The Sun. — London, England, 1859-06-10 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.) The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. MALICIOUS INDICTMENTS. On the motion of Lord CAMPBELL, this bill, which stood over from last session, was ordered to be read a second time to-morrow. ROMAN CATHOLIC COLLEGES. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY asked if the Govern ment intended to grant a charter to the Roman Catholic College, St. Stephen's-green, and if there were any nego tiations pending in connection with the subject ? The Earl of DERBY had Bo difficulty hi answering the question. As at present advised it was no a charter t the intention of the Government to recommen d the granting of to the college in question. THE ADDRESS. The Marquis of EXETER, as Lord Steward, brought up the reply . of her Majesty to the address of their lordships on the occasion of the opening of Parliament. On the motion of the Earl of DERBY the reply was ordered to be entered on the minutes of the house. LAW OF DEBTOR AND CREDITOR, AND CON SOLIDATION OF JOINT-STOCK ACTS. The LORD CHANCELLOR brought in two bills, which it was of importance should be passed as speedily as possi ble. The first was the Debtor and Creditor Bill, and the other was a bill to consolidate the law with respect to the winding-up of Joint-stock Companies. He proposed that the bills should be reed a first time that evening, a second time and committed to-morrow, and a third time on Thurs day next. LAW OF PROPERTY TRUSTEES RELIEF BILL. On the motion of Lord ST. LEONARDS this bill was read a second time. --- THE WHITSUNTIDE HOLIDAYS. The Earl of DERBY said, in accordance with the usual custom, he should move to-morrow, tha t the house, at its rising, adjourn over Whit-Monday and Tuesday, and re assemble on Thursday. THE NATIONAL GALLERY. The Earl of SHREWSBURY moved for a copy of the correstondence b e t wee n the trustees of the National Gallery and the Council of the Society for the Encou ragement of Arts, Manufactures, and Commerce, with reference to the opening of the Vernon and Turner Galleries of pictures at South Kensington of an evening, and also for copies of all letters and memorials on the same subject which may have been received by the said trustees up to the date of their making the return now moved for. The Marquis of SALISBURY said he had no objection to the motion. Lord OVERSTONE objected to the expense of printing this correspondence, but as the trustees of the National Gallery had no objection to the production of the papers, it was thought desirable they should be produced. With respect to the opening of the National Gallery of an even ing, he thought such a step was not desirable, as there was no other gallery of the same description open at dark. More over, it was thought that the gas and the dust arising from a crowded room would have a very injurious effect on many of the pictures. The Earl of DERBY said there could be no objection to the production of the papers. After a short conversation the motion for the production of the papers was agreed to. MILITIA COMMISSION. The Duke of NEWCASTLE asked when the report of the commission appointed to inquire into the state of the militia would be produced? The Marquis of SALISBURY said the commission would meet for the last the on Monday next, after which the report would be laid before Parliament at the earliest possible moment. The Earl of DERBY said he had been informed that some judicial business stood for Wednesday next, and he begged, therefore, to state that he should to-morrow move the adjournment of the house until Wednesday, and not Thursday, as he had formerly stated, it being clearly understood that the house would meet on Wednesday merely for the transaction of judicial business. Their lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER took the chair at 4 o'clock. SWEARING IN OF MEMBERS. Several members took the oaths, amongst whom were Col. Tynte, Mr. Divett, Mr. Clifford, &c. , PRIVATE BUSINESS. Several private bills were advanced a stage. PETITIONS. Petitions were presented in favour of legalising marriage with a deceased wife's sister; the Medical Practitioners Bill ; the ballot ; against the return of the members for Pomfret, Huddersfield, &c., &c. FOREIGN ENLISTMENT. Mr. D. SEYMOUR gave notice that he would move for leave to bring in a bill to amend the laws relating to foreign enlistment. MR. CHISHOLM ANSTEY. Mr. E. JAMES gave Rotice that on Monday next he would move for the production of papers relating to the dismissal of Mr. Chisholm Anstey from the Attorney- Generalship of Hong Kong. PENALTIES INFLICTED ON THE POOR. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE directed the attention of the 'Secretary of State for the Home Department to Return No. 192, of thelast session, relative to convictions and penalties inflicted on the poor, under the act 29 Charles 2, by the magistrates of the county of Southampton, for selling fruits or sweets under the value of one penny; and asked whether it would not be expedient to have the law re waled, or impartially administered throughout the country. The hon. member mentioned several cases in which fines were inflicted on persons for selling a pennyworth of some articles on Sunday. Mr. S. ESTCOURT said that if a proposal were made to repeal the act in question, he would give it his most serious consideration. OCCUPIERS OF LAND (IRELAND), In answer to The O'DONOGHUE ' The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that bills in refer. ence to this subject would shortly bointroduced. CHURCH RATES ABOLITION. --- Sir J. TRELAWNY obtained leave to bring in a bill to abolish Church-rates. THE WAR IN ITALY. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE moved an address for copy of the instructions given to each officer sent by the British Government to the head-quarters of the armies in Italy of Austria, Sardinia, and France, together with any corres pondence that has passed between the Government of Eng land and those countries relative to such mission.—Agreed to. THE NAVY. Mr. lIUTT moved for; return of all ships of the Royal Navy not in active service, with the name and class of each ; distinguishing ships lying in ordinary from those otherwise laid up in harbour, and stating the date when each ship was last actively employed.—Agreed to. THE ARMY. Colonel SYKES moved an address for return of the number of officers and men, distinguishing each arm of the service, cavalry, infantry, horse and foot artillery, and en gineers, annually, from 1800 to 1858, both years inclusive; stating the numbers serving at home, in the colonies, and in India ; the enrolled pensioners, and embodied militia and volunteers ; and the amount annually voted for these ser vices, distinguishing effective and non - effective services.— Agreed to. THE ADJOURNED DEBATE ON THE ROYAL ADDRESS. The debate was resumed by Mr. Sergeant DEASY, who, after some preliminary ob servations, said that the Government of Lord Derby in Ireland was open to grave objections as regarded pa tronage, and exclusion of Catholics from juries in particular cases. This had created great bit terness of feeling in Ireland, and excited much dis trust in the policy and impartiality of Government. That feeling should be removed , - or, at all events, abated, neither of which he believedwould be effected solong as the present Government remained in office. (Hear, and oh, oh.) He denied that the result of the late elections in Ireland proved the opposite of what he asserted, as was contended by some parties. It was indispensable that there should be larger concessions made to Catholics than was proposed by the Government. He denied that the antecedents of the present Gov ernment were suc h as en titl e d th em t o th e con sideration of that house or the country at large—that they showed the greatest hostility to what was liberal and in accordance with the spirit of reformers. When they at tempted to introduce anything of a liberal character they failed altogether—the Reform bill of last session was a proof of his position. Such being the case, he contended that the Government tenure of office must necessarily be brought before long to a termination. The Government might have gained some increase in their numerical strength ; but it , was a fact that the Liberal party was muc h more united than previously, and tftere was a disposition on the part of that party to make mutual concessions, in order to secure good measures for the country. With regard to the foreiku policy of the Government, he did not consider it entitled to that praise which was claimed for it' by certain politicians ; and the predictions of the Government last session were falsified by the present state of hostilities. As regarded other departments, he asserted that they would not suffer much even if the Government changed hands, because on that side-of the house which he occupied there was as' much efficiency as would render the transfer of the executive to their hands unattended with any danger. (Hear, hear.) They had been taunted with their dissensions, but was it not a fact that there were differences of opinion amongst the supporters of Government on certain questions ? He denied that the Government were justified, from the known consti tution of the house, in expecting to get such a constitutional majority as would render their remaining in office prudent or beneficial to the interests of the country. He believed that it was highly desirable for the interests not only of his own country, but of En ;land that power sholild pass from the present Government into hands that were more able t• wield it with efficiency, and which would enjoy confidence at home and respect abroad. (Hear, hear.) Colonel DICK SOll proceeded to make his maiden speech. He said it was with no ordinary diffidence that he ventured 'to throw himself upon the indulgence of the house—a diffi dence which arose from his total inexperience of parliamen tary usages. But he felt that he would be guilty of a great neglect of duty if he allowed that inexperience to interfere with the expression of his conscientious opinions. (Cheers.) It had been made / matter of reproach to the Conservative members that they had, on the former evening, allowed gentlemen on the other side to monopolise the whole of the discussion. They had been taunted with being unable; or unwilling, to explain their reasons for sitting on that side of the house. Though, asa new member, he might be sup- Posed not the best fitted to reply, he was willing to accept the challege which had been thrown out to them. It was adit by the noble lord who move d th e a m endment that Was a decidedl y par ty to lay down move. (C * heers ) He had no wish any stan d ard as to the principles which ought to characterise the debates of the house, but he felt that a party move ought to have some eTounds of sense and rea son on which t o found l *tNow7he tad watched the whole of this debate ; and though * the party opposite had had the sole occupation of the bat t t ip-field he had not heard a single argument to pro ve the jus t ice of the , r) aotion. (Cheers.) He would not allude t o what.' took p l ace 4 n former Parliaments. It was not for him to def en d the oliA7ly and the acts of her Majesty's ministers —it was not for Min to defend men who were so much better able to defend , thems e lve s but he must say for them, that he believ ed the dissolution ' ; lawn of Parliament was the only constitution : 11 course which, under the circumstances, the y . could have 'tinned. He believe d they had taken the straightforward line of policy in refus ing to carry on the Government as it he obedient slaves of an opposing majority. (Cheers.) He believed they had acted constitutionally in advising er Majesty to a pp ea l to the country to send to her assistas .ce such a body of re presentatives as would enable one pro: rty or another to rule with authority. And now that they had met it was their b ounden duty not to impede the cot irse of legislation, but t o give the Government -a