can never be too highly lauded, which renders it next to impossible to declare of any educated individual, whether he is or is not noble. Arms are in heraldry considered the unerring signet of nobility, but these appear conceded to all who occupy a certain position in society. The convenient title of " Esquire" is shared by the descendants of peers and representatives of the oldest and noblest families in Europe with merchants, and manufacturers, and even retired shopkeepers. The so-called landed gentry are of inestimable value, together with the baronetage, as supplying the needful link betwixt the peerage and the lower ranks. By the arrangement thus attained, no man's pride is wounded; the privilege of gentility is shared by all the educated; no exclusive barrier is raised betwixt the titled and the untitled; and it is, in fact, impossible to say, where titles commence, and where they end. There are all the elements of social stability in such an order of things. At this very period, despite the triumphs of the democratic spirit elsewhere, no aversion to our peerage, as such, exists, in any considerable party, not even the most innovating, within this mighty empire. On this point, then, we might appear secure. But it is not so. Certain political changes, already loudly clamoured for, would, if conceded, destroy the balance of power, and thus bring about the overthrow of our undoubtedly most noble aristocracy. Up to the present period, neither branch of the legislature (neither Crown, Lords, nor Commons) directly represents the numerical majority of the nation; all have their deep-rooted sources of moral influence, which are on the whole fairly balanced; and thus a just equilibrium is maintained; not the impracticable equilibrium denounced by De Lamartine as identical with stagnation, but a changing balance, preponderating by turns in various directions, but never altogether overthrown. But were household suffrage to become the law of the land, the House of Commons would thenceforth directly represent a vast numerical majority, and, by an almost necessary consequence, power would be centralized in, and finally monopolized by, it. Thus the prevailing taste or fancy of the moment, whatever that might be, would be almost secure of triumph, and the nation would lose true liberty in the very power of carrying all its conceptions into immediate effect. It is our business here, in this sweeping summary of our national dangers, rather to indicate great truths, than logically to work them out in all their bearings; but it appears to us abundantly evident, that the House of Lords would have little real power to oppose the direct manifestation of the nation's will, or rather of the will of the majority, who, though they might by no means morally represent the true nation, would have the power of making laws that might bind that nation for ever. Universal suffrage, a far more honest and self-consistent measure than the scheme of Messrs. Cobden and Bright, would attain the same result, by vesting the real authority in one single branch of the legislature. That branch which directly and exclusively represented the popular will would soon be found to be allpowerful. Vote by ballot would, of course, be a step in the same direction. As Lord John Russell has wisely remarked, it would be impossible to establish a system of secret voting without yielding the right of suffrage to all men; for, at present, the suffrage is a high and honourable trust, and is only to be vindicated on its present foundation as such; it must therefore be acted up to, in the light of day, not discharged beneath the mantle of privacy, and for any possible private or dishonourable purpose. We need not urge here the more common but equally unanswerable argument against the ballot, “That it would be a direct premium on falsehood; as none but the liar and the rogue could profit by it; he, namely, who would vote one way, and affirm that he had voted the other, or who lived a life of perpetual mystification." For the present, we are mainly anxious to establish this great fact, that all who value their country's constitution, in its mingled developments of aristocracy, democracy, and royalty; who believe power when settled in one individual, or one majority, to be necessarily despotic, and consequently evil; and who are, therefore, resolved to uphold that balance of power, which a Montesquieu and a De Lolme have commended as the highest goal of political perfectibility, which the sages of all ages have desired, and which our country has now so long enjoyed; that all these true conservatives, and yet wise progressives, in as far as the social evils of our working-classes are concerned, must resolutely and strongly combine against that false liberal movement, which would tend to centralize power in one branch of the legislature, and so overthrow the equilibrium of the State. This is, perhaps, the most immediately practical danger of the day, and must therefore be recognized and guarded against as such. The third great danger to our State and Constitution may be discovered in the wrongs and miseries of the working-classes, which can be here but briefly treated of. Our defective political economy has wrought much mischief. Unrestricted competition has been supposed to be the grand panacea for all evils. The aim of our legislature has been cheapness, at whatever cost, and not true plenty. Instead of endeavouring to increase our produce, and more especially our agricultural produce," the sinews of the State," to a just ratio with our population, we have been led astray by the fatal error that "population must of necessity exceed production," and that it is our main duty to retard the advance of the former. Yet we have seen in Ireland, that misery will not effect this desired result: poverty brutalizes and frees from moral influences. Imprudent early marriages are the almost universal consequence. It is obvious, without entering on the consideration of the many pressing subjects which present themselves, that statesmen, having to deal with an enormous practical evil, the excess of population over production, should apply themselves to increase the latter to the utmost possible extent; and this, not by striving to develop our manufacturing and artificial powers of produce, at least not primarily, but by promoting the cultivation of the soil to the extent, if needs be, of millions of acres, both at home and in our colonies! Capital always exists for reproductive purposes: and what could be so reproductive, as its outlay for the creation of substantial national wealth, such as might render life a blessing to the working-classes? There are, no doubt, great difficulties to the attainment of this end; but our views are not Utopian. The sources of wealth exist, and they may be wrought out to far more purpose than the mines of Golconda ever were. But, once more, our object here is not so much to provide a distinct remedy for existing ills, as to recognize the