Зображення сторінки
PDF
ePub

their notion that this or that man must be king, that God meant him to be king, and after him, his eldest son, and after him, his eldest son, and so on. I know this may be a very convenient way, generally, of settling for kings, but I do not admire the notion that the great God decreed that so it was to be, and that we are bound to the king that turns up in that way, however foolish or wicked he may be.

The people of England have not gone on acting under any such notion. Again and again they have put down a man who was in the line to be king, and put up someone else instead.

But while I can only partly admire those old devotees of royalty, there are some persons, some things, my dear children, that I most thoroughly and heartily admire. They are yourselves, dear boys and girls; your truth, and tenderness, and loyalty, towards certain little kings and queens that reign in your own houses, and reign truly, and truly by Divine right.

You know very well who is the king or the queen in your own house-the baby to be sure. Isn't it so Supposing it to be a girl, hasn't she a Lady of the Bedchamber and a Mistress of the Robes? You, her brothers and sisters, are not you her Guard and Maids of Honour ? And when your father trots her upon his knee,

isn't he her Master of the Horse? And if it is a boy, it is all the same.

And truly it is God who has set these little ones up to be kings and queens. Is it not He who gives us the inclination to gather around them, to attend and to defend them wherever they are carried. Do we not catch every sound that comes from their lips, and stoop to pick up everything that they let fall?

I dare say you have often looked in the inside of a flower, perhaps a primrose or a cherry blossom, and seen how the little vessel in which the seeds are to grow is placed right in the middle, in the very heart of the flower; so that all the rest of the flower, and all the rest of the whole plant, will shelter and protect the vessel and the little seeds that are to grow

inside it. These seeds are to hold the infant plants.

In the same way, God has put the little babes into the middles of our world and the middles of our houses, where they are surrounded and sheltered and guarded and obeyed.

And if, dear children, you should hear your father called a Radical, it most likely means that he is trying to save his money for you and your mother, and the little king or queen, and to prevent certain rapacious creatures from getting hold of it; creatures who get rid of as much in a week as would maintain you and your parents all the time of your growing up. You shall soon hear again from

-:0:

YOUR DEMOCRAT.

"THE DEMOCRAT."

TO THE EDITOR OF THE DEMOCRAT.

SIR,-I an am an English working man, and quite agree with the views you hold in your paper. I am the only person who takes your paper in these parts. This is a great Tory county, and Liberalism stands a very poor chance; whenever it begins to lift up its head it is immediately crushed by Tory influence. I, for my part, cannot see but what the 150 millions paid to the landlords in this country is a direct tax on labour, for many of them, no doubt, hold their lands by a very doubtful title. The spoils of the monasteries in the reign of Henry VIII. were handed over to gorge their ravenous appetite. Their lands since that time have increased in value to an enormous extent, made so by the industry of the working classes whoso fate

it is to live a hand-to-mouth existence. Charles II., who, when he was alive, was called" A most religious and gracious king," had several bastards by mistresses, some of whose descendants hold very large estates, such as the Duke of Richmond and Gordon, the Duke of Cleveland, and the Duke of Grafton and St. Albans, who owe their positions and estates for being what Lord Thurlow calls the accident of an accident. The State Church, too, is a most monstrous iniquity; it is thrust upon the people in spite of their better judgment, and costs the nation eleven millions per year, and parsons are thrust upon congregations against their free will which I have not time to enter into at present, and inclination. There are many other abuses but which I should like to refer at some future time, and send to your valuable journal.—Yours, Shropshire.

etc.

:0:

J. B.

Why is it unjust to blame a coachman for cheating us? Because we called him to take us in.

What 'bus has found room for the greatest number of people?-Colum-bus.

IN THE LIGHT OF COBDEN.