fair char Lee of unfolding their measiures. T here was one thing at least of which they were h elm d to take care ; if they did by their decision now declare that the present Government were not to retain the reins of o ught e to be prepared with a strong Government office, es. Now, he would ask hon. gentlemen to ffi t ue e theyy eirp look round on the other side and ask themselves where that Government was to come from. It was now said that the diversities which theyall knew to have existed on the other s ide had been arranged, while her Majesty's Ministers were taunted w..i.th having lately lost .two of their ablest colleagues. Well, he regretted that, but when he contrasted this honourable dough painful conduct with these arrange ments of differences in prospect of office on the other side, he couldonly say :that it was not on his side, at any rate, that men consented to stifle their principles for the sake of place. (Cheers.) The two noblelords opposite were, it was said, ready to act together. It would ill become him to speak with any but feelings of the most profound respect of those two noble lords, but he might ask, were the antecedents of one of them such that they considered him gifted with that com bination of energy, discretion, and consideration for the feelings of foreign powers which would enable him to pre serve neutrality ? With regard to the noble lord the member for London, he might ask whether that noble lord would take up as his ground of action the broad basis of the k English constitution, or whether he would extend the hand of friendship to men whom he knew to entertain opinions that, however honourably and conscientiously they held them, were opposed to the feelings of the large majority of the house and country ? (Cheers.) He would now come to the question of that support which it was made matter of complaint against the majority of the Irish members that slze c r were about to give to the Ministers. It could not be • o f him that he was attached to any hierarchy, Sa: but he felt unbounded pride in the thought that while h e s t-ood there as a sincere Protestant, and one who, as was . known to all who knew him, was incapable of sa „id e i n v his principles to his interests, yet he stood in that house as the representative of a great Catholic con stituency. He denied that the Catholics d emanded any illegitimate preponderance whatever—he huled back with scorn the impatetion that they were prepared to make their religion a mattor of bargain and sale. (Cheers.) If, then, they wished to rmow why it was that the Roman Catholics oflreland had sent Conservatives to Parliament he would answer, it was because they were disgusted with the treachery of which they had been made the victims by other parties, and the' had made up their minds to give a fair trial and support to men who they believed would give them that justice and due ,lonsideration to which they were fully entitled as an importaelt element in thecountry. He would appeal to the Irish members of Parliament—those men who had not always receiJed due credit for their con duct—menwhose talents had not' always met in that house with that consideration which tivy deserved—men who, though they were opposed to him on many points, yet he believed had conscientiously devoted themselves to the wel fare of their common country—he would ask them had they forgotten the treatment they received from other hands, and were they now prepared to see their country made the tool of faction and the mere shuttlecock for place ? (Cheers.) Let them give the present Government a fair trial ; and if on that trial they were found wanting he would be among the first to join with them in an attempt to remove them from office. But until that were proved he asked his countrymen to join with him in giving a cordial support to men who were prepared to maintain neutrality in Europe and to uphold the integrity of this great empire. (Cheers.) . Mr. DUFF supported the amendment. Mr. S. FITZGERALD said the noble lord the member for Tiverton had complained that the Government had left all the argument to the Opposition side, and that it rented with the unsupported speech of his (Mr. Fitzgerald's) right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to vindicate their policy. But he thought he might appeal to those who had heard the debate of the previous evening whether, al though the preponderance in number of assailants rested with hon. gentlemen opposite the victory and the success did not remain with his right hon. friend. (Cheers.) Indeed, the noble lord the member for Tiverton seemed to be of that opinion himself when, on the first night of a debate of that importance, he was constrained himself to enter the lists to restore the unequal fight, and to inspirit again the failing courage of his forces. (Cheers.) The noble lord took the position which had also been assumed by nearly all the speakers on the Opposition side, that the house ought to re fuse their confidence to her Majesty's Government on the ground of failure in their administration of both our domes tic affairs and our foreign relations. With reference to the first point, the noble lord had said that during the whole course of the past session'the Government found themselves unable to carry those measures which they considered de sirable for the public service, and to give effect, when in office, to the opinions they expressed in Opposition. The noble lord had already been reminded that, the failure to carry measures thought to be necessary to the welfare of the country was not peculiar to her Majesty's present ad visers. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord has been reminded that if the present Government were unsuccessful in their reform measure the noble lord the member for the City of London has been twice in the same predicament. (Cheers.) And the noble lord (Lord Palmerston) was only not open to a similar retort, because, although he promised a mea sure of reform, he was not able to redeem it. (Cheers.) The noble lord told the Government that they were not able to carry their India Bill, but be was himself open to a simi lar remark. Night after night the India Bill of the noble lord appeared upon the votes—(“,No, no," and "hear, hear")—but, if he remembered aright, some of the most important provisions of that measure were stoutly and stiffly but unsuccessfully contested by the noble lord. (Cheers.) Under what circumstances did the Government of Lord Derby come into office? (Cheers and counts'r cheers.) It was in consequence, not only of the vote of that house, but of the unanimous and indignant vote of the whole people of England that the noble lord was expelled from office. (Cheers.) The noble lord's argument came to this, the, be cause in the last Parliament Lord Derby undertook to form a Government which did not possess the confidence of the house, it was therefore the duty of the present House of Commons to also refuse the noble earl its confidence. The , noble lord further said that the Government were not entitled to the confidence of the House because they were amble to carry out in power the principles which they pro fessed in Opposition. They were told that if the present vote were successful a new Government would be formed upon a wide basis. It was not stated that it would em brace all the sections of the Liberal party, because, although it had been asserted that the differences in that party were only differences of detail and not of principle, yet he saw gentlemen upon the benches opposite who differed more from the noble lords than the noble lords differed from many hon. gentlemen sitting on the Ministerial side of the house. (Cheers.) They were also told that the new Government was to be formed on the principle of mutual concession. But the house had a right to know by whom those conces sions were made, to whom they were made, and their nature. He would ask the hon. member far Birming ham—who did good service to the Conservative cause in the autumn and winter by going from town to town pppos ing schemes that startled the country—whether in .1 - us new coalition the hon. member was to be allowed to carry out in power the principles he professed in Opposition. (Laud cheers.) Of this ho was sure that the House of Commorts would not extend its confidence to any Government unless it distinctly understood on what grounds that Government was to be formed, and whose principles were to guide the future Cabinet. (Hear.) Leaving domestic affairs to those who would follow him, he would ask permission to say a few words in answer to the argument of the noble lord, that the Government were not entitled to the confidence of the House of Commons in consequence of the-policy they had pursued upon foreign affairs. The noble lord put this accusa tion in two points of view, The first found fault with the present Administration because they had not prevented the breaking out of hostilities in Italy; and, secondly, he maintained that the Government did not deserve the con fidence of the house because their declaration of neutrality was not sincere, and because they were inspired by Austrian sentiments. • He could understand accusations levelled against the Government upon such grounds as these—that they had not interfered at the right time or in the right manner; or that they had not displayed energy enough ; or that they had not made all the exertions that were necessary to maintain the peace of Europe. But these were exactly the points which, in the present state of their information, it was not possible for the house to form a judgment upon. (Hear.) That information had just been laid upon the table by the Chancellor of the Exchequer,and when it was in the hands of members it would then be in the power of the House of Commons to say whether the Government had exerted themselves in the right manner and at the right time. But when the house were in ignorance of what the Government had done, to ask them to condemn the Government, not on account of the measures they had taken, but solely on ac count of the result, was a claim on the part of the noble lord so totally irreconcilable with any principle of justice that he was sure the House of Commons would not adopt it. (Cheers.) The noble lord, however, seemed to be aware that the house could not pass an opinion without knowing what the Government had done, and he therefore volunteered some information to the house as to they had the i course which the Government had taken. He s h h a a d d pa utsreised used the Austria, e nd of t m ha e t nac it e w t ae o France that under stood in Europe that if hostilities broke out and England were en gag ed ofAustria.eduine them, theG fr ov e e m rn w m h en era t w th ou e l n d e t b ak le e l t e h rd e part hud received thi s information, g end knew not but he would assure him that, from beginning e had been made to not one tittle of truth in the report that t At no. time had the Government o ventured l e to use. e(Cthheeers.) lan guage of menace to France. They had attempt to hold an impartial balance,never done more than and to give such advice to both parties as their ad visers of both parties enabled them to give . situation ras is right hen. friend the Attorney. General for Irela n d ea in the last session of Parliament called the attention of the house to some striking circumstances which occurred in 1848. If hon. members who were not in the house at that time would refer to the Blu e-books on the Italia n a ffairs of 1 848 , they would learn that if the Italian question—the difficulties of which menaced the peace of Europe, and might, if we did not preserve our neutrality, wrap the whole world in flames—were not settled in 1848, it was wholly owing to the noble lord. (Cheers.) In a despatch written to Lord Pon sonby the noble lord said : "I have to say that a question so important in itself and so mixed up with national feeling and with traditional policy as the question whether Austria shall or shall not retain a portion of her Italian. possessions, has seldom been decided simply by negotiation