causes of danger, and prepare men's minds to grapple with them: and it is certain, that one of the most serious of these causes is the state of our working-classes. We speak broadly and generally, and by no means wish to imply that the English labourer is ill-fed, ill-clothed, or ill-provided for, if tested by the continental standard. The very contrary is the case. But far more may be done, than is done; and, as it may be, must be! The English people are disposed to loyalty. They are conscious that they are in the possession of all the blessings of political and social freedom. Any strong desire for the suffrage is confined to a certain class of political agitators. But men are generally impressed with the conviction, that it resides within the power of government, and is its consequent duty, to amend their lot. Attain this one end, and the last apparent cause of danger to our country's institutions will be forthwith swept away. And let it not be supposed that these political comments on home affairs are naturally unconnected with our immediate theme, the state of "the German mind:" this is only of immediate and practical consequence to us as bearing on our own. We wish not only to satisfy the curiosity of those who may wonder at the prevalence of infidel and democratic notions among our German brethren, though this curiosity should be gratified,-but to apply and utilize VOL. X.-NO. XX.-DEC. 1848. C C our experience, by recurring to our home standard, and realizing its great excellencies and possible deficiencies. The example of Germany, then, is mainly useful to us, as teaching us to appreciate the institutions we possess, and which that country stood in so great need of; a wisely balanced representative constitution, a popular aristocracy, and a Catholic State Church; consequently warning us, as thinkers, citizens, and statesmen, against any tampering with that constitution, any disrespect for that aristocracy, or any neglect of that Church, or attempt to underrate her just claims and treat her as a mere State-lackey. The spirit of reverence would soon fail, if her hallowing influence were withdrawn from our political institutions; royalty and aristocracy would lose much, if not all, of their beauty and value in popular estimation; and democratic changes would soon be effected in the third branch of the legislature, which would finally centralize indisputable supremacy in that body, and thus give a death-blow to freedom. - One more lesson we learn from German, as from French, "levelling of religious truth with falsehood." These countries endowed various Churches, or religious bodies, alike or equally :-further, Christianity was not their common statute law, not treated as the basis of all politics. Let us beware of the light of incendiarism this foreign recklessness has kindled,-or of any kindred danger! Let us not stoop to fire our torch at the same volcano, which may slumber in seeming quiet! Let us not endow two Churches at once; thus practically professing, that to this nation truth is truth no longer. The false steps we have made in this direction, whatever they be, let us retrace; and at whatever sacrifice. Sternly let us resist all future encroachments of this foreign faithlessness. Never be Rome's usurping Church endowed within these Sister Isles! And as pregnant with danger is the other quasi-liberal measure we are urged to, in emulation of foreign wisdom; to unchristianize our legislature, our state, our nation; to proclaim that for legislative purposes we are no longer "under Christ," to admit the Jew to our Houses of Parliament. Let us not be told by faint well-wishers, they would aid us if we took firmer ground, if we could with any hope of success urge a more definite protest on our representatives. "On the faith of a Christian !" "How vague is this!" urges well-intentioned weakness. We reply, it suffices for all practical ends. We could not make the Church's ereeds requisite for admission: could not even, perhaps, with justice, admit the Quaker and exclude the Arian. Where then should we stop? We stop within that line, which attests, that Britain receives the Christian faith as truth absolute, not proble matical, and which imposes silence on the secret infidel who perjure's himself for ambition's gain. More we ask not, need not: but this is ALL. Once again, then, solemnly we charge our readers, "Seize not with monstrous folly the very hour of foreign downfall, to emulate its causes.' Members of the House of Commons, you, in particular, perform your duty; awake to your country's danger; and show Europe that Britain will not be dragged a helpless self-doomed victim in her wake! But you, Peers, 1F indeed the folly, or weakness, or wickedness of others constrains you to perform your duty, (which we will not believe), then flinch not, but earn, by firmness in this hour of trial, the grateful thanks of children's children! We have spoken warmly; some will think too warmly let us return to a more sober mood, lest we be stigmatized by the common-place as dreamers. We must not lose sight of our immediate theme. : German literature, then, has of late begun to exercise no inconsiderable influence over ourselves. Let us not be dragged into the abyss after our Teutonic friends and brethren: but let us rather extend the helping hand to them, and, in Heaven's good time, assist in upraising them on a more solid foundation! The German mind is a strange mixture of strength and weakness. With little of positive wisdom, it is capable of profound thought. Its tendencies are to the mystic and ideal, but, like "Euphorion' in "Goethe's Faust," it has sought to soar so high above the practical foundations of this earth, that it has lost itself in the clouds, and finally fallen as a dead weight into the stony pit of doubt and anarchy. As yet, the nobler elements of the German intellect have been almost ever manifested in direct opposition to the Christian Revelation. But may we not trust, that sooner or later, when the bottom of the abyss has been reached, a gradual reaction must ensue? that by slow and toilsome efforts, perhaps, yet in some sort and some way, the German mind will soar from its dungeon of rationalistic darkness? Is it not to be expected, that some gifted individual may yet arise (for by individuals, under God, are nations lost and saved), who may possess the power of Goethe without his indifferentism and egotism; the zeal and earnestness of Schiller, without his infidelity; the devotional energy of the mystic Werner, without his wild rashness and inconsistency; the more tempered wisdom of a Schlegel, without those Romeward tendencies or predilections which rendered his highest efforts barren and almost mischievous; some mighty genius, in fine, who will conjure up a train of noble spirits to follow in his train, and who will teach the German nation practically, that the highest intellects may bow to the claims of Christianity, and that genius is never so worthily employed as when hymning |
