Current:

Northern Star (1837-1852), 18th September 1852, Edition 2 of 2, Page 8, Justice—Immutable, Universal, Eternal ! ...

Page 8
Page 8
8 of 16

On this page

  • Text (2)
  • Transcript

    • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

      Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

      88 The Star Of Freedom. September 18 ,18...

      88 THE STAR OF FREEDOM . September 18 , 1852 .

      Justice—Immutable, Universal, Eternal ! ...

      Justice—Immutable , Universal , Eternal ! THE EUROPEAN REVOLUTIONISTS AND THEIR NEWEST TRADUCE !! . Of late England appears to have absolutely renounced those generous sentiments , those lofty aims , and that great ambition that formerly entered so largely into the composition of the national character . The coercion of the Portuguese patriots , the shameful surrender of the guaranteed inpependence ot Cracow , the treacherous complicity with the French traitors in their assassination of the Roman Republic , the dastardly refusal

      ofaidtothe heleagured republicans of Venice , the Judas like treatment and betrayal of the Sicilians , the cold-hearted connivance at Hungary's destruction , the apathetic disregard of Germany ' s abasement , the direct participation in the compression of the brave people of Schleswig-Holstein , the Whig and Tory laudation showered upon the bandit-hero of the coupcPetat ; in short , the unholy alliance with Europe ' s tyrants , and the crafty , cowardly , bloodless , but none the less fatal warfare against Europe ' s people during the past five years , prove , not merely the treason of that arch-traitor Paljikrston , the

      despotic tendencies of such as Derby , Maluesbuiiy , and Russell , and the libevtieidai character of the British government , but also the miserable degeneracy and degradation of the nation as a whole A serious , ' a terrible accusation , but one that can be thoroughly justified and completely proven . To all that concerned the treatment of other nations , the conduct of the English government , and the national honour , the great mass of the people have shown themselves absolutely indifferent . True , during a few weeks , in the year 1849 , a select number of lip sympathisers , and word-mongering cosmopolites did do the e ' hivalric on sundry platforms , and hurled high and haughty

      defiance at Kaiser and Tsar . But not a Cossack the less , not a Croat the fewer , inarched against the sons of Arpad . Though Marylebone did " come forward , " and even Netting Hill threatened to join the moral pronunciamento , the colossal Autocrat , and thebeardless Nero took noheed ; for well they knew that British brag was but bosh , and shop keeping sympathy the mere swindle of sentimentalism . Italy fell without evoking murmur or sigh on England's part ; Hungary , still more unfortunate , was mocked with the mirage of British sympathy as fleeting and unreal as the phantasms of the desert , as deceptive and rotten as the apples of the Dead Sea .

      Another and a crying sin proclaims the shame of our country —the treatment of the refugees . England vaunts her " hospitality ,- '—much abused word ! The semi-barbarous Arab is not content to merely allow the stranger thrown upon Hsproiectionto exist without attack on his part ; he understands " hospitality" to mean shelter , food , oil for the wounds , and balm for the stricken spirit of the wanderer . But the Christian , civilised , freedom-loving Englishman , repudiates such antiquated ideas of hospitality . The exile is free to land upon our shores , and free to perish of hunger beneath our inclement skies . There is

      something monstrous and unnatural m the cruel , cold-hearted apathy of our countrymen , to the condition of the refugees . Nor is mere indifference their only crime . I have shuddered to hear of well authenticated instances of personal , disgusting insult offered to the most unhappy of these unfortunate men , — instances of mob brutality , which , though not going beyond words , recall the memory of those hideous days when " George the Third was king , "' and loyal ruffians burnt Paine in effi gy , and consigned Pkiestly ' s house to the flames . Still more criminal , if not so openly disgusting , has been the conduct of the

      liberal ( I will not say the Democratic ) portion of the population . Only a few units among hundreds of thousands have remembered the claims of Humanity , and the requirements of Duty . Even the majority of their " leaders , " who should at least have set a good example , have done directly the reverse . One has heen intent only on filling his own pockets with the last coppers to be wrung by brazen charlatanism from brainless credulity ; another has taught the doctrine that the people of

      this country must first enjoy the plenitude of their own rights , before giving a crust of bread or drink of water to their fainting comrades , who have elsewhere fought the fight of universal freedom and justice ; another has said , " All effort is useless ; the people , sunk in apathy , are not to be aroused . I , too , will therefore wrap myself in the mantle of callous indifference . " Everywhere the gloom of moral death ; on every side the burning shame of Duty unheeded , and National Honour trampled in the mire .

