The Sun. — London, England, 1835-02-25 00:00:00

ception made as against the late advisers of the Crown in reference to the commercial affairs of this great country. The revenues were flourishing—trade was most prosperous— an eulogium was delivered upon the happy state of our com mercial concerns, and the clearest evidences were afforded of the general prosperity of the country, without a particle of blame being attached to—without the least imaginable impu tation being cast en—the policy of the late AAiinistration. It was not for a single moment pretended that the dismissal of the late Administration arose from any incapacity on their parts; it was not from any want of success in their measures; it was not from any failure of any sort or description that on the 14th of last November the late Administration was dis solved. How had the Noble Duke opposite endeavoured to account for that dissolution ? He told their Lordships that a Noble Lord, now a: Member of that House, had, previously to the month of November, enjoyed in an eminent degree the confidence of the late House of Commons. Now, this w: a stin argument which he ( Lord Brougham) wished to put even more strongly for the Noble Duke than he himself had put it. That argument amounted to this—that Lord Althorp possessed to an unprecedented degree the confidence of the House of Commons ; that there never was bestowed upon any Minister more of the love, the respect, the confidence of the representa tives of the people, than upon the late Chancellor of the Ex chequer ; with the almost unrivalled eloquence of Pitt, with the gigantic powers of debate, and of every other sort and kind possessed by Fox, with the long experience of Sir Robert Walpole, and the many high qualities which secured to that Minister so much power in the House of Commons—not one of those distinguished men enjoyed anything like the pre-eminence to which Lord Althorp bad attained.—( Loud cheers.) In numbering Sir Robert Walpole with those whom he had named before him, he was not giving that Minister more than his deserts ; true, he had occasionally spoken lightly of matters which in an improved and purer age were looked upon seriously ; he had therefore laid himself open to the animadversion of those who were far less honest : he was still a great Minister, and worthy to be named with some of the greatest ; but not even he with all his great ser vices to the Crown, with all the favour he obtained and de served from the country, not even he, and not one of his successors now enumerated, had ever attained to so large a share of the confidence of the House of Commons as that pos sessed by Lord Althorp. If he did not fear that his saying so might be imputed to the influence of private friendship, he would say that Lord Althorp personally and individually en joyed more of the confidence of the House of Commons than any one of his predecessors. He felt that in saying this he was putting the argument very strongly for the Noble Duke, and he would, if ho could, put it stronger; and, now, what did it amount to ? The Noble Duke affirmed that the late Ministry could not go on. By what tenure did they hold their offices ? did they hold them par outer vie? had they no estate in theiri but for the life of another, and that other one having no connexion with them ? According to the Noble Duke, it was not an estate for the life of the King nor the life of the Parliament, they did not hold their places during good behaviour, nor during pleasure, nor as long as they were effi cient, nor upon condition of their measures being attended with success—no such thing ; they held them simply during the natural life of the late Lord Spencer, and no longer, that Noble Earl being then 78 years of age. The position contended for on the other side was this, that the moment Lord Spencer ceased to exist that moment the Administration must cease to _exist likewise. Upon whose authority did that statement rest ? The House must have been surprised to learn that this assertion was made upon the authority of Lord Grey ; he regretted to name him ; he regretted his not having yet taken the oaths and his seat permitted his being named in that House. Their Lordship's could not fail to have observed that all of a sudden that Noble Earl had become a great and para mount authority on the other side of the House. He had been spoken of by the Noble Duke as the Noble Earl who had so worthily filled the office of Prime Minister, forgetting how that Noble Earl had been often charged with nothing less than na tional robbery—how often he had been threatened with im peachment—of what exaggerated accusations he had been made the subject—with what invective he had been assailed out of doors, and how he had been vituperated within, the walls of that House ; that Noble Earl denounced as the au thor of a revolutionary bill,—as responsible for the revolution ary dissolution of Parliament,—as having sown with a broad cast the seeds of revolution,—as having aimed, by means of popular excitement, at the destruction of all legitimate govern ment, of the House of Lords, and of the monarchy—was now in a moment an authority of the highest order. All those topics of vituperation, all those causes of animosity, were laid as rest pulveris exigui jactu. All faults were now forgotten, and his Noble Friend's authority was held to be decisive, anti according to the Noble Duke did decide the question, the argu ment standing thus—because Lord Grey said that Lord Al thorp was the right hand of the Administration, it was in stantly concluded that the Government could no longer be carried on. It seemed to have been held by the noble Duke that he (Lord Brougham) :and his colleagues wee guilty of great presumption in attempting to carry on the Government ; and, as their Lordships must recollect, the authority of Lord Grey was quoted on behalf of this most remarkable argument. How strongly did such a mode of discussion remind him of the way in which texts of Scripture were quoted and twisted to serve the temporary purpose of an argument ? Now, if the authority of the Noble Lord were good for any thing, it was equally good throughout—if wise, be could not be wise on one question only, and of no value upon all the others. If the Noble Duke might quote him, so might he (Lord Brougham. ) A single exception in his favour could not be allowed, and if his name be made to serve tae ix-7)=a of one side of the House, why not those of the other? He should most unhesitatingly use tl.e a uthority of his Noble Friend as the Noble ha ,l dnn?„. :de begged of ma Aotate Duke not tol}o alarmed at his passing over one part of the discussion, to which, at his own convenience, with the permission of their Lordships, he should presently refer. Here some allusion wasmade by the Noble and Learned Lord,as as we understood, to the election of Speaker, upon which the Duke of Wellington intimated that that vote was not of so much moment as had been represented.) Theta the Noble Duke would like to have an amendment upon the address car ried by a majority of 10, or if by a majority of 40, it would be four times as good.