passage-that" sharp but short passage," called anarchy, through which some of their guides are now honest enough to confess they may have to struggle to the attainment of it. Now, considering the amount of the sacrifices which must be required in order to the establishment of a democratical form of government in Great Britain, and which are no less than the previous demolition, not of the monarchy only, and its various ramifications and dependencies, but of the vast actual bulk of aristocratical wealth and privileges by which it is supported, who but a madman can so much as dream of the possibility of accomplishing such a transition without such a previous struggle?-and who (to push the argument one step farther)-who, that is not worse than a madman, will presume to assure the ignorant and unthinking, that the passage will be a "short" one, or that it will, with any degree of certainty, lead to the end contemplated? Reform is not necessarily revolution. This we have said and again repeat-the distinction cannot be too constantly kept in mind. But in the mouths of these humane assertors of the "sharp but short" horrors of the middle passage, they not only do mean the same thing, but, by the mode of reasoning employed in speaking of them, it is frequently rendered no easy task again to disunite them. "Popularize the government," say they; "reform the representation on the broadest basis; and"-what then? why, then-" the people will be patient, or the mass of the people will rally round a constitution, whose frame is co-extensive with themselves, and whose vitals are organic of their wisdom and virtue." Precious jargon, this, to be sure-and such as would have been well suited to the wildest days of French Jacobinism. To hear them uttered makes one for the moment imagine that the darkness of the middle passage, if not its accompanying horrors, has begun already-that the floodgates are already open, and the revolutionary torrent ready to burst in upon and overwhelm us. But let not these self-sufficient gentlemen deceive themselves, while they attempt to frighten others-let them not prate and bully themselves into imagining that such a state of things has actually arrived, as that, with the

apprehension of which they seek to disturb the weak and drivelling aristocracy-those "thoughtless creatures," who now look with such placid indifference at the cloud that is gathering round them, "black as their hearts, or dense as their stupidity!" The floodgates are opened certainly-but they are those only (Heaven be thanked!) of noise and nonsense, such as these good gentlemen are now self-convicted of being in the habit of uttering in their own chosen conclaves, but which, if they think to palm on the world at large as the sense of the people of England, or of any portion of that people worthy the name of a party, they only evince that their knowledge of the present state of society-their acquaintance with human nature in general-is about upon a level with their skill in the first rudiments of moral and political philosophy.

99 66

Neither is the British aristocracy -that "infatuated," "domineering," "blind," "proud," "selfish," "timid," "black-hearted," "densely stupid," part of the nation-that class of "fated people," "admiring fools," "stricken with mental blindness," thoughtless creatures who have no perceptions that ever extend beyond an effect," a degree only more decent than Nero," (we select only a few of the more polite and appropriate epithets employed to designate it in about six or eight pages of an article in the last Westminster Review, already referred to,)-neither, we say, is the British aristocracy ready to concede to these modest reformers the boon so reasonably demanded-nor are they, (the reformers,) whatever they may pretend or fancy, in a situation to enforce the demand. The aristocracy will neither surrender its rights and privileges-its wealth and powerits "accursed domination"-without a struggle-nor are its opponents able to compel such surrender, either with or without one. If the question must be tried upon this issue, we are prepared for it-but we trust that the real and inherent good sense and virtue of the country will avert the trial-for bloody and fearful (we are ready to admit) it would be, although to be followed (as we are sure) by a result widely different from that which these good people anticipate.

There is one short passage in the

article of the Review already so often referred to, which for its unsuspecting truth and simplicity, is worth all the falsehood and rodomontade of the remainder-or, rather, as a setoff, will afford more than an equipoise against all the rest of its mischievous absurdity. It is that in which the writer, evidently writhing under the disappointment of his hopes to have witnessed a general insurrection of the manufacturing districts, attributes the failure to the accidental misfortune of the labourers, from whom so much was expected, having had at the time "full employment.". "Had work failed," he says, "when the peasantry were breaking out into tumult,"-how unlucky that it did not fail!" who that knows the materials for combustion, can fail to tremble at the bare thought of what would have been the consequence?" So, then, that a supply of work at this critical period did not fail the peasantry, is the cause that those "who know the materials for combustion," did fail to tremble. This, it must be admitted, is prettily expressed-but, not to waste time in admiring the mere beauties of expression, let us attend to what fol

It has so happened, by a most curious dispensation, that the very example that has fired the minds of the manufacturing population, has, through its effects, stayed their action. The troubles of France and Belgium have thrown them out of the European market. England has had a great proportion of their orders, and our manufacturers have been sufficiently, if not amply, employed. The activity of their hands has checked the impulses of their minds, but the spring will not lose its force because it is pent."

