling lips a tribute of approval, was electrical at the time, and will not, we are convinced, be less impressive when the true merits of this prudent and patriotic policy are viewed in its ulterior consequences. Let us be proud, as we ought to be, of such a leader: let us be proud of the wise and honourable followers who have made him the object of their unprejudiced and independent choice; and let us thank the great Disposer of events, that a way of safety seems at last to have been shown us, from the many fearful dangers with which we have so long been surrounded.