and without an appeal - to arms ; and it seems now to have become inevitable that the fortune of war must, to a certain degree a t least, determine the manner in which this question between Austria and the Italians is to be settled. The part which naturally belongs to the British Government in this matter is to remain a s pec tator of events, until invited by the contending parties to interpose by good offices with a view to an amicable arrange ment.' Was it for the noble lord who said that the Italian ques tion must be left to the arbitrament of the sword, that the Minister of England must fold his arms and not interpose until the parties to the war, exhausted by the contest, should invite the interference of the British Government —was the noble lord who thus left the matter to the chances of war the person now to turn round upon the Government and blame them, not for having undertaken negotiations, but because, having undertaken them, those negotiations were unfortunately unsuccessful ? (Cheers.) Lord PALMERSTON—What is the date? Mr. S. FITZGERALD—August, 1848. At any rate continued the hon. gentleman, in respect to the conduct of the Government in endeavouring to prevent hostilities, he might fairly claim a comparison of the policy of 1859 with the policy of 1848. (Hear, hear.) But the noble lord said —and it was the gravest charge which he imputed to the Government—that they were not sincere in their declarations of neutrality, and they were influenced by Austrian sympa thies. He (Mr. Fitzgerald) could only say that no single word had dropped, not a single line had been written, not a single act had been done by any member of the Government that could in the least degree justify such an insinuation; but, as the noble lord challenged an examination into sym pathies, and accused the Government of Austrian tenden cies, it would not be improper to consider whether the noble lord himself was entirely free from sympathies an the other side. (Hear.) He would not inquire too curiously into the nature the objects, or the results of Imperial hospitality— (" oh," and cheers) —he would not speculate upon combi nations at Compiegne, but assume that a compliment was intended to be paid by a great monarch to an illustrious statesman, perhaps with some desire to show a recognition of the earnestness with which the noble lord had endea voured at no remote period to alter the laws of this country in order to gratify an Imperial desire. (Cheers.) More re cently the noble lord had made a speech at Willis's Rooms, where he was supported by the noble lord the member for London and the hon. member for Birmingham—a combina tion so portentous and extraordinary that the man who might have ventured a year age to predict its possibility would have been considered qualified for confinement in a lunatic asylum. (Laughter and cheers.) However, in such company the noble lord made a statement of his views, which it was said was not entirely satisfactory, even at that early period of the alliance, to the hon. member for Birmingham ; and in that statement he put forth as the keystone of his foreign policy the maintenance of most intimate relations with France. (Hear.) No one could more highly value the alliance now happily existing between this country and France than himself (Mr. Fitzgerald)—he believed that it had conduced greatly to the advantage of both countries as well as of Europe—(hear)---but he thought that the mo ment when we were professing a strict and impartial neu trality was hardly the time for the noble lord to declare that the first object of the Government, if it should be formed, would be the maintenance of friendly relations—not with both Powers, but with one of the belligerents only. (Cheers.) The noble lord had done more. In a speech delivered at Tiverton the noble lord had expressed a hope that before the end of the campaign the Austrians would be driven out of Italy. (Cheers.) No doubt those who loved freedom and liberty might desire its extension in Italy, but would it be prudent to commit the guardianship of our "strict neu trality" to a noble lord who declared he had one common object with the Emperor of the French, whose arms he de sired to see successful, and the keystone of whose policy would be to maintain the most intimate relations with the Government of France ? (Hear, hear.) Would that be consistent with strict and impartial neutrality ? (Cheers.) But the case did not end there. The noble lord in his speech referred to what he called the bad origin of the pre sent Government. What was that origin ? Why, the noble lord was expelled from power, not more by the vote of that house than by the general feeling of the country, be cause it was felt that he was sacrificing the honour and interests of this country to the Government of France. (Cheers.) Might not the noble lord, who was willing to alter the laws to gratify the Emperor of the French, be also induced to modify his policy for the same reason ? (Hear.) In the early portion of his remarks he (Mr. Fitzgerald) ha observed that the formation of a Government upon a broad basis must, even in reference to domestic policy, expose great differences of opinion, and that some of its members at least could not carry out in power the opinions which they had expressed in opposition. (Hear, hear.) But in what position would such a Government be placed in respect to foreign affairs ? The noble lord opposite (Palmerston) would have to forget that for his loss of power last year he was con siderably indebted to the noble lord the member for London. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord the member for London, too, must forget something. He must forget that as a member of that house he was asked by the noble lord, then at the head of the Government, to adopt that which he described as a "policy of humiliation and shame." (Hear, hear.) When the future Government upon a " wide basis" should be formed, embracing all the talents and sections, it would be imposible to overlook the claims of the right hon. ,gen • tleman the member for Ashton (Mr. M. Gibson). In what position would that right hon. gentleman be placed ? What were the opinions he had expressed of the foreign policy of the noble lord the member for Tiverton, who from his vast experience and general knowledge must exercise a para mount influence in such matters in any Cabinet of which he was a member. The right hon. member for Ashton, in a for mer debate, quoted a public writer whose words, he said, " seemed to be aimed with wonderful accuracy, and with a very discriminating appreciation of the real character of the noble lord, and of the character of his foreignpolicy." Those words thus adopted by the right hon. gentleman stated— " There is no constituted authority in Europe with which Lord Palmerston has not quarrelled; there is no insurrection that he has not betrayed. The ardent partisans of Sicilian, Italian, and Hungarian independence have certainly no es pecial cause for gratitude to a Minister who gave them abundance of verbal encouragement and then abandoned them to their fate." On the other hand '—mark this— ' when Lord Palmerston has made up his mind to court the good will of a foreign power no sacrifice of principle or of interest is too great for him. " The right hon. gentleman must admit that those words were large enough to include the abandonment even of " a strict neutrality." The passage quoted by the right hon. gentle man concluded with the following emphatic words— " From first to last his character has been the want of a firm and lofty adherence to the known interests of England, and it is precisely from a want of such guiding laws of con duct that our foreign policy has degenerated into a tissue of caprices, machinations, petty contentions, and everlasting disputes." He (Mr. Fitzgerald) did not deny that he thought in many respects, those expressions were not just to the noble lord, but he imagined the right hon gentleman who had adopted them as describing with ' wonderful accuracy' the character of the noble lord would, if he joined the future Government upon a wide basis, find some difficulty in reconciling that step with the opinions he had expressed while in opposition. (Hear, hear.) The words had been spoken recently, the events to which they referred were not remote, and he did not believe the house would, now that issue was placed di rectly before it, p . roclaim a want of confidence in the present Administration in order to establish a Government the chief and most influential member of which would be the noble lord whose conduct had been thus described by one of his future colleagues. (Hear.) On the contrary, he looked with confidence to the issue of this conflict, and he believed that, whether the division took place to-night or to-morrow, the house would, by giving her Majesty's present Ministers a :majority, enable them, in strict accordance with the opinions, wishes, and feelings of their countrymen, to carry out that policy of strict neutrality to which they were pledged—(cheers)—and which they believed to be necessary as well for the interests of this country as for the highest in terests of humanity and civilisation. (Loud cheers.) Mr. BRIGHT and Sir G. C-LEWIS rose together, but the right hon. baronet gave way to the hon. gentleman. Mr. BRIGHT—Sir, in the observations which, with the permission of the house, I shall address to it, I shall endea vour to keep myself as strictly as I can, under the circum stances, to the grounds upon which I shall feel it my duty to support the amendment which is now before the house. The hon. gentleman who has just sat down, I think, has not clone very much to clear up the question before us. Ad mitting all that he says to be true, it comes very nearly to this, that he thinks the noble lord the member for Tiverton is about as bad as his colleagues. I think that is the whole substance of his speech. (Cries of No, no, met by cheers.) I am not about to defend the conduct of the noble lord the member for Tiverton—(hear, hear, from the Ministerial benches) —nor am I about to retract a single sentence that I have ever said with regard to him ; but I must beg tore mind him. gentlemen opposite that by their unanimous opinion in private, and some of them have expressed it in public, it is a matter of deep regret that they have not been for years past arrayed under his banners. (Cheers, and cries of "No, no.") I shall not attempt to add any proof to that, because on both sides of the house what I have stated. is well known to be true. I am very glad, sir, that the tactics of Tuesday night have been de parted from, and that the silent system is not to be imposed on hon. gentlemen opposite throughout this debate. (Hear.) I was afraid that we were coming back to times one remembers many 'ears ago, when hon. gentlemen were not allowed to speak on a question now happily settled for fear they should say something that it would be almost impossible for their leaders to answer or to atone for in debate. I shall not endeavour to establish the propriety of the course lam about to take on several—l was going to say on any—of those grounds which have been attempted to be met by the hon. gentleman who has just spoken. I should not think it necessary to vote against the Govern ment because they insisted upon a dissolution of Par ment, a proceeding which no doubt members always feel to be objectionable, nor would I vote against them because there were certain vague charges of corruption brought against them at the recent election, for I know tht.t our sys tem is balanced between a considerable freedom in the large boroughs, corruption in the small boroughs, and coer cion in the counties. (Cries of " No, no," and counter cheering.) I know further that practices which 'I should neither like to be concerned in nor to defend have not been confined to the present holders of power; and unless I had proof more distinct than I have, I should not think it would justify me in a vote of want of confidence in the Government on account of any charges I have hoard with respect to