      The above sentences present , however imperfectly , a picture of national degradation more than sufiieient to gratify the most rabidly prejudiced enemy of England . " Surely there is no lower deep of perdition ; nothing more shameful yet uncatalogued ? " If the reader thus thinks he is mistaken . It is nothing extraordinary to find the recognised organs of aristocrats and usurers libelling and slandering the friends of democracy and social right . It is well understood that the

      " ready-writers , " who make of journalism a " profession , " are no more particular as to the cause they will advocate , or the pany iney will serve , than are the street-walkers of the opposite sex in the selection of their companions . A sensible person will expect to find as much ( or as little ) of virtue and honour in the one profession as in the other . Consequently , in reading the effusions of this class of writers , there is nothing that can surprise , however much there may be to excite disgust and indignation .

      But these loathing sensations arise with seven-fold force when compelled to contemplate the repulsive spectacle of men who assume to be guided by nobler motives than the love of filthy lucre , following in the wake and treading the slimy path of the unscrupulous " professionals . " To this blackest infamy and crowning shame I have now to direct the reader ' s attention . I little thought , when last week commenting oiijthe tirade of the Daily News against the Red Republicans , there was at that moment passing through the press an article published in last Saturday ' s Leader , which would throw into the shade , and by contrast render almost endurable , the anti-Republican libels

      of the Times , Herald , Daily News , & c . I take up this subject with unaffected sorrow . I have always admired the talent exhibited in the Leadir , and , while I have seen in its columns much I could not agree with , I have respected the right of free opinion , and assumed that , however widely differing from certain of my own views , the writers in that paper were none the less honest , and as such deserving my esteem and the public's support . With no favour to solicit—with no reward to gain—I have , on more than one public platform , testified to the merits of the Leader , and urged its support as a duty incumbent upon the democratic public . And now I regard the position I must take as a personal misfortune—a painful duty , not to be avoided , but none the less to be deplored .

      I do not accuse the Leader ; it stands self-accused . I do no , denounce its conductors as enemies ; they proclaim themselve dafote > /!¦ . ¦ s

      Justice—Immutable, Universal, Eternal ! ...

      In last Saturday ' s Leader , the reader will find an article headed " Socialism and its newest tradueer ; " being a comment on the article in the Daily News of the preceding Monday . The editor of the Leader seizes upon every admission of the Daily News in favour of socialism , pure and simple ; but seizes also upon every word of the Manchester organ ' s attack upon Red Republicanism , adopts that every word , and , with additions of his own . pours out upon the revolutionists of Europe deluge of venom never rivalled by any single journal avowedly devoted to the service of our enemies . I remember the anti-KossuTii

      libels in the Times ; I recollect the Herald ' s atrocious calumnies upon the French " insurgents" of December-I have occasionally seen that vile sheet of slander the New York Herald-: but these combined would be weak by the side ot the Leader , if only for this reason , that men know how to estimate an avowed enemy ' s strictures and accusations—but when this accuser and denunciator is a p rofessed friend , the effect ef widelv different . Democracy , like Cjesar , has received her most fetal wounds from the hands of her false friends . Struck

      down by the daggers of the despots , Democracy beholds the Leader advancing bowie-knife in hand . Et tu Brute I But the Leader is mistaken . It took twenty-three wounds to despatch Cjesaii , double that number will not dispose of much hated but yet living Red Republicanism , The writer in the Leader commences with a homily addressed to his worthy brother of the Daily News ; e . g .: — « When a public writer undertakes to make explanations and distinctions

      for the profit of his readers , he is especially bound , if not to attainaccuracy , atalleventstoseekit . " If the editor of the Leader would onlv have abided by his own canon , he would have escaped irreparable discredit . His article abounds with inaccuracies , which the reader will presently see . But , m the first place , must be noted the significant compliments paid to the writer in the Daily News :- " We cordially adopt the sharp line of distinction he has marked out to sever that body of

