NEWS OF THE WEEK.
BEFORE any one was aware of it, there was something like a Minis- terial crisis, all about the Factory Bill ; for mutual exasperations, and the efforts of interested bystanders fomenting the quarrel, ibreed Ministers to take up a position of obstinate resistance, and Lord ASHLEY one even of aggression. As the question was not originally of a Ministerial kind, Members were not aware of the advantage which would be taken; and thus facility was afforded for that strange dislocation of parties which characterized the divisions. The opposition to Government was made up of the most hetero- geneous materials. Two sections may be considered as belonging to no party. First, there was Lord ASHLEY himself with the Short- Timists in the House, of all parties, from FIELDEN to FERRAND ; men distinguished by " impracticability" in politics and contempt of ordinary worldly considerations. Then there was the section composed of Lord HOWICK, Mr. CHARLES ROLLER, and the bud- ding Anti-Laissez-faire party. Young England also inclined to Lord ASHLEY. but not with headlong devotion ; for, though he had Lord JOHN MANNERS, Captain Rous, who is deemed an honorary member of the juvenile band, reverted to Ministers when he found that there was a factious use made of the attack upon them. Other Members were actuated by spite against the Ministry ; others, by spite against- the manbfavturers-ircountry gentlemen with a pious horror at the roturiers invading the House and society with the wealth, the vigour, and the irreverence of traders. Lastly, there was a numerous contingent of merely Anti-Ministerial Whigs, headed by Lord ./oraN RUSSELL. The other side pre- sented not quite so many separate elements, but it was suffi- ciently broken up : there were the officials and the gentlemen " with whom they usually act" ; Mr. LABOUCHERE and some other Whigs, who retain a greater regard for appearances than for office ; the Members for the factory-districts, representing the views of the master-manufacturers; the Free-trade opponents of restric- tions on commerce or labour,—some of whom, however, like Mr. COBDEN, did not take the occasion to assert their principles. And perhaps among the voters in support of Lord ASHLEY might be detected a strange clique, who voted for his extreme restriction because they disliked all restriction, and sought to engraft on the bill an amendment which they believed would be fatal to it ! Such was the crossing of parties, which gave at least a colourable ma- jority against Government, and on Friday landed the measure in that absurd position that it affirmed neither a ten-hours nor a twelve-hours time for factory-labour. No task could be more em- barrassing and thankless than that before Government—either to yield their honest opinions, or to take their stand against every tricky assault of the popularity-hunting and cant which so eagerly courted alliance with philanthropy, in the hope of being con- founded with it. On Monday, Sir JAMES GRAHAM announced that Ministers would abandon the bill, now reduced to an irreconcilable absurdity ; and introduce a new scrap of a measure, consisting of those parts to which the House had already agreed. The House received his announcement with hostile, almost with contumelious interruptions. Lord ASHLEY looked obdurate; Lord HOWICK patted him on the back; the Anti-Ministerialists were elate ; rumours began to fly about that Ministers, if beaten, would resign ! There was a positive crisis ; when amiable Lord ASHLEY'S courage failed him, and on Wednesday he announced that he should suffer Ministers to effect the exchange of bills. He gave up the attempt to force the ten-hours project through Parliament. Perhaps he fore- saw that it would be stopped in the House of Lords. Perhaps he re- peated of damaging, in a hopeless cause, a Government of which he generally approves, only to succeed, not in carrying his project, but in " letting in" the Whigs. At all events, the excitement subsided; the crisis was over ; and the approach of Friday was no longer anticipated as something that might decide the fate of the Conservative Ministry. Canada has been allowed to send corn into the ports of Great Britain at a fixed duty of Is. : Mr. Ilurr proposed to extend the same privilege to the Colonies of South Africa and Australasia, and to India. There is not an argument urged in favour of Canada which does not apply with equal force in favour of the other de- pendencies; but there are some arguments which Canada could not command. The South-eastern dependencies can say with Ca- nada, that colonies are the best customers for our manufactures, and that the settlers have a claim, as fellow-subjects, to be regarded rather as participators than as rivals in furnishing food for those of their family whom they leave at home. South Australia, struggling with incalculable difficulties which official extravagance and mis- management entailed upon it, has, in the seventh year of its exist- ence, sent the best wheat in the English market, and could send more if the entrance hither were free. India is forced to send home millions of tribute ; and to supply it with a natural means of remittance would be both justice and mercy. Government will not assent to a proposition of such self-evident justice. Mr. GLADSTONE, who was the organ of refusal, certainly does not possess his colleague's skill in "dressing up a case for the House." He has two reasons against this measure,—the benefit to the Colonies would be " insig- nificant "; and yet the permission would cause "panic" among English agriculturists! A little while ago, there was a paper in a Quarterly Review, urging the importance of free trade between the Mother-country and the Colonies, as rendering England independ- ent of the world and of " hostile tariffs " : the imposing scheme was imputed to Mr. GLADSTONE; it even earned him some reputation in France, where it was regarded with invidious admiration : he denied the authorship ; but the best disproof is his refusal now to permits free Colonial trade, because, before it has been fairly begun, it is small, and because, " microscopic " as he called it, it would breed a panic among the " sensitive " agricultural class. Mr. GLADSTONR is becoming noted for the frivolous and vexatious nature of his ex- cuses. His best excuse was unavowed—the Colonies are made the scapegoat of Ministerial Free-trade sins : as " only the Colonies" can be injured, Ministers make a stand against the most cogent of all claims to act upon their own principles, because they wish to show agricultural Conservatives that they can at times make a stand against their own principles. So strong was the general feeling in favour of the proposition, that the commercial writer even in the thoroughly Ministerial Standard expresses a hope that it may be affirmed "at a future and more auspicious period." What period is that ? When the whole system of Corn-laws shall be swept away ? The refusal, no doubt, to make the just concession now asked for South Africa, Australasia, and India, will be a new incentive to hasten that consummation.
After being many times postponed, Lord PALEcas-roN's resolu- tion, aimed at preventing any modification of the Slave-trade Trea- ties of 1831 and 1833—at preventing any friendly closing of that still " open question" with France—stood at the head of the Notices of Motion for Thursday ; but honourable Members did not " make a House." Could not the perturbed Viscount muster forty of his own friends to keep the doors open till he should begin ; or did be repent of his restless diplomacy ? In either case, he might take the opportunity to reflect, and perhaps amend his ways by not renewing his notice. It would be the more seemly, and, should he ever be in office again, perhaps the more convenient course for himself.
