The Press. — London, England, 1854-06-03 00:00:00

JUNE 3, 1854. introduce a measure of parliamentary reform !' Well, the conutry had a Government pledged to parliamentary re form. Where are their measures? Has Lancashire or Yorkshire wore members now than then? (Hear, hear.) Where are their great measures of parliamentary reform? I n the political dusthole, in which lie the suffrages of Sud bury and St. Alban's—(cheers)—and you have absolutely so little power or so little inclination that you cannot deal even with the other tainted boroughs. (Cheers. )" Mr. Disraeli proceeded to examine Lord John's pre. sent position in the house, declaring that he had de serted his old friends and broken up an historical party for the sake of occupying a subordinate position among men who had spent their former lives in op posing his measii..!: nal vilifying his fame, and under a chief whom he bad himself stigmatised, a few years since, as a " conniver with foreign conspirators." With regard to the charge of having sacrificed the cause of Jewish emancipation either by his vote or his absence, the right hon. member met it by an un qualified denial. Sir G. OBEY interposed in support of his former colleague, regretted the "acrimonious" tone which the debate had assumed, and declared that all the old friends and supporters of Lord John Russell still placed implicit confidence in his honour. Colonel PEEL, speaking as a Conservative, could not join in assaults which might have the effect of weakening the hands of the Ministry in carrying on the war. Lord Jowl Russzu. renewed the defence on his own account. He had opposed Lord Derby's Admi nistration at first because he considered their pro posal for continuing to bold office, with a Parliament whose confidence they did not possess, for eleven months before proceeding to a dissolution, most pe rilously unconstitutional. Afterwards he consented to join the Aberdeen Ministry, in defence of the great principle of " parliamentary government," which stood at the time in serious danger, and but for his aid appeared impossible. On this point of his per sonal history Lord John entered into some interest ing speculations : " If I had thought a Government could have been formed, either by myself or by other parties, without a junction between different parties in politics, which Government could hope to be strong in the confidence of the House of Commons, I would rather that the Government should have been formed of one party only, than that the Govern ment should be formed of different parties who had not hitherto worked together. But when I came to consider the position in which I might be placed, should her Majesty have sent for me to ask my advice on that occasion, could 1 form a Government which was likely to obtain a permanent majority in the House of Commons ? Could Lord Aberdeen, with the assistance of Sir Robert Peel's friends, have formed such a Government? Lord Aberdeen thought that was impossible. He has frequently declared to me that he thought thatwaa impossible. The Government of Lord Derby had just been defeated, and was not able to com mand a majority in the House ofCommons. Was I then to con tribute to bring parliamentary government into discredit? (Laud cheers.) Was it not my duty, by every means in my power, to enable Lord Aberdeen to form a Government which would have the confidence of the House of Commons? (Cheers.) On this subject I did not act alone. I did not betray, nor desert, nor surrender the confidence of that great party with which I was associated. (Great cheering.) My right honourable friend Sir G. Grey has given his testimony to the fact that I did not desert them ; and I may add, that the man whom I naturally went to consult on that occasion was not one who had constantly been my enemy —one in whom I had no political confidence—the man whom I went to consult was my Lord Lansdowne ; (cheers)—and I found with him a right honourable friend of mine, as distinguished fur hie talents, as distin guished for his character, as any member of this house or of his party. I mean Mr. Macaulay. (Cheers.) I think I betray no confidence when I state what passed on that occasion. I asked Lord Lansdowne, supposing that lord Aberdeen has a summons from her Majesty to form a Government, whether bethought that I could be a member of the Cabinet with Lord Aberdeen — whether he thought it was my duty so to do. We discussed numerous contingencies, and Lord Lansdowne ended by declaring that in his opinion it was my duty—s duty which I owed to the public—to accept office underLordAberdeen. Mr. Macaulay expressed his opinion still more strongly. He said, ' I know you are not afraid of responsibility— (loud cheers)—but you never incurred a more awful res ponsibility than you will incur if yon do not lend your utmost assistance to form a Government on the present occasion.' (Hear, /war.) I consulted others, and they were also of opinion that it was my duty to form a Govern ment which would unite the Whig party with the party of the remaining friends of Sir Robert Peel, who were then ready to accept office under Lord Aberdeen. (Hear, hear.) The question was this: if, as 1 thought, it was impossible to form a Ministry composed of the Whig party—if it was impossible to form a Ministry composed of those who fol lowed Sir R. Peel—if it was unwise, if not impossible, to leave the Government in the hands of a party which had not the confidence of the House of Commons, and which, In my opinion, did not deserve to have that confidence — (cheers)—there remained the question whether those men who had acted together on the greatest question that for some years has divided Parliament—l allude to the ques tion