      economical doctrine , comprised under the general term , Socialism , from those violent A * i > subversive theories ( if theories they deserve to be called ) of professed political revolutionists and destructive demagogues . " After quoting its daily contemporary ' s description of * the Red Republican , including the declaration that " with such men there is only one way of dealing , " namely , to crush them by force , the Leader adds : — " This may not be a very close description of the political sect , & c , " but ice arc not the less disposed to accept the conclusion ; that is , to crush by force this hated party I The writer in the Leader then proceeds to give ' a more exact description of Red Republicans , " which shall be quoted presently . Further on he says— " Our

      contemporary , in distinguishing Socialism from Red Republicanism does well , and deserves our thanks . " The Leader adds , that Socialism has nothing to do with political revolutions , & c ; that orthodox churchmen and conservative politicians may make very good Socialists ; that Socialism is not destructive , but is , in the strictest sense , Conservative , & c , & c . How far even English Socialists will accept this account of themselves and their faith it is for them to say . A tory and orthodox socialist is a curious production , and decidedly limited to home growth . The mongrel socialism which is the delight of the Leader has certainly no existence upon the continent , where socialism is political and anti conservative . I affirm this ; and challenge proof of the contrary .

      I haste to the leader ' s " exact description " of Red Republi cans : — They were so-called from hoisting a red flag , which ( according to their own creed ) was intended to signify , that they would seek to defend " the Republic , " even at the cost of Mood , in contradistinction to the peaceful revolutionists of July 1830 , who had so done their work by halves , that , after eighteen years , ' it had to be done over again ; and to the " Moderate " Republicans of February , who had temporized with the Reaction , until a crouching phantom of treacherous compliance had become an amalgamated Party of Order , avenging panic by persecution .

      Supposing the above to be an " exact description , " is there anything in the creed of the Red Republicans for which they need to blush , and which should excite the ire of a professed friend to freedom ? If by hoisting the Red Flag they intended to signify that they would seek to defend the Republic , even at the cost of blood , they deserve honour and applause j and shame upon that man who would make of their political stead fastness a pretext for covering them with calumny . It is not true that the " peaceful (?) revolutionists of July " so did their work by halves , that after eighteen years it had to be done over again ? Dare the Jjeader affirm the contrary ? And did not that justify the unfurling of the red flag ? Is it not true that the " moderate " republicans of February temporized with the

      reaction until a crouching phantom of treacherous compliance had become an amalgamated Party of Order , avenging panic by persecution ? Dare the Leader attempt a denial ? And does not that demand that the red flag shall be henceforth the banner of foully-cheated and cruelly-wronged democracy ? I justify the red flag on the supposition that the jJeader ' s " description , " or explanation , is " exact , " which it is very far from being . That explanation which is not full , is not , cannot be " exjiofc ; " nnd J tell the editor of the Leader , in his own wor d * , that not only in reference to the passage under notice , but also other passages yet to be quoted , that " either he is ignorant of what heprofesses to describe sc authoritatively , or he is informed , and deliberately sets aside his better knowledge . In either case he disregards the truth . "

      Whatever the readers of the Leader may think , I am sure that no reader of this journal will for a moment hesitate to accept the testimony of Louis Blanc in preference to the reckless assertions of the anonymous writer in the Leader . From the illustrious French writer ' s " Historic Pages , " I quote the following in reference to : —

      THE RED FLAG . It was not from any savage disposition that the people demanded the Red flag . The sentiment was this . It may be remembered when in 1789 the tricolour flag was adopted , royalty still existed , and was not at that time threatened by the dark cloud that already appeared in the horizon . Undoubtedly serious differences had occurred between the middle class and the court ; but Louis XVI . had left Versailles to come and make his peace with Paris ; hoav it was as a token of . his reconciliation that the white , the royal colour , was added to the red and blue , already the Parisian colours . Such was the origin of the tricolour flag ; which consequently expressed the idea of a compromise ; it bore traces of monarchical prejudices , and reminded the people that there was in the nation a something which was not the nation . After the revolution of February there was no king ; why should the colours

      of royalty be preserved ? No sovereignty was any longer acknowledged but that of the people ; why ,, then , preserve the emblem of a composite sovereignty ? From the ruins of all the old castes was about to arise the one family of the French nation ; why then have a flag which , by the diversity of its colours , seemed to revive the difference of classes ? The red flaa was demanded as the standard of unity .. Besides , it was the ancient flag of the Gauls ; it was the historical standard under which our fathers fought against Rome ; and at the time of Joan of Arc , against the English . Such were the feelings that animated the people with respect to this flag , whatever images of bloody times might have been seen in it by some ; or however it might have been revered , as the flag of martyrs , by others . And , in proof of this , the people might be seen m every direction with the red rosette in their button-holes at the time they were applauding the government for having abolished the punishment of deatk . " I beg special attention to the next extract from the Leader

      Justice—Immutable, Universal, Eternal ! ...

