TOPICS OF THE DAY.
SELF-DEPENDENCE OF THE PEOPLE.
BEING convinced that amongst the causes of obstruction con- tinually operating to defeat the progress of the popular cause, ignorance and miscalculation are usually at least as muck con- cerned as baser motives, we make no apology for recurring to a subject the discussion of which is calculated perhaps more than any other to develop the nature and extent of these obstructive errors.
In estimating the condition and prospects of the People as claimants for Reform, facts alone will not supply us with all the data we require : if we take no pains to fetch out the spirit of the events of our time, it is in vain that we chronicle the events them- selves. Thus, for example, with regard to the growth of popular influence on the counsels of Government—one of the least dis- putable of the facts of the age ; or with regard to any particular practical triumph proceeding from it on which the mind of a Re- former may feel disposed to rest with complacency ; we should greatly deceive ourselves if we saw nothing but progression in these things ; and we should deceive ourselves still more grossly if we saw in them any reason for relaxing our energies in the popular cause. This, however, describes a fallacy so common amongst those who from their previous convictions, as well as the natural suggestions of their own temper and genius, ought to be- long to the present ranks of Radical Reformers, that a few argu- ments may very properly be expended upon it. It is partly owing to the error of looking to the nominal triumphs of the People, in- stead of regarding their actual position, and of relying on the mere outward facts—instead of extracting, as we have said, the spirit—of the political history of our time, that many politicians, whose Liberal principles would otherwise unite them to the better section of Radical Reformers, do not attach themselves to that party ; whose comparatively moderate numbers, consequently, in Parliament and in the public Press, have been made a constant theme for Tory ridicule and Whig sophistication.
In order to be convinced that the acquisitions which have been made to the cause of the People are not all acquisition, and that their progression is not all progression, we must be at the same pains to investigate the matter as we should be in resolving any other seeming paradox. And, first, we must remember, that because a people cannot pre- side bodily over the administration of its own affairs, and must ne- cessarily, in some degree or other, and in some form or other, de- legate the charge of its interests, therefore—being unavoidably dependent to that extent on some party in the state other than itself—it is most essential to its wellbeing that it should be at peace with that party, and in the enjoyment of a certain mutual confidence and good understanding with it. It is not enough to have forced measures of justice from the hands of an unwilling Legislature—it is not enough to be able to do the like again ; if every day the People could frighten or charm some new boon from their Governors, it would not be enough. Political agita- tion is not, and never will be—according to our reading of the character of Englishmen—their chosen element, nor even the long- endured condition of their existeuce. Let triumph follow triumph; let the country be made to feel The might that slumbers in a peasant's arm," and to acknowledge that its best strength lies there ; still, this cannot—must not—last. They who will always in such conten- tions conic off best (the People themselves) are averse to it. They hate agitation ; and are of themselves so prone to end it, that they rather err on the side of a too contented acquiescence in in- justice, and have more than once shown a disposition to put up with injuries for peace's sake—when that phlegm their Saxon forefathers gave them has preponderated over the Norman fire. And this, 0 Tories ! you have called " reaction "—ignorant of the character of your countrymen ; and yet, 0 far worse Whigs! who, with such a people to deal with, have only contrived to re- double agitation and to make peace impossible If then we allow, that a certain good understanding and mutual confidence between the governed and their governors are, in the main, no less essential to the wellbeing of the former than the ac- quisition or impetration of actual benefits, the next question is— Have these elements of the social health derived increase from the operation of recent events ? Have the actual benefits (ad- mitted to have been received) been accompanied with a corral, sponding improvement, or even with a due maintenance, of the good understanding (asserted to be necessary) ? Certainly not : neither, in the present state of the representation and general sys- tern of government, is it possible it should be so. In fact, the re- verse is the case. The more the People succeed in obtaining from their Governors, the less their Governors become disposed of themselves to grant; the more they fear the People, the more they hate the People—the more are they strengthened in what- ever spirit of resistance to popular rights and the progress of re- form they may have at any time previously manifested. It may therefore be confidently asserted, that even in proportion as the People are successful its improving their position, it becomes im- perative upon them to guard it with jealousy and diligently to fortify it. And thus we prove our other assertions,—first, that in weighing the present condition and prospects of the People it is of at least as much consequence to ascertain the spirit of the events of the time as to consider the events themselves ; and, secondly, that the progress of the popular cause, on which Reformers are apt to dwell with so much satisfaction, is not all progress, but carries with it the seeds of relapse—to crush which, all the as- sistance derivable from continued fidelity to the popular cause is therefore necessary. This argument may be looked upon as a sort of trivium in politics, (and yet no trivial argument,) whence different roads diverge, leading to different and even opposite points of conclusion. One class of politicians would no doubt reply—" You indicate the even ground on which we denounce your agitation ; we too are of opinion that the People forfeit the good-will of their Rulers by taking the redress of grievances into their own bands, and that they thereby lose one of the elements o I good government; and therefore we say, let the People be quiet and subtnissive, that their Rulers may be kind." In what direction this road is to lead, we need no sign-post to inform us : it conducts us back to the times of PITT and CA STLERE AGH —when we do not deny that the Government of this country, in proportion as it was more absolute, was in some points of view even more paternal, than in our time. Our readers, however, will not require us to adduce the reasons which lead us to reject this invitation to turn back :
" Returning were as tedious as go o'er,"
and of rather more doubtful expediency. Paternal governments —in the sense of governments that are to enjoy entire freedom
from responsibility, and to give, in return, their good-will and charitable services to the People—are at an end in this country. The People want no more such fathers; they have ceased to be children. It is obvious, then, that we must look in other direc- tions for our place of rest than that from which we have come. We have "taken up our bed," and must walk away now till we have fairly reached our journey's end : it will be very different quarters from those we have left, and equally unlike any we have yet come to, in which we next repose.