Disraeli, in that book of his upon Lord George Bentinck, which I always regard as a cynical jest, compares to the list of Homer's heroes, the country boobies, who, on that eventful night when the food tax was for ever abolished, protested with burlesque solemnity against Peel's great wrong to the rich. The illus tration would more aptly apply to those who shared with Cobden the toil and the glory of his battle. They were all great, but Cobden was the greatest. He brought into British statesmanship and politics the unfamiliar lights of philanthropy and business common sense. He was absolutely fearless, and is notable as the ex-greatest of that modern school of Democrats who, in the House of Commons, dare to have minds that are not merely emanations of the party whip, and dare to speak those minds. Twenty-one years have passed and gone since that April Sabbath upon which Cobden died, yet his name is brighter now than it was then, and each year seems like a new glass added to the telescope through which we view him.

It has been noted by shrewd observers that the cause of progress in this country is uniform. First the reform is ridiculed, then reviled, then adopted. In 1832 the Earl of Carnarvon, a man whom Lord Malmesbury speaks of in his memoirs as having "great weight in public opinion," thus addressed Earl Grey "To propose such a reform" (viz., the great Reform Bill) "is to have a fool's head on your shoulders and a traitor's heart in your bosom." In 1840 Lord Lichfield declared, and he was a Postmaster-General, "the proposed scheme" (the Penny Post) "is the wildest and most traordinary I have ever known." One more instance from the wit and wisdom of the House of Lords, of which I have collected some hundreds of examples to be one day published in THE DEMOCRAT, Lord Melbourne, in 1839, delivered himself of the following remarkable statement :- "The repeal of the Corn Laws would be the most insane proposition that ever entered a human head." So spake a British Prime Minister and a man able enough for a lord. Two years later, although he had not changed his mind, he had almost adopted Free Trade as a policy, and seven years later, on the 2nd of July, 1846, a band of men met, partly in gladness and partly in sorrow, for they met in all the triumph of a great accomplished task, and they met with the melancholy of those who, having fought side by side through a long and desperate campaign, are about to break up associations that have become almost hallowed. These men who were about to part were the Corn-Law League, and their "most insane proposition" had entered into the head of the most accomplished statesman of that time. The Corn Laws were repealed.

Within late weeks we have had a new illustra

tion of how his great spirit has impressed itself upon the nation. Cobden waged unending

war with "The Devil of Battles." He could not be made to see that Russia and Britain had conflicting interests. Where Russia went, Cobden argued she improved, and no improvement was unimportant to Britain, for it meant an increase to Britain's trade. At last these opinions seem to be bearing fruit. Russia is taking large strides upon her inevitable course towards Constantinople, while a Conservative Anti-Government in Britain looks on with comparative indifference, and a London press is not raving for blood and blows. If it is the interest

It seems always to me that when we look back to that period, with its struggles and its triumphs, there is much to learn and much to inspire. It is true that we can draw no exact parallel between any two great movements. In the land war we have weapons that they had not in the corn war, and we lack means of affecting the thought and vote of the country that they possessed. But, always remembering that their fight is not our fight and that their tactics would not always suit us, we cannot too much nor too often read the story of how the Anti-Corn Law League combatted and overcame the idea that for a nation to be prosperous the people must have dear food and little of it.

The whole combat centres round the figure of Richard Cobden. He was the Washington of cheap bread. Not that he stood alone.

of any nation to oppose Russia that nation is not Britain. It is the most natural thing in the world that Russia should desire to hold the Dardanelles. Suppose some foreign nation held the Straits of Dover, would it not be natural for Britain to strain every nerve until she had freed her commerce from the danger that for ever threatened it? The oil wells on the Caspian Sea give Russia the power to become one of the foremost mercantile countries in the world, but what is the use of a commerce which at any moment a foreign power may destroy by blocking the Straits? I do not know but that Russia at Constantinople would mean absolute rest and safety to this country. For to develop and consolidate her influence in the Peninsula she would need money, troops, and energy to an extent so great that a career of barren conquest in Asia would be the last thing of which her statesmen would dream. If

Austria can afford to see the Danube transformed into a Russian river without action, and almost without protest, Britain has very small reason to complain. But when we behold the nation in a temper so placid and so sensible, can we believe that so short a time has elapsed since Palmerston and his mad policy of acting the part of an armed Providence to the whole round world? Thank God and Cobden for the change! We seem to be at last coming to the belief that we will do best by minding our own business, and leaving Providence to take care of the Universe other nations.

