Life of Henry Reeve, vol 2 | Page 6

principal members. The Reform Bill, brought in yesterday, raises more questions than it answers; but it will probably serve to give prominence to the dissensions in the Liberal party. 'Tis a real misfortune; for a disunited party cannot assert any influence in Europe.
Lord Brougham is returning to Cannes, though with little inclination to stay among such grave causes of anxiety. So long as France is free to act by sea, the road to Italy does not lie through Var, but in the ports of Toulon and Marseilles. Shall you soon be hearing the guns of the second Marengo?
The action of England at this important crisis was curious, but characteristic. The destinies of Europe were shaking in the balance; the fortunes of France, of Italy, of Austria, probably also of Prussia, and very possibly of Russia, were at stake; so the English Government thought it a suitable opportunity to tinker the constitution and introduce a Reform Bill--which nobody seems to have wanted--mainly, it would seem, to 'dish' the Whigs. It was, however, they themselves who were dished. Mr. Henley, the President of the Board of Trade, resigned on January 27th. So also did Mr. S. H. Walpole, [Footnote: Mr. Walpole died, at the age of 92, on May 22nd, 1898.] the Home Secretary, who wrote to Lord Derby: 'I cannot help saying that the measure which the Cabinet are prepared to recommend is one which we should all of us have stoutly opposed if either Lord Palmerston or Lord John Russell had ventured to bring it forward.' None the less, the Bill was introduced on February 28th. On the second reading it was negatived; a dissolution and a general election followed; and on the meeting of Parliament, in June the Ministry were defeated on an amendment to the Address, and resigned.
But though the want of confidence appeared to be based on the question of the Reform Bill, there is no doubt that there was a widespread mistrust of the foreign policy of the Government. For some years past, perhaps ever since Mr. Gladstone's celebrated Neapolitan letters in 1851, successive waves of sentiment in favour of Italian independence and unity had passed over the country; and Lord Derby, or Lord Malmesbury, had perhaps fancied that this sentiment might be invoked in their defence. They had not, indeed, taken any overt action, but there was a general idea that they were inclined to favour the designs of Italy and of France. Now, to favour the cause of Italian independence was one thing; to favour the ambitious and grasping schemes of France was another; and the leaders of the Liberal party were not slow to denounce the Government, which--as they alleged--was ready to plunge the country into war for the sake of currying favour with the master of the insolent colonels of 1858.
Reeve's own view of the questions at issue may be gathered from the letters which he wrote to the 'Times,' [Footnote: January 19th, _The Policy of France in Italy_; April 28th, The Policy of France, both under the signature of 'Senex.'] and more fully, more carefully expressed in the article 'Austria, France, and Italy' in the 'Edinburgh Review' of April. In this he distinctly combats 'what is termed the principle of "nationalities"' as unhistorical. The theory is, he says, 'of modern growth and uncertain application;' and he goes on to show in detail that it is not applicable to any one of the Great Powers of Europe.
'Of all the sovereigns now filling a throne, Queen Victoria is undoubtedly the ruler of the largest number of subject races, alien populations, and discordant tongues. In the vast circumference of her dominions every form of religion is professed, every code of law is administered, and her empire is tesselated with every variety of the human species.... But above and around them all stands that majestic edifice, raised by the valour and authority of England, which connects these scattered dependencies with one great Whole infinitely more powerful, more civilised, and more free than any separate fragment could be; and it is to the subordination of national or provincial independence that the true citizenship of these realms owes its existence.... It is the glory of England to have constituted such an empire, and to govern it, in the main, on just and tolerant principles, as long as her imperial rights are not assailed; when they are assailed, the people of England have never shown much forbearance in the defence of them. Such being the fact, it is utterly repugnant to the first principles of our own policy, and to every page in our history, to lend encouragement to that separation of nationalities from other empires which we fiercely resist when it threatens to dismember our own.'
He then goes on to speak of the administration of such nationalities,