What is precisely intended by the metaphor of a spring not losing its force because it is pent, as applied to the present position of the manufacturing classes, need not be asked too curiously, because the real merit of the passage consists in the previous confession. So, then, it seems, the oppressed, tortured, enslaved, but brave and indignant mass of the British populace is by no means inclined to perform the virtuous action of rising against their blind and stupid rulers, and hurling them to the earth, unless under the influence of immediate distress and starvation. We

fully believe it; and we fully believe, also, that that unlucky absence of immediate distress and starvation, to which alone the writer ascribes it that we are not already revolutionized (or popularized, as his phrase is) to his heart's content, and to which he affixes the term curious dispensation," is, in fact, nothing more or less than the ordinary course of events, under the administration of the Divine Providence, acting on general principles, without reference to the partial or distorted views of things which are sometimes taken by short-sighted mortals, and more especially so when under the influence of some prevailing passion or prejudice. The Manchester manufacturers, though excited, no doubt, by the contagious examples of France and Belgium, are nevertheless quiet, because they are not distressed; and the reason why they are not distressed, is that the manufacturers of France and Belgium are distressedthat, too, in consequence of the very events which have excited the enthusiasm of our manufacturers, who, but for the unlucky circumstance that they are not in distress, would ere now (so says, at least, this exquisite reasoner) have broken out into open rebellion. But is it not always thus? When has there been, in the history of the world, or when will there be, a period that distress has not somewhere existed, or will not always somewhere exist? or that distress, where it exists, is not attended by discontent? or that discontent, unless repressed by some principle of counteraction, does not break out into overt acts of tumult or of rebellion? But the merit of the confession is this, that the people are not to be so excited except by actual distress, and by distress only. No! The harangues of Mr Cobbett-the ravings of the Westminster Reviewer

all will not do. They may, indeed, occasion some Swing letters, some mischievous and criminal burnings, some riots, and a few executions; but, all they can do, they cannot stir up a rebellion, still less bring about a revolution, unless they have distress-not partial and occasional only-not such only as has existed ever since the world began, and will probably never cease to exist so long as the world endures-but deep, general, lasting distress, and such as

is irremovable, except by means of some convulsion as great and general as itself. It is to a state of distress like this, and to nothing less, that they look for the success of their hopes and machinations; and they imagine that they go some way towards the accomplishment, by falsely representing that it exists, and, still more falsely, that it is caused by the present form of government and the vices of its administration. On such gross misstatement and perversion of facts do they rely as their only chance of victory; and by the frequent and full exposure of their egregious fallacies we may best hope to defeat them.

England, to the utter dismay and discomfiture of these admirers of "sharp but short passages," is not prepared to follow the examples of France and Belgium. Why? Because their cases are wholly dissimilar-because what was right or pardonable in the latter instances would be not barely wrong, but even monstrous, in the former. The late revolution (if so it may be called) in France, was necessitated by the previous attempt at revolution on the part of the government. Its aim was to preserve, not to overthrow the constitution by law established. That of Belgium was an insurrection to shake off a foreign yoke, imposed, not in right of conquest, (a position which generally commands respect, even if it does not ensure obedience,) but at the mere arbitrary will of a congress of states, self-empowered to regulate the future destinies of Europe. In both cases, the price paid for the assertion even of justice has been, and continues to be, enormous -besides the blood spilt, and the immediate misery inflicted, the consequent loss (as we have already seen) of commercial credit, the pressure of manufacturing distress, and (above all) the unsettled state of the government, and the dread of further convulsion. Now, what is there in our political condition or circumstances to call for, or justify, the incurring of similar penalties? We cannot complain of national independence invaded, of public liberty infringed, or of a constitution trampled upon and violated. It may be fit and reasonable that some additional privileges be conceded, some fresh securities provided; but we have the means and the prospect

of obtaining them legally and peace. ably, without resistance or bloodshed, without anarchy, and without revolution.

