DISCUSSION.

Discussiow has been regarded and valued as preliminary to action, insomuch that in despotic countries it is suppressed lest deeds fol- low. It has thus acquired such an exaggerated repute, especially among trading political agitators and their customers, that it is even held as possessing a primary importance. Nine-tenths of the energy of the country is wasted in resultless "discussion." People seem to think that when they have procured a " discussion," the chief thing is attained. Is some deplorable and urgent want de- tected, it is "discussed," and there is an end of the matter. The consultation of physicians is called ; the doctors elaborately can- vass their disagreements; and separate, without a thought of really doing any thing for the patient, or at any rate not till "next year." In compliance with the new preference of words over deeds, instead of really legislating, Parliament only " debates" ; and your Popular Member or "patriot" accounts it a vast public service to hold the Council of the Nation to the same subject for a fortnight together. Plenty of bills, indeed, are passed ; but the process is inverted with respect to deeds : the object of the originating legislator usually is to make every measure as little as possible comprehensive, com- plete, satisfactory, or final—to make it such as will provoke fewest " objections," and therefore as negative as it can be. Moreover, if any party should so far err as to produce a measure with some po- sitive merits, a hostile party, either out of dislike to the " prin- ciples" of their opponents—and " principles" is the Parliamentary term for purpose, object, method, execution, and everything else— or out of mere jealous rivalry, strive to reduce the measure to a caput mortuum. From timidity, from the want of earnestness, and in the hope of like favours on occasion, the party legislating are always ready with " concession " to disarm opposition; so that if the Bill be not a mockery of its preamble, the Act is a mockery of the Bill. The result is, that as so little is always done there is ever the more to do ; which gives constantly-growing occasion for talk ; and thus the mine appears to be inexhaustible.

The habits of mind induced in statesmen by this new form of activity are curious, and not elevating. Not deeds but words, not performances but promises, not realities but appearances, are now exacted; and every class of statesmanship has sunk to a branch of quackery, with its own tricks and arts, grown mechanical to the most practised quacks or "leaders." None is so exalted in station, perhaps none so exalted in purpose, as to escape contamination. Practical duties, for the present benefit and advancement of the country, are neglected ; and it has all become a matter of contest in words. Instead of eagerly seeking what they may do, states- men stand upon the defensive, seeing what they must be forced to do ; and they think that such is the discreet and wise course. So inveterate is this habit, that even when they wish to do a thing, or affect to wish it—and "it is all affectations "—they will not set to work except under a "pressure from without:' Often, to see the

thing done is the last thing that their rivals desire, especially to see it done by the opposition-shop ; so that those very persons who urge the necessity of some great policy, slily intercept the pressure from without, lest the task should be executed by the professedly willing demanders of compulsion. Some guess that Sir ROBERT PEEL would be glad enough to repeal the Corn-laws, and that be might be made to do so ; but how would the Whigs like to force upon him the credit of such a measure ? which they again would rather have the credit of wishing than really be forced to do. When at last driven up into a corner by "discussion," practical results are evaded in a very remarkable way—the whole necessity and wisdom of the thing urged is cheerfully acknowledged, and there everybody stops, delighted at realizing an idea. Thus the Whigs most resolutely asserted the paramount necessity of appropriating the Church-revenues in Ireland ; but as to really appropriating them—that point was a "concession to the Tories." Conservatives smilingly admit the beauty of free trade—in the abstract ; but they will not be so unpolite as to go more than a step beyond the Whigs in reality ; and the Whigs again are quite satisfied with having said that they would go beyond the Conservatives. Young England recognizes the claims of the poor, meets the working-man on friendly terms, and warmly remonstrates against neglect of his interests ; and we are all charmed at so much benevolence : but we shall see next session whether Young England will go beyond cricket-playing and speech-making. With these verbal duties and liabilities, the art of statecraft has degenerated to one of wrangling ; and very curious is the peculiar style of fence. The favourite weapon is quotation from authorities, and it does not much matter to any party what the authorities are. Like the archer of old, your Tory picks up the arrow of a Whig quotation and shoots it back as glibly as a French archer might have done an English abaft at Crecy. The present absorbing topic, the state of the distressed agricultural poor, is a notable case in point. The agricultural labourers are in miserable estate—everybody allows that ; some- thing must be done—of course; and arrived at that conclusion, there we stick. "Something must be done," suggests the question "what ?" and that is the pretext for an endless " discussion " ; so that what must be done never is done; and the poor are expected to be content with the acknowledgment of their claims. All this 'while, there is the most vivacious " discussion" : the Reverend SYDNEY GODOLPHIN OSBORNE writes to the Times, Anti-Poor-law fashion, quoting ADAM SMITH; the Chronicle picks up the identical quotation, and launches it generally against Anti-Free-traders ; the Protectionist Post catches the shaft as it flies, and retorts it on the political economist. You would think that it was of the last im- portance to the whole world to know what ADAM SMITH "says," as if that settled everything. Ask any of the controversialists to do what ADAM SMITH says, and—mercy on us, what a " discus- sion " it would provoke ! The present disputation might be put somewhat in this form.

Whig-Radical—Oh, what a shame! Here are the poor labourers living like pigs, only without enough to eat. This comes of dear bread I Ultra-Tory Protectionist—Ah, dreadful ! That is all along of the free trade you forced upon Peel : see how cheap corn is !

