NOTE.
We are indebted to the courtesy of the Morning Chronicle for being made aware of a very lengthy and elaborate attack on the Spectator—a whole columnfnl of well-contrived misrepresentation—by. the League newspaper. The League is the journal the support of which, according to the published accounts, has cost the Anti-Corn-law funds 10,0001. It is not the first time that the mercenaries of the League have made calumnious attacks on thisjournal, with a view to injure it; the apparent reason being, that we have differed from the professed agitators as to the best means of attaining common objects—repeal of the Corn-laws and free trade. We leave it to less interested observers to say which style of advocacy has had the most effect in bringing the question to its present stage of opinion, at least among those who now really have the disposal of the issue. At any rate, whatever service we may have rendered in that behalf has been unbought. The immediate object of the League attack, as quoted by the Chronicle, is to produce an impression that we have changed our views since 1841, " when there was a Whig Ministry to be schooled, and scolded, and snubbed, for so often querulously remonstrating against the recognition of general principles'": and to make out the case, the paper in a recent number, headed " How to Facilitate Corn-law Repeal," is contrasted with papers written in February, March, and May 1841. Some of the quotations are mere passing expressions, tending to show that five years ago we were zealous Corn-law repeaters: our readers know that we are so still. The accuser says that our virtue has declined under the Peel regime, and that we are " all timidity and compliance." His notion of patriotism and virtue seems to be, that one should always flatter and indulge " Liberals" and belabour ".Tories": our notion is pretty much the reverse. We think that the actings of professed Liberals should be tried by a severer standard than the timid approaches of men trained in another faith. In the Whig Ministry of 1841, we saw those who pretended to be Liberal supporting the Corn-laws and shirking free trade, until the questions could be made to serve a desperate party purpose. What indulgence was merited then? In 1846, we see a new party arising, once belonging to the avowed enemies of free trade, now far advanced in conversion. Is the better policy here, encouragement, or the opposite? The only substantial (imitation of these past matters is that from the paper for March the 6th 1841; in which, according to the League, we supported "total and immediate repeal" of the Corn-laws, and showed that the immediate repeal would be the least injurious to the agriculturists. That paper, however, was not so much an exposition of our own views, as of the grounds on which those who enter- tained them were justified in making them conditions of their support to candi- dates for election. We have always recognized a distinction between the immediate enactment of repeal and the immediate completion of the change. In the very paper cited by the League, we say of "immediate repeal"—" By this the Anta- Corn-law agitators do not mean that a free trade in grain, to be beneficial, must be established in 1841 and in no other year." We believed, indeed, at that time, that a sudden change would be least injurious to the agriculturists: we believe still that it would be so, ff you could insure the farmers against the effect of their own panic. The unreasonableness of the panic is not the point; the fact is sufficient. The thing that frightens your horse may be a shadow; but if he is frightened, runs away and throws you, the bruises are not the less real because the shadow was unsubstantial: proof of the illogical conclusion of the horse is no salve for your own hurts. The recent paper on the way to facilitate Corn-law repeal had not the general question of the Corn-laws for its main subject: it was addressed to the new Colonial Minister, and its main subject was colonization; a measure of safety which we have urged upon every Government, and not always without success, for many years—long before the League or its League existed. It is pretended that emigration was proposed as something to be secured before repealing the Corn-laws: no such absurdity will be found in our pages; but a favourable opportunity was seized for urging on the attention of one Cabinet Minister the share which his depart- ment ought to take in the great measures that are coming under consideration to improve the condition of the empire. We might reprint alongside of this essay, m the same number of our journal, the remarks on " total and imme- diate repeal," so little inconsistency either in doctrine or temper is there between the two. In the recent paper, we represent "some of the League" as saying that the panic and its disastrous consequences " would serve the monopolists right" for their opposition to free trade; and we are called upon to explain whom we mean by "some of the League," and who said so? The phrase was, as the context showed, the embodying of a sentiment current enough among the more ardent agitators: from the context also it might be gathered that Mr. Cobden was the most promi- nent person intended. We do not think that our interpretation of phrases which he scattered abroad some weeks ago was at all strained. His declaration at Covent Garden Theatre, that the monopolists could no longer have a "feather-bed" to break their fall, wag a specimen of the harshly exultant language that he adopted during the " crisis." Now, we thought and said, when success approaches, 15 the very time to display that moderation which distinguishes all of generous race in the hour of victory. If mild and forbearing language can sooth the mor- tification of the defeated Protectionists—for such they virtually are—if any prac- tical means can be found to quiet their panic, under a change which they really dread—to refuse such a palliative is mere "spiteful antagonism," whoever makes the refusal. Mr. Cobden spoke in a better tone at Liverpool subsequently; for though he has a tongue too ready to be always discreet, he has a strong head and an honest heart. It would be well if the proceedings of subordinates were always of a kind to do credit to the League, its earnest leaders, and its important mission.
Previous page