—( A laugh.) Would not the Noble Duke .allow him to use the authority of the Noble Earl. What ! would the idol be worshipped only for a single occasion, and The image of the god be broken and cast away? It was time to tell, or rather to remind, the House of what that Noble Earl had said in the presence of 2,800 persons, who had heard his declaration, and by whom it was echoed and applauded. At that time, be it remembered that Earl Spencer was four months older than on the occasion when Earl Grey spoke of Lord Althorp as the right hand of the Administration. That Noble Earl said of the Tories Non meus hic sermo ; his words a ere. " The Tories are ashamed of their name, and have 'haltered themselves under the title of Conservatives." He did not quarrel with them for that ; one name was as good as another, and he hoped that they would be good Conservatives, notwithstanding the reforming mood, under the influence of which they were supposed to act. His Noble friend, on the occasion to which he referred, further said, " Those persons fancy they can take the Government. Let them only try it." He could observe that some Noble Lords opposite might ima gine that that observation was intended as advice to the Con servative party to assume the Government.—( A laugh.) It would be quite of a piece with the argument by which it was attempted to fix the responsibility of forming the new Govern ment upon his Noble Friend near him, because, and for that reason only, his servant had carried a letter to London from Sir H. Taylor to Sir H. Wheatley. Was there anything that could more completely expose the animus with which the discussion was carried on, than the manner in which that part of the argument was used? "They take the Go wernment ! Let them try it, and see what the country and what the House of •Commons will do." The idea was absolutely hope less—it was ridiculously impossible. As to the value of Lord Al thorp in the House of Commons, it was not overrated by Lord Grey : at the same time the death of Lord Spencer, though most unfortunate, was not unexpected. The advisers of the Crown at that time looked forward repeatedly to that event, and canvassed it in every point of view. As men of prudence—of ordinary prudence, they must have most deeply felt the loss—not, as the Noble Duke seemed to think, the total loss to the Ministry of Lord Althorp to the Administration, but his removal from one House to the other. He repeated, that the total loss of Lord Altborp to the Cabinet, great as it might be, was not contemplated, but even for that event they were fully prepared; on that point they had not the slightest hesitation; jt was a subject upon which they entertained not a par ticle of doubt, and those who represented them as having any dif. ference of opinion w;!treference to it made a most false representa tion, and still more false was the representation of those who had dared to represent, in the rose of known facts, that his Noble Friend near him had ever expre,;_sed to his Majesty a shadow of doubt as to the practicability of gang on with the govern ment, even though it should sustain such . a loss as that of Lord Althorp.—( Hear, hear.) Those persons woo madg such representaions, if deceived, were most grossly deceived--if they fancied them true, their imaginations were in a state ap proaching very closely to unsoundness ; but if they invented those falsehoods, and, knowing them to be false, propagated them, there was no language which he could utter in the presence of their Lordships that would adequately express his opinion of the total want of good faith which marked such conduct. — Whether the whole proceeded from an affection of the brain, or whether it was one of those tales the responsibility of which could not be affixed to any individual, by reason of one portion being re presented and the residue invented, gaining in its progress as it passed from one to another, so that no single relator could be held responsible for the entire—whether it were so or otherwise, this at least was true, that the whole began and ended in London, that there was not a colourable pretext for it, that there was "not a she ' dow of a shade" of reason upon which it could rest, that there never had been a question out of the city where he then addressed them. What, then, became of the whole argument ? It fell dead :to the ground. But then the authority of Lord Grey was quoted tv show that he had in effect advised the King to break up the Go vernment ; but he hoped their Lordships would remember that there never had been an admission on their part that the y were not pre pared to continue and carry on the Government. Their opponents, howevs , n-, told them that they knew better than the Members of the Government themselves, for they thought that the Government could not. be carried on, and their opinion must be received as de cisive. The Noble Duke opposite had put the question thus—Was Lord Grey Ole only person to have an opinion, and was the King not to judge ? He would meet the Noble Duke upon that ground. —(Hear, hear.) To change and to choose itt Ministers was the undoubted prerogative of the Crown.—( Hear.) Let their Lord ships only look at the meaning of that. In every State the filling up of offices was in some way or other provided for. A monarchy .did riot allow of elections : from the Monarch himself, down through all the gradations of office, appointments were not elective in this ,country. It was evident, then, that the power of nomina tion must be vested in some competent authority. In whom had the constitution of this country vested itiat authority, and for what purposes? Priviarily in the Monarch, for t;,.; good of the com munity at large i s , was a thing not to be used amusement ; it was not to be used as an idle or a pampered man might eitZ: is e the right of sending away his servants without notice and choosing others ; and he need scarcely suggest that the man w h o exerc i sed that right capriciously woul d be all the worse served for indulging his whims. If men of that description turned off their servants for no assignable cause and without notice—if they so made fools of themselves, they must pay for it. The Constitution invested the King with the prerogative of choosing his advisers, not for the purposes of his own gratification—nor for ,the advantage of a part of the nation—not for the injury of the majority, but for the benefit of the whole. The choice to the Monarch could not be one of gain or loss to him—it was not his own concern, it was a sacred trust, and in the exercise of that trust the King was himself a public servant, performing therein the highest of all his duties, one which, above all others, he should not deal with capriciously. An adviser of the King might tell him " You have an undoubted prerogative to change or to choose your servants"—and that to a certain extent was true; "your Majesty had much better have duke such a one than the earl who now serves you, or this marquis than that baron ;" but that indulgence of private whims and individual fancies was not constitutional, it was not the tenure according to which his Majesty held his high office. So long as the prerogative under consideration was exer