But it may be answered that all this is gratuitously to impute revolu→ tionary projects to those who are preaching nothing more than reform. We deny the truth of this answer, and appeal to the language already quoted, which, we contend, is the language of revolution, and nothing else. A reform ushered in by the false vituperation of all existing authori ties, and avowedly to be founded on their demolition, is nothing else but a revolution, and to be brought about at no expense short of anarchy and destruction. The downfall of the aristocracy is the thing called for; and, to justify the call, every false accusation that malevolence can invent, and ignorance swallow, is heaped on the head of the devoted order. "Popularize the government -reform the representation on the broadest basis." If this be not revolution, there is no meaning in language. Yet even then we are told, that, in so doing, we shall but "shew the beginning of a better order of things-the commencement of a curative process." That is, to cure a diseased limb, begin with amputationa right recipe in extreme cases-but the people of England will perhaps even yet be satisfied to try a milder regimen.

That we labour under abuses that require to be corrected, defects in the constitution which require to be supplied, and imperfections to be amended, nobody now pretends to doubt; but " the curative process" as to many of these matters has already begun, and, as to others, only requires to be clearly pointed out, in order to its commencement, nobody but a revolutionist, in the garb of reformer, will affect to deny. The venerable fabric of our laws has already undergone considerable repairs and alterations to render it more suitable to the exigencies of modern use. Much more still requires to be done, in order to make it as cheap and easily accessible to the mass of the community as the mass of the community has a right to expect, but that more is in a fair train of accomplishment, and needs not a revolutionary impulse to accelerate its progress. The government ex

penditure has already been greatly reduced, and there is no apparent indisposition to be charged to the account, either of the present or of the late Ministry, to reduce it still further within the narrowest limits that are consistent with the national honour and dignity. The true principles of political economy are even now, perhaps, but just beginning to be developed; but, so far as they are comprehended, there appears no indisposition to act upon them; on the contrary, it seems as if there were greater danger of reducing them to action before their consequences have been sufficiently weighed and ascertained. Whatever may be said of the selfishness of the aristocracy, there is no want of alacrity on their part to concur in, or even to originate, measures seemingly at variance with their interests-we say seemingly, because, in point of fact, there is no such thing as a separate interest in any branch of a community. What is most for the benefit of the whole body, is most for the benefit of every one of its members; and this truth is now generally acknowledged, and, wherever its application is clearly demonstrated, put in practice. What is now asserted of the aristocracy, applies, with perhaps even greater force, to the clergy, whose acts of charity, patience, and self-denial, under the flagrant attacks of unjust accusation and extortion that have lately been practised against them, is deserving of praise only not less exalted than that which the generally exemplary tenor of their lives and conduct demands.

This is not all, however. The temper and spirit of the times-the circumstances of the world at largeand the example of the more immediately surrounding nations-are such as to demand, not the correction and amendment only, but also the reformation (in the true sense of the term already noticed) of some of our existing establishments. A legislative assembly, based on the system of real, and not what is called virtual, representation, may now be considered as the indispensable requisite of a country pretending to free institutions; and England has too long held the first rank among nations in respect of liberty, to be content with a secondary place in the list, and to be kept without the enjoyment of that

which constitutes the leading article of every constitutional charter. In order to the possession of this essential requisite, it is necessary that some existing rights and privileges be previously abolished-and this necessity it is which gives to the measure in question a character beyond that of mere correction and amendment, and entitles it specifically to the name of reform. That somewhat more of the popular ingredient may safely be admitted into the representation thus reformed, it is not meant to deny; but, at the same time, the aristocracy must have pre served to it the full share of influence to which it is fairly and constitutionally entitled; or it is revolu tion, not reform, that is conceded, and a republic that is introduced, in the disguise of a popularized monarchy.

