From Lancashire, December 19. Complicated as the present 
situation in England seems if one sticks, as the Englishman does, 
to what is most immediate and close at hand, the external practical 
aspect, it is nevertheless simple if one reduces externals to the 
underlying content. In England there exist only three parties of 
any importance: the landed aristocracy, the moneyed aristocracy, 
and radical democracy. The first, the Tory party, is by its nature 
and historical development the purely medieval, consistent, reac- 
tionary party, that of the old nobility, which fraternises with 
the “historical” school of law in Germany’ and forms the pillar 
of the Christian state. The kernel of the second party—the 
Whigs— consists of the merchants and manufacturers, the majo- 
rity of whom form the so-called middle class. This middle class — 
which includes everyone who is a gentleman, i. e., has a decent 
income without being excessively wealthy—is, however, a middle 
class only compared with the wealthy nobility and capitalists; 
in relation to the workers its position is that of an aristocracy, 
In a country like England, which lives only by industry and 
therefore has a multitude of workers, people will be much more 
conscious of this than, for example, in Germany, where the middle 
class comprises the craftsmen and peasants, and where such an 
extensive class of factory workers is unknown. As a result, the 
Whig party will be forced into the ambiguous position of the 
juste-milieu as soon as the working class begins to be conscious of 
itself. And this is taking place now. The working class is daily 
becoming more and more imbued with the radical-democratic 
principles of Chartism and is increasingly coming to recognise 

them as the expression of its collective consciousness. However, at 
present this party is only in process of formation and therefore 
cannot yet act with full vigour. 

Needless to say, in addition to these three main parties there are 
all kinds of transitional shades, and at the moment two of them 
are of some importance, although devoid of any basic principles. 
The first stands halfway between Whiggism and Toryism; its 
representatives are Peel and Russell, and it is sure of a majority 
in the House of Commons in the near future and therefore of 
forming the government. The other, the “radical” shade, is half- 
way between Whiggism and Chartism; it is represented by half- 
a-dozen Members of Parliament and a few periodicals, in 
particular The Examiner, and its principles, although not formally 
expressed, are the basis of the National Anti-Corn Law League.’ 
With the further development of Chartism the first group is 
bound to gain in importance, since it represents the unity of Whig 
and Tory principles against Chartism, a unity which the latter 
expressly stresses. As a result, the second group is bound to come 
to nothing. The position of these parties in relation to one another 
is shown most clearly in their attitude to the Corn Laws.'* The 
Tories will not budge an inch. The nobility knows that its power, 
apart from the constitutional sphere of the House of Lords, lies 
mainly in its wealth. With free import of corn, the nobility would 
be forced to conclude new contracts with the tenant farmers on 
less advantageous terms. All its wealth is in landed property, the 
value of which bears a fixed relation to rent and falls with the 
latter. Rents are now so high that even with the present import 
tariff the tenant farmers are being ruined; free import of corn 
would bring down rents, and with them the value of landed 
property, by a third. Sufficient reason for the aristocracy to hold 
fast to its long-standing right, which ruins agriculture and reduces 
the poor in the country to starvation. The Whigs, always a perfect 
juste-milieu, have proposed a fixed import tariff of 8 shillings per 
quarter; this is just low enough to let in foreign corn and spoil the 
market for the tenant farmer, and just high enough to deprive the 
tenants of any grounds for demanding new terms of lease and to 
establish in the country an average price for bread just as high as 
it is at present. Thus the wisdom of the juste-milieu is ruining the 
country even more surely than the obduracy of consistent reaction. 
On this question, the “radicals” are truly radical for once and are 

* Here and below the name of the League is in English in the original — 
Ed. 

The Position of the Political Parties 377 

demanding free import of corn. But The Examiner only summoned 
up the courage to do so eight days ago, while the Anti-Corn Law 
League from the outset confined itself so emphatically to the 
struggle against the existing Corn Laws and the sliding-scale* that 
up to the last moment it continued to support the Whigs. 
Gradually, however, absolutely free import of corn and “free trade” 
in general have become the battle-cry of the radicals, and the 
Whigs obligingly shout with them for “free trade”, which they 
understand to mean “juste-milieu” import tariffs. It goes without 
saying that the Chartists are totally opposed to import tariffs on 
corn. But what will come of all this? That corn imports are bound 
to become free is as certain as that the Tories are bound to be 
overthrown, by peaceful or by forcible means. One can only argue 
about the manner in which this change will come about. Probably 
the very next session of Parliament will bring Peel’s renuncia- 
tion of the sliding-scale and, with it, of full-blown Toryism. The 
nobility will give way on everything that does not compel it to 
lower its rent charges, but no further. In any case, the Peel-Russell 
coalition, the Parliamentary centre, has the most immediate chance 
of forming a government, and by its juste-milieu measures it will 
delay a decision on the corn question as long as possible. How 
long, however, depends not on it, but on the people. 

: : a * time 
Marked with the sign x