cised for the good of the community, it could be safely held and efficiently wielded ; but the parties who advised the dismissal of an Administration upon no public or statable grounds, incurred a most serious responsibility. No sovereign of this country had a right to dismiss his Ministers unless upon public grounds, and, as he before showed, those who assumed office after any dismissal, were respon • sible for advising such dismissal, and no man had any right what ever to advise the exercise of that highest of the royal functions un less he could openly state and defend the grounds upon which that advice was given. In what way had the prerogative been exercised on the present occasion ? It had been exercised when Parliament was not sitting. In what manner had the prerogative been exer cised on former occasions? Since the Revolution:there were, he believed, but two instances of the Ministry being changed while Parliament was not sitting—both were in the reign of the late King. In the year 1765 there was a dismi ssa l of Ministers in con sequence of a quarrel with Mr. George Grenville. One of the dismissals was that of the Rockingham Administration, I , and in both of those there was as much of the - exercise of that kingcraft, which George the Third began early and practised late.—(Hear, hear. In the case of Lord Chatham the public were most anxious to obtain the benefit of his services. It might be true that there were those who thought that that cele brated man might be paralleled in the present day, though for his part he knew not by whom. Be that, however, as it might, Lord Chatham took an earldom and left the House of Commons, which no one ever did voluntarily, and thereupon he lost all his power i the great Prime Minister was turned out, the King was advised to take advantage of his want of weight ; then came that well known Administration which Burke had described us " a piece of tesse lated pavement, with here a bit of black, and there a patch of white." If it be necessary to dismiss an Administration, and he would not go the length of saying but that such an occasion might arise, Parliament ought to be called together immediately. Now, he would call • upon hit opponents, unless in the times of the Tudors or the Stuarts, to give a single instance in which there had been any Ministerial changes, otherwise than on assignable, constitutional and public grounds. If Ministers resigned, it was a sufficient cause. If they were torn amongst themselves by endless dissentions, if they differed from the Sovereign, if they differed from the country at large, if their measures were evidently ruinous, if dishonour abroad and disaffection at home marked the whole tenour of their government, any of these might be constitutional grounds of dis missal, and above all, if there happened to be a general feeling and a strong feeling of distrust and disapprobation throughout the country, it would form a sufficient ground.—(Hear, hear.) Those then which he enumerated were the only causes, and yet not a shadow of reason founded upon these was attempted to be given. He would ask any Noble Lord with the utmost confidence whether any one of those reasons applied in the present instance in the slightest possible degree ; the King's speech answered the question, both as to measures and otherwise, whether connected with the administration of affairs at home or abroad, in respect of measures ecclesiatical or municipal. There was no disagreement among the Ministers themselves. Since the change which took place in the month of June last, when the Government of the Noble Viscount (Melbourne) was formed, never did any shadow of dif ference of opinion even as to matter of detail—never did any one difference as to any one line of policy—never did any one hesitation in one person respecting the opinions formed by another, once ob tain, from the time when the Government was first formed till rthe day when it went down.—(Hear, hear.) There was no difference with the Sovereign—no occasion was given—no dissension took place—in short, there was not one of those reasons, nor any part or parcel of any one of those reasons, in existence to justify the disso lution of the late Administration. He had stated that George 111. was an experienced Sovereign in changing and making new admi nistrations, and the experience which had been little comparatively in 1766, and which being so confined, led him to commit some errors, forty years afterwards in 1806, with the lesson of the Ame rican war and its necessary consequences, adopted a different course being then advised by the friends of the present Cabinet, by a Noble and Learned Lord, by the late Lord Liverpool, the late Lord Lon donderry, then Lord Castlereagh, by Mr. Perceval, Mr. Canning, and by all those gentlemen who succeeded the administration which was then turned out. What took place on that memorable oc casion put the stamp of authority on what he had stated, and vindicated the opinion he had expressed of the limits within which the King's prerogative should be exercised of dismissing his Mi nisters. What was the course pursued by George 111. ? There never was a greater desire entertained, either at Court, or by a party, the Conservative party, then called Tories, to get rid of the Government of Lord Howick, after the death of Mr. Fox, well knowing, no doubt, the importance of that extraordinary man to that Administration. But how differently were things done then by wiser men and in better times ! The Whig Administration had then no favour at Court, the King's favour they had certainly not enjoyed since the coalition in 1784, nor had they the favour of the Tories. Well, Mr. Fox died September 13, 1806, there being ample notice of his approaching end for at least two months before, in consequence of the unhappy experiment he was obliged to un dergo. There was no hurry, neither public nor secret advisers, nor illustrious Dukes taken by snrprise.—(A laugh.) Did his Majesty then on the 14th of September, on the death of Mr. Fox, act as his present Majesty OR the 14th of November last, was ads vised to do on the death of Earl Spencer ? Did those great states men who counselled George 111., experienced, sage, eminent, and discreet men as they were, ever think of advising him, because Mr. Fox was dead, instantly to turn out the Whig Administration? No such thing; no such advice was given: they were allowed to remain in office till the end of March following, not from any want of inclination to turn them out—on the contraey there was every inclination steadily, unremittingly, uninterruptedly manifested, to employ any opportunity that could be taken advan tage of to dismiss them • but they were . allo;ved to re _ snAl_ir mt race six lol n e i r e ,. hec w an i se the thOUt at a onstitut tl on e cause. Nay, the King even allowed them to dissolve the Pa..:..