between protection and free trade—whether the men who concurred on that question might not be able to concur on other questions, and enter office together?" His Ministry, Lord John added, were now engaged upon a most difficult task, quite distinct from any THE PRESS.' individual measures of domestic policy—that of con ducting a great war with one of the most formidable European powers. Should he be made to think that the Government ceased to occupy a position in which they could alone carry on that war so as to make it successful, anti tend towards a safe , and honourable peace, then he should cease to be a mem ber of it; but, till that time, no taunts could move him. His part was one of far more labour and anxiety than of pleasure, profit, or emolument ; but he would retain it, trusting his conduct would re• ceive a fair interpretation from the house and the country, which, though " occasionally apt to be mis led, had hardly ever failed in the end to construe rightly the actions of public men." Mr. B. OSBORNF. endeavoured to impugn Mr. Disraeli's statement of fact by producing certain volumes of Hansard, where he found that the right hon. member had been absent from one division on a question of Jewish rights, and in another had voted in the negative. Mr. DISRAELI briefly demolished the allegation, explaining that his absence in 1849 was caused by illness, and that in 1850, during a debate in which there were very numerous divisions, he voted for the negative one upon a " cross" question. Mr. WAL POLE followed up this subject, hearing ample testi mony to the sincerity of Mr. Disraeli's opinions and conduct in favour of Jewish emancipation. Mr. BRIGHT assumed the character of impartial critic of the controversy, from which, he observed, Lord J. Russell had not withdrawn without some scars. He acquitted the noble lord of having acted improperly or yielded to unworthy motives in join ing the present Cabinet, but pronounced, on his own part, a full conviction that no good measure was to be expected from them. Mr. Bright went on to protest against the precedent which the Ministry were setting by first plunging the country into war, and then claiming for themselves exemption from all the ordi nary casualties that could befal a Government on the plea that they must not be embarrassed while carry ing it on:— " On the theory of the noble lord, the majority of nine teen, by which the late Government was overthrown, was not more decisive than that which threw out the last mea sure of the noble lord ; hut if they had involved us in war —if they had undertaken the responsibility of this great calamity—it would then have been the duty of Government, and the noble lord would himself have said, As you have got us into this war you must get us out of it again —you must take the responsibility of the war on your own slum]. ders. That is the condition to which we are driven. Let a Minister be ever so reckless, ever so unprincipled, ever so unpatriotic, yet, by a course of concealed and misunder stood diplomacy, let him involve this country in difficulties with a foreign country, and then we are told that the majo rities of this hoitse go for nothing—that reform hills, cor ruption bills, oaths bills, settlement bills—all that in ordi nary times were thought necessary for the welfare of the oouatry—all these are to go for nothing now—we may not be able to pass a single measure except those which have reference to the imposition of taxes--but as we have led this country into a war Parliament must support us, and all other measures must be deferred. (Lund cheers.) I confess, looking to the future, I can see nothing clearly de fined as to the foreign policy of this country. We are engaged in a war for objects on which the Government has never yet condescended to enlighten us, and as to the terms on whioh peace is to be procured no one has any idea—we have so ally who was denounced by members of the present Cabinet not more than eighteen months ago, and who is in possession, and will shortly be in possession, of no fewer than four European capitals—Paris, Rome, Athens, and Constantinople. (Loud cries of Hear,hear ) And, seeing that all this has been brought about by what I believe to be the mistaken and mischievous policy of the noble lord and his colleagues, I see no ground for the noble lord calling for the confidence of this house, or for the con tinued support and approbation of the country. (Loud cheers.) - ' Sir J. PAsieorom contentedly left the question of the Derby Administration where the able and spirited vindication of Mr. Disraeli had placed it. The ob ject of his address was to vindicate his late colleague in turn, and for this purpose he recapitulated the facts which Mr. Osborne had presented in so dis torted a form, showing that the right hon. member for Buckinghamshire had never faltered from the conviction which he had originally announced in favour of the Jews " From that opinion (said Sir J. Pakington) it has been my fate, like my right hon. friend the member fur Mid burst ( Mr. Walpole), always to differ, but it has been ad hered to by my right hon. friend the member for Bucking hamshire with a decision, a boldness, and an honourable consistency which, I believe, has tended to win hin the confidence and regard of all men, whether they differ from him or not. (Chem.)" The CRANCRLLOR of the EXCREQtrER then entered into the debate, but spoke only briefly, touching first upon Mr. DISRAELI'S charge against himself of assail ing Lord Derby's Government with " sanctimonious eloquence," and then seeking to put Mr. Bright right on the question of ministerial duties and privileges during the progress of a war. He then sketched the career of the present Administration, enumerated their performances during the last session, and with respect to this pleaded that pending circumstances rendered it altogether exceptional. On the whole he . 