MINISTERIAL RECEPTION OF THE TORY " CONCESSION " ON IRISH
QUESTIONS.
(From the Morning Chronicle.]
The proceedings of Tuesday night in the House of Commons afford one more me• log proof that, though the cause of Reform may be tardy in it progress,
co obstructed by numerous and seemingly impassable obstacles, sometimes at a 6,a stop, and sometimes even to all appearance retrograde, yet let its friends asoly stand by it faithfully, and its ultimate triumph is certain. Perhaps no measure, except that of Catholic Emancipation, ever experienced a more etre- e us opposition, or met with greater impediments in the course of its discus- :ono, than the Irish Municipal Reform Bill, the principle and main provisions of which have at length been prudently yielded by the Tories. Most sincerely do we congratulate the public upon the gratifying evidence exhibited in Sir Robert Peel'e temperate and conciliatory speech, of the resistless force of popular opinion beating upon a principle of sound policy and transparent justice. We regard the amicable course at length taken by the Opposition on the Irish ques- tiOns, not as a party triumph, but as another victesy of the great principle of Reform. The concession is to the Reform Bill, not to Ministers.
[From the Globe.)
Tie fitting and appropriate line of conduct on Irish questions, to he observed by Opposition, ',Ministers, Independent Members, and Mr. O'Connell, all came to be canvassed successively in last night's debate. The attitude of parties is I new and curious one. On the one hand, England is thoroughly tired of Irish Church questions, which have in a manner elbowed English interests almost out of consideration. Whigs, Tories, and Radicals are all equally tired of this, and well may they be. There is no party in England disposed to agitate these clues. tioas longer. The High Church party, represented very faithfully by our late Monarch, turned, and tried to keep out the Whigs for their Irish Church policy. The Whigs returned to office, and tried to puisue that policy. Matters came to a dead-lock, and at length it is recognized that nothing decisive on this ground can be done by either party. It is a drawn battle ; no clear-sighted Tory mis- takes it for victory,. The Administration of the country are well justified in abandoning ground on which they cannot advance to any practical purpose. The Opposition leaders (after the escapade of the other week, into which Sir Robert Peel was dragged by his party) are now disposed, agreeably to the Wellington pro- gramme of last session, to recede from their obstructive position on the Irish Mu- ;impel question. All parties are mainly agreed in supporting a poor-law. There is then an end to the party treatment of Irish questions I Yes—for the present—so far mconcerns the conduct of English parties. 31r. Ward, indeed, as an Independ. eat Member, declared his continued adherence to the Appropriation principle, of which he himself was the first parent. But Mr. Ward, in his zeal upon this point, now represents no great party in England. It is another, and a mach more involved question as to parties in Ireland. It must not be forgotten that these questions, which have so little bearing on any substantial English in- terest, are viewed very differently across the Channel. The rationale of political *tenon, when it excites masses, is much the same everywhere and at all times. There are national wants—there are principles or pretexts which serve as a war-cry for those who feel those wants and which their chiefs take into their mouths whenever they want to raise the masses. It matters little what those pretexts or principles are ; a red rug will do to fight under ; a cock or a
bull will furnish a crest. When masses suffer, any cry which affects their imagination and feelings is quite enough to precipitate them upon their real or imagined foes. Of these war-cries, however, the most formidable are those cettainly, which not only affect the feelings, but also the pocket. Irish tithe combines, in the highest degree, these ingredients. It ought to have been settled mere than thirty years bark, but for the blindness and supineness of the old Tory dynasty. To settle it now is a duty, doubtless, but is terribly thankless one. The eye of the Irish peasant will pursue it through
all changes ; the mind of the Irish peasant will hardly be satisfied that it adds nothing, in its proposed shape, to the payments lie would have to make were it abolished, to the landlord — to whomsoever has the absolute property of the soil, in which his interest is solely that of a tiller or pauper. There were deep growlings of distant storms in the short speech of Mr. ()'Con. nell. Whether these may blow over lightly or not—whether the pacific settle. meat of Irish questions, and the sound, civil, and economical organization of the Irish people, are works allotted to these times, and to these parties—who can say? Ireland of late has at least occupied her full share of the national councils. And these councils have more and more tended, with increasing concurrence of all conscientious men of all parties, to the establishment of those institutions, and the introduction of those iinprovetnents, which have proved elsewhere the surest basis of public freedom and social order.
ADVERTISEMENT FOR A COALITION,
[Front the Ilertford Refimmer.]
A greater triumph than that obtained by Sir Robert Peel was never achieved by any individual. We speak of Sir Robert Peel, personally, and nut of hie party. He is no more responsible for the insolent taunts addressed by Lord Lyndhurst to the Irish people, than he is for the follies of Lord Londonderry or Colonel Sibthorpe. We look simply to his personal influence and standing; and going back to his Tamworth address as containing the development of his polity, we say that without office, and without any other than moral power, he has Worked out every principle of that address, and compelled his opponents to adopt them. No man ever believed that Sir Robert Peel was opposed to 31iiiiicipal Re- form in Ireland, nor has he ever committed himself upon that question'. To the introduction of Poor-laws he has from the fit st been favourable. The only principle to which he stood pledged never to give his assent, was the appli. cation of Ecclesiastical propel ty to any other than Ecclesiastical pot poses. tpon this he staked his 31iiiistetial existence in 1835, and was beaten. Cann this he has, from first to last, insisted in opponition, as he did in power ; and this is the basis of the new arrangement. " * a • * With the Appropriation principle tile only barrier disappears, by which the
pure Whigs were separated from the Libeler Conservatives. The our e Whigs are opposed to the Ballot : so is Sir Robert Peel. They call the Reimiii Bill a final measure : so does Sir Robert Peel. They mean to confine themselves to the correction of abuses, without tampering any furiber with the franchise : who so fit as Sir Rabert Peel to be their kit u? What is to prevent hint, and a certain number of Iris friends, inert, fem. log a Cabinet in conjunction with a certain number of those noo it' power, and thus fusing into one party two powerful political sect Dos, sepa- rated rather by personal dislikes and predilections than by ail sulistan• Cal differences of opinion ? We are far from thinking that such a G evert:- Thant would he a bad one. It would possess much influence, and nitnult talent. It could never go back. It might be urged gradually on, by a viaorete., popular opposition, which would speedily be organized. Such a state of things would be infinitely more natural than the endeavour to maintain in power a pits
tally the weakest of the three, into which the country is now dis aled. Pr onn the moment that Lord John Russell committed himself irrevocalds ag rills,. the
Ballot, in favour of which .200 of his supporters were arrayed, it N1:1* evident that it was not upon the popular section of the Liberals that the Government meant to lean. It is equally evident that they cannot continue white they are. Where can they seek refuge but in the or ins of Conservatism ?
Previous page