- ment after the death of Ms Fox,' although he very plainly nne have foreseen that a second ctab5...1....ti,,n would. ,non occur. however, was not the course which his present Msjeet . , to pursue, clearly because it was thought that an opportunity ex isted, in the loss of Lord Althorp, for turning them out, although no charge whatever had been urged against them, no difference of opinion upon any question existing among themselves, and still being prepared satisfactorily to go on in conducting the Govern ment of the country. He now came to another part of the pro ceedings—the dissolution of Parliament which followed. And here he could not but observe a gross, glaring, and almost incredible in consistency in the argument of the Noble Duke—he protested if he *had not heard it with his own ears he could not have believed it. The Ministers were turned out because Lord Althorp was taken from the House of Commons. That was the argument. After Lord Althorp, who so deservedly and so eminently possessed the confidence of the House of Commons, left the lower House of Par liament, what reason, argued the Duke, had the Noble Lord (Mel bourne) to believe that the House of Commons would continue their confidence under another leader? The Noble Lord's Admi nistration was therefore dissolved, because the Commons would no longer confide in them, crippled by the loss of Lord Althorp. The Duke turned out Ministers because the loss of Lord Althorp pre vented the Commons from following them any longer. But, then, unfortunately, the next thing he did was, to turn out the House of Commons for confiding toe much.—(Hear, hear.) Ministers were turned out because, losing Lord Althorp, the House of Commons would not follow them, and then the House of. Commons was turned out because it would follow them too much, although Lord Althorp had left it. They might disguise it as they liked— they might wrap it up in boisterous assertion—they might cover it over with flimsy pretext in the well-turned periods of an address, or a mover and seconder's speech, or summon up a cloud of smoke in order to conceal it from their vision, but it was not difficult to pierce through, and to blow all that away with one breath. The plain truth was, they all knew there was but one reason for getting rid of the late House of Commons ; and what was that reason ? that it did not confide enough in the late Ministers ?—that they lost its confidence, having lost Lord Althorp ? No, no ; but that the late Ministers were still the favourites of that House, were still confided in, though deprived of the inestimable services of Lord Althorp, and that the new Ministers durst not allow that House to meet, knowing as well as he knew that their first vote would have been, not that they could not trust the late Ministers because of the loss of Lord Althorp, but that, although they regretted that event, confide in the late Ministers they would. That was the rea son, and the only reason, for the dissolution of the Parliament. Men ought always to be consistent in their pretences ; but, unfortunately, those who used the ratio suasoria and the ratio justifica were not always successful ; the one was some times found to be utterly irreconcileable with the other. It might have been urged that Lord Althorp's loss in the House of Com mons caused the dissolution of the Ministry ; on that ground the Duke might have rested his foot, and not, perhaps, been very easily remoVed_i but when he followed that up by dissolving the House of Commons, by turning them out after having assigned such a reason for turning away the Ministers, there was an end of all reasoning; nothing remained but pretext which could not for one moment deceive any man of sound, sober, and lo gical understandiug. He now came in the course of time and ar gument to the Ministers who had succeeded the Noble Viscount's (Melbourne's) administration, and the grounds on which the Noble Duke expected the confidence of Parliament. As to the dissolution, the Noble Duke agreed with the Noble Viscount (Melbourne) in maintaining that it was to be justified by the event. The Noble Duke said he expected the confidence of the House of Commons, and seemed to think his Noble Friend (Melbourne) a very unrea eonable man, because, on the first night of the session, he de manded a test of success before it could well be known whe ther they could succeed or not. Why, if nothing had occurred in the last few days—if, in place of what had happened, the house had shown itself ready, even before the chair was filled, to evince its confidence in the Duke, there might appear something in the argument, and it might have appeared unreasonable to call for the evidence of success be fore such a test could with propriety be applied ; but that test had been applied, and, in the surest manner of any that had ever been placed on, record. He never yet heard, since the revolution in 1688, of any one instance where a minister was defeated on the first day of a new Parliament—after recurring, as the King's speech had it, to the sense of the peo ple, which certainly was not to be gathered from the hustings, but from the voice of the people's representatives in Parliament, as sembled but for the late fire on the very spot out of which the late representatives were thrust by the proclamation—on the very day of the return of the writ, the first instance of the kind on record, those representatives left Ministers in a minority on the question of who should be Speaker of the House.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Such was the ground on which was to be raised the fabric of trust in the confiding spirit of the New House of Commons. Some men were constitutionally more sanguine than others, but, judging by all past experience of reasoning on probabilities, a more doubtful case for future confidence he never heard of. But there was another ground on which confidence was claimed. It seemed that the ex- Tories, the Conservatives as they were now called, had all of a sud den become reformers alses end they were told by the seconder of the address, if they (the old Refoorkers) wished to be consistent, if they really wished for reform, they shes 44 give credit, confidence, and support to the present Government, wig? are quite as pod Reformers :t h li n e when ?—(Heir, hear.) Was it situ„ the testing of the writ? or since the return of the since the vote on the --• W in.:e il l e y e c s i . 9cti S o i n nl r peradventure writ? when thq reforming spirit come on these gentlemen, ve l !o nefrh9 question or . 1 .. :. Qneaker . P. 4 did this new - mere now for re forms Cf corPOrgtions in law, in the church, in the state, :: the tithe, in the Marriage Act, who were now for making marriage a civil contract, and abolishing all laws for Dissenters and for every body else—the very men who a few month s ago w ou ld no t li s t en to any thing of the sort—(h ear , hear)—who told those who pro posed such things they were pulling down the church about 1 the ' • ears—who inveighed again s t th em as revolutionary —who chal lenged them as rebellious---who declared that they had either fools' Sue] was advise heads on their snoulders or traitors' hearts in their breasts—when and whence had those marvellous, those miraculous conversions taken place ? He hoped his experience of men had not made him distrustful of their honesty and good faith—he hoped that having lived so long in the world, as unfortunately he had, the consequence was not that he entertained a worse opinion of the character, prin ciples, and common honesty of his fellow-creatures than he ought ; but he could not help saying, and it was the result not more, per haps, of reason and experience, than of a sort of instinct, which, after all, characterised our common nature, an all but invincible instinct to mistrust all sudden, unaccountable, miraculous conver.. sions.