CHAPTER XVI.

PARTY.

“Of all the tyrannies that molest this terrestrial scene perhaps there is none so arbitrary, so extravagant, or so grotesque as the tyranny of party. There is none that so frequently subjects the wise to the caprices of the fool, and the good to the designs of the knave.”—_The Times, Dec. 1850._

There are two great principles of government which divide the opinions of mankind.

1st. Unchangeableness; or, “Let things alone:”—the law of the Medes and Persians.

2d. Progress; or, the continual advancement of mankind in the improvement of their Institutions.

No number of persons sufficiently extensive to deserve the name of a class, have ever advocated the principle of _Retrocession_. Some few enthusiasts have indeed believed in a golden age, and have advocated the pastoral, or even the hunting life. These, however, were not persons capable of collecting, examining, and weighing the evidence on which alone an opinion on the comparative happiness of people existing in a savage or in a civilized state of life can justly be formed.

A larger number exist, the admirers of the past, each perhaps the worshipper of his own peculiar age. Had he lived in those times, enjoying only the ordinary capacity he now possesses, but endowed with all the increased knowledge of the present day, he might then have attained a position more commensurate with his wishes, though quite disproportioned to the industry of his exertions or the calibre of his intellect.

§ In our own country, “the wisdom of our ancestors” is with some the hackneyed theme of unbounded admiration.

Our ancestors were generally wise and sagacious men: they applied their energies and their knowledge, as far as it went, to their _existing_ wants and necessities. Those amongst them who deserved that character, would, if questioned, have expressed in language the precept to which their deeds conformed. Availing themselves gratefully of all the knowledge bequeathed to them by their predecessors, they struggled to advance it for their own and their children’s benefit, and thus they might have counselled every generation to their latest posterity:—

“You have received from us, tested by many trials, the treasured knowledge, gathered under difficulty and danger, of our country’s experience.

“Let the great object of each generation be to purify that body of knowledge from its partial errors, to add to it the greatest amount of new truths.

“Remember that accumulated knowledge, like accumulated capital, increases at compound interest: but it differs from the accumulation of capital in this; that the increase of knowledge produces a more rapid rate of progress, whilst the accumulation of capital leads to a lower rate of interest. Capital thus checks its own accumulation: knowledge thus accelerates it own advance. Each generation, therefore, to deserve comparison with its predecessor, is bound to add much more largely to the common stock than that which it immediately succeeds.”

§ A question has not unfrequently been proposed by those who apply their foresight to remote rather than to immediate objects—

“What will become of our posterity when our coal-fields are exhausted?”

The best answer to this question is, that when that distant day arrives, if our posterity, with the accumulated knowledge of centuries, shall have failed to find any substitute for coal in the many other sources of heat which nature supplies, they will then deserve to be frost-bitten.

§ It is remarkable that the great parties adopt opposite principles in pursuance of the same line of reasoning.

The advocates of things as they are, wish to stop all change, in order to _prevent revolution_. Those who inculcate continual progress, support it, because it makes all changes gradual, and thus, in their opinion, it _prevents revolution_.

It is by sudden changes in laws and institutions that the greatest misery is inflicted on mankind. Those gradual changes which are spread over a considerable period are foreseen, and men make preparation beforehand to accommodate themselves to the new but expected circumstances.

If the changes effected by the Reform Bill, had been spread over the ten preceding and ten subsequent years, few will deny that it would have been a better measure, and more effective for its purpose. The experience derived from its earlier changes would then have been available for its later uses. The pertinacity, however, with which all reform was resisted, led to such a state of affairs, that after the refusal to transfer the franchise from East Retford, revolution was averted only by vast and _immediate_ concession.

§ The terms Tory and Whig had been the watchwords of these two parties, until, at last, the public lost all confidence in either. With the increasing wealth of the country, and with the greater application of observation, of reasoning, and of science, to its many arts and manufactures, a vast increase has been produced in the numbers, the power, and the influence of the middle classes. Many individuals who have raised themselves by their intellect and industry into this class, have been so fully impressed with the advantages of previous training, that they have made efforts to give their children an education more extensive and more liberal than any which, until lately, our universities had attempted to supply.

It is to the growth of this class, which includes men possessing from 500_l._ to 5,000_l._ a-year, that we are indebted for much of the strength which public opinion now exerts upon the ministry of the day. Notwithstanding the vast influence of wealth and of rank throughout the country, there are still amongst these middle classes, thousands whose moderation renders them rich; who, therefore, can afford to be honest, and whose approbation is neither to be purchased by wealth, nor won by the seductions of rank and of fashionable life.

Such men, on all public questions, influence widely and justly the opinions of those around them. There are such in the House of Commons; and, with the extension of knowledge, many more will be added to their number.

Thus the very weakness of an administration may possibly become an advantage, since it thus becomes impossible for government to carry any measure entirely opposed to the calm good sense of the people. This, however, admits of one excepted case. If a party to advance its own interests will pander to some strong passion, to some prejudice of ignorance or of bigotry, it may for a time succeed, though it will ultimately lose in character.

In the meantime, the people have found out that Party is made use of only for the aggrandizement of a few families; that it has degenerated into a clique, banded together for mercenary purposes, without enthusiasm or genius to compensate for its meanness, and with little of talent to palliate its want of integrity.

The reign of party, however, verges towards its end; the supplies on which it feeds are sapped by economical reform. That almost all places under Government are greatly overpaid admits of no denial. The demand for them is notoriously great, and it is equally notorious that nothing but the strongest political interest has any chance in the contest for them.