their proceedings in the recent contests. In regard to the qestlon of not having kept the peace of Europe, I should not for a moment think of supporting a vote of want of confidence on that account. (Ministerial cheers.) If they had permitted this country by mismanage meat to be engaged in war, that might, indeed, have been a good ground for such a vote ; but I do not see how the Government of this country can in fairness be held responsible for the maintenance of peace between two other great powers of Europe--(cheers from the Ministerial benches). More than that, in this case I admit I have no facts before me sufficient to prove that the Government have not done all that was in their power to prevent the vast ca lamities which have so recently befallen Italy. (Hear.) The grounds which have been alleged as reasons of com plaint may indeed be reasons, but in my mind they offer no sufficient justification for the support which I am inclined to give to the amendment which has been moved. I come to one point, however, on which I feel that with my views I have great reason to complain of the conduct of the Govern ment, and to charge them with mismanagement in respect to the course they have taken in regard to the neutrality to which they have pledged themselves, and of which they boast. I want to know whether that neutrality be a real or pretended neutrality. (Hear.) I have heard from members of the Government, in whom I am free to admit I have the greatest confidence, that they are as anxious to keep out of war as I can be myself. (Ministerial cheers.) lam not about for a moment to say that that is not the fact, but I am about to show that the course which the Government has taken in regard to that matter has been such as to lead to doubt in the minds of the population of the country, and to doubt generally in the minds of th e p o p u l a ti on o f Europe. (Hear.) It will be admitted on both side s o f th e house that as far as the public opinion ha s b een expresse d t h roug h th e p r ess, by public meetings, and in th e or di nary conversat i ons of every society, of, every rank of life in England, that it would be difficult to find one singl e Englishman, on single Irishman, or one single Scotchman, at this moment who is in favour of being mixed up in any way whatever in the hostilities which have broken out. (Hear, hear.) I think the positive hunger for the continuance of peace on the part of the people is evident from all that we see, and hear, and know. That I think will be admitted by every hon. mem ber whom I am now addressing in this house. (Loud cheers.) The case before us is this. If peace be broken, as far as England is concerned it can only be broken by our own -voluntary act as regards Fra e n a c c e e . , ww lt inseqveuirtea'tctuleark us— Austria, as long as she is at peace, can never atteck us ; and it is ecually clear that unless we are resolved upon war it is almot impossible that we should attack Austria. In point of fact,war between England and Austria alone is very much like afish in a river fighting with a horse which is grazing on its tanks. (A laugh.) Certainly Austria cannot assail England and there is scarcely any considerable point in which Ragland can assail Austria, therefore there is in reality no great danger of any war acci dentally occurring between England and Austria. The question of neutrality, then, arplies almost entirely to the Government of France. (Hear.) Now, what has been done in regard to that ? I make this statement before the house, because while we have tie cry of neutrality on our lips, nothing should be done tint might tend to make that neutrality difficult or impossible. For example, war was declared—l am not sure whether before, but immediately after, there was a great cry of apprehension that we should be drawn into the war ; and I an told that there has been a great increase in the naval pown. of England in the Medi terranean.. (Ministerial cheers.i It is quite clear that that cannot be directed, and there h no suspicion that it is di rected, in any way against Austria. Then we had a great stir about enlistments for the navy. (Ministerial cheers.) There have been exhibitions it the streets of advertising vans, with bands o'f music and banners, for the purpose of enlisting any stray individualswho might wish to exchange their service and their occupation. At the very time this was being done, there were, I sin told, in ourdepoots, 3,000 or 4,000 seamen capable of manning, at any time, twelve line-of-battle ships: (Ironical laughter.) I am not a very great authority perhaps on these matters---(hear)—and I should not think making the statement I • have made if I had not received it from a person who is acquainted with the facts, and who is perfectly competent to form a sound judgment upon them. I do not think that all this can have reference in any degree to the possibility of hostili ties with Austria. Then what has been done in regard to any other mode of defence ? The Chancellor of the Exchequer tells us that there are more soldiers in this country at the present moment than there have been since the time of the great war, and yet notwithstanding that he invites everybody who has a little notion of military affairs, or wanting to have it, to engage himself as a rifleman in one of the numerous bodies or corps which are are being formed. (Ministerial cheers.) I know there are gentle men who think these things useful—(renewed cheers) —but at least they will allow there is something to be said on the other side of the question. 1 rather agree with the ingenious author of the Biglow papers who says that if there is any thing more ridiculous than military glory it is militia glory —(cries of " oh, oh")—and I say that if there is anything more ridiculous than militia glory it will be amateur rifle men glory. If there is any necessity for them I am not finding fault with them, but I what I say is this, that if there he any country in Europe, and that country be France, with which under any conceivable circumstances in the present state of things you can be brought into con test, is it not likely that all these ,preparations which you are making, both by land sea, at the time when you are telling the world your force is so great and complete—is it not inevitable that the course you are taking must destroy in the minds of the French Government and the French people any belief whatever in the language you are holding in respect to neutrality, any faith in your professions ? I think it very likely that the rifle corps movement was a movement of party tactics. (Oh, oh). We know very well that the yeomanry and militia, and I dare say the rifle corps movement, do something to add to the strength of the Con servative party in some of the counties of England. (Re newed cries of " oh, oh.") We must either be driven to the conclusion that you suspect France has designs against us or else that you contemplate at no distant period the possibility of attacking France. (Vehement cries of "no, no.") One of those two conclusions I hold you cannot escape from after 'the conduct which the Government has adopted. I want to ask the Government whether, as rational men, apart from those superstitious fears which sometimes haunt the minds of almost all men, there is any fair ground why we should add from year to year to every armament of this country, and to our military expenditure, on the ground of appre hension of danger from France ? The present Emperor of the French, at least in his conduct to this country, has given no ground for suspicion. (Cheers.) The house will allow me to say that I have a right to be deemed a person who can exercise an impartial judgment on this question. I did not approve of what I call the hasty recognition of the accession of the Emperor of the French to the throne of France. It did not appear to me to a question which we ought to have been enthusiastic about. I never approved of the intimate personal alliance which has existed between the Ministry and court of this country and the court of' the French Emperor; I did not join the crowds in the streets of London when the Emperor and Empress came to Eng land, and when the press that now assails him asked the people to prostrate themselves as it were before his chariot wheels. (Hear.) I never joined in this house in the ex cessive and fulsome laudations which I am sorry to say I have heard from both sides, and, therefore, having no feel ing of hostility to any person reigning in Europe, or any people—and it would possibly not matter if I had— (laughter)—coming here to discuss these questions, I have an impartial opinion, and if the house will allow me I will state it. (Hear.) I say, that for what was done at the time when the Emperor of the French obtained his present posi tion of power he can owe no gratitude to the ,Government or the people of England. I say that he went into the Russian war with England, not because he wished to go into that war, but because he thought it highly useful to him, and he was anxious evidently to associate himself 'closely with all the foreign policy of England. I say he entered into war with China at the request of the Govern ment of England, and I say he had an opportunity to carry out those benevolent designs which. some men think he entertains, if he have entertained them, at a time when all the military resources of England were being sent some 10,000 miles away to quell a most gigantic and perilous revolt. (Cheers.) More than this, at the present moment he has on his hands a war with a great military power ; he has on his hands enough to tax the energies of any ruler and of any people. (Hear, hear.) Surely it is not necessary to appeal to the common sense of hon. members, and to argue, that whatever may have been the danger heretofore from the side of France, that danger must be immeasurably diminished by the circumstances in which the Government of France is at this moment placed. Yet if it be possible for that which has been proved to be ima ginary to become real now—and if it were real before it must have become imaginary now—then I argue this way, that there is no increasd cause to suspect France, and that, on the contrary, if there were ever any cause to suspect her, that cause is now diminished and reduced to the barest minimum. But what is the conclusion to be drawn from the proceedings of the Government ? If you agree that there is no cause to suspect France, you are driven to the conclusion that your Government contemplates the possibi lity, nay, the probability, of attacking France. (Loud cries of " No, no," from the Ministerial benches.) Don't let hon. gentlemen opposite think that I am charging the Govern ment with such an intention. I am only showing that from the unfortunate course they have taken their proceedings lay them open to the charge, and I shall be glad when, in the course of this debate, we shall have upon this point a frank declaration from the Government which shall be satis factory to this country and to Europe with respect to this grave and perilous question. It is not only the impression in England, but you know very well that the proceedings of the British Government have created in the minds of other people an idea that we know something which they do riot know, aad when they see the most powerful organ of the press in London writing in a manner to make that alarm more alarming, it is not to be wondered at that there should be an uncomfortable feeling. That feeling exists not alone in England but in Germany. This opinion is generally expressed, as any Englishman may see from the German papers, or hear from - persons recently travelling in Ger many, that the proceedings of the English Government are all directed, not against Austria, but against France, and therefore they believe that the Government is rather inclined to side with Austria than with France. If you inquire what is the opinion generally expressed in Paris you will find that there is a sense of want of confi dence in the English Government very much like that which, I believe, prevails in the house at the present mo ment. (Hear.) There is growing up—l do not believe it is from anything which the Government has written or from anything the Government has thought, or from any thing that their agents abroad have done, but from the cir cumstances I have detailed—in the minds of the French Government and of the intelligent people of France who read what is going on in this country, a feeling that the alliance which has so long existed is being gradually rent asunder, if not violently, and that a coolness and danger is growing up where there has been friendship and perfect security. Now, sir, I am disposed to blame the Govern ment for this. (Hear, hear.) They may choose to say, and I shall not be able to dispute it, that they have had no such intentions; but I am satisfied that in England and on the Continent of Europe their proceedings must shave been deemed to be altogether unnecessary, if there was not a latent belief on the part of the Government that sooner or later they would be compelled to take sides against the Government of France. If I recollect the speech of the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer—a speech which he made not very long ago to his consti tuents—there was in it what I may call a bounce and a boast about the pecuniary condition of this coun try, which I did not think quite becoming in a Cabinet Minister or a Chancellor of the Exchequer. The right hon. gentleman told the world that 20 millicn a year for 10 or 20 years, what did it signify to a great and indus trious people like this?