—( Hear, hear.) That a man should at once, from the enemy of reform—from the drearier of change—from the vitupe rator of all innovations—from him who confounded with revolution, with anarchy, with political insanity, if not depravity, any one that would dare to touch one of the outworks of any of the vene rable institutions of the country in church or state—that such a man as this who had signalised those opinions by years of uninter rupted, unabated, pertinacious hostility to every species of reform, and regarded it as synonymous with destruction—that such a man, whose conduct had recorded all that in the eyes of the world, whose speeches had sounded it forth in their ears, session after session, whose protests had enrolled it and stigmatized it in the boldest language on their Lordship's journals—(Hear, hear. ) that that very man should all at once, on the 14th of Noveraber, 1834—without any event having happened—without any change of public affairs—without any but 24 hours' experience added to his former stock—without any time for reflection, neque spatium lo cumee dolori, to mourn over former opinions, to balance conflict. ing emotions—no time but between the opening of the King's let ter, reading it, and getting into his carriage to go to Brighton — that such a man should have so decided and operative a change pro duced on him all at once, in so short an interval, appeared certainly to him (Lord Brougham) talking moderately, one of the most un accountable phenomena in humam nature, which he had "ever yet, either as a statesman, a philosopher, or a man of the world, been called on to contemplate. But then the argument still was, " onl " y trust them, for only see what had been done in former times. This was not the first time that argument had been used.—( Hear. ) This was the Noble Duke's second conversion, and in 1828 nobody inveighed so eloquently and so pathetically as the Noble and Learned Baron on the woolsack (Lyndhurst) against the Catholic Emancipation Bill. On that occasion he had, to be sure, altoge ther begged the question, as the Noble Duke did on the presentoc casion ; but the Noble Duke did so in a sturdy manner,—(A laugh)—having laid it down as an indubitable proposition, that the late Ministers•could not do without Lord Althorp ; he declared • all that was perfectly well known, and therefore Ministers must be turned out.—(A laugh.) But the Noble and Learned Baron was a beggar of another sort,—(Laughter)—a more rhetorical, more dexterous, and therefore less faithful beggar.—(Continued laughter.) ." ridentem dicere verum " Quid vetat ?" When pushed to ascertain extent, when exposed in its naked de formity, nothing was so ridiculous as dishonesty and inconsistency. The Noble and Learned Baron, then, had given them an example of the nimbleness with which he was capable of being converted. A Right Hon, Baronet, the nominal head at least of the pre sent Administration, just as the Noble Duke was the real one, was very well known, in connection with the Emancipation ques tion,' as were Mr. Goulburn, and Several others, the stedfast and fhrmidable enemies of the measure ; and such was the pre cedent on which they were now told to rely,—the former con duct of the Noble Duke, to which his injudicious supporters appealed, when in the face of the country and the people's Re presentatives they challenged the confidence of the British na tion—" Don't doubt that they will reform. True, that nq set of men ever pledged themselves so stoutly against it—true, that no men ever committed themselves so deeply against all change— true, that ever since entering on public life no men ever thwarted so much all measures of amelioration and improvement, except when beaten, or placed in minorities of one in the other HoUse of Parliamont ; but never mind, don't doubt them, they are capable of doing again what they did before, by abandoning all their former supporters, changing all their former principles, and becoming con verts in !4 hours to contrary opinions !" That was the argument on the other side. Now there was, undoubtedly, something in this ;it went a great way to settlewhatdegree of contidencesuch men should have. But he thought that the people to whom they should appeal for confidence should be those who had tried them—they should appeal to a Noble Baron above (Lord Roden as we understood), who did not change his opinions although he was deserted by his political friends—or to an illustrious Duke (Cumberland). They had tried them—they knew what they were made of—they had formed an estimate of their trustworthiness from what they remem bered of their former conduct, and to those he should refer them. He was not to be taken in by any such pretensions. No one re joiced more heartily than he did in the conversion of those noble and right hon. persons to the opinions he had always entertained in favour of Catholic emancipation. But he freely confessed—and he was bound now to state a qualification of his former opinions—he freely confessed that he was a dupe on that occasion. —(Hear, hear.' Not on the Catholic question, on which his opinions never varied—not on the excellonce of that measure, though unhappily too long delayed to produce its full effect--(Hear, hear)—but he was bound to retract the assent he then justly and fairly gave to the defence urged by, those noble and right hon. persons who had brought it forward for the sudden and (as their adversaries said) unaccountable change of opinion. They said that they had become convinced that emancipation was necessary in order to save the state. He had never doubted that, but they declared they had at length arrived at a knowledge of its truth ; and they added, that no persons could carry the measure except themselves ; and that they retained office in order to carry it into effect. Not that they had changed their opinions to keep their places ; but that in their pla ces, they changing their policy could, and alone could, carry that mea sure which at the eleventh hour they had discovered to be necessary to the safety of the State. He listened candidly, and not only candidly, but cheerfullt, to that excuse. Anxious for the success of the measure, he did all he could to further it, and in fact he did more than he could fairly be called on to do, as a party man, upon that occasion. No doubt it was said that Whig leaders were always factious, and looked only to the turning out of a rival party ; but he would be bold enough to make this statement, which he had never made before, that he and the late Mr. Huskisson, at 5 o'clock on a Thursday evening, a very remarkable day in the recollection of some present, when they had been dismissed from his Majesty's service on account of the Catholic question, having heard the state ment iof what was going on at Windsor purposely communicated to them ov a ' , id. Mr. Huskisson, that disinterestedness and honest love teinn iked - steady devotit., that wince he thought it his duty. -4ivirtics - place, be (Lord Brougham) acting in concert with him, and tcok occasion to avow to Parliament, for the purpose of its being known elsewhere. and preventing the dismissal then contemplated, that rla power on eo.rii, could induce either of them to take office, or be accessory to any arrangement for succeeding those who were about to be expelled on account of the Catholic Bill.