509 submitted that they did not deserve the charge of legislative impotence. The discussion terminated, the orders for the se. cond reading of the five bills being discharged. CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE FLEETS AND ARMY. The FOIST Loan of the ADMIJULTY, in reply to Lord I). Stuart on Monday, detailed the arrange ments by which, provided only they are honestly carried out, the officers and men serving in the Bal tic and Black Sea fleets, and with the expeditionary forces In Turkey, may correspond with their friends at home regularly and economically : Forthe Baltic fleet a midi was made up in London every Tuesday, the letter being transmitted eta Belgium sad Prussia to Dantric. whither Sir C. Napier war instructed to despatch every Friday a steamer to meet and convey the correspondence to the fleet. The postage on letters not exceeding the half oinice in weight would amount to ed. fee officers' letters, that sum being made no by a charge of Sid. for the British, Id. for the Belgian, and gad. for the Prussian rate. Seamen and wi thers would receive their letters for tel., the British rate being reduced in their behalf to • halfpenny. Besides this weekly despatch, letters would be transmitted by all Government vessels that might be sent to join the fleet, at a charge of hl. to the seamen and soldiers, and of lid. to °facers. With regard to letters from the Baltic fleet, Sir C. Napier was instructed to send a steamer regularly once a fortnight to Engl and , so as to keep up a regnlar communication. Letters to the Black See fleet and the army in Turkey would be sent six times in every month through France, at the same charges established by the Franck Govern ment for their own troops—via., 3,1. a piece for all letters under • quarter of an ounce in weight. Soldiers' and sailors' letters would also be conveyed at the usual privileged rate of Id., by the fortnightly Oriental steamer from Southampton to Malta, and thence by such casual opportunities as might offer to their ulti mate destination. Sir J. Graham further explained that the complaints of delay and overcharge which had been so frequently made were principally from the fact that the letters In question had been addressed to a particular locality instead of, generally, " To the Fleet," the poets! authorities being consequently obliged to forward them through the visual route and at the cus tomary charge. LAW OF PRIZES. The Manning the Navy Bill, as it is intituled, which relates to the treatment of prizes taken from the enemy, custody and distribution of prize -money, &c., was brought up on Tuesday for third reading in the House of Lords. The Earl of HARDWICKE urged several objections to the details of the bill, contending that as its pro visions stood the duties of prize-agents could not be efficiently discharged. He moved amendments taking away the retrospective operation of the bill with regard to agents, and securing to the officers and crews of her Majesty's ships the right to appoint their own agents. The amendment was opposed by the Duke of NEWCASTLE, who contended that it was calculated to raise many doubts where none need exist. After Some remarks from Lord BROUOHAK their lordships divided, and the amendment was negatived by a majority of 47 non contents to 34 contents-13. The bill was thon read a third time and passed, as was the correlative measure called the Navy Pay Bill. OXFORD UNIVERSITY BILL. The committal of this bill was resumed on Thurs day at the 20th clause (relating to the establishment of " private halls"). Several hours were passed in the discussion of different amendments, and mid night had some time passed when only two clauses, 20 and 27, had got through committee. The further progress of the measure was then inter mitted. Lord JOHN Balsam., before the chairman left the chair, announced that the Government designed to make considerable alterations in the latter part of the bill. They had discovered from the long debates and frequent defeats they had already undergone, and the almost innumerable amendments proposed upon the remaining clauses, that it was almost im possible to get it through as it stood during .the present session. They designed, accordingly, to cut away some sixteen clauses involving points of detail, and substitute five new ones in their plate. The precise tenor of this new matter he could not explain at the moment, but indicated that the general effect would be to restrict the enacting force of the measure, and on many points leaving them to be settled by the proposed Board of Commissioners in concert with the Heads of Colleges. RAILWAY REGULATION BILL. The Railway and Canal Traffic Regulation BiL passed through committee in the Peers on Tuesday. Lord CAMPBELL interposed another protest on the occasion, declaring that he had consulted his brother judges with respect to the bill, and they bad unani mously expressed an opinion that the duties which it would assign to them were not judicial duties, and the great majority felt themselves incompetent to per form them properly. The LORD CHANCELLOR replied that the duties devolving upon the judges under the bill were of similar character to those they were already often called upon to perform in regard to other cases which came before them for trial. It was, however, agreed, at the request of the Chief Justice, sod with the consent of Lord Stanley of Alderley, that the duties in question should be limited to the Court of Common Pleas. ~..~1 -1. i...... I