—and when he referred to that greatest of calamities, thenationaldebt—the right hon. gen. tleman selecting his metaphors, I suppose, from his own personal experience—said, it was no more than a flea-bite. I think that when a Cabinet Minister in the position of the Chancellor of the Exchequer speaks to a large audience of his - constituents and countrymen it would be becoming in him to be a little more careful in regard to what is accurate in such matters. Does not the right hon. gentleman know that that very debt of which he spoke so slightingly has been the cause of the embarrassments during the years in which,it was contracted and ever since of millions of fami lies, and that there is not a gaol or workhouse in the land whose walls have not resounded with the lamentations and sorrows of those who traced their ruin to the excessive amount of taxation which that debt brought upon them. (Cheers.) I can't have co nfidence, I am sorry to say, in a Minister who thus endeavours to mislead the public, and in a Government whose neutrality, so far as one can see any active exhibition of it, is to be found in continued and gigantic preparations for war. (Hear, hear.) I am told it would be a dreadful thing if there were to be a change of Government, if one is, after all, to take place. I remember an hon. gentleman behind me (Mr. Kinglake) who, in an interesting book that he wrote upon Egypt, told us that at Cairo, whenever the plague was very destructive, whenever thatgreat nprofessionaluntbr s o e ,people howlers" died, were w h e i c m h p w lo a y s e d e . v er ( y L a fe u w g h d t a e y r s . Now, whenever any government is found to be in extremis, we find these professional howlers crying out, with which ever House of Farliament they may be connected, and in whatever part of the West-end they may happen to reside. (Laughter.) Now, y: ith respect to the next Government— (Ministerial cheers and laughter)—l have no objection to look in the face those difficulties which to hon. gentlemen opposite are so mysterious. I think that in all probability we shall have the same professions of neutrality that came from that (pointing to the Treasury) bench ; Put at the same time I hope, and I believe, that so far as regardsthat country with which alone there is the smallest danger of our becoming embroiled—that with respect to that country there will be felt, among all classes of its people, that there is some what less of coldness, somewhat more of, sympathy, than, so far as we know and can gather, has been shown by the present Government. (Hear, hear.) I have no objection to tell the noble lord the member for Tiverton that I am not one of those who have ever approved of that strict and full alli ance which has existed between France and England for a few years past. I do not think, though it has been very popular in England—l have never thought that it was an alliance which added to the dignity and to the power for good of either of these Governments or either of these na tions, and therefore I shall be glad to find in a future Go vernment—if there be one soon to be formed—that the relations between the two countries should rather be such as we hold with the rest of the world—generous and digni fied, and should be conducted on the part of each country in such a manner as to show that they both have an under standing with, and bear intimate relation to, the rest of the nations of Europe. But, sir, with respect to the question of neutrality, I should like to offer one more observation, and I am anxious for it on this ground, that we may show respecting our foreign policy that we have learned something , from thepast, something from that war the treaty subse quent to which efforts an tf being made to undo. That war loaded us with that debt, s vith that taxation, with that pau perism, and with that widespread misery, which has neve since entirely ceased, an c t which arose from our blindly plunging into that war. Your war with Russia, to which the house knows I was om the very first entirely opposed, is now generally felt throt ughout all classes of the people to have been fruitless in a 11 but the loss of English blood and of English treasure. Let the house remember that those who sit on both sides of it have the same inte rests. We on this side alo not pretend to a morality and humanity that you have : not ; but I think I may appeal to both sides of the house in asking if it would not be a wise thing for us now to come tc • the conclusion that so far as-re gards continental wars, i n which there is no probability of European nations attackiix, this country, it is our interest, however others may invol vie themselves in conflict, to leave the contest to them, and 16 tep aloof from the struggle ? I be lieve that if we do so, with. the happy geographical position of these islands, with the a dvantage of a free press, withthe intercourse between this c ountry and the other nations of Europe, we shall set an exa rnple which will exercise great in fluence when these nations c lo by any unhappy circumstances become involved in war, wh en wecan show that it is a solemn principle of the English nat 'ion to abstain from shedding its blood in European conflicts, we shall then be regarded by the continental nations as an impartial tribunal, and those na tions might appeal to us with a belief that, when they were asking our counsel and good offices these would be given in the spirit of generosity and c of ifidencEt with which they were asked. (Hear, hear.) Now, sir, I must pass for a moment to another great question, on v 7hich I feel as strongly, er nearly so, as that on which 1 have referred—l mean the question of Parliamentary Rei'orm. The Chancellor of the Exchequer made everything t i tat could be made for his side of the question in his speech tiro other night, a speech which, probably, considering the case :he hadin hand, was as much to the purpose as it would be possible for human ingenuity to make. I thought he was to king the course of a most able counsel, who in a desperate came advises the prisoner not for his life to open his mouth, for that if he does there will be no possibility of avoiding a conviction. (Laughter.) The right hon. gentleman made soraething like a general defence of the course his Government had taken upon the question of reform, and he, no doubt - from past experience, having great confidence in the generosity and simplicity of many hon. members on this side of the house, asked them to have faith in him for the future. (Renewed laughter.) The right hon. gentleman, however, postpones the redeeming of any pledge for the introduction of a Reform Bill till another year, as if anybody could tell what another year would bring forth. The debt has been long due to the people, yet the right hon. gentleman has asked for another year to pay it in ; there has been time to pay instalments, and the right hon. gentleman has produced the bill which has met with such an unfortunate though deserved fate—he comes forward to give the people an instalment, and pays them in " Bank of Elegance" notes, and in coin that has never passed through her Majesty's Mint. (Laughter.) In point of fact his " Reform Bill" was not only no reform bill, but the whole country protested against it as anti-re • form, and his bill did not fail because he had not a majority at his back, but because he could not have carried it among his own supporters. How many letters and remonstrances did Lord Derby receive on the subject of that bill ? Nearly as many as, if you counted them, there were gentlemen in that Parliament as I now see opposite to me. But we are to take a promise for next year I Last year we had promises that the Reform Bill would be proposed, and how we have obtained the fulfilment of them we all know. (Opposition cheers.) What reliance, therefore, is to be placed on the promises of the right hon. gentleman for next year? Then, has the past policy of the Government upon this question of reform been such as to encourage us to a faith, hoping and believing all things. What confidence can we have in a measure of the right hon. gentleman, supported by a party who have been opposed all their lives to everything like parliamentary reform, who introduced a bill which would have gone far to defeat whatever there is of freedom in the present system, and who repudiated the idea of lower ing the borough franchise and whose colleague, moreover, the Secretary for the Colonies (Sir Bulwer Lytton) sup ported the bill as maintaining the ascendancy of the middle classes, while the working classes were to be shut out ? (Opposition cheers.) The right hon. gentleman stands to the last hardened and impenitent on this question, and seeks to win the innocent and childlike faith of some indi viduals in this house. (Cheers and laughter.) I have never heard of one of the 28,000,000 of people outside this house who would, in such a circumstance, pledge - their faith, though I am told there are some here who are so prepared. I do- not blame them, but I will only say that they have arrived at a state of mind of which I can form no ade quate idea. (Loud laughter.) Yet there arc some persons who, after all this, are ready to place faith in the right hon. gentleman, and believe that he is not only a reformer, but that he is actually pantin g for the coming of the next ses sion of Parliament, when he hopes to take the wind altoge ther out of the sails of the noble lord who sits before me (Lord J. Russell)—when he hopes to convert me into an attached admirer of the reform he is to propose. (Much laughter.) I ask the house if it is a befitting thing that this question of reform 'should be thrown over to another year ? I should not blame the right hon. gentleman if he were not able to pass his bill between this time and that when hon. gentlemen will think it their duty to kill grouse —(laughter)--but I say that, if he had been actuated with the zeal for reform by which some hon. gentlemen in their innocence suppose him to be actuated, he might at an early time have laid his bill upon the table of the house, or might even have carried it to a second reading ; and if hon. mem bers had found the wea th er t oo h o t f or the consideration of such a warm subject—(laughter)—they might have post poned the further consideration of it to a later period, per haps in November. Whether Governments were formed from one side of the house or the other, the great difficuty was to get a Government with a majority; and, at the risk of having a Government supported by a