—( Hear, hear.) He had already declared that the individual who took an office from which another Minister had been removed, in law and in fact rendered him self responsible for his dismissal, and on that principle he acted ; he refused to take office, and announced that office would be offered to him in vain, because he knew that no man could then be acces sory to any new ministerial arrangement without incurring the greatest of all possible evils. He knew that office would have been offered, not for the purpose of rendering them odious in the eyes of men, as in the case of a similar most disgraceful of all offers re specting the Princess of Wales, that by coming into office they should engage to give up the principle of the . Catholic Question, but as the means of holding out a threat upon the then Ministers. He had no doubt but that Noble Lords and Right Hon. Gentlemen did as they said—merely kept their places to carry a measure which was necessary for the safety of the empire, and which they felt they alone could carry. Nevertheless their conduct was covered with equivocal circumstances. It was always Anispicious when people change their principles and gain something, although cer tainly it might be a proof in some cases of magnanimity and ho nest devotion to the public well-being. But that was a case which should only occur once in a Statesman's life. A man might once get himself into that false position—he might once expose himself with impunity to such a load of suspicion ; but he must beware of trying such an experiment a second time, for assuredly no weight of reputation, no amount of public service, would ever enable a man with impunity to play the same game twice.--( Hear.) At all events the circumstances , now were materially changed ; and if the Noble Duke thought he could alone carry the Emanci pation Bill before by remaining in office, assuredly he was not the only one who, in the opinion of the county, was competent now to carry into operation the principles of Reform.—( Hear.) What had they done since they came into Offi ce ? th e N o bl e Lord would ask. Ihey (the Opposition) were desired to give them a trial. A trial ! Why, had they not been tried all their lives? They had been in one constant course of trial ; and all the trials they had had had only produced a constant train of convictions. They had not. only been found wanting in reform, but the very bitterest oppo nents of it. Why was the political world to be in a worse situa tion than an individual with respect to servants ? A servant came to an individual and desired to be employed ; he met with a re fUsal ; he desired to have a trial ; he was told he had had a trial before—there had been very suspicious circumstances in his accounts--the mistakes had all been on one side, and al though he (the servant) stated that nobody could do what was required but himself, yet after no less than twelve years' trial, he had been invariably found wanting. Just so it was with those who now supplicated for trial. It was, therefore, quite a joke to ask for further trial. He (Lord Brougham) would now inquire what their conduct had been ? They were going to reform ; they were going to turn over a new leaf ; they had become converted, and were going to reform everything in church and state. If that were so—if they were true and honest Reformers, why did they turn off the Reformed Parlia ment ?—(Cheers.) The Reformed Parliament was ready made to their hand—it was in its youth—it had not been enervated by any improper excesses; it had not been sapped by intrigue or injured by old age ; and notwithstanding all that, the very first act which they did was to turn off that Reformed Parliament--and why ? Why, because they were Reformers, and because they wished to give Reform to the people ! In truth, they did not exactly say so, but that was the gloss which lie (Lord Brougham) put upon it. The real fact was, that they had dissolved that Parliament because it was a Reformed Parliament, and becanse they wanted another What was the conduct of the present Government at the election which had just taken place ? Wherever a gentleman appeared on the hustings to support violent Reform measures, he (Lord B. ) could very well understand the Noble Duke when he said, " Don't let the Government give him their support," for although the Government was composed of Reformers, yet it was of mode rate Reformers ; but when a moderate Reformer and an Anti- Reformer appeared on the hustings, he (the Noble Lord) would only ask the House, which of those men Government had sup ported ? Nay, they actually bragged that they had got ninety or ninety-five Anti-Reformers into the present Parliament.. Was that a specimen of their new-born zeal—was that a retracting of their steps ? Alas ! he feared that all that had been heard of their preceding conduct, and their sudden change, would vanish into nothing when put in contrast with the first act of the Administration in dissolving the Reformed Parliament, and in their second, in opposing every reform candidate who had appeared on the hustings. Nevertheless, Parliament had been dissolved, and he entirely agreed with his Noble Friend lately at the head of the Go vernment, that anything louder than the solemn warning that had been given at the hustings, and even since, could not be given to the present Miuisters, against rash and daring proceedings. No man, except in one or two instances, had ventured to come to the hustings except under the colours of Reform ; and that exception was, or those exceptions were, in some county where influence pre vailed, or in some borough where corruption existed that required to be reformed. He should be glad to see what Government would do in that respect ; he would anxiously watch it, desirous of seeing whether or not it would disfranchise those boroughs from which it gained its members. Some exceptions, too, there were, and he trusted for the character of English gentlemen those were few, in which gentlemen came forward professing principles on which they did nqt iptorkd t p He had heard of one or two wh o on the hustings professed strong F - efigrE4 priPciPle§. Pe had heard of one or two who were aspect by their ethistitgePes .... , timents were with respect to t x h i e inis p present had succeeded two who, outbidding their opponents had so .xeeptions, but still one exception went to prove the rule, and the general rule had been, that the Reformer alone had been chosen at at a popular election. Upon the whole, therefore, his ( Lord Brougham's) expectation from the present Government of anything like reform was confined and