There can be no medium betwixt absolute acquiescence, on the part of the bulk of the People, in the measures and proceedings of the Government, and a thorough reform of our institutions, ac- companied by a fair and full representation of the interests of all classes. The People have become so morally strong, that there can be no doubt of their being able to obtain in future any just objects of claim, by a repetition of those exertions which carried the Reform Bill. But for "paternal" governments they must look no longer. Babies are loved because they are helpless,— and perhaps helplessness on the part of a people may be one source of kindness in their governors! but the People having now "grown up," as we said before, and shown themselves hole- pendent, and able to maintain their own rights, have alienated the affections of their superiors; from whom, we should deceive ourselves and them, if we stated it as our opinion that they had reason to expect, henceforth, any thing but sheer enmity—open or disguised. For one voluntary benefit to be conferred upon them by Lords or Commons—for one liberal act—one measure of relief —one sympathizing thought—they must not look. As long as the old system of se/f-representation shall remain in force, and country squires meet in town to provide for themselves and fami- lies anti secure their own trade in corn, so long the People must depend on their own exertions for the accomplishment of any ob- ject connected with legislation which their condition may call for.
We have said that the People hate agitation. We do not retract that opinion. The People hate that which interferes with the peaceful prosecution of their affairs; and if they agitate, it is that they seek to remove other evils, felt to be more serious dis- turbers of those peaceful pursuits than the agitation itself. But that a people, with the habits of industry and love of quiet so strongly characterizing the English, should be found year after year agitating, combining, threatening—cannot be considered in any other light than as reflecting deep, indelible disgrace, on the Government of the time.
What ulterior measures the People may be brought to consider necessary to the ends of peace and good government, we know not; but, in the mean time, it cannot be too often repeated, that the representation of the People is an experiment which has ever yet been tried in this country. • Wur contemporary the Globe, we perceive, returns to the sub- 14bt of our last week's article. We ought, no doubt, to feel very proud to be thought worth so much powder and shot by "the great Globe itself,' and to be rather ashamed of our gallantry for not returning his salute with the same number of guns.
We wish, however, we could impress upon our contemporary the fact, that his desire for the advancement of truth would be more unequivocally manifested to his readers, if he addressed himself to the discussion of some distinct question, and fairly exhausted it in arguments of his own, instead of making the arguments of other writers a peg on which to hang gossiping commentaries. It does not look like earnestness. It is so easy to pick holes in other men's reasoning, and so much less easy to produce a well-reasoned discourse oneself, that to adopt the former method of discussion and eschew the latter, may, for aught we know, beget in the minds of the Globe's readers some most unwarranted disparage- ment of the pure and exalted views of philosophy directing his pea. 1Ve Mien expend only a few words here on the Globes articles of Monday and Tuesday last; for as to our opinions on subjects of general politics, we prefer that our readers should gather them in the more deliberate form in which we usually address them, and not from the language of dispute, which is seldom exact, and, as the Globe has convinced us, not always so moderate—we may say so modest—as befits the consideration of important and diffi- cult public questions. The Globe announces an inconsistency in our views of Universal Suffrage, as expressed last week and as expressed in the Spectator of September 8. We subjoin the extract from the latter, and we make the reader a present of all the inconsistency he may find in it.
" There being so strong an apprehension that, with the present notions, and lacking the curb upon hasty spirits which the possession of property sup- plies, the masses would run into ruinous extremes, the question arises, whether they are likely soon to obtain the predominance they aim at in the government of the country. We have no hesitation in saying that there is no probability of their success for a very long period of years. The discussion of the question can do no harm—on the contrary, it will serve to enlighten all parties on the subject of their mutual rights and interests; but we cannot conscientiolisly treat it as one that lies befote us in a practical shape. Balancing the power of the opposing parties, we should be guilty of gross deception if we encouraged the advocates of universal suffrage in the hope of speedy success."
That the question is " not one that lies before us in a practical shape," we still maintain ; and therefore it was that we did not propose it, or even allude to it as a topic for consideration, till the Globe thrust it upon us. It is the Globe, therefore, which has the merit of having brought forward a question of no" practical shape."
But the right of suffrage in the million, we admitted in Sep- tember, as plainly as last week we expressed our conviction that the right could not be "sefety " a ithheld much longer- " The right of the unenfranrhised strenuoudy to endeavour to obtain the pri- vileges of citizenship, denied to them lay a combinution of the other classes, is unquestionable."—Spectutor, No. 5:32, p. 846.
The Globe finds the question of universal suffrage very irre- levant and unpractical; but is nevertheless "quite willing to have it discussed, and to take a humble share in the discussion." No doubt. Since, however, we are still of the same opinion as in September last, that it is a subject which cannot come before us for a long while in any " practical shape," therefore, whether we may be also willing to" take our humble share," will depend in a great measure on whether the Globe contrive to indue the question with more interest than he seems able to do at present.
Previous page