      Theie is , however , let it be avowed , another "Red" Republic to a may suppose our contemporary alludes . That Red Republic is « u , nl- ' sinister , a fatal anachronism . it is the impotent plagiarism of a « ' ¦ : na (/ of / ues , who seek to cloak their isolations in turbulence , and the ? " ? ^ ** liess of thought in revolutionary jargon . Lamavtinc , in the noblest . enof his life covered that flag with shame , and swept back into the fm ; '' ; ° meiu of crime the scum that had polluted for a moment the pure air of \\ J 1 \ "'*"'" - & is hot , we rejoice to affirm most emphatically , in the columns of fi , ' Jt that the "Red" Republic will find a syllable of iaint excuse or T M'kr We heartily abhor aid despise all that it worships and exalts its m ^ s a % symbols , its traditions , its organization ; its contemptible anl-JTr ' ' ' sanscullottism , its deification of monsters like Marat , its envy " f . ,, ow o { dignity of mind , its corrupt , and (/ reed // discontent , its cowardly Kn' *! *!' , lft after terrorism , its stole vocabulary , aud its coarse and barren foVmui " $ eagerly snatch this occasion to tell our extreme political friends ' it' ^ ,: English writers , breathing English nir , the present conductor * of j < r ^ have no part nor lot with" lied" Republics ; and this not that we lnt > . er tism less , but that we love freedom aud civilization more . It is often " ' ' - ^" to us to find our native Ewjlish tongue , sullied l »/ the mischnjov ; slanti , ^' fll ! demagogues . In France , it is true , there " Reds" are a miserable 5 ri * and in England , they are at most a dozen or two of stage-struck Cw , V but it is well to denounce the excesses from which liberty now siiff ' ' Europe over ; it is well to separate the cause , which we believe tobt- a 11 and true one , from the contagion of a disastrous alliance . a « '

      To comment on the above atrocious libel , sentence bv . tence , aud line by line , would but be a waste of valuable sm ^ and an unpardonable tax upon the reader ' s time . Nor is sH comment necessary . Instantaneously there must arise-Ln / f ., has already arisen—the strong feeling of unutterable ) m ]\^ tion , mingled with inexpressible disgust , and i ndescribah ?" scorn for the man who deliberately and " with malice afL , thought , " has thus dared to vomit his venom upon his bettermen , whose shoe-latchets he is not worthy to unloose . ] , ?! this neither knowing nor caring who he may be . I j ^ him by that which he has chosen to reveal of himself , and

      Incomparing him with that which I know of those whom he ly ( s so foully assailed . Of course I speak of the continental re , i republicans / ' not of the " dozen or two of stage-struck { W tans . " They can afford to laugh at the sneer , and despise its utterer . By the way , is the Leader quite certain that theiv are only " a dozen or two ? ' Not to speak of those beyond the leader ' s circle , it may be that the publisher of that paper will find that the article under notice has lost it more than a dozen or two of subscribers . The polished penman of the Leader j s

      mightily offended at " the niischevious slang of foreign demagogues . " I venture to predict that the proprietors of that paper will discover , when too late , that of all the " slam * " tliev ever met with , that of their able contributor will most mil cheviously affect the contents of their strong box . The man of " slang" rings the changes upon " barrenness of thought . " revolutionary jargon , " " state vocabulary , " & c , & c , Wlc his entire article proves that he could not have written it had he not been well read in the stale vocabulary and reactionary

      jargon of the Bonapartists , Royalists , and Ordermon ^ is . From them he has borrowed his " gang of demagogues . " " monsters , " " terrorism , " " scum , " " kennels of crime , " & c . It accords with his stale vocabulary to denounce Marat as a " monster , "—Herat , the devoted friend of the people—the inflexible enemy and scourge of political imposters . It accords with the Leader-editor ' s mongrel liberalism to laud Lamartbe , who ruined the republic of ' 48 , and who , far more than any other man , is to he held accountable for the failure of the revo lution , not merely , in France , but throughout Europe . The editor of the Leader talks of " plagiarism , " and " stage-struck ;" and when he attempts the sublime he rants , a la Hides , of the

