And what is the state of the monopoly? How have the manufacturers gained? Let FOUR MILLIONS of diminished exports on the half year only, and the suppression of the Manchester return of the number of unemployed operatives in the very metropolis of the League, be the reply. Yes—it has come to this pass, that the free-traders DARE not publish to the world the results of their own madness. In the month of June last, there were within a fraction of EIGHT THOUSAND workmen without employment in Manchester alone, and the numbers were increasing so fast, that it was deemed expedient to discontinue the startling return. How can we be surprised that Chartism and disaffection are rankling in men's minds, when we take such deliberate pains to make them paupers?
We are told that the state of the Continent is such that our export market is impeded. Let us for the moment admit that such is the case, and let us see what sort of argument that furnishes for the continuance of the present system. Is it deliberately proposed that we are to remain with our ports open, until France and Germany, and Spain and Italy, are tranquillised? Are the prophets of peace still so sanguine of the speedy realisation of their visions? Are we to wait for years—with an increasing debt, a diminished revenue, and still further stagnation of employment—until our brethren on the other side of the Channel have reconciled their jarring theories of Red Republics and of unity, adjusted their boundaries, and again betaken themselves to the arts of peace? Our own constitution may well be shattered before that consummation can arrive! But the truth is, that, in many respects, the Continental disturbances are not unfavourable to our export trade. If, on the one hand, they have occasioned a less degree of consumption; on the other, they have paralysed industry and depreciated capital abroad. Belgium, it is true, is a formidable competitor for our staples in the foreign market; but, notwithstanding, we do not expect any serious diminution in this branch of our foreign trade. The evil of which we complain is chronic, and it has not been caused by any sudden or violent convulsions.
It is to our colonies that we must look for the cause of our diminished exports. It was our paramount duty and obligation to have fostered these, and to have made them, by a wise system of reciprocity, at once the best supporters of our power, and the most sure and steady consumers of our manufactured produce. We have done nothing of this. On the contrary, the course which we have thought proper to pursue towards those integral portions of the empire has been marked by tyranny and injustice. We have ruined the West Indies, and yet we wonder why they do not consume our cottons! Our weak and ridiculous legislation, without foresight and without principle, has not only retarded the progress of the colonies, but absolutely frightened them out of our market; and unless a very different system is speedily adopted, we may have bitter occasion to rue our folly, and to curse the selfishness of the men who, from mere lust of personal power, have sacrificed the best interests of the nation.
How, then, have the manufacturers gained by free trade? On the one hand, they have not been able, by inviting and giving every facility to imports, to increase the quantity of their export; on the other, they have closed up several of their surest markets. The full extent of our egregious folly has not yet become visible to the public. The manufacturers, by a sort of retributive justice, are the persons who are feeling it the most, and ere long they will be compelled to acknowledge it. It is seriously affecting the trade and commerce of our greatest cities. The number of vessels which have cleared out of the Clyde from the port of Glasgow during the last nine months, is in the proportion of 382 to 602 for the same period in the previous year! Glasgow, as every one knows, owed its rise and opulence to its connexion with the colonies, more especially the West Indies; and here is the heaviest blow which probably was ever heard of in the history of commerce, struck, through free trade, at the second city of Britain. It is good that we should know these things; better if, by revolving them, we can turn experience to advantage. Let the electors throughout the kingdom, more especially in the towns, meditate seriously before they are again called on to use their political franchise; let them reflect on their own diminished prosperity, and beware of that hollow liberalism combined with quackery which is the stain and the curse of the age.
To this position we have been brought by a bad commercial policy, originated by mean and mercenary men, and most unhappily adopted by a minister who became a convert towards the close of a long official life. We have seen and felt the system as it works; and the only question now for our consideration is, whether we are to suffer it to endure? If we do so, it is vain to deny that we are on the verge of general ruin. There is not a symptom of improvement. Day by day the cry of distress waxes louder, and yet we hesitate to take the necessary steps for effecting our own emancipation. There is hardly one man in the country—the bailie of Blairgowrie perhaps excepted—who can have, or feels, the slightest confidence in the abilities of Lord John Russell. Such a cabinet as this, in point of political decrepitude and imbecility, was never yet formed; and it could not live for an hour save for the unseemly dissensions in the Conservative camp. These cannot be permitted to last. There is no merit in personal devotion when pushed beyond its proper sphere; and the best service which Sir Robert Peel can render to his sovereign, is utterly to abjure all pretension of ever returning to power. Surely he can have no wish to head a reactionary movement, or expose himself to the obloquy of recanting the last edition of his views.
