MR. BUCKINGHAM AND MR. BAILEY OF SHEFFIELD. TO THE EDITOR
OF THE SPECTATOR.
Sheffield, 23d August 1836.
Sin-1 am a constant reader and general admirer of you excellent paper ; and whenever I perceive in it any thing that is likely to raise doubts of its impar- tial justice, I am grieved at it, as being likely to weaken its influence ; and this is a time in which we cannot afford to lose any thing for the Liberal cause. In reading your paper of Saturday last, I observed a paragraph relative to lin PARKER'S reelection, in which you go out of your way, unnecessai ilv as it would STeM to me, to speak contemptuously of the electors of Sheffield, as well as one of their Representatives, Mr. Hue K NC HA ; for you say " that the opinions of a constituency which could prefer Mr. Buckingham to Mr. Bailey, are of very little consequence." Now it is probable that whatever merit Mr. BAILEY may possess, is as likely to be known here, in his native town, where he has lived all his days, as anywhent ; but though two vet", favourable opportunities have been presented to him to obtain the suffrages of his fellow townsmen, they have twice elected Mr. BUCK' NCH:\ 31 in preference to Mr. BauLxv ; the former, without local property or without anv influence beyond his own merits, having been on both occasions preferred to the latter, who bad every aid which local property aud local influence could give to his claims.
If you had strengthened your opinion of Mr. BAILEY'S superiority to Mr. BUCK [UGH A 31 by any comparative estimate of their respective qualifications, it would have had an appearance at least of greater impartialitv than the sort of summary judgment which you have volunteered. The electors of this
borough are not deficient in intelligence, tl , ,11 they do not choose Mr. BAILEY' to represent them ; and they therefore c pare the qualifications of the 3Ieniher of toeir choice with the one you would seem to force on their iv- septum-c. They ask whether Mr. Ilart.Ey has a larger fund of general infor- mation, collected from personal intercourse with almost every country in the world, than Mr. IlucKING HAM ? whether he has greater powers of application to make that information availaltle for the public good ? whether he is a better thinker or a better speaker ? whether he has given greater proofs of his attach- ment to liberty, or laboured with ar zeal to promote It ? whether, if Mr. BAILEY had been in Parliament, he would have attetalcd closer to his duties, or voted more independently ? or, in short, have done any thing, as a Men:Lyr of the !louse of Commons, of Inure public utility, or in efficient manner than Mr. Bo CRIS (111A 31 „„' ...... tliey efillIC 10 the camclusion, as far as can ie.— r awn all their expressions, that Mr. 11Ararn- ciaffil not have served them better, and might have served them worse. Why, then, should they give him a preference? They say, very naturally, that they are more compe- tent to judge of the relative merits of any two candidates presented to their choice, than aav persons at a distamat can he ; because here, on the spot, every particular respecting them is made k tit by the rivai advocates of each ; and they have the same advantages in forming their Judgment as a jury who hears and sees all the evidence given in court, has over persons who merely read an account of the trial. And I believe they are right. There is one portion of your conduct towards Mr. BUCKINGHAM which is, howevet, even less just thou the summary and contemptuous manna in which you treat both I and his constituents,—I mean your Cut iii! omission of all allusion to the labours which he has really perforated: for, to read your account of the business of the session, your enumeration of the Members, and your list of the Bilk passed and Committees appointed on public inquiries, no one would have known that Mr. BUCKINGHAM had ever prepared any measure or joined in any inquiry ; and though you could go out of your way to find space for a sneer at his letter to Mr. O'CONNELL on the evils of spirit-drinking among the Irish peaaantrv, you could not—when the account of the bills of the session was before von, and when it would have been strictly within your way to meet with it—find space for a single line to allude to the successful passing of two bills on Copyright both brought in by Mr. Becatm:n A31, and carried through both Houses, the one to pridect the productions of British art in prints and engrav- ings ft oat the piracy to which they were daily subjected in Ireland, and the other to relieve authors and publishers of books from ..... re than half the burden to which they were before subject in being compelled to give eleven gratuitous copies of their production,: to eleven public libraries of the kingdom. So also, when you enumerated the Reports of Committees, you passed over entirely all mention of one that is admitted very generally to be one of the most important of the whole session—the Report of the Select Committee on Shipwrecks. YOU could not have been ignorant of this, for it was published at length in the Morning Chronicle, the Sun, and the Shipping Gazette, and in a shorter form in other papers, with commendations on every side; and, considering the magnitude of the evil it exposes and the importance of the changes it recom- mends, it deserved a very prominent place in the list of the Reports of the Session, instead of being passed over as it was by you without being even men- tioned d These are omissions, both inrthe Bills and Reports, which cannot be supposed to be accidental ; and, coupled with your evident desire to disparage Mr. BuCICING H at in the eyes of his constituents, seem to prove that, for the sake justifying ustifying your opinion, you do not scruple to deal so unfairly by a public man as to keep back from your readers all knowledge of whatever public ser- vices he rnay havesendered ; thus adding deception to injustice, by suppressing what, in a fair and just account of the Public Bills and fteporta of the Session, ought to have been mentioned at least by whomsoever brought in or completed ; and which no doubt would have been mentioned, and mentioned with praise, if they were the productions of any other person than Mr. BUCKINGHAM, whom you had predetermined to deprive of all credit even for that which he had done. 'rho friends of Mr. BAILEY, who include some of the most honourable and intelligent men of this town, will not be much obliged to you for endeavouring to promote the as yet until ied claims of that gentleman, by thus trampling under foot the already proved and established claims of his rival; and the ft hauls of Mr. BuettiNG A m—among whom are to be found many of Mr. BAILEY' Ip- porters, for in political opinions there is not the slightest difference between them as to Liberal or even Radwal ideas of Reform—will console themselves with this assurance, that the Spec/a/or happily is not the only newspaper which is though, as far as its influence extends, it has done all it could to do injury to the man of their choice, by keeping back from the public all mention of his actual labours, and then holding up his eonstituents to contempt because they prefer him to one who has, thus far 'at least, only professions to offer as his claim to their preference.
