7 MARCH 1846, Page 15

COALITION.

Iris curious to see how the present fusion and confusion of parties perplex party politicians. In the eddy, they cannot discover which way the stream runs in order that they may float with it or stem it. Mr. George Bankes, dimly aware that there is a com- bination of political sections against that section to which he belongs, loudly denounces " coalition." There is, says the Globe, no " coalition "—it-is "union." The Whigs, according to the Whig journalist, are persevering in their own opinions, regardless of party differences. The Peelites are proselytes, " come in at the eleventh hour to gather the harvest which has been prepared by their earlier and harder-working brethren " ; yet "their fellow labourers " "cheerfully coaperate with them in the good work." And the Liberal writer patronizingly defends the conversion of " the Peelites "— " Are men never to change their opinions? Or, if they do, are they never to act upon such change? In that case, the country would lose the benefit of their more matured judgment. A great number of Members in both Houses of Parlia- ment enter upon their career at an age when their opinions must of necessity be very crude—if they have any opinions at all: many of them, having no opinions of their own, attach themselves to a party, which they blindly follow. Is there to he no locus pcenitentice for such persons as they advance in years? Shall they never profit by experience? To say that a man is bound to act with his party, is to declare that he owes more allegiance to a section of the community than to the community at large. * * * To contend that the chiefs of different parties should never coalesce, is to maintain that there should be a perpetual war of persons in the state—a struggle between men rather than measures. * * * There is nothing to be ashamed of in an honest change of opinion. Only let the convert be candid, and fairly avow himself to have been mistaken, and hold his head humbly before those whom he acknowledges to have been always in the right. Penitent conversion is better than obstinate consistency."

Much of this is well said ; and there seems at last to be some reason to hope that "measures rather than men" may become more than a cant phrase. But we must not let our satisfaction at this candour of "the eleventh hour" blind us to the insinuation that lurks under it. It is implied that the Whigs have made some great sacrifice. There would be no harm in leaving them to that flattering presumption, if it did not tend to prevent a right understanding of the real state of matters.

The Whigs have sacrificed nothing spontaneously, though they have been involuntarily deprived of something; but if they are sincere in their past professions, the whole change should be a matter of exultation—of success, outrunning their hopes, " hum- bly" and " candidly " acknowledged. By the recent change, free trade, but lately a theory about which the Liberal party itself wae divided, has now become a practical measure ; and the whole- sale conversion to that doctrine, which Sir Robert Peel has achieved, has not only had the effect of adding a large contingent to the Liberal body, but has at the same time united the whole of that body in one uniform doctrine of thorough free trade. The ehange which this implies in the future treatment of the subject is enormous—immeasurable. Free trade is henceforward not a -party theory, but a national policy; disputes about the pure doc- trine or the necessity of some arbitrary and fanciful qualifications, such as divided the Whigs from real Free-traders, are obsolete, and the whole doctrine is assumed ; discussion is now limited to the way of removing the obstacles and prejudices that hinder its complete adoption, as quickly and as harmlessly as possible. The Whigs never hoped to attain such an advanced stage by 1846: they were too timid ; and, for all they thought themselves the best practical statesmen, they had too little reliance on their %own ability to bring about such a result. It has been done for them, and not hostilely, but with their concurrence. They have h een heartily welcomed to help in the work which they could not

h ave managed alone. The division between Sir Robert Peel and the Protectionists has endowed the Whigs once more with poli- tical importance. Of all parties, therefore, it least becomes them to crow over the " proselytes " from the other side. But the case is made clearer by a glance at the recent and Motorious facts connected with the Ministerial crisis. The Pro- tectionists assert a doctrine which prevails with a certain section of the public ; the Whigs assert, in like manner, another doctrine —half protection half free trade; the League, a third—free trade.

All those doctrines are forms of public opinion. But there is a fourth public opinion which has been .0-rowing up—a real public opinion—that is, an opinion creeping abroad among all classes of the people, not based upon distinct abstract theories, but dissatis- fied with existing practice, and leaning to the opposite of that practice. That newly-formed practical opinion on opinions Sir Robert Peel perceived and asserted. His declaration virtually merged in the party of his followers on such class of subjects, the parties of the Whigs and Free-traders. The old political strength and vested interests of the Protectionists opposed and embarrassed him. In a manner without precedent, he relin- quished office and party confidence while in the full possession of party strength; sacrificing power to conviction. The Whigs were invited to try their strength in overcoming the diffi- culties of the occasion, in achieving the common object of the new combined Free-trade party : they failed ; with the express concurrence of all sections in that party Sir Ro- bert Peel was invited to resume the great task ; and he did so. What sacrifice was there in all this, but the original sacrifice by the Premier of political power to the conviction of a political necessity 1 The Whigs surely made no sacrifice. There was no sacrifice to be made by them. If there were any, it would have been the sacrifice of the cause which they professed to have so much at heart : and, no doubt, by refusing to enter into the new combination, they might have sacrificed that cause—and with it every rag of good name for themselves. At present their honour and dignity consist in occupying a conspicuous place in that powerful league combined, for the success of a great measure, in a union honourable to all parties : their honour consists in do- ing all that they can to advance the common object—in display- ing their sense of its paramount importance—in rising, as their quondam opponents have done, as their allies the Leaguers have done, superior to party with all its paltry spirit and obsolete taunts.

Indeed, it is no longer men that predominate, but a policy. And in that fact the "coalition," whether it proceed no further than this Parliamentary combination, or result in a combined Ministry, differs from all past coalitions : it is not a conspiracy—a compro- mise to admit certain men to power under the name of a mea- sure ; but it is a real union to carry a measure by men who have shown, on both sides, that their desire to do so exceeds their de- sire for ordinary power. To legislate for class or party in this matter, would be as idle in any statesman as if he were to propose some exclusive legislation for the benefit of one of the antiquated orders of chivalry still surviving. This question of Free Trade, therefore, exhibits a totally novel disposition of parties, and one as dignified as it is novel. No doubt, the same spirit might ex tend to other political questions. There is no reason why Free Trade should have a monopoly of highminded statesmanship.