minority of that house, her Majesty must have advisers. Let the house inquire whether that did not arise from the present state of the representative system. (Hear, hear.) No doubt hon. gentlemen opp6site believe in the freedom of the county constituencies, but the greatest corruption exists in the buying and selling of the small sections of small constituencies—(hear, hear)—by which these small con , stituencies pass lightly' from one party to the other, according to the zeal and liberality of the Government in power. I say this is the reason why such a majority is not returned as would facilitate the formation of a Govern ment which could hold a firm attitude before this country and assume a string position in the eyes of foreign Govern ments. (Hear, hear.) With respect to the formation of any new Government, I am sure the right hon. gentleman the Attorney-General for Ireland (Mr. Whiteside) will feel great interest in that question. (Laughter.) I presume it would be the duty of that Government to bring in a mea sure amending the representation at an early period, which at least must be very different from any the.right hon. gen tleman has brought forward—a measure which would en large the rights of the people, and obtain the general appro bation of Parliament and of the country. lam assuming that the noble lord near me would adhere to the very mode rate programme which he indicated before the dissolution —I presume it would offer a £lO rental qualification in counties, and at least a £5 or £6 rental in boroughs—even that in large boroughs would give a great amount of satis faction, and in small boroughs it would enlarge the con stituency, but not to a proportionate extent. That even would, at any rate, give a substantial increase to the con stituent body, and a wide difference would be discernible between it and the measure offered to us by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. (Hear, hear.) There is one other rea son why, besides this question of neutrality and this ques tion of Reform, I think it will be admitted that hon. gen tlemen on this side of the house will assent to the course which has been taken on this occasion. I think the Chan cellor of the Exchequer and his colleagues will admit, that if they had been sitting:on this side of the house, they would have recommended and adopted the line of action now pro posed. But the Chancellor of the Exchequer tells us that the Government is a good Governtnent, that we have not shown that they have done anything very bad, and that there is no ground on which we can justify the seeking to expel them from that side of the house. But there were parties at the elections. (Cheers.) The Address was moved by an hon. gentleman in a speech that was very un affected and sincere. That hon. gentleman was returned for the large constituency of South Lancashire. But why did he come as the representitive of a constituency which last session sent up an hon. friend of mine I presume because there was a difference of principle between the hon. gentleman and my friend who was formerly returned for the constituency. (Hear, hear.) Why was there a contest in the west riding of Yorkshire, where the numbers polled for the successful candidates were 15,000 and upwards, and where the right hon. gentleman (Mr. S. Wortley) who has sat everywhere in this house--(laughter)—boasted of having polled 13,000 plumpers. Was that contest entered upon merely for amusing exercise ? (Laughter.) Why was a political wanderer sent down to Birmingham merely to give my friends there great trouble? (Great laughter.) I suppose there must be an essential difference of opinion at the root of all this. The hon. members for North Warwick shire have seen their side of the house drifting towards the views of this, and a great change has occurred since I first had the pleasure of sitting opposite to them in this house. What was it that you assume the constituencies sent a ma jority to this house for ?, Was it to support a Government in a minority, and thinking differently from themselves ? I cannot think that anything so unreasonable can be imagined. Having taken our oaths and made our affirmations with a view to proceeding to the business of the session, are we to abstain from dealing with a Government holding opinions of a different character ? Everybody knows it is painful to execute those great changes which generally occur in such eases. (Laughter.) I am' not quite sure it will occur. (Laughter from the Ministerial benches.) That is a matter which rests at present in the bosom of each individual member, and to-morrow night we shall probably be in full possession of the information. There is another point in the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to which I must make some allusion. He said that the Tories or Con servatives, or Conservative Liberal party—for it has so many aliases that one hardly knows how to call it—he says his party has never been so exclusive as this (the opposition) bench, and that when a man of capacity was found any where he was invited to that bench, and invited to a high position in his party. That party allowed Sir R. Peel to lead them, but when he did that which all the world now admitted to be most beneficial to the country they cast him off. (Cheers.) They dealt in the same manner with the right hon. gentleman the member for the University of Oxford. They had shown generally a rancour scarcely comprehensible. But though the Conservative party did so I tell you that thereby you have done yourselves great harm, though as the result it has enabled the Chancellor of the Exchequer to become your leader. (Ministerial cheers.) You have enabled him to occupy the eminent an 4 proud position ,in which he sits at this moment. (Renewed cheers.) But you have almost proscribed the Peelites, and I could almost imagine that you had derived the idea from reading the Old Testament of classing them with the Hi vites and the Jebusites of whom we read in that book. It seems almost as if you had doomed them to perpetual ex tinction. On this side of thehouse'it is said that the Whig paily are exclusive in their formation of Governments ; but we may, perhaps, now look for a more comprehensive plan in the formation of a new Government. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) I believe such a Government would preserve the neutrality of England, and pursue a policy on reform very different from that of the present Government, who have tampered with it, and may betray it in the session to come. It is most important, too, that a friendly feeling should exist with France. These are objects which it be comes the people to seek to further. The right hon. gen tleman was ingenious when he referred to what he desig nated the " reconciled sections" of the Liberal party. F or sixteen years I have had a seat in this house, and I have never during that period given a vate merely for the pur pose of displacing a Conservative or embarrassing weakfoar Government ; but my votes have always been given rnthe purpose of forwarding those principles which you all know I hold, and that policy which I have always frankly avowed and maintained. (Cheers.) Now, I suppose the stoutest ship with the strongest tackle will sometimes find itself ' where it did not expect to be ; but if there be a change of ' Government I expect to sit opposite or close alongside the 1 right hon. gentleman the member for the University —if he dos not change his place — (a laugh) —a n d I shalrp — ui l, sue the same course that I have always _ regard topursued in times past—namely, a course of vigilance with the Government. (Hear, hear.) I never quarrelled with a l Government which intended t o b e lib eral because it did not do all that I wanted it to do or go quite so far as -I desired. I have never quarelled with any Government yet except when it has deserted the principles of its ancient party— (hear, hear)—and has asked us who sat on the same side of the house to support that which, with any show of consis tency, it was impossible for us to support. Well, if there come a new Government, and my seat be where I have indi cated, I shall watch that Government with the vigilance that I have exercised in time past, and with as much forbearance as I can show consistently with what I believe to be my duty to those great political objects to which my life has been devoted. If they pursue a moderate, but an honest and straightforward course I shall bear in mind the difficulties by which they are surrounded ; and I shall be anxious to continue them in office as long as I find them disposed to move on fairly and reasonably in that direction which may be said to be indicated by the average opinions of those who sit on the same side of the house. (Hear, hear.) But if, unfortunately, they should do some of those things which they have done in times past—(laughter)—my sorrow will be great, and my opposition, if I am here, will be inevitable. (Hear, and laughter.) lam afraid, some night or other, we shall find them, as in past times, handed over to the Philistines who will sit opposite them. (Cheers and laughter.) Yet I hope, sir, whoever may form this Govern ment, whoever may be members of the Cabinet, will look back and take warning from their previous failures. Since the fall of the Government of Sir R. Peel there has been no good handling of the Liberal party in this house. Their Cabinets have been exclusive—their policy has sometimes been wholly wrong, and generally it has been feeble and faltering. (Ministerial cheers.) Let us find that in the new Government there are men adequately representing the reconciled sections, acting with boldness and power, grappling with the abuses admitted to exist, and relying on the moral sense, the honest feeling of the house, and the general sympathy of the people of England for improvement in our legislation, Mad then I shall begin to hope that they will have that which her Majesty evidently wishes—a longer tenure of office than any Ministry that has existed for many years past. (Cheers.) Lord ASHLEY said he should vote in favour of the amendment, because he desired to see the present Govern ment turned out, and his own side of the house occupying their places, for he believed that the country would thenhave a sagacious Administration, possessing wisdom to ori ginate, and a will to execute, measures marked by a sound and sensible policy. Mr. PALK considered that in the present struggle for place between rival statesmen and rival parties, only one interest had been forgotten, and that was the interest of the nation at large. The country was getting sick and tired of these constant struggles. The so-called Liberal party,had rejected a better measure than was ever obtained from any other party. The consequence was a dissolution of Parliament, and at that critical period England had not the influence she ought to exercise m maintaining the peace of the world. He believed the well-being of the country was perilled by the rivalry of noble lords in their attempts to obtain office. Unless the house of Commons vindicated itself, they must not be surprised if such a change were demanded in the Constitution of this country as would sweep away from the aristocracy all their powers, and place them in the hands of the multitude, and of men without re - gard for our ancient institutions, but quite determined to take on themselves the Government of England. Mr. BAXTER wished, in a few sentences, to state the reasons that influenced him in the vote he intended giving. He was one of those members who opposed the introduction of the Conspiracy Bill, and who supported the amendment which caused its defeat, knowing well that such a course of procdeding would assist in placing hon. gentlemen opposite in the places they now held. That 'being the case, he could not support any want of confidence motion based on light or trivial grounds. In the present serious crisis of the nation's history they were asked, was the foreign and domestic policy of the Govern ment such as to command the respect of the country and the confidence