But the main business of Cobden's life was his great agitation against the food tax. When he began it there did not seem much room for hope. Even enthusiastic men thought that half-a-century would pass before their task was done. They had absolutely to educate the nation. None knew better than Cobden the force of inertia in his countrymen. "We are a Chinese people," he once said, "and a lucky thing it is that our grandmothers did not deform their feet à la Chinese. If they had we would have had a terrible bother to emancipate women's toes." How much seemed against him, how little for him! Even the merchants, whose fortunes the change from Protection afterwards multiplied, were at first against him, and in his bitterness he spoke of them as "the toadies of a tadpole aristocracy only less intelligent than themselves." The Times, of course, reviled him as it is paid to revile all true reformers. But even the Times slightly surpassed itself when it referred to Mr. Cobden and Mr. Bright as "capering mercenaries, who go frisking about the country." Then, as now, the Tory press, pulpit, and platform painted the working-man as leading a happy and idyllic life, disturbed only by agitators. Mobs assailed them, arguments were answered with half-bricks, and those who could not confute facts and figures called on society to persecute, and religion to curse. But still the leaguers, undismayed, fought on. Plain and simple men, leaving their homes and businesses to accomplish an almost apostolic mission, they were not to be daunted. In great cities and in remote hamlets, from a platform or from an unyoked cart, they told their story in frank and earnest language. They spoke, they conversed, they argued, they seemed never impatient and never tired; their motto was "No day without a meeting," their practice was no hour without something done for the cause. At last their doctrines grew to be a power. Who can tell the secret and subtle process by which public opinion changes? The apostle of a new doctrine visits some hopeless

city, he is received with jeers, with clamour, and with even violence. He speaks his message, and, seemingly, he might as well have spoken it to the senseless winds. In a very few years he comes back again, and the bells ring out his welcome, and the people hail him as a hero and a conqueror. Such is the potency of sowing seed.

The Corn Law agitation was inspired by two motives, working generally in opposition, but working here in the truest harmony-it was founded upon business calculation and pure philanthropy. Cobden proved to the middle classes of this country that by abolishing prohibitory duties they would at once put money into their pockets, and would'give cheap food to a starving people. Which of these motives was most powerful with them we will not too nicely inquire. At any rate, they did support him, and they spent time, labour, and money in the cause with a perseverance and a liberality which are characteristic of them when once their enthusiasm has been aroused. From a very early time the result certain. Nothing could resist such energy so directed. The opposition of "vested interests," a name which is to the oppression of labour what the name of Christ was to the Roman Inquisition, did not give way, but was literally swamped by the rising floods of popular enthusiasm.

was

The

We cannot now rely upon the middle class in our land war. Many individuals of the class will nobly step forward to our aid, but the class, as a whole, will be against us. It would seem as if the Corn Law struggle had exhausted that ardour for reform which blazed brightly through many centuries, and illuminated the path of progress. The middle classes have grown wealthy, timid, luxurious, and selfish. great reform of Free Trade heaped riches upon them; cottages grew into mansions, and mansions expanded into palaces; the wild insanity of a shoddy aristocracy seized upon plain women and half-educated men; the honest and hearty sympathy between employer and employed that existed often enough to form a powerful link between the classes became forgotten. The middle classes have drifted to an open Conservatism or to a paralysed Liberalism, potent only for mischief. Plainly did Cobden see the drift of feeling. In a letter to Mr. Bright he says: "There is an apparent tendency in your speeches to advocate the interest of the working, as apart from the upper classes. Now, I am sorry to say, that whenever the case is so placed, there is a tendency in the middle classes to range themselves with those above them to resist a common danger." Again, speaking of

the absolute need of effecting some change in the feudal system of land, Mr. Cobden says, "The snobbishness of the moneyed classes in the great seats of commerce and manufactories is a fearful obstacle to any effectual change." And again he puts the case in a very strong light: "If we go into the conflict we must seek recruits among another class."