limited; and although Government expected some support from the present Parliament, the statement of that expectation was accompanied with very plain indications, that if they did not receive it they would have recourse to the desperate expedient of a second and immediate dissolution. Although there had been a sort of clamour raised a short time ago, when his Noble Friend had mentioned his understanding to that effect, that it would not be, yet the Noble Duke had, when on his legs, taken no opportunity of denying it. His (Lord Brougham's) expecta tion therefore was, that some such rash attempt as that would be resorted to, which he would fairly say would be an attempt upon the Constitution of the country, a direct attack ,on that Constitu tion, and an inroad on the best and only security of the Throne itself. That was far from being a chimerical notion ; and would nothing be done against the Reform Bill? When he recollected the language in which that measure was received—when he knew that in one House of Parliament the present Ministers and their friends stated that measure to be, in distinct terms, one that was calculated to create the worst despotism that ever existed in any part of the world—a measure to fill the House of Commons with mob demagogues, to the exclusion of all wise and prudent men—a measure which involved, the confiscation of the funds, the destruc tion of tithes, the abolition of nobility, and which went to tear the crown from the Sovereign's head—when in one House it was so described, and when in the other it was, perhaps not in such lan guage, but in language similar, described in a protest on the jour nals of that House as inconsistent with the safety of the Monarchy and the best institutions of the country—as fatal to them all ; when these were the opinions, and when that was the language of the present Ministers regarding the Reform Bill, was he en tertaining a vague, a groundless, a chimerical, a fantastic appre hension, when he believed that that Bill would not be safe in their keeping? He did not think they would be doing justice to their own consciences if they did not do something to thwart the working of that Bill. He would put himself in a parallel case : supposing, contrary to all his strongest opinions, deeply rooted principles, and powerful feelings, politically and as an individual, that a clamour arose in the country, massacres having taken place in the West India Islands, that this country had become overwhelm ingly depressed in consequence of the state of the. West India mar kets, and a great re-action, as it was called, had taken place on the subject of slavery, which might be deemed by some a sufficient reason for bringing in a bill to abolish the great measure of ne gro emancipation, and which being done; there would be no lan guage that h e co u ld use th a t h e wou ld fail to employ in depre cating such a step, or in raising the country and the Government against it; nor would he fail to enter his strongest protest against it; but supposing it was carried by a majority of 44, the majority on the Test and Corporation Acts, would he be the person who who would come down next day, and say that he would carry that Act into operation ? No, his should not be the unholy hand that would assist in any way in abolishing such an act of mercy and sound policy; and ,admitting that the repeal had passed, he might _be reduced to despair, but still he would live in some hope of being able to undo the act ; and supposing him to have come into office again, he should feel himself bound in sound policy, in honest sen timent, to labour night and day in undoing that act which he had striven against from beginning to end. When, then, he felt that he would be bound to act in that way, could he suppose the Noble Lords opposite would or could do otherwise in regard to the Re form Bill ? He was only giving them credit for acting with the same integrity that he himself would act in such circumstances. For that reason, he was confident the Noble Lords opposite would conduct their proceedings against the security of the Reform Bill. Let them, then, by dissolving Parliament, wear out the people by election after election, if they durst. Let them try it ; and if they but got a majority at any election, let the people of the country be well assured that the first act of a Conservative majority in Parliament, in whatever way obtained, would be to re-enact a part at least of the system of rotten boroughs.—(Hear, hear, hear.) To be sure, he should be told that the' Noble. Duke and the Right Honourable Baronet at the head of the Govern ment had said the Reform Bill was now a part of the Consti tution. That might be very true, but then came this melancholy situation—that the same Right Hon. Gentleman used to represent the Protestant Establishment as being part of the constitution and laws of the country in the same way ; he used to say the same thing of the rotten borough system—the same of the Catholic dis abilities, and yet he brought in a Bill for Catholic Emancipation. Who then would wonder, if a Conservative majority was obtained, that they should say the whole of the people were against the Re form Bill, and that away it should go ? What would become of the opinion then that it was part of the Constitution ? That was the misery of having opinions of a thing being a part of the Con stitution. Why, they took it up and laid it down just as a man would a cloak, using it only for a particular purpose—here to-day and gone to-morrow ; so that what was parcel of the Constitution to-day was no longer so in 24 hours hence. They considered that they had aright to be Reformers, anti-Reformers, or Orangemen, just as they thought the country required. The people of this country, however, had one security ; and he would say unto them, never be taken in by the professions of untried men ; let them always adhere to those who had been their friends, their supporters, and fought the battles of the Constitution with them. Let them adhere to those who had been the friends of the policy which the people had adopted for their own ; let them never more think that either the Reform Bill itself or the continuance of that Constitu tion which it had given, and with which it had blessed the country, or that any other Reforms to which it might lead, could ever be safe in the promises and hands of those who had from the moment cf its agitation unflinchingly opposed it. Never let them trust those who had before gone from their pledges ; but above all, he would say let them trust their tried Reformers, and stick by their Reformer', in whom they had a right as rational and prudent men to confide. What might be the issue of the conflict into which the Noble Duke had thought fit voluntarily to enter, what might be the issue as regarded the two branches of the Legislature, was not for him to say. Of one thing he was morally certain, that if any desperate attempt should be made to overawe the people of this country by mere force and power, or to wear them out by re peated appeals to their sense as it was called, but which would be come appeals of a very different nature if persisted in —(Hear, hear)—if any attempt should be made to set at nought the sense of the country, after the appeal had been made of a highly unneces sary, unconstitutional—ay, the Noble and Learned Lord would say, of an impeachable kind—(llear, hear)—in the circumstances in I ' that :.