The government of England is nominally a limited monarchy, but practically almost an oligarchy. A large number of its appointments are shared by a few families, into which some daring and unscrupulous intruders occasionally force their way, by opposition which it is easier to quell by place than to answer by argument: or into which less gifted and more cunning supporters sometimes obtain an entrance by a judicious alliance.

§ It is strongly asserted that government cannot go on without party. That those who maintain this opinion are incapable of so conducting it, must be at once admitted.

Without, however, entering into the debateable question of the _limits_ of party, it is sufficient to state another principle, which no honest man will deny, and then to leave to the advocates of party to reconcile it with their doctrine.

_It is morally wrong to endeavour to convince any one of the truth of an opinion in which the advocate himself does not believe._

If this principle were practically acted upon, how much of the valuable time of both Houses of Parliament would be saved! In looking over a debate, or still better, a _division_, the private opinions of many of the speakers are often well known by their friends to be quite at variance with the doctrines they advocated in their speeches. The quasi-honesty of those who admit the truth in private, is however venial, when compared with the hypocrisy of those who are equally false on both occasions.

Party, then, as it practically exists, is one of the evils of the political state of England.

The remedy must come partly from the reduction of temptation, by diminishing the salaries of all those places and appointments for which there is such immense competition; partly from the effect of public opinion; and ultimately, to a far greater extent, when any sincere desire exists to restrain it, from improved methods of distributing patronage.

But one defect seems almost always to accompany a high state of civilization, namely,—a great deficiency of moral courage in large classes of persons, who from knowledge and position ought rightly to contribute their share to the formation and expression of public opinion. The first evil which this produces, is an excessive zeal and energy in a few of those who are most strongly convinced. These bear the brunt of the attacks of all who are interested in the support of abuses. If, unhappily, they are not independent in fortune as well as in spirit, these, the forlorn hope of reform, are sure ultimately to be trampled upon and destroyed by the jobbers—they die with ruined fortunes and broken hearts.

Many of those who shared their opinions, and urged on their enthusiasm, but who warily abstained from expressing their own thoughts _in public_, now venture to avow those principles, to which opinion has at length advanced: these reap the rewards won by the energies and sacrifices of their martyred friends. For such, the epithet the poet applied to Bacon is not unfit:

—“the wisest—meanest of mankind.”—POPE.

A very serious evil arises from this timidity in expressing opinions. The whole state of society presents a counterfeit surface,—no man knows how many or how few really share his opinions: its whole fabric is in a state of unstable equilibrium; it is liable at every moment to most unlooked-for changes, from accidents apparently trivial.

The following is one amongst many examples which might have been selected of the different standard with which Party measures services rendered to the public by those within and those without its own limits.

In the year 1847, when some millions of English money were sent over to save the people of Ireland from perishing by famine, it became necessary to organize a system of accounts and of regulations, for the direction of those officers who were sent over for the purpose of personally superintending the distribution of this relief.

These arrangements were made by the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, Sir C. T----, K.C.B., at extra hours; but it does not appear how many months he was so employed.

The office at that time held by this gentleman, was one for which he received a salary of £2,500 per annum; and certainly this liberal salary ought to have commanded the devotion of his whole time, if necessary, to the public service. It would seem that some application was made from the Treasury, and that Lord John Russell acceded to it with unwonted liberality. He gave the remuneration in a manner thought unconstitutional by several eminent members of the House of Commons, and to an extent justly considered extravagant by the public.

The following extracts from Hansard will explain the matter.

“The Chancellor of the Exchequer.—With regard to Sir C. T----, the case was an exceptional one; but his services on the extraordinary emergency alluded to were so very great that it had been thought right to make a Treasury minute, awarding him £2,500. The item would be found in the ‘Civil Contingencies’ laid before the House.

“Mr. Disraeli,—while readily acknowledging the great services rendered by this gentleman, could not forget that the Order of the Bath had been conferred upon him—a reward bestowed upon him as for services which could not be paid by a pecuniary grant. The vote of £2,500 was surely conceived in rather bad taste; and a _preux chevalier_ like Sir C. T----, bearing his blushing honours, might well be supposed to recoil from receiving an extra year’s salary.

“Mr. Gladstone—condemned the conduct of Government in this matter. It was their duty to have submitted a vote to the House, not to have taken on themselves to reward a public servant. If there was one rule connected with the public service which more than any other ought to be scrupulously observed, it was this, that the salary of a public officer, more especially if he were of high rank, ought to cover all the services he might be called upon to render. Any departure from this rule must be dangerous.

“Lord John Russell said, that the Government thought the services of Sir C. T---- were deserving of reward.

“Mr. Goulburn.—According to all precedent, the House of Commons ought to have fixed the amount of Sir C. T.’s remuneration.

“Lord John Russell.—Sir C. T---- stated in his evidence that he worked three hours before breakfast; that he then went to the Treasury, where he worked all day; and that the pressure upon him was such that he wondered that he had been able to get through it alive.”—_Hansard_, Vol. 101, p. 138, 1848. Supply, 14th Aug. 1848.

There appears to be some indistinctness as to the fund out of which this 2,500_l._ was taken. Compare Hansard with Questions 1693 and 1696 of the Report on Miscellaneous Expenditure.

No mode of keeping accounts, however, will alter the fact; that if the famine had not occurred, neither would the 2,500_l._ have been required; consequently, that sum was part of the whole amount our humanity cost us.

The liberality of the Minister to the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, may be explained by stating that he was the _brother-in-law_ of a Cabinet Minister.

There was another gentleman at least equal in talent to the Assistant Secretary, whose services were gratuitous, who, at the risk of his health, was actively engaged on the spot in superintending the distribution of the relief. To him the Government thought it sufficient to give the Companionship of the Bath, whilst the Assistant Secretary was made a Commander of that Order.