NEWS OF THE WEEK.
ONE subject has overridden all others in Parliament this week— the Navigation Bill ; which stood for the second reading in the House of Lords, and by which the fate of the Ministry was sup- posed to hang. But, however alarming, the rumours on that head have come to nothing. Ministers have induced the Lords to adopt the principle of the bill, on the second reading ; osten- sibly on the broad grounds, of desirable concessions to foreign allies and customers, of concession to our Colonies which has been rendered needful by one adoption of free trade, and of the neces- sity to complete the-. series of changes to which the country has committed itself. The arguments advanced against the measure were unsubstantial, and not new : Adam Smith's old apology for the Navigation-laws, stretched beyond his meaning and applied to a wholly altered state of things ; the necessity of keeping up a nursery whence to man Ins iszsen—a necessity admitted, but of a kind to be provided for separately and the fact that the Colonies are not unanimous,—as indeed what community is? But the sub- stantial interests of the Colonies are too manifestly arrayed on the side of repeal to permit a moments's hesitation as to their real' .wishes. Some of them martvish protection restored ; but in it' g- fault of that, the repeal of the Navigation-laws is to them a de- sirable measure.. It is not lo be supposed that the shipping in- terests in England can altogether escape loss in the transition ; but in what degree even they will be affected is very uncertain ;
i and there is every reason to rely on the energy and invention of those who carry on the trade which is the last to lose the old legislative " protection," to make all square in the end. The argument* against the 11111 being neither new nor substantial, they derived little force from a speech which for Lord Stanley was tame ; and if Lord Brougham made them amusing, the effect of his eloquence died-away with the laughter which his discur-
sive pleasantry had provoked. ,ss
But arguments in debate had little to do with the result : that was foreknown. A majority of 10 was predicted, and 10 it was. Some voted because the measure fitted their own predetermined views ; it is within the bounds of possibility that a few had been recently convinced by reasons advanced in the Parliamentary discussions; more submitted to a blind necessity, a sort of political predestination ; and no inconsiderable party placed its votes at the disposal of Ministers as "her Majesty's Government." But the issue was well known, or at least confidently anticipated, be- forehand. Indeed, the greatest danger that ever attended the bill arose from doubts respecting the sincerity of Ministers them- selves, suggested by their own hesitating treatment of the sub- ject, and their gift of a place to Mr. Baines on the understanding that he might vote against the repeal of the Navigation-laws,—as though they cared more for Mr. Baines and Ilull's one Whig vote than for the particular measure.
Some opponents boast that the bill is not yet out of danger, since it may be rendered harmless in Committee. It is observed that although the gross number of votes gives a favourable major- ity of 10, yet the deduction of the proxies exhibits among the Peers present an adverse majority of 14 ; and we are reminded that proxies are not allowed in Committee. That is true; but some other considerations will scarcely be forgotten by the Peers. It is not probable that they will resort to a manoeuvre based on a view which throws discredit on their privilege of voting by proxy. It is not usual for the Lords to deal lightly with settled conclusions of the House : a scrupulous abstinence from that evolution is one of the surviving distinctions between the Lords and the Commons, and if the Lords themselves set about abolish- ing such redeeming distinctions—Heaven help them ! Besides, clauses removed in Committee may be restored at a subsequent stage by the House; so that the manoeuvre would be not only mean but vain. Nor are the Lords likely in the subsequent and less critical stages of the bill to assume a new levity in defying
public opinion. They will perceive how much better it is to re- concile themselves to the necessity of finishing off this series of changes, so as to have done with the vexatious process, and to at- tain that stability which is denied while sweeping changes are in agitation.
The political results of the decision of Wednesday morning are not unimportant. Lord Stanley has flinched from a position to which he had been hurried by the reckless zeal of his party : his defence of the Navigation-laws was a ,pro-forma kind of resist- ance; his speech against repeal was cold and tame on the broad essentials, eloquent only when he was mooting some isolated or trivial point. In his demeanour the Tory party confesses itself beaten. The Standard, indeed, says that there has been no vic- tory • that the second reading was carried by "a majority scraped together by means the most unscrupulous and unconstitutional ever resorted to by a Ministry in extrentis—ambassadors collected, menaces most industriously circulated, and even the influence of Royalty claimed and employed for the purpose of coercing the doubtful and hesitating into a vote repugnant to their judgment and their conscience." This is like the common invention of dis- appointment; and as to what is said of " Royalty," we believe it to be wholly without foundation. The majority was given to the bill on the grounds above stated; and the result of the debate is a confession that the Tory party is effete.
The Whig crisis therefore is over, and Ministers have prolonged official existence—a renewed tenure with all its consequences. For, undoubtedly, as soon as Members with important public questions in charge are relieved from the fear of immediately ousting a feeble Government, those public questions will be re- vived, and new tests will be applied to the Ministerial "responsi- bility."