      V ictoria : " Not that we hate despotism less , but that we love freedom aud civilization more . " Very original that ! Alas poor Shakspebe ! He describes those who demanded the rd flag as " scum , " fresh from "the kennels of crime . " Who was the foremast man to demand the red flag ? Louis Blasc . Is he " scum ? " The Leader charges the red republicans with " envy of all true dignity of mind ; " and " corrupt and greedv discontent . " The answer is simple : The red republic numbers among its soldiers the elite of the mind , eloquence , and literature of France . As to " corrupt and greedy discontent , ' ' it is enough to observe that Lameksais has made voluntary sacrifice of the highest dignities he might have acquired had

      he abided by the church of despotism ; Raspail has renounced the honours and emoluments of science , to spend his last years in the confinement and gloom of captivity . Barbes was possessed of riches , manly beauty , every essential to make of this ; earth a Paradise , and this life a round of pleasure ; he offered ! up all on the altar of his country to spend the best years ( perhaps the remainder ) of his existence in a dungeon . The Leutkrr would fain separate socialism from red republicanism ; audi asserts , that in France the " reds " are " a miserable minority . ' A falsehood . Let the reader judge by the exiled . Ledku Kollw is red republican and socialist , so is Lows Blanc , Felix IYmv Schcblciikr , Thoke , & c , & c . Pierre Lerouk is socialist andd

      red republican , so is Cabet , & c , & c . These are " representa-itive men , " and chiefs and guides of masses of their fellow countrymen . The sensitive and delicate editor of the Leader has a Iiohij horror of " the coarse and barren formulas , '' ' commonly known as "Equality Liberty , and Fraternity . " He adds : |' W < eagerly snatch this occasion to tell our extreme political friendi that as English writers , & c , the present conductors of M Iacader have no part nor lot with ' red' republics . " Who awn the present conductors ? To what section of the reactionaitfas has the Leader been sold ? It is well-known who was frit

      editor twelve months ago ; it is as well-known who was vcrjr recently its nominal editor . The democratic public oughtn ' t know whether the writers alluded to have now any comiexiota with that paper . It is not many months since one of the theie " conductors" of the Leader sported the ribbon of the " re < re republic " at a democaatic festival ; while another " conductor

      has on more than one occasion given his countenance to jMli flag , and his applause to the representatives of the red republioltf Have those writers ceased all connexion with the Leader , or ajaj they included in the list of its present conductors ? Persona b considered , the question is of no importance , but politicalJu viewed , it assumes another aspect . The Leader is at full hDert'rt to become Bourbonist , Bonapartist , or true-blue British moiioi archist ; but let it hang out its real colours , and take up ll !

      yosition with the enemies of democracy . That the ptfff conductor-in-chief ( who speaks for the rest of the band ) d «>' to find friends among democracy ' s enemies , is proved by « ' « simple but significant fact : last Monday ' s Times contained u « following advertisement : — THE LEADER on Red Republicanism and Socia" 6 M . -Scc * , ' "Leader" Newspaper of Saturday , September 11 th , No . 129 . lin " Office , 7 , Wellington-street , Strand . Why single out the above-named article for specialj >« p " unless believed to be calculated to win the favour and patww * » u . of the anti-republican readers of the " Times" it _ ,

      . ^ The " Leader" accuses the Bed republicans of c * J ^ from which liberty now suffers all Europe over . " liie c i ' ^ : is a calumny . The only " excess" they were g ^ YfJloW excess of moderation in allowing schemers and naiw { , tionists to take the management of affairs . Therein t * y > ; fault and folly of the true patriots . Jt was the U ^*™ - -

  • Citation
    • Northern Star (1837-1852), Sept. 18, 1852, page 8, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/ns/issues/ns2_18091852/page/8/