The Ministerial newspapers are apparently at a loss how to
deal with the article on the state of Parties in the London and Westminster Review. They are waiting, probably, for a signal from Downing Street, which may be communicated to-morrow. The Chronicle nibbled at the subject on Thursday, and contrived in three lines to misrepresent the object of Sir WILLIAM MoLessvoltatas manifesto previous to the opening of last session, the conduct of the Radicals in Parliament, and the meaning of a passage in the new article. The Chronicle sap it is " admitted" by the Reviewer " that the attempt to run down Ministers was a failure,"—intimating that such was the drift of Sir WILLIAM MOLERWORTH'S counsel to the Radicals. That this is not true, a reference to Sir WILLIAM MoLaswotertes paper in the January number will prove. On the contrary, most friendly advice was offered to the Whigs ; which, had it been accepted, would have saved them from their subsequent disgraces and present embar- rassment. The desire was to keep the Whigs from falling, not to run them down. If, however, the Radicals did attempt to run down the Whigs, they can scarcely be said to have failed ; for the Ministers, maugre the death of WILLIam and the favour of VICTORIA, are weaker now than then. But, in point of fact, such was neither the aim of the Radicals nor the consequence of any thing they did. The Whigs " ran down " themselves, and have none others to blame for the diminution of their strength. The admission in the new article is simply that some of the Radical attacks on the Whigs were ill-timed, and not well-sustained ; but it is not said, because it could not be truly said, that the object of those attacks was to run down the Whigs; the wish and aim of the Radicals having been, and being still, to urge Ministers forward in a course that can alone preserve the Government from falling into Tory huuds.
Previous page