A reform, such as has been now said to be actually wanted, there is no doubt as to the intention of the present government to concede. The only possible obstruction to such a concession, will arise from the vain attempts of a revolutionary party to obtain by force, more than the country at large is prepared either to demand or receive.

Rave as wildly as they may-talk as much at random as they will, about "the aristocracy having had their long and disastrous day, and its now being the time of the Demos;" the organs of that party will probably not obtain any one of those nostrums which they so loudly proclaim to be indispensable. They will not obtain universal suffrage; but they may expect, and will (unless the opportunity is lost by their own fault) doubtless receive as wide an extension of the elective franchise as is compatible with the exclusion of that portion of the community which, from the circumstances of age, sex, or humble condition, it is fit to presume, generally speaking, is incapable of exercising a sound and independent discretion in the choice of a representative. They will not obtain annual parliaments, nor any renewal of them so frequent as to be judged inconsistent with the great object of regularity and stability in the operations of government. They will probably not obtain that most highly wanted of all expedients, election by ballot; because it may not be thought

necessary or advisable to restrict the free and open intercourse between the elector and the candidate; to destroy the honest and manly confidence of each in the other; to lessen the fair influence of rank, property, and intelligence; or to substitute in its place the ascendency of a hireling press, or of seditious demagogues. But, in the room of these dangerous, or, at best, doubtful expedients, they will gain wholesome laws for the lessening of the wasteful and demoralizing expense, and mischievously protracted time of elections, for the eradication of bribery, and the prevention of undue interference; and they will gain (what is of more importance than all the rest) the practical recognition of the great principle of reform, which, when once established, may be gradually extended, with safety, to objects beyond the limits within which it is thought expedient at first to confine it. If, in consequence of their refusing to be satisfied with concessions such as these, and pertinaciously insisting on more, the government should be forced to retract, and the nation frustrated of its now sanguine expectations, on their heads be the consequence. Let it be civil war or rebellion, it will be of their raising, and the precious fruits will also be theirs-short-lived, it is confidently hoped that it may prove, but to meet with a far different termination from that which they pretend to anticipate; alike fatal, perhaps, to the expectations now formed by good men, but not equally destructive of the reputation and dignity of Great Britain, or of her rank in the scale of nations.

Not to part, however, without a few words of remonstrance to the upholders of what has been absurdly, and by a fatal misnomer, styled "the conservative system"-that, namely, which stands self-opposed to the demands made by the loud voice of the age, in a tone which it is madness to defy, and the excess of imbecility to pretend to turn a deaf ear to. Let these grave and hardy assertors of impossibilities hold themselves out as long as they please, to the admiration of one another, as being

"The only faithful found

Among the faithless,"

they still require to be taught what every child learns in his first lesson, whether of religion or morals, that it is not for weak creatures like men to talk of the immutability of any human affairs, however at one time happy or prosperous-that it is in vain to struggle with the tide of Time -and that it is the part of a wise man to watch the course of eventsand to cease from resistance as soon as, by the sure prognostics derived from experience, he perceives that to resist would be to risk the occurrence of evils greater than any that can be produced by timely and prudent concession.

Presumptuous was the wish so patriotically conceived, and so repeatedly extolled, of that pious churchman, who exclaimed, with reference to the constitution of his native country, now no more existing as an independent state, "Esto perpetua!" The ancients, indeed, to secure what might be humanly termed a perpetuity to their laws and edicts, had them graven on brass. But what is the perpetuity even of brass itself, when opposed to the irresistible advance of Time? Even in the very infancy of the world, this question might have been answered, as it was, some few thousand years after its creation, by Old Simonides:

"Who so bold To uphold

What the Lindian sage* has told?
Who will dare

To compare
Works of man, that fleeting are,
With the smooth perennial flow
Of swift rivers, or the glow
Of the eternal sun, or light
Of the golden orb of night?

Spring renews

The floweret's trues With his sweet refreshing dews; Ocean wide

Bids his tide With returning current glide : The sculptured tomb is but a toy Man may fashion, man destroyEternity in stone or brass? Go, go! who said it was an ass." Fragm. 10. BRUNCK, Analect. tom. i. p. 122.