TOPICS OF THE DAY.
• POLITICAL INDIFFERENTISM.
WHEN the House of Commons was counted out the other night, Sir John Jervis hinted as a reason, that Lord Lincoln had made a long speech: according to the Law Minister, it is quite natural that the Representatives of England should rather waste a colony than be troubled with listening to a long speech. And we be- lieve he is right. But the indifference is not limited to Van- couver's Island ; it impartially embraces all our colonies : the Faithful Commons would rather that British North America should go than be troubled just now with a change of Ministry. Lord Grey may treat the Australians as he pleases—who cares ? To mention the Cape of Good Hope is almost as sure to thin the House as " Ireland."
Ireland ! ay, who cares for her, except a few individual Eng- lish Members and some Irish Members ? Ministers indeed are conscious of responsibility, but their chief is quite content with his notion of "measures from time to time applicable to the occasion." He is content to keep Ireland on a repairing lease, with the mental reservation that he does not mean to invest much in the repairs. Ireland "wants but little here below " : cobble and botch, and wait for better seasons; that will do. Irish Members are dis- agreeable fellows : they make some sport, now that Roebuck is in the House, but the sport is stale. Ireland is not England.
"England " I why, who cares for her—except the Chartists ? Perhaps Lord John Russell does ; because the House of Bedford stands upon England, as the world does upon the tortoise in the Hindu cosmogony. But as to any patriotism—it is a schoolboy's virtue, and Englishmen have outgrown it. Are we not " tran- quil " at home ? Is not trade reviving ?—at least the Chancellor of the Exchequer has said so. Does not the tea come up to breakfast every morning ; is not the cream from Richmond punctual ; are there signs of decay about M. Soyer's regime ; does the Carlton pale in its magnificent luxury ; are there not two Operas ; have rents fallen in Belgrave Square or in Bucking- ham? In short, is not the country prosperous? What more then ? what next? "Apres nous le deluge" was the bravado of one who did feel some solicitude amid the whirl of the gay pre- sent: but there are to be no more deluges. Deluge has made positively his last appearance. And there are to be no more de- luges metaphorically so called, in England—that is, revolutions. The Chartists are quiet. Ireland is put down, even by Lord John and his Cabinet. Possibly, indeed, those who look below the surface may descry in the labour question—Pooh! who talks about that, except Carlyle or the Communists? Leave that sub- ject to them. And as to England—vast abstraction I—never trouble your head about her. She is the Toots of nations, and declares of everything, by her Representatives and their de- meanour, that "it 'a of no consequence."
Even the Protectionists abate their breath, and cease to vatici- nate. If Major Whittaker brings forth statistics in the Morning Post, to show that England must part with all her agriculture, transferred by free trade to America, and that she must become the workshop of the world too late perhaps to retain her custom- ers, who cares ? Major Whittaker may have reasons—figures ; but the minds of men are made up, and they will not listen—not because they can beforehand detect his errors, but because it is a trouble. Lay an embargo on the milk of London, for a single day, and you may excite a sensation ; but talk of things future or distant, and you are only tedious. Rome, that eternal city I who cares for her ? Rome again warred upon by Gauls, is no more than a trite newspaper subject. Lord Lansdowne says that the British Government suggested no "obstacles" to the said Gauls ; and when he declared that their ulterior proceedings were no business of ours, Peers ironically cheered, not the sentiment, but the naivete of its avowal. Non- intervention is the fashion—that is, nonintervention with Lord Palmerston : he may intervene, if he won't drag us into it. The honour of the country cannot be compromised, because the coun- try has no honour—Mr. Cobden says so.
It would be awkward, indeed, if anything were to happen while we are in this state of blind apathy. It; for example, Ab- solutism or Red Republicanism were to gain the day all over the Continent; if Chartists or Irish had those offers of foreign aid which we think so incredible and impossible : it mould be awk- ward. Very awkward too if the labour question were by any chance to break out into active and substantial existence. Cer- tainly the public is not prepared for it. No class is active just now, except the Financial Reformers—the professed agitators of the middle class. We have lost all habit of activity, all common bonds by common interests and objects. Parliament, meetings, newspapers, disclose the universal indifferency. If the invasion predicted by Sir Charles Napier—who assures the Chronicle, this Week, that we have only three steam frigates to oppose it—if that invasion were to come, or a labour insurrection, or any other proof of our not having attained the millennium—what should we do? Improvise a special constabulary, or call out the mili- tary. And what if those great measures failed? Why, then, we could fall back upon "the people "—with no accord, no confi- dence in each other, no real care for each other, no confidence of class in class, or of people in men. That is the condition we live in. It is based upon the slight mistake, that what we can Predicate of the present we can predicate of the future. We give the selfish, objectless, listless apathy, a pretty name—we call it " peace"; and, declaring that it would be naughty to break the dream, we look no further.
Previous page