Our

These are facts of vital importance. land war is a people's war. In reality it is not waged against the middle classes, but still the middle classes will be against us. We have not, like Mr. Cobden, a gigantic bribe to offer them, and it is to be feared that such an unsubstantial thing, so incapable of being converted into stocks and shares, as the happiness of the people, will hardly influence them. The wealthier middle classes have sold themselves to the aristocracy, and have adopted, with all the zeal of perverts and all their own natural ignorance the doctrine that nothing is so dangerous as enthusiasm for humanity.

What have we on our side to make up for the loss of the wealthy middle classes? We have three things which Mr. Cobden had not, three things each of them by itself equal to the influence of that power which we have lost we have national education, untaxed printing, and the transferance of the electoral power into the hands of the working classes. These changes together constitute a revolution. It is twentysix years since Mr. Gladstone swept away the last tax upon knowledge; it is sixteen years since Mr. Forster brought in his great Education Act; we count by months the time since the working classes of the country began to be really enfranchised. The newspapers of the country have been multiplied by three, their circulation is expressed in bewildering millions. There we have our compensation for the loss of rank, wealth, and influence. How mighty has been the stream of tendency from 1832 to 1886, what vast obstacles it has swept from its path, what fertility it has brought to the British mind! The working classes of this country are beginning to do their thinking for themselves. Here is one significant sign of the times. Within the last year or two publishers have begun to issue at very low prices printed editions of the world's classics. These are bought in numbers so enormous that some booksellers have on the day Cassell's National Library is issued as large a demand for the new volume as they have for the evening newspapers. Who buy these? They are bought by the intelligent mechanic and by the clerk who works harder than any mechanic for the most wretched pittance. Even girls, turned year by year out

In his own

of the board schools, with a craving within them, and a dreary fate before them, read these books and gain glimpses of a less sordid life. Such literature, harmless as it may seem, is in reality more revolutionary than Reynolds's Newspaper. It teaches these people to think, and thought among those who want in the midst of plenty is the beginning of revolution. Two ideas have taken possession of the common mind, the one that the labouring classes are miserable, the other that they might easily be made contented and happy. way almost every working man in the kingdom is more or less considering that problem. The bitter atmosphere of bad times has helped all minds to activity. The agricultural classes of Scotland, Wales, and Ireland, have, within a very short time, become saturated with the idea of Land Restoration. Half-a-dozen years ago it seemed as remote as one of the planets; to-day it is the practical question debated wherever two or three are gathered together. Within two years not one miner out of six had ever seriously considered the enormity of min in g royalties. At a meeting of twenty thousand miners held a few weeks ago it would have heen difficult to have found six men who did advanced thinkers had come to deem that the not regard them as a public wrong. Very lately the other day at Hull the President of the trades' unionists had grown fossilised. annual Congress delivered, amidst the applause of his comrades, a noble and eloquent address, so advanced and so boldly confident of a better future that it might have been written in this journal.

Yet

All this means that where Cobden had to move heaven and earth we can accomplish our purpose with comparatively little trouble. He had to create the means of changing public opinion; we find it ready-made to our hands. It would almost seem as if we had been too successful. I sometimes ask myself if those who believe in Land Restoration have in them the dogged tenacity of those who sacrificed their years and their wealth to remove the curse of Protection. Considering our strength in the country, surely we should have by this well-timea small but firm and vigorous Parliamentary representation. Men are everywhere crying out for a new party, a party with a real and wide-embracing programme. I venture to say that if in this pause and stagnation of public opinion we had had in the House of Commons a small and devoted band proclaiming loudly and proclaiming constantly the whole programme of THE DEMOCRAT, and caring neither for party leaders nor for party discipline, we

could have thrown the country into a very fever of discussion, and perhaps advanced our cause by years.

The race of Cobden is not dead, but it seems to slumber. We know that it will awaken, but still we grudge it every hour of rest. The social question is not a question that can be settled to-morrow as well as to-day. The arithmetic of destitution, the awful sum of human misery that never ceases its fearful growth, these will not wait till this or that nice point of political etiquette has been finally settled. While we stand inactive men are dying from hunger.

COMMONS

A SCOTTISH PRESSMAN.