Anti-Poor-Law—Yes, all the world are growing paupers; and instead of providing comfortable incomes out of the poor-rates, you separate man and wife in the workhouse !

Peel- Conservative—It is very distressing.

Whig-Radical—Are not you ashamed of yourself, then, for not setting all to rights ?

Ultra-Tory—Ay, why don't you do something ? Peel-Conservative—Yes, certainly, something MUSi be done. All—Something must be done.

Peel- Conservative—Well, show me what, and no one will be more

willing than I am to advance the progress of the country by judicious measures of amelioration, and to restore to a state of material comfort "a bold peasantry their country's pride?'

Whig-Radical—Repeal Corn- Trio Ultra- Tory—Restore the Corn- law.

/

Anti-Poor-law—Repeal Poor- Peel-Conservative—Now, how can I do all at once ? Let honourable Members make their suggestions one at a time, and they shall receive from me that respectful attention which Whig-Radical—Repeal the Corn-laws.

All the rest—Oh, you violent demagogue! what a confusion you would make! Besides, you yourself did not do it when you could ; and your own Colonel Torrens says— ( Tremendous discussion.) Peel-Conservative—" Revenons a nos moutons ": something must be done. (.411—" Something must be done! ") I am sure, if the honour- able Member convinces me—and I am sure I never shall be con- vinced—that the repeal of the Corn-laws would really conduce to the welfare of those industrious classes to whom we all owe so much— (A11—" Ah ! that is what I say! ")—I shall be the first to propose the Repeal of the Corn-laws. (Cheers and counter-cheers.)

The rest—Meanwhile, something must be done.

Peel-Conservative—Something must be done. But what is it ? Ultra-Tory—Restore agricultural protection.

All the rest—Oh, the dullard ! where have you been sleeping all this time? Ricardo says- Ultra-Tory—Well, I know, Ricardo says— (Renewed discussion.) Peel-Conservative—However, something must be done ; and if, in temperate debate, honourable Members will only show me what, and not revert to impracticable though venerated fallacies of a bygone age,

I shall proudly undertake the mission of doing what I shall be com- pelled to adopt.

Anti-Poor-law—Repeal the Poor-law, then.

Ultra-Tory—That fellow has always got some underhand purpose to serve, even when he is in the right I Nottingham election- Peel-Conservative—I did not make the Poor-law ; but I concede that the honourable gentleman opposite was very judicious to do it ; and when- Whig-Radical—Hear, hear !

The other two—Oh, you hard-hearted political economist ! You will do nothing for the poor.

The two others—What do you hypocrites care for the real interests of the poor ? Adam Smith says— The other two—Ay, Adam Smith says— (Awful discussion.) Peel-Conservative—However, something must be done. (All—" Some- thing must be done.) Let us only discover what it is that all of us can approve and none of us discover any objection to ; and only convince me that that is the only thing that can be done, and that it is the thing that must be done ; and then—we will talk about it.

Whig-Radical—These are indeed concessions that disarm me quite ; and if by putting aside party-spirit we can enter upon the discussion Ultra- Tory—(Aside)--I am quite shelved. (Aloud) Humbug! you two are conniving to cheat the people and share the booty, while they are starving.

Whig-Radical—Very true, I forgot that—they are starving ; and really it is shameful that nothing is done. Paley says— Ultra- Tory—How dare you quote Paley ? Dr. Arnold— (More discussion.)

Such is without exaggeration the spirit of the whole controversy. Each party seems to think that its duty lies in refuting its adver-

sary. If one brings a proposition to a theoretical proof of necessity,

he thinks that he may take as much credit as if it were done ; while his antagonist thinks that to pick a hole in the other's argu- ment absolves him from the duty to which the argument leads.

Real statesmen would be eager, not to vanquish in this mock com- bat of wrangling, but to seize upon every suggestion of possible utility, however imperfectly put, and upon ascertaining realities, not getting up appearances. Thus, instead of "putting the best light" upon the state of the agricultural labourers, the really coura- geous and discreet statesman would first ascertain what it really is ; then, on any remedy suggested, instead of trying to discover how he might evade the trouble of applying it, he would put it to the only tests of its merits. Those tests would be—practicability, present

benefit, absence of ulterior bad consequences. Allotments, for in- stance, are suggested : they are clearly practicable ; they probably

confer immediate benefit ; and the statesman should at once fasten upon the question, are the ulterior bad consequences—moral de- pendence, and the evils of the conacre system—inseparable from allotments, or only incidental to bad arrangements ? That ques- tion might be so far settled in the conviction of any man as to jus- tify his action, one way or another, in six months ; and no question out of the pale of the exact sciences could ever very well attain a greater degree of certainty. Emigration is another remedy pro- posed : it is practicable—the cost is no valid obstacle, since money to any amount has been obtained for far more questionable purposes ;

it would bestow immediate benefit—for the casual hardships of the labourer in the Colonies are not to be compared to the permanent hopeless degradation of the field-labourer at home ; and no bad ulterior consequences have ever been alleged against it. That question might be settled to any man's mind in six months ; and every such question ought so to be examined and settled, not evaded and stifled in the tumult of squabbling—in that kind of talking against time and conviction, which, under tie name of "free dis- cussion," impedes and frustrates the functions of Parliament.