There is another reason why the Conservatives are imperatively called upon to unite. Recent disclosures of a very startling nature have forced upon us the conviction, that the Whigs are worse than weak, and that they cannot be depended on as steadfast guardians of the crown. There is more in the famous letter written by Mr Thomas Young, formerly private secretary to Lord Melbourne, than meets the eye. We attach no undue importance to this epistle—we shall not stoop so low as to examine the motives and intention of its author. His own attempted explanation is, if possible, more damning than the treasonable missive itself. We could only, were we to exhaust our whole powers of illustration, repeat what has been already stated in the masterly article of the Standard. It is as clear as day, that at the time of the passing of the Reform Bill, the underlings of the Whig administration were cognisant of a hideous project for a violent and bloody revolution, and that, to take the mildest point of view, they concealed that knowledge from their masters. Franks were obtained from the Home Office, for the purpose of suborning the loyalty of at least one officer, high in his Majesty's service, and proposing to him the odious part of a leader in a popular insurrection. Whether that letter, written as it probably was in the fullest confidence, ought or ought not to have seen the light, especially after the lapse of so many years, is a matter with which we have no concern. That is a question which is only personal to Mr Young and his correspondent; but we have the document, and the whole nation is entitled to inquire into its tenor. And never, upon any accusation of so grave a nature, was a more miserable defence preferred. In fact there can be, and there is, no escape from the legitimate conclusion. At that time a section of the Whigs were ready, for the sake of carrying their own scheme, not only to have connived at, but to have lent their whole influence to a popular outbreak and rising, which might, in all human probability, have been subversive of the constitution of the country. Lord Melbourne might not have known of that letter: we go farther, and state our positive opinion that he was utterly ignorant of its existence, because, however we may have differed from him in politics, he is a man whose personal honour and loyalty have always been free from a stain. We believe—and are glad in stating it—that he was utterly ignorant of the vile treason which was hatching in his own department; but we shall not extend the same shelter of belief to others of his unpatriotic party. That treason was meditated is plain; and very thankful shall we be if the higher order of the Whigs shall take the pains, by disavowing and repudiating the acts of their subordinates, and by withdrawing from those implicated the unmerited rewards of their sedition, to clear themselves from the heavy suspicion which this document undoubtedly affixes on their loyalty. It is a disclosure too grave to be met with a light explanation. The fact of meditated treason, known to Whig officials, has transpired, and we are entitled to know how far upwards the rank contagion had spread.
That letter, apart from its historical value, is important at the present moment, inasmuch as we think that no one can peruse it without feeling convinced that, in any struggle for power, the Whigs would have no scruple in sacrificing principle to their interest. They have done so already repeatedly, and their tactics have always been to retain or recover office by making large concessions to the demands of the Radical or the Irish party. We are not without apprehension that they are, even now, contemplating some move of a similar nature, to be made during the ensuing session of Parliament, for the purpose of retrieving some portion of their lost popularity. The Radical party have openly threatened to withdraw their support from the ministry unless some increase of the suffrage shall be granted; and an agitation to that effect would be particularly palatable to the free-traders, as it might tend, in some degree, to draw public attention from the utter failure of their schemes. Any movement, in such a direction, would be followed by the most disastrous consequences. A further infusion of the popular element into the House of Commons, would simply lead to greater encroachments on the constitution, more reckless experiments upon the stability of our trade and commerce, and more culpable bidding by ministries for popularity in every shape. Where is to be the end of such an agitation—unless, indeed, we were to follow the notable examples of France and Germany, and adopt universal suffrage—if, on each occasion when the country is suffering under the pressure of noxious laws, no mode of relief can be suggested, save through an extension of the Reform Bill? We should have thought that the success of the first experiment was not quite so conspicuous as to invite another of the same nature. The impudence of the Radical faction is really almost incredible. Mr Cobden and his confederates have got free trade, from the effects of which we are presently languishing; and they now propose to revive our spirits and replenish our purses by stocking the House of Commons with an additional importation of men of precisely the same caste and opinions as their own! We suspect that the funds would scarce be lively if the country were assured that forty Brights, instead of one, were seated in our National Assembly.
We therefore again implore the Conservatives to unite without loss of time, since in their hands alone can we have a thorough guarantee for the safety of the crown, the stability of the national churches, and for the integrity of the constitution. Let all lukewarmness, all promptings of personal ambition, all latent rancour, and all absurd and unreciprocated confidence, be given to the winds at once; and let us seriously and diligently apply ourselves to the task of recalling to Britain and her colonies that measure of prosperity which we possessed before evil counsels prevailed, and which, even now, is not beyond our power to recall. The industrious classes of the community, impoverished and straitened as they have been, have a right to this service from the high-minded gentlemen of England. The power and the ability are with us, if we only testify the disposition; and surely it is madness to remain at idle feud while the enemy are visible at the gate.
