the tamworth manifesto of 1834 was an attempt to construct a party without principles; its basis therefore was necessarily latitudinarianism; and its inevitable consequence has been political infidelity.
at an epoch of political perplexity and social alarm, the confederation was convenient, and was calculated by aggregation to encourage the timid and confused. but when the perturbation was a little subsided, and men began to inquire why they were banded together, the difficulty of defining their purpose proved that the league, however respectable, was not a party. the leaders indeed might profit by their eminent position to obtain power for their individual gratification, but it was impossible to secure their followers that which, after all, must be the great recompense of a political party, the putting in practice of their opinions; for they had none.
there was indeed a considerable shouting about what they called conservative principles; but the awkward question naturally arose, what will you conserve? the prerogatives of the crown, provided they are not exercised; the independence of the house of lords, provided it is not asserted; the ecclesiastical estate, provided it is regulated by a commission of laymen. everything, in short, that is established, as long as it is a phrase and not a fact.
in the meantime, while forms and phrases are religiously cherished in order to make the semblance of a creed, the rule of practice is to bend to the passion or combination of the hour. conservatism assumes in theory that everything established should be maintained; but adopts in practice that everything that is established is indefensible. to reconcile this theory and this practice, they produce what they call ‘the best bargain;’ some arrangement which has no principle and no purpose, except to obtain a temporary lull of agitation, until the mind of the conservatives, without a guide and without an aim, distracted, tempted, and bewildered, is prepared for another arrangement, equally statesmanlike with the preceding one.
conservatism was an attempt to carry on affairs by substituting the fulfilment of the duties of office for the performance of the functions of government; and to maintain this negative system by the mere influence of property, reputable private conduct, and what are called good connections. conservatism discards prescription, shrinks from principle, disavows progress; having rejected all respect for antiquity, it offers no redress for the present, and makes no preparation for the future. it is obvious that for a time, under favourable circumstances, such a confederation might succeed; but it is equally clear, that on the arrival of one of those critical conjunctures that will periodically occur in all states, and which such an unimpassioned system is even calculated ultimately to create, all power of resistance will be wanting: the barren curse of political infidelity will paralyse all action; and the conservative constitution will be discovered to be a caput mortuum.
