TORY TACTICS: HOW TO TREAT THE WELLINGTON PEEL REFORMS.
THE attempt to get up a Church and King cry, to revive the days of Anti-Catholic bigotry and Birmingham mobs, has utterly failed. People laugh at Guy Faux, and no, longer; dread the Pope of Rome. If Dr. PRIESTLEY were to make his appear- ance in Birmingham, be would be honoured as a demigod by the sons of those who burnt his library and threatened his life. The country is one generation wiser as well as older than in the days of Anti-Jacobin fury.
The Tories, some of the more sensible of them at least, see and feel this. The necessity of some new method of deluding the masses is recognized ; and it proves their real consciousness of the progress which the desire of improvement has made among the people, that they now strive to trick them with the pretence of being friends to Reform. The Duke's organs, indeed, adopt dif- ferent tones; but while Fraser speaks to the High Church party, the Standard and the Times are constantly insinuating the pro- bability of Church and Corporation Reform being conceded by the embryo Ministry.
Few, however, will be the dupes of these false and stale profes-
sions. We know that, to forward his own immediate ends and those of his section of the Oligarchy, the Duke would not scruple to belie his most solemn engagements,—that he would carry mea- sures essentially the same as those which, being supported by a Liberal Ministry, he described as subversive of the Church and Constitution. This he did when he carried the Catholic Bill. But let us bear in mind what use he made of the power which he was enabled to retain and acquire by this concession. He used
it against the Reformers. He yielded to force, to absolute neces- sity (so he informed the party who had trusted in him), when lie granted the Catholic claims. He saw no such necessity for reform-
ing the Commons House of Parliament,—that is, he presumed upon his power to uphold the then existing system of corruption. He stopped short, when a clear-headed, honest, and consistent states- man would have moved forward.
So, if the Reformers are so foolish as to trust him, will it be again. He may bribe his party to concede a certain modicum of Church and Corporation Reform, by a pledge that he will go no further. But this is not the course which the real Reformers mean to pursue. They foresee that, after the questions now more prominently in view have been disposed of, others will arise. If the Tories succeed in establishing themselves in office. there will be a multitude of them. It will be no answer to a demand for remedying fresh abuses, that some old ones have been done away with. But even the most favourable part of the puke's political career, gives only the hope that he will carry one or two measures as a sop, and then resolutely refuse to move a step further. He and his party are essentially Anti-Reformers. They will not give up an inch that they can keep: they will not relinquish an abuse except by compulsion. They have no notion of looking at the Reform question as a progressive one; but are endeavouring to regain power and pelf at the least possible expense to themselves, and the least possible advantage to the country, with the ulterior design of using their power for the preservation of remaining abuses in Church and State. It requires no extraordinary saga- city to see this. Common sense, the history of the past, and the experience of the present, prove that such only can be the aim of the Tory faction. If the Reformers are tricked by the palpable cheat, truly they deserve all that is prepared for them. In pursuance of the plan we have indicated, the Tories may introduce into Parliament certain measures in the guise of Reform. If the Reformers support them, all well and good : if the Reformers vote against them, then they will be held up to the country as insincere Reformers, mere partisans, who refuse what is essentially beneficial to their constituents, because, forsooth, a Whig did not propose it. With this cry, they would venture, perhaps, on a dissolution and a new election.
There is, however, a very simple why of defeating this crafty project. Let the Reformers support every measure that contains the principle of good, and vote it into Committee: when there, let it be made a really useful and efficient measure, in spite of its authors: if they, from the fear of the Lords or the innate love of corruption, then abandon the measure, the Tory trick will bring disgrace only on those who projected it.
Another course may be followed when the form of pro- cedure is different. Suppose Mr.Gouttitrast, or any other of the
PEEL and DAWSON crew," should bring forward resolutions equally efficient as those of Mr. WARD on the Irish Church. Let the Reformers one and all support them; and then vote an address to the King, declaring that the House has no confidence in the will or the ability of Ministers to carry the plan laid down in the resolutions into effect. There would be no inconsistency in this.
Many other methods of keeping right with the Country, and yet outvoting the Duke, will suggest themselves. But it seems to us that either of the two we have pointed out will answer the purpose. The main point to keep in view is, never for an instant to believe that the WaLuNcrosuand-PEEL-men are honest Reformers, or that it will be safe to trust them.
Previous page