These remarks are not based upon mere speculation. We are well assured that, during the last few months, much progress has been made towards a thorough fusion of the two sections of the Conservative party, upon clear and common grounds. All difficulties would by this time probably have been removed, but for the scruples of two or three gentlemen who are supposed to possess the private confidence of Sir Robert Peel, and who have hitherto identified themselves with his fortunes. Now, as it must be perfectly apparent to any man of common reflection, that the bulk of the Conservatives never can, under any circumstances, consent to act under the leadership of Peel; as he himself has, over and over again, publicly stated that no motive or consideration would induce him to return to power—it is absolutely incomprehensible to us how such scruples can exist in the minds of the individuals to whom we allude, if they really believe in the sincerity of this last declaration of their leader. No one wants him to take office, and he says that he will not accept it. So far all are agreed. If we believed that any one of these distinguished and honourable men is convinced that the commercial policy of the last three years has been wise and sound, and that, with any amount of trial, it can terminate otherwise than fatally for the interests of the country, we should have no right to address them upon a subject so momentous as this, and certainly no desire for one moment to gain their co-operation. But we can very well distinguish betwixt a feeling of strong attachment to an individual whose talents they have been accustomed to respect, but whose views they have only partially penetrated, and a settled conviction in the soundness of the policy which it has been his destiny to originate. We believe that, hitherto, the former sentiment, and not the latter one, must be taken as the true explanation of their conduct—that they are unwilling to abandon the man, although they have lost their faith in the efficacy of his measures. Now, if this be the case, how can they justify themselves for opposing, upon such slender grounds, the reconstruction of the Conservative party? They must be well aware that Sir Robert Peel has forfeited for ever the confidence of a large majority of those who, a few years ago, were his most steadfast and faithful followers, and that far more through his own deliberate acknowledgment of double-dealing, than from a mere change of opinion upon any one point of commercial policy, however important it might appear. It may be the misfortune of Peel, rather than his fault, that he cannot estimate the proper value of plain manly confidence and unshrinking candour; that he has invariably declined the straight for the crooked path; and that an excess of ingenuity—a vast misfortune for a statesman—has tempted him to meddle, repeatedly and almost incessantly, with interests far too important to be approached except with extreme deliberation. These are the considerations which must preclude him from being restored to his former rank as leader of the great Conservative party; and we notice them now, not as matter of blame to him, but in explanation of the general feeling. And we go further than this. We say that, in order to render the Conservative union enduring, it will be absolutely necessary to reconstruct the party upon clear, avowed, solid, and proclaimed principles, so that no doubt whatever may be left as to the course which in future is to be pursued. Instead of that shifting and wavering policy which has paralysed our colonies, terrified our merchants, and depressed the money market, we must resolve upon a definite plan for the future, which shall restore confidence, and secure us, so far as may be, against the recurrence of similar disasters. We must also determine whether the present currency laws are to be maintained, or whether they shall undergo such alterations as shall prevent them from aggravating the pressure in circumstances of unforeseen difficulty. On all these points Sir Robert Peel stands strongly and unfortunately committed. Even since he has been in opposition, he has shown no symptoms of the slightest relaxation of his last adopted ideas; and it is quite impossible for us to forget that, through his influence, the Whigs were enabled to carry that bill which is universally acknowledged to be the death-warrant of our West Indian colonies. Under these circumstances, the devotion of his few adherents is not only an act of Quixotry, but a serious injury to the party which has a right to expect their services and their aid; and, however much we may respect the talents of the gentlemen to whom we have alluded, we must tell them that the period for a definite selection has arrived, and that, by standing in the way of Conservative reconciliation and union, they are not performing their proper duty either to their country or their Queen.
With such financiers as Goulburn and Herries in the Commons,—with such eminent statesmen as Lords Stanley, Lyndhurst, and Aberdeen in the House of Peers,—there can be no doubt of the strength and the success of the Conservative party if once more thoroughly united. We have always regarded the unfortunate division as one of the most serious disasters that ever befell the country, not only because it destroyed the cohesion and severed the councils of a body which, under any circumstances, would have been strong enough to keep both the Whigs and the Radicals in check, but also because it engendered much apathy and some disgust amongst men who were the most valuable supporters of Conservative principles, and who, in consequence, ceased for a time to take any active interest in public affairs. The unseemly election contests which repeatedly took place in England, between parties mutually designating themselves Protectionists and Peelites,—sometimes terminating in the defeat of both, or in the triumph, through their idle rivalry, of a liberal candidate, who otherwise never could have succeeded—did a great deal to widen the breach, and to lessen the mass of the opposition; and we revert with considerable pride and satisfaction to the fact, that in Scotland no such unnatural dissension was exhibited, but that men belonging to every shade of Conservatism were eager to act in concert, whenever a candidate appeared. We can make allowance for some exasperation on both sides, under such very peculiar and novel circumstances; but we hope that we have seen the last of these discreditable and weakening contests.