PARLIAMENTARY FAILURES.
THERE has been agitation enough in the new House of Commons for its newest members to have, as the phrase is, " found the level." On looking about, it may be seen that if the true level is in the House of Commons, then certain high reputations have fallen desperately low. COBBETT, for instance, of whom much was ex- pected, and who really set out by performing something that showed he wanted neither presence nor elocution to enable him to succeed, is now, nearly at the end of the session, one of the least-considered. persons in the House, and what is more, feels him- self to be such. O'CONNELL, who can wield other assemblies as Hercules managed his club, has no weight in the Commons : he pos- sesses every species of art and talent resorted to in oratory—has voice, manner, passion, and imagination ; and yet his exhibition is, it may be said, a total failure. To these might be added several names : one only need be mentioned. Mr. ROEBUCK showed, at Bath, knowledge, readiness, and a power of convincing an auditory : in the House, his speeches, save one or two in the beginnin", have all wanted effect; they were mere idea, and fell upon thj'House like snow upon the water—a moment white, then gone for ever. He is now therefore only suffered. And yet of the members of the House who are listened to with great attention, and whose opinions influence those of others, how few are there' whose talents or ac- quirements are to be compared with the abilities of any one of these three examples of failure ! What is the cause ? is it that these men are thought insincere—that they are merely acting a part, acid that the House cannot bear hypocrisy ? Look at Sir Romer PEEL, the most consummate actor in the House : in this alone he equals, nay surpasses, O'CONNELL; and yet no member is listened to with the same anxiety of attention that he is. Is it the want of what is called a stake in the country ? Some of the most successful members of the House of Commons, such AS SHERIDAN, BURKE, CANNING —not to mention living men —have not had either a stake in the country or a stake in town. Is it want of social respectability? is it want of what is termed "high character? "—meaning, we presume, unimpeachable integ- rity. It is not : this will not account for failure in the instances alluded to, for it .does not exist against all of them ; and on the other hand, Parliamentary success is not infrequent in the ease of persons of blemished reputation. What is it, then ? Success in the House of Commons is curiously made up, and it is not easy to analyze its constituent sources. Great wealth is not a necessary qualification, but it is a useful adjunct : the serious charge of being an " adventurer " cannot be thrown out against the possessor of large property. But property alone will do nothing : some of the richest men in the House dare not open their mouths in it. The same may be said of an exalted private character: this is, however, hardly ever thought to exist but when accompanied with wealth, or after long trial. Neither Will a knowledge of facts and a familiarity with all the refinements of theory prevail : both are seen to fail every day—it would be invidious to enumerate in- stances. Oratory, in its higher degrees of excellence, has been seen to command the attention of the House,—as in the case cf Mr. MACAULAY, who came into it with the injurious reputation of being a reviewer and a genius: but we see far greater influence than his constantly obtained without any of his claims to rhe- toric. And even rhetoricians as gobd as himself, though not so agreeable to the ear of a drowsy audience, have failed: witness the arch-reviewer, Mr. JEFFREY. What is it then? The true source of power in the House of Commons is, in our • opinion, the being a.ble"te convince it that you are on all oceasions a safe practical guide. . Constituted as this assembly is, in 'She course of long debates, and the discussion of multifarious subjects, it very commonly—what with imperfect knowledge, sleep, and the confusion of too much business—falls into a puzzled state : it wants to have the matter settled : it wants to see its way.' If the Minister shows that he will hive his way, or go out, or dis- solve Parliament, why then the matter is simplified : it comes to this—shall we turn him out, or be turned out; and then a guide is scarcely wanted. Speeches are listened to for sport, or decency. But if the Minister wishes to throw responsibility on the House,--- or if he be not a very clearheaded person, and really, perhaps, has not much will, and less mind,—or if the Minister and the country are at variance,—then the great anxiety is so to conduct business that no egregious blunder be made. In such circumstances, great is the relief when a safe and practical guide gets up and helps th6 House through the mire. A safe practical guide, however, is not to be met with every day. He must be a true man of business; he must not be given to the charms of theory, as new projects are called; be must not be liable to be called an adventurer; his mo- tives must all be unsuspected, save of a reasonable hankering after power ; he must be a thorough master of all he attempts to meddle with, no matter how small the detail may be ; and he must be capable of dressing up his advice in such a manner as to show that he himself is perfectly clear in his own view, and is ready to meet all corners. A safe practical guide may now and then touch upon subjects he does not understand ; but it must always be in the way of warning or caution; and, indeed, the general burden of his oratory should he, not too fast : "Here is a short way out of this business for the present, the rest must be postponed for more deli- berate consideration : the safe thing is this, vote so and so, and there is nothing to prevent the House from getting home." Fes- tine lente is the motto. Such a man will always prevail with the House of Commons. He may despise the arts of oratory, the in- fluence of wealth ; he will be able to compete even with the bands of party, and it will never be long before such a man is backed by powerful aristocratical aid. It is only the Newspapers that keep up the experimentalists in the House. It is understood there are two classes of speakers,—they who speak for the House and its gui7 dance, and they who address the public for its guidance. • There are light-armed irregulars, who are in neither class, but who sooner or later fall into them, or fall out of the House.
Previous page
