Blackwood's Edinburgh magazine, Vol. 75, No. 462, April 1854Various
History
Blackwood's Edinburgh magazine, Vol. 75, No. 462, April 1854
Various
England -- Periodicals; Scotland -- Periodicals
We are quite aware that it would be, to say the least of it, gross
impertinence to make any such statement, or to express any such opinion,
without reasonable and rational grounds. We should be very sorry to do
so at any time, but more especially at the present, when we wish to see
Ministers disembarrassed of all perplexing questions at home. But it is
their fault, not ours, if we are forced to make the disclosure; and to
show that, in reality, the grand mechanist of 1832 had so forgotten his
craft, if he ever had a due knowledge of it, that after his last
abortive effort, in 1852, he was fain to derive new notions from the
pages of the _Edinburgh Review_. In saying this, we intend anything but
an insinuation against the talents of the author of the articles to
which we refer. We can admire the ingenuity of his arguments, even while
we question their soundness. We have no right to be curious as to what
section of politicians he belongs. He may represent the philosophic
Liberals, or he may be the champion of Manchester in disguise. All we
know is, that he has written three plausible articles, after the manner
of Ignatius Loyola, the result of which has been that poor Lord John
Russell has plunged into the marsh, misled by the _ignis fatuus_, and is
at the present moment very deep in a quagmire.
Some of our readers will doubtless remember that, during the autumn of
1851, various pompous paragraphs appeared in the Whig newspapers,
announcing that Lord John Russell had withdrawn himself to country
retirement, for the purpose of maturing a grand and comprehensive scheme
of Parliamentary Reform. The task was entirely gratuitous and
self-imposed; for although the venerable Joseph Hume, Sir Joshua
Walmsley, and a few other Saint Bernards of the like calibre, had
attempted to preach up an itinerant crusade, their efforts met with no
response, and their harangues excited no enthusiasm. Nobody wanted a new
Reform Bill. The class which, of all others, was most opposed to
innovation, embraced the bulk of the shopkeepers in towns, who, having
attained considerable political and municipal influence, were very
unwilling to share it with others, and regarded the lowering of the
franchise not only with a jealous but with an absolutely hostile eye. It
was upon the shoulders of that class that the Whigs had been carried
into power; and it really seemed but a paltry return for their support
and devotion, that a Prime Minister, upon whom they had lavished all
their honours, should attempt to swamp their influence without any
adequate reason. It would be absurd or unfair to charge them with
selfishness. The first Reform Bill, acceded to and hailed by the great
mass of the people, had established a certain property qualification for
voters; and no one could allege that popular opinion was not
sufficiently represented in the House of Commons. Nay, many of the Whigs
began to think that popular opinion was too exclusively represented
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account