TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE COURT AND THE MINISTRY.
THE King's assent to the introduction of the Irish Church Bill has been signified by Lord JOHN RUSSELL to the House of Com- mons, in the usual form; and upon this simple fact some of our Ministerial contemporaries consider themselves justified in de.. daring their disbelief in the reported hostility of his Majesty to Liberal principles and the MELBOURNE Cabinet. The Globe, on Tuesday, called it a " startling refutation of the late rumours and vaunts, which they (the Tories) have been industriously cir- culating about the King's secret differences with his Ministers:" and on Wednesday, the Courier, after alluding to Lord JOHN RUSSELL'S communication, said
our part, we do not believe in the existence of the influence assigned to the Tories, and do not therefore believe in any of these intrigues: on the con- trary, we believe that his Majesty acts with perfect good faith towards his Mi- nisters—that he has taken a just view of the circumstances of the country—and has a full and complete confidence in those Ministers %vliose straightforward in- tegrity, manly simplicity, and undeviatiug political consktency, contrast so fa- vourably with the shuiiiing, cunning tergiversation of Sit Robert Peel and his friends, and have won for them the confidence of this mighty nation."
It is proverbially easy to convince men of the truth of that which they are eager to credit ; and in this way we must account for the facility of belief exhibited by our contemporaries: but it really seems to us that something more conclusive is required to prove the conversion of the Court from Toryism to Reform principles, than the formal announcement of his Majesty's consent to the in- troduction of any Ministerial measure. It is always the implied, if not the express condition on which a Minister in modern times accepts office, that he shall be allowed to propose such bills as he thinks fit to the Legislature. The celebrated India Bill of CHARLES Fox was permitted by GEORGE the Third to be carried through the House of Commons; ut he did not on that account refrain from using all his influence to defeat it in the Lords. In like manner, WILLIAM the Fourth may treat the MELBOURNE Cabinet in regard to the Irish Church Bill: we do not say that he will, but our suspicions of the King's hostility arc not diminished by the consent he has given to the mere introduction of the utensil re.
That the King was the ready and willing instrument of the Tories in November last, will not be denied; and we ask for the proofs of his change since that period. He received Lord MEL- BOURNE back again, because he had not the power to resist openly the \vitt of the Nation ; but we have Lord MELBOURNE'S own authority for the fact, that the process of forming his Ministry was very disagreeable. This could only apply to the difficulties thrown in his way by the King. The compulsory formation of the present Administration is any thing but proof of the Royal wil- lingness to support Liberal men and measures. Then it will not be pretended that there is any thing like cordi- ality in the intercourse of the King with his Ministers. It is easy to sneer at the tittle-tattle of a Court ; but, as straws thrown into the air will show which way the wind blows, so the casual expres- sions ef a Monarch—his undisguised ebullitions before the mem- bers of his household—will convey a tolerably correct idea of the current of Royal thought and inclination.
The Courier pretends that the King has been misrepresented with reference to his speech to Sir CHARLES GREY, which we quoted last week- " Recollecting, we presume, the long and disastrous war between England and her Colonies, which led to the final separation of the United States'frorn England, under circumstances ot bitterness and exasperation, his Majesty is said to have taken an opportunity, when Sir Charles Grey was presented to him, of warning Sir Charles not to suffer Canada to be lost or given away in a similar manner. His Majesty's friendly admonition, meant to remind Sir Charles of the errors committed by the Commissioners sent to the United States, and to warn him against the feebleness, mingled with insult and vioLince, which were then displayed, has been held by the Tories to imply that his Majesty expressed disapprobation of the principles on which the Connnissioncrs were likely to pro- But the Courier has not told us why, of the three Commis- sioners, the King should select Sir CHARLES GREY, a scarcely disguised Tory, for the object of the public odmonition. Why was not Lord GOSFORD honoured with the " irregular and extra- official " injunction ? Why could not the King trustLord MEL- BOURNE, or Lord GLENELG, with the duty of impressing upon the Commissioners the necessity of preserving the Canadas? It was an insult, and we fear an intentional one, to his responsible advisers, to give instructions in this manner to one of the Com- missioners. It was intended to imply a want of confidence in his Ministers—as if their instructions would tend to sever the Colonies from the Mother Country, and therefore require:1 counteraction from the King himself. In this light it was viewed by the Tories; and we think it. is the common-sense view of the matter.
We must have very different and more explicit evidence than any which the Courier or the Globe has adduced, before we can place credit in the asserted sincerity of the King's surport of his Liberal Ministers. We shall see how the Household votes on the Irish Tithe Bill—we shall see whether the recess will pass over without another coup d*Nal—we shall see whether the necessary creation of Peers will be made to produce con- formity between the House of Lords and the House of Com- m. ons. The King has it in his power to show himself to the nation in the character the Courier ascribes to him; but until lie does, let the Reformers act as if they had to contend with the Court. The Minisleos of their choice are not, they may rely upon
it, upheld as is fitting by the Court : so much the more heartily should they be supported by the People, as long as they maintain their popular course.
We suspect that it is useless to warn Ministers themselves against the delusion that they have the confidence and good-will of the King. Notwithstanding the tone of the Ministerial jour- nals, Lord MELBOURNE and his colleagues must know too well whet their real position is at Court, to need any such admonition,
Previous page