-:0

ENCLOSURE.

When an enclosure is made privately in the assertion of a right of absolute ownership the most serious injury may be inflicted on a neighbourhood and on the nation at large. But Parliament has no power to interfere. No consent is asked to enclose. The enclosure is made on the assumption of a legal right, which can only be disputed in the law courts.

If the nation is in the future effectually to assert its interest in the common land of the country this process must be stopped and no enclosure henceforth allowed without the express sanction of Parliament. Enclosures are made in defiance of rights of common because the owners of those rights are not able to bear the expense of the costly litigation which is necessary to abate the enclosures, or because they are afraid to offend a powerful neighbour. The success of the commoners' suits respecting the London commons shows that where there is money to support the proceedings necessary to test the validity of an enclosure, the enclosure, as a rule, turns out to be unlawful. As matters now stand, it is a mere accident whether an unlawful enclosure is challenged or not.

If encroachments are to be prevented, the only effectual mode of procedure is to forbid all enclosure of common land in the future without the sanction of Parliament.

Mr. Shaw-Lefevre, in pleading lately for the extension of Hampstead Heath, quoted a recommendation of so old a writer as John Evelyn, that London should be surrounded with a belt of meadow land, planted with aromatic and fragrant herbs and trees, so that from whatever point the wind blows the air of the city may be sweetened and purified. At Frankfort-on-the-Maine a narrow belt of land, probably the site of the old city wall, has been planted and laid out in grass plots and flower beds, walks and drives, and well supplied with gravelled spaces for children to play. It is surprising what a sense of spaciousness and comfort is derived from such a simple expedient.

In so all-important a matter as the sweetening of the air we breathe, there should be some systematic and self-working means of counteracting the constant spread of houses and destruction of all vegetable life.-The Contemporary Review.

WORTH NOTING.

No man with a spark of humanity in his bosom ought to allow himself to forget for a moment the attitude assumed by the Government in reference to rents in Ireland. The policy announced on the first night of the session is now being carried out, and we venture to inform them in no part of the world are such dastardly atrocities being committed as those which result from the action of the present Government in reference to the enforcement of unjust rents. Lord Salisbury said we do not contemplate any revision of judicial rents. should come out that the courts have made blunders, and that there is that impossibility in any case of paying rent, I think it is not the landlords who should bear the loss. I think this would be one of the cases for the application of the principle of purchase by the State, and that the State, and not the landlords, must suffer for the errors that have been made. This expression of opinion is worthy of the man who endeavoured to introduce into an act of Parliament a clause compelling the Metropolitan Board of Works to purchase his own property on terms which were grossly unfair and unjust to the community.

Lord Churchill, on the same subjects, adds insult to injury, and tells the world that Irishmen cannot pay their rents because they do not make good butter. He said: "The Government are of opinion that it is quite possible the fall in prices of produce-I allude especially to the fall in the staple article of Irish produce, butter-may be due quite as much to careless and defective manufacture as to any general depreciation in prices. We take our stand on the Land Act of 1881. The policy of Her Majesty's Government will be to see that all legal obligations are strictly enforced." The absolute absurdity of his contention respecting butter is shown by the fact that the price of butter has fallen elsewhere as well as in Ireland.

MR. SHEEHY asked in the House of Common whether it was true, as stated in the Press, that the cost of evicting six families on Lord Clanricarde's property in Galway was £10,000, of which the taxpayers of the United Kingdom would have to pay £6,000; whether that sum would have bought the fee simple of the evicted lands many times over; what was the sum due to the landlord by these six tenants, for the non-payment of which they had been evicted at such cost; and how much of the expense would be borne by the landlord? The Attorney-General for Ireland. "It is impossible to estimate with anything like an approximate accuracy the cost of carrying out the evictions referred to; and the Government is not aware of the amount due to the landlord; but it may be taken that the cost of carrying out these evictions was much in excess of the amount due. obvious, however, that the Government cannot be governed, when called on to assist in enforcing legal process, by the proportion which the cost of doing so bears to the amount recovered. Why should the Government disregard humanity and

It is

« НазадПродовжити »