The most remarkable electieneering novelty of the week is Mr.
Disraeli's final removal of the Protectionist mask he has worn for so many, years. He has gone a step beyond Lord Derby in ac- cepting rreeltrade as an irrevocable necessity; and, unlike Lord Derby,_he does.not even affect to do this with regret. The meaning of Mr: Disraeli can only be said, in his own figurative phraseology, to "loom" in the studiously vague and obscure verbiage of his address to his Buckinghamshire constituents. As far, however, as it is intelligible, the statement seems intended to convey an impression that Mr. Disraeli dissented from the commercial policy of Sir Robert Peel, not as opposed to its principles, but simply on ac- count of the precipitancy with which they were earned into operation. He desires it to be remembered that he supported the Free-trade policy of Sir Robert Peel from 1842 to 1846. He declares that "the time has gone by" for a recurrence to protective policy. He proclaims that "the spirit of the age tends to free intercourse ; and no statesman can disregard with impunity the genius of the epoch in which he lives." The voice is the voice of Disraeli, but the words are the words of PeeL After thus re- pudiating the pledges upon which, with his colleagues, he wriggled his way to offiot—and branding the Protectionist opposition to preceding Free-trade Ministries as factious and as false pretences—he proceeds to state the new grounds on which he claims the continued confidence of the gulled and. duped holders of his political promises-to-pay. They are—the enunciation of a new and original economical theory ; good measures, entirely carried or attempted to be carried by Minis- ters since they came into office ; wonderful projects enter- tained by them, which "seem to loom in the future." The theory is a new theory of rent : "practically speaking," says Mr. Dis- raeli, " in this country rent has become a return for the capital invested in land." By far the greater part of the capital invested in land has been that of the farmers : in strict logic, therefore, Mr. Disraeli is bound to maintain that this return called rent oiwlit to be paid to the farmers,—a mode of pay-
ment ill calculated to restore to the landlords the five millions by which Mr. Disraeli says their rentals have been reduced. The
measures carried or about to be carried by the Government are— the. New Zealand Government Bill and Chancery. Reform, both of which Ministers found ready-made to their hands; and the Mi-
litia Bill, a modification of the very indifferent bill promoted by their predecessors. A measure which has been defeated was the proposal to transfer the four votes of two disfranchised boroughs to two newly-created counties,—'a measure palpably put forward not to be carried, but to boast of to agricultural constituencies at the elections. The Ministerial projects which
"loom in the future" all resolve themselves into the great panacea of the readjustment of taxation. Whether the agriculturists would. gain or lose by such a readjustment, must be at least doubtful. At present they surcharge railways with poor-rates ; they are ex- empted from some duties on horses, sheRlaerds' dogs, and taxed carts ; they pay lower tolls, and a lower house-duty. No probate or legacy duty is paid on real property. All these advantages must be given up under an equalized system of taxation ; and what the agriculturists are to gain in return has never yet been specified. The Ministerial manifesto of Mr. Disraeli is certainly not marked with wisdom' it can scarcely lay -claim to cleverness. But it must be admitted to be the sublime of impudence.