of the House of Commons ; was the peace of England safe in their keeping ? Much as he admired the tact, courtesy, and ability of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the admirable management of the navy and many departments by Sir J. Pakington and Gen. Peel, he could not bring his mind to answer the question in the affirmative, and therefore he felt himself compelled to sup port the amendment of the noble lord. The legislative fail ures of her Majesty's Government had been a series of blunders. (Hear.) He wished some explanation from her Majesty's Government about their connection with Cardi nalWiseman, and how it was that that prelate was received with open arms by the Conservative pdrty in Ireland ; but if her Majesty's Government would not explain them he hoped the hon. gentleman the member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Spooner) would. He, however, believed that that hon. member was too honest to be a party to any such compact. He hoped to see her Majesty's Ministers removed from office, and to see those men called to the councils of her Majesty who possessed the confidence of the country, and whose mea sures when brought in deserved the support of all parties. Mr. LIDDELL had detected in,the speech of the hon. member for Birmingham some things,which he was unwill ing should pass without observation. If he understood rightly, the hon. member rested the support which he gave to the vote of want of confidence on three material grounds, and the most important complaint against them was founded upon their foreign policy. In the able summary of his opi nions which the hon. member for Birmingham gave at the conclusion of his speech, he said he hoped to see, upon a change of government, something more of sympathy with France. He had a right to ask what the meaning of that was. He had a right to ask whether he meant that we should sympathise with a nation that had broken the peace of Europe in a most outrageous manner ? He was as alive as anybody could be to the importance of the French alliance ; and he believed that their influence combined for good purposes might rule the world. They heard that France was fighting for the independence of Italy, but he offered his humble protest against a despotic power en gaging in such a cause. The next great charge made by the hon. member for Birmingham against the Government was that he suspected that its professions of neutrality were insincere, and he rested that charge upon the fact that Eng land had been increasing her armaments. He (Mr. Liddell) however, believed that if there was one act of the present Government which had received the unanimous approval of the house, and endeared them to the people of England, it was the efforts made to maintain our naval supremacy. (Hear; hear.) When the hon. member for Birmingham— a man of the people—took on himself to say that the neu trality of the country was in danger in consequence of the formation of rifle corps, he would ask whether it was the Government that established rifle corps, or the people of England who came forward as one man to do so. (Hear.) There was one other point which the hon. member for Bir mingham adverted to—his own peculiar hobby, reform. He could not help noticing the remarkable change in the opinions of the hon. member between last autumn and now, for now he had very much modified his views. In his speech that night he had foreshadowed what the policy of a Liberal government should be, in his opinion, upon the question of reform, and it needed no prophet to predict that the hon. member would form one of any government formed by those who sat on his side of the house. The bill he now shadowed forth was not the one he had previously produced, but a moderate reform bill similar to that which had been advo cated by the two right hon. gentlemen who left the Minis try a short time ago. He congratulated the hon. member on his present moderation. As to the want of confidence vote, if he could look at the matter si m ply as a soc i a l ques ti on , he should regard with indifference any change of government that might take place, for this simple reason, that at the present day anygovernment must necessarily bring forward the same measures. He believed that a Reform Bill, from whichever party it came, would, when it left the committee, be much the same. It was on considering the foreign aspect of the matter that he could not make up his mind to vote for a new government. There was,great prestige attaching to cer tain great names, such as Napoleon, Nicholas, Metternich ; butif there was one name in modern history more unpopular in Europe than another, it was that of the noble lord opposite (Lord Palmerston). He admired the character of the noble lord; and if we were to have a change of Government, would prefer to see him at the head of it, for he believed his mea sures would be always tinged with principles which influ enced members on the Conservative side of the house ; but his foreign policy was always alarming and often intrusive. If ho was in the Government it was to be feared that his name would carry influence destructive of the peace of Europe. This opinion was entertained by persons who were not Conservatives, for he heard those who were Whigs say so ; and a similar feeling influenced many Roman Catholics, which might account for the support which the present Government had received from that body. Mr. J. GURNEY said he had been absent from the house last year when the Conspiracy Bill was under con sideration, and he then paired in favour of it, feeling that France was justified at the time in asking for such a mea sure. Ho must frankly confess that he did not think a case had been made out against the present Government. (Ministerial cheers.) As regarded the Reform Bill brought in by the present Government, he thought, had it gone before a committee, it might have been made a good bill, and he thought the Goverement might be able to bring in a Reform Bill which would be acceptable in the next session. (Ministerial cheers.) As to foreign affairs, he thought the Government had carried out the sense of the country by acting on the principle of neutrality, and that they had adopted the fitting means for placing the country in a proper state of defence. (Renewed Ministerial cheers.) Though these necessary defences might cause considerable expense, he did not think it was an expense which the country would grudge, and that such preparation could not give offence to any foreign Power. He therefore in tended, in his sense of his public duty, to vote against the amendment. (Ministerial cheers.) Mr. CROSSLEY said, when the change of Ministers was made, and the present Government came into office, and they were required to state their sentiments upon the question of Reform, the answer of the Government was, that during the recess they would consider the matter, and would be prepared to bring in such a bill as would meet the wishes of the country. He found, however, when they did introduce their Reform Bill, that it altogether failed to meet the necessities of the country. (Opposition cheers.) Now, he did not approve of a bill being read a second time unless it was of a kind which would meet the requirements of the house ; and when a bill went into committee which was not of a satisfactory character, there were frequently difficulties in getting clauses which were objectionable so altered as to make them of a satisfactory character. It was perfectly useless in this house waiting for nine months longer in the hope of any measure of Reform being bronght in by the present Government, as had been intimated, especially as that Government was composed of men who reagard combination had always been opposed to Reform, andendeavouringg the o t, there last general election, were every w h ere endeavourin to'dis ta ne o w f p G l o a v ce eru re m fo o r u m t, e r h s e . th h (H u e g ar 11a r. hear.) uld be With every shade of liberal opini ons i n t h e new Government,' and he was satisfied, if such a Government should be formed of men of talent, they would be able to bring in a Re fo rm Bill which would give satisfaction, and that they would be able to prevent this country d 'ft' cheers.) drifting into war. (Opposition Mr. SPOONER said he rose merely to answer the hon. member for Montrose. There wasdistinct a com from the Chancellor ofpe the Exchequer declaration at there was no after act with the Po or with Cardinaliseman, and that statement, he Nvowl ered that any hon. member should repeat that electioneering fabrication. Hon. gentle men opposite looked at the expense laid out upon ourde fences as an indication of an intention of going to war, but for his part he looked upon it as the best preservative against a war. -Mr. HORSMAN looked upon the issued of this debate as a very serious one. An appeal had been made to the country for the purpose of ascertaining which party had the confidence of the country. That question would be de cided by the pending division, and the majority, on what ever side it w as , wou ld d ec id e the fate of the Government. It was against constitutional principles that a minority should govern the country. With regard to the war, he believed that the policy of the Government, whether com posed of one party or the other, would be to abstain from war. The diplomatic transactions of the last few months would form a most important chapter in history. It would be one of their first duties to ascertain how the Government had conducted these negotiations in the interests of peace. It was said the Government had been grossly deceived, and they should inquire whether, if that were true, it wanwing to the weakness and credulity of the Minister, or whether they had been deceived, like other Governme nts, by a con spiracy to disturb the peace of Eu . rope. Ile . thought that upon the decision of that question the Ministry should stand or fall. The Ministry most competent to the admi nistration of international affairs should be in office. The state of affairs was most critical. The most matured expe rience should have the management of the present perilous crisis in our history. But he had ilbjected to this amend ment because he thought their fate should be decided upon their conduct of the foreign policy of the country. But they could not 'arrive at a fair decision upon that till the papers were upon the table of the house. He had made - no secret of his opinion. They should have in their hands the evidence upon which to found their judgment before con demning the Ministry. (Hear.) If they had appealed to the house for forbearance on that ground, he should hays supported them. But they had not done so. The Oppo sition had adopted a most manly course, and they had rested their claim to office upon the confidence of the house. That challenge had been accepted by the Chan cellor of the Exchequer. There was a common agree ment that the opinion of the constituencies should de cide the question. All who were returned for Lord Derby would vote for him, and those returned for the Liberals would go into the opposite lobby, and as he was returned with an unfavourable answer to Lord Derby'a appeal by his constituents he had no alternative but to vote For the amendment. Mr. K. SEY ME R in opposiug the amendment of the noble Lord, felt constrained to repeat what had already been said, that there could be no ground of complaint against the noble lord for bringing forward that amendment. (Hear.) The Government appealed to the country, and by the result of that appeal they were content to abide. He did not see how they could have taken the course recommended by the right hon. gentleman who had just spoken, for when a vote of general want of confidence was moved how could they select one single point—that of their foreign policy—and ask the house to wait till they had read the papers ? He would ask the right hon. gentleman, who seemed to have been looking out for an opportunity to support the Government, but had not been able to find it, what other course the Government could have taken ? He