I have still, however, sufficient reliance on your general sense of justice to convince me that you will readily inset t this letter, and thus make the best atonement that 011e honourable man can make to another for an injuly which, unless it can be justified, ought to be repaired.
I am, Sir, your obedient servant, AN ELECTOR.
[This soi-ilisant " Elector " puffs Air. BeexINGitam with about as much modesty as if Mr. Bucittsmitam himself held the pen as well as inspired the composition.
Let us replace before the reader, from the mass of compiled news iii the Spectattir of tint 20th August, the entire little paragraph which has served as a pretence for the pa- " Th,. I ti1els ot Sheffield talk or Mr. dolto Bell. formerly one of the editors of the True Sqn. as .1 e4adidate t he representation or hat borough ; aud the Tories wish Mr. John ■I tent %1OrMy to come forward ; hot Mr. Parker has strong Meal influence.
mid will almost certainly he returned. It rmittvrs o liat the electors of Sheffield II I y Iii ott this occasion. No import:inc.. can be attrilnacil to (lie OpitliOlIS of a con. St ittleney tI Ii, i CON■ili 1irvii.1 either Mr. Parker or Mr. Buckingham, to such a persou RS thhtingttklied townsman. Mr. Samuel Bailey."
Here it will lie seen, that we made no invidious distinction between the two Alembers for Sheffield, as the tricky " Elector " wottld falsely insinuate by his garbling. We played them both below Mr. BAILEY ; and Air. PARKER has just as much cause of complaint, if any, as Air. BUCKINGHAM. But we venture to say that Mr. PARKE.R—WII0 has the reputation of being a modest and unassuming as well as an intelli- gent and usefol Member—feels it no disparagement to be told that the works of Mr. BAILEY display a higher degree of legislative ability than Air. Pairs en himself has given evidence of possessing.. We have always been of opinion that there are too few men of iIr. Mutant's order of mind in the House of Commons—men who would biing the philosophy of legislatiou to bear 011 the making of Acts of Parlia- ment. There are few such men in the country; and it is a matter of regret and loss to the public—mid, in our opinion, disgraceful to the constituency whose suffrages he sought—that either Mr. PA RK ER, Mr. Brexisettast, or any other person in England, should have been pre- ferred by them to Mr. BAILEY. Ile is the chief ornament of their town, with an American as well us European reputation as a writer on the higher branches of polities ; as a Ilefoinaer he is worthy to sit beside Mr. GitorE ; he is no self-seeker or dreamy schemer ; his fortune is ample, and his private character perfectly unblemished. We trust that the next general election will not pass over without the return id lr. BAILEY* for SOIlle impertant constituency, gilled with more discernment than that of Sheffield.
Pro?.-et-ding on the assumption that we desire to "trample under foot the already proved and established (+tints " Of tIr. BUCKINGHAM— alt 716 OH (*mauled, as we have n, on a false and garbled quo- tation—the sei.disant " Elector " complains of the omission of all ac- coma of ;qr. 1:ceINGHANes labours in our emunerution of the Bills passed and the Committees appointed last session ; and reminds .us that, through his instrumentality, two bills on Copyright were carried through ban it 1 louses, "one to protect the productions of British artists in prints and engravings from the piracy to which they were daily sub- ject in Irehind ; and the other to relieve authors and publishers of *books from more than hay the leaden to which they were before sub- ject, in being compelled to give eleven gratuitous copies of their pro- ductions to eleven public libraries of the kingdom." The first of these bills mar, no (Italia, be of service in a small way ; the second, as we understand it, is ati incomplete and paltry piece of legislation, which transfers f publishers to the public the cost of supplying certain libraries with books. 'fliere was very little difliculty in getting either of these measures through Parliament ; and they attracted exceedingly little notice : Alt. BUCKINGHAM has ample reward for his easy exertions in the gratitude of the publishers. As for placing such insignificant measures as these by the side of the great political acts of the session, (which our summary was confined to,) nobody but their author would dream of such an abgirdity. The Report of the Committee on Shipwrecks has not yet been deli- vered with the Parliamentary Papers of the Session, though an unau- thorized copy of it was sent, irregularly, (Mr. BeesiNenast probably knows by whone) to some of the daily papers, and appeared among the last days of the session, when our columns were crammed. It is diffi- cult to pronounce on the value of a document of this kind without examining the EVIDENCE on which its recommendations are built ; and lucre the evidence is still impublished. We certainly were not attracted by the Katerfelto style of the conclusion of the Report ; and we ob- serve in the Newcastle paper of Tuesday, a writer who shows more acquaintance with the subject than we profess, deals very disparagingly with its substance. This we shall not do, till, among the postponed tasks, with which, at the close of our imperfect Summary of the Ses- sion, we promised to occupy the leisure of the recess, the one in ques- tion can have been deliberately accomplished. In the mean while, with the Report of the Drunken Committee in our recollection, we shall not, merely on the credit of Mr. Becsnaeliam's name, consent to piece the Report of the Committee on Shipwrecks among the useful
or important or more noticeable labours of the session.—En.]
Previous page