thought gentlemen opposite might well hesitate before they formally expressed want of confi dence in the Government, unless they could see their way to the formation of a strong and lasting Government (Hear.) Before going into the question of the difficulties that stood in the way of forming a Liberal Government, he would notice some observations of the noble lord the member for Tiverton as to the circumstances con nected with the formation of the present Government. The noble lord (Palmerston) twitted the Conservative party with having in the first instance supported the Conspiracy to Murder Bill, and afterwards going against it. But what were the circumstances? He (Mr. Seymer) recollected the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, not liking to take the unusual course of opposing a bill brought in by the Government of the day in its very first stage, said he would vote for its introduction, but expressly guarded himself, at the same time, against being understood by that act to give the measure a future support. (Hear.) On the) contrary, the right hon. gentleman stated that the measure was one which did not meet with his unqualified approba tion, and that the noble lord at the head of the Government should have sent a spirited reply to the demand of Count Walewski, such as Mr. Canning would have written. (Hear, hear.) And then the right hon. gentleman the member for Ashton took advantage of that speech of the right hon. gen tleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and framed a motion which the Conservative party, with the opinions they entertained on the subject, had no alternative but to support. (Hear.) That was the true history of the transac tion, which had not been quite fairly represented by the, noble lord the member for Tiverton. , They all knew the re sult of that motion. A Government was formed by Lord Derby, but not certainly after any eagerness on his part to seize the reins of power ; and the first act of that Govern ment was to establish friendly relations with our nearest ally and powerful neighbour, the Emperor of the French. Their next step was to procure the release from prison of the English subjects who had been so cruelly treated by the. Neapolitan Governrr mt, and whose case had been rather prejudiced than aided by the preceding Government. (Heart hear.) They then brought forward their India Bill, which was not very fairly received by the house and the county/. Hon. gentlemen opposite had better not say much about the country. He did not think the country would easily forget the assault made upon the Government by what was called the Cardwell resolution—(a laugh)—for of all the attacks made on a Government within his recollection, he never knew one which ended in so ignominious a failure. (Hear.) When the noble lord the member for Tiverton talked about the forbearance shown on his side of the house towards the Government, he (Mr. Seymer) denied that there had been m G a o ni ve f rn est m ed en in t wthasataoqtuawrrin. office e e mi rst On aathetntye attempt contrary,forbearance w e ar as an t c h e e made by the Opposition to eject them from power, which, however, so completely miscarried that it could not be repeated in the same session. Was that for bearance ? (Hear.) The Government then sought to deal with the question of church rates ; and the bill of his right hon. friend the member for Cambridge University received a generous support from the Conservative side of the house, and might have ended in a fair settlement of the question, but it was opposed by those members who, while willinF to relieve the Dissenters, were not willing to abolish churca rates in those places where they were collected without dif ficulty under the existing law. No doubt a Government in a minority were open to have a measure relating to church rates rejected in that way; but the fault lay with hon. gen tlemen opposite, who ought to have settled the question long ago, and who, not having settled it, should have as sisted the Government in doing so. (Cheers.) The same course was pursued in the case of the Reform Bill. The Government not having a majority were met in an un nsuai way by the motion of the noble lord the member for the City of London, who, taking one or two provisions of the measure which happened to be unpopular, insisted on taking the sense of the house upon them before it had been read a second time. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord the member for Tiverton seemed disposed to support the bill, or, at all events, to allow it to be read a second time. He thought the noble lord said as much, but it was defeated by the ingenious device of the noble lord the member for the City. The recent history of the Liberal party was ex ceedingly instructive. It was a singular fact that all the recent instances of the breaking up of Liberal Go , vernments had proceeded from the Liberal !side of the house. (A laugh.) He would refer to an instance just be fore the first formation of Lord Derby's Government. The carrying of a verbal amendment moved by the noble lord the member for Tiverton in the Militia Bill, in a very thin house, was so resented by the noble lord the member for the city of London that he immediately gave up the charge of the measure. The next case in which a Liberal Government was broken up by one of their own party occurred during the war with Russia, at the instance of the hon. and learned member for Sheffield, when he moved for a committee of inquiry into the origin of the calamities and sufferings of the army in thb Crimea. In another instance an attack on a Liberal Government emanating from the Liberal party as sumed the form of a " round-robin" addressed to the noble lord the member for the city of London, suggesting that he ought to resign, and resign he did. (A laugh.) Then there was the attack made upon the Government of the day on the question of the China war, and proceeding from another member of the Liberal party. He (Mr. Seymer) voted with ce y b e soughtr fo r Tiverton, todu in the h i his a rlao majority, address r awjta e or yssrTsis thtaytoieud, believe nb l t l ouh i b s tal t e teh o t inhe:setrhtb t he yeanpt m t hiji a C: wa nob eac n a majority on that occasion, and he never gave a vote with greater satisfaction in his life .. He complained that, in the appeal to the country which followed, the noble lord the mt s u e e r am y ll ative party were the abettors of the atrocities perpetrated rstocsnhhal during ooaf party rs short thd h heNu e avrta scCa obtainedot hi inno n sonpw a , frwo united.a for hie Conspiracy a . eB aw(i Bill. l a g . s H ou e s ( t m ed r fr . someymoffierc)etoonokthleeaqvueetso doubt it. He did not believe it, because there were questions on which the country called fora de cis i on, and with respect to which there were most decide dif ference s f opinion among them. . membersThe questionopposite. o f reform e would was n r e o f t er one t o o could ac t nnewahrichtwtoheayf in common. There was the ballot, a vital question. That was not a matter of detail, and it was a questionwhich he did not see the possibility of the united Liberal party settling satisfactorily. The noble lord the member for the city of London might be squeezable on this point. (A, laugh.) The right hon. gentleman the member for Carlisle was, he suspected, half squeezed already. But the noble lord the member for Tiverton was staunch. He had made many excellent and manly speeches against the ballot. It o co si ul te d w it h re o ma ma i i n nt an ain o e p d en th q a u t es a t a ion ex w :e t us h i h o o n n o . f gen the ; would not do to say that the ballot was to b e an open ques ttiloenm. e n ll o a p w p franchise without the ballot would be worse than nothing and only place the unfortunate labourer in a more depen dent position than the present constituency ? (Loud ch eers . )' The speech of the noble lord on the hustings Tiv erton must t must be unsatisfactory to the advanced Liberals on the, question of Reform, as they must have expected a good R. form programm,e from the noble lord. Heheld in hand by hi report of the noble lord' s speec h , revised w as published "price 4d.," an d , to tell the tr m ' which rather dear at the money. (A l augh.) He uth, it was never read a m ore meagre programme. The noble lord ought to be a lowering of the said he thought there County franchise, and the borough franchise, some transfer of seats there wa s some the transfer of seat s h e believed in Government Bill (" No," and he a r)—and such an extension of the suffrage as would not swamp the present constituencies, who had exercised the franchise •in a manner that had conferred honour upon themselves, and been attended with advantage to the country. (Cheers.) There was nothing in that to which hon. members sitting on his side of the house could not subscribe. (Hear, hear.) But there was a great deal in it incon s i s t ent with tl • re views of the hon mem b e r for Birmingham. He held in his hand s a rev i se d *edition of the speech of the hon. gentleman, which was published at is.. and which was betterworth ls., he thought, than the speech. of the noble lord was worth 4d. (A laugh.) The hon. member for Birmingham put forth a schedule of disfran chisement and the redistribution of seats. Would such a scheme be adopted by the united Liberal party ? He sus pected that a very small schedule of disfranchiseme nt would be satisfactory to the noble lord the member for Tiverton. (Hear.) The hon. member for Birmingham said in one of his speeches that hereditary legislation could not be a permanent institution in a free country. (Cheers, and cries of " Read on.") The hon. gentleman went on to say that, at all events, it would require extensive modification, and that last session the Queen proposed a system of life peerages. (Cheers.) But that was a legal arrangement, intended to increase the number of law lords in the upper House, and could not justify the hon. gentleman in saying that a House of Peers could not be a permanent institution in a free country. (Hear, hear.) They might be told that this was a harmless theory. But the hon. member for Bir mingham was not the man to hold opinions as mere theories. His opinions were not held for the closet. There was u° doubt he meant what he said, and that he would endeavour to give effect to his opinions as soon as he could. Mr. BRIGHT begged to say that if the hon. gentleman would read the speech he delivered at Glasgow he would find that the statement he had just made was entirely in- correct. (Cheers.) Mr. K. SEYMER did not know what the noble lord — (loud laughter)—lie begged pardon, the hou. gentleman -- meant. He had read to the house an authorised report of what the hon. gentleman said at Manchester. The hon. gentleman appeared to have qualified his statement, as he had qualified many others. (Cheers.) He wanted to kno w, and the house would want to know, how the united Liberal party intended to act with regard to principles which the hon. gentleman clearly did not intend to lie dormant, but which he would endeav our t o ac t u p on . He did not see how the united Liberal party wero to deal with the ques tion of church-rates. The noble lord (J. Russell) objec ted to the bill of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Walpole), be cause it gave up th e p r i nc ipl e o f an Established Church; while some hon. gentlemen opposite wanted to liberate the State from any c onnex i on with the Church. The se were questions that pressed for a solution, yet upon which hon. gentlemen opposite entertained irreconcilable diffe rences, (Hear, hear.) It was clear that a Government formed of such elements must rely upon the support of the Consernative side of the house against those who sat below important question gangway on its own side. Anothe r m ost question was the arming of the country. The hon. mem- ; ler (Mr. Bright) laughed at the militia and the riflemen, and his especial charge against the Government was that THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JUNE 10, 1859, I I I I I