-kpeal was made; and instead of carrying on the Go vernment as the wisest and ablest, and the most honest—ay, and the trust firm-minded of former statesmen were always contented to carry it on—he meant in deference to the sense of the, people, aril in c , liance with that sense, as declared legally, regularly' and constitutionally by their representatives in Parliament as sembled; then woe be unto them, whomsoever they might be, who should attempt to govern against and in spite of the House of Commons, and to set up the House of Lords as go verning the nation, for it would come to that--(Cries of " Hear, hear")—thereby to present to the people of England the government of an Aristocracy, which it then would'purely be, and which of all forms of Government that ever cursed mankind, as uniformly admitted, would be the one most to be execrated, without being the most respectable. The Noble and Learned Lord felt bound to state his apprehensions as to this. He belieeled the intention to be that of insisting upon neglecting, if not of run ning counter to the sense of the people. Things were regarded as frivolous, indications were set at nought, merely because they came from the other House of Pailiament. They were told that majori ties in the House of Lords were to be considered as well as majori ties in the House of Commons ; and the want of confidence of one of the houses, the distrust of the House of Commons, the sense of the dissolution of the House of Commons, were all to be set aside, utterly disregarded, because in the Lords there was an overwleelming, an overpowering majority in favour of his Majesty's proceeding. That was not a wise decision—not a judicious course. If anything could.make the House of Lords more hated than an other, it would be, which he hoped and trusted, for the sake of the country, would not take place—that of retreating back on the sense of the House of Lords, and despising the approbation of the House of Commons.—(Cheers. ) The LORD CHANCELLOR said he rose, not for the puiiose of answering all the details which the Noble and Learned Lord had entered into, and still less of taking notice of the threats he had so plentifully dealt in. —(Hear.) But as he had,made a charge against him (the Lord Chancellor) which was utterly without foundation, he rose for the purpose of meeting - that charge, and for the purpose of defying the Noble and Learned Lord to a proof of his statement . He (the Lord Chancellor) asserted most positively that the Noble and Learned Lord had maligned him in the statement he had made. It was true that he had on a former occasion opposed the Roman Catholic Bill ; it was true that at a subsequent period. he supported that measure to the utmost of his power. The grounds upon which he had adopted those different courses he had upon former occasions stated;_ they were matters of history, and he would not now enter into them. But the Noble Lord (continued the Lord Chancellor) has dared to say that I pursued the course I took for the purpose of retaining my possession of office. I deny peremptorily the state ment of the Noble and Learned Lord. I say, if I may make use of the expression, he has uttered an untruth in,so expressing himself.— (Loud cries of " Hear, hear." " Order, order," and much confu sion.) My colleagues at that time, some of whom are now in the House, know that we were at the time when that measure was brought in firm in our possession of the Government. My friends who are present know the accuracy of my statement, which is this, —that we were satisfied the tranquillity of Ireland could not be pre served unless - we adopted that measure and changed our policy-- (Cries of " Hear, hear, hear")—and so far from that measure having been brought forward and supported by us with a view to preserve our places, it must be well known that we hazarded our places by pursuing that course, and that we actually resigned our offices in consequence of the course that was then taken.—( Cheers. ) What right, then, has the Noble and Learned Lord, in his fluent, and I may say flippant manner to attack me as he has dared to do ?—(" Hear, hear," and much cheering.) But I pass this subject over. The Noble and Learned Lord has mis represented, as I understood, the Noble Duke. The Noble Duke said, he did consider himself responsible for the dismissal of the late Ministers ; and the particular statement into which the Noble Duke entered was for the purpose of satisfying your Lordships, and for the purpose of satisfying the country, that he knew nothing of the fact of the dismissal until after it had taken place—(Hear, hear)—but that having acted . afterwards in the way in which he did, by the law and the Constitution of the country he considered himself responsible for the act.—(Cheers.) That was a misrepre sentation of the Noble and Learned Lord. His quickness and his sagacity must have caused him to understand the Noble Duke, and canascribe what he stated only to an intention to pervert the Noble Duke's statement.—(" Hear, hear," " Order, order," and great confusion. ) Lord BROUGHAM rose , and said , as soon as silence was ob tlaeienrded—thalt hewill just use the same language to the Noble an d L earne d uses to me, if he chooses to make this all arena of indecency. When he says that I perverted what the Noble Duke said, I can only say that he has misstated every word that I h ave used from beginning to end, and that he has no right to say I in, tended to pervert. The LORD CHANCELLOR said—Perhaps I had no right in strictness to say that the Noble and Learned Lord intended to per vert, but I have stated my reasons for the conclusion to which I came; those grounds were satisfactory to my mind, and the Noble Lord has not denied the correctness of my statement. Lord BROUGHAM—Every word of it is incorrect. The LORD CHANCELLOR--With respect, then, to the dis. missal of the late Ministers, allow me to recall to your Lordship? recollections the circumstances under which that took place ; and I am ,quite sure your Lordships will feel that if we had actually been the advisers of that measure, as we really were not, the course that was pursued was the correct and proper 0ne,....( Hew., hear.) The Noble Duke has directed your attention to the circumstances that took place at the time of the secession of four of the most he doubted whether at that particular moment he Government, and' in your I;Ordsliips'. hearing par ticular and leading members of the late Government at that period, a The ergent solicitation of his • colleageee and the Noble Earl at the head of it. The Noble Earl was desirous "That was the first breieb rpede in the G to use the e L 4 e niAuggespe.t Ait.Ahfartepe7eaetidsied(cfoonrtivie iftr cof} Il ea a tn rc e ) down to the goit4o dcoeof4tirtlardeinsodictifirrectinvyi,ngoiiano; he No N b o le bl e e te an d e theneCi • ;n which he was placed, and said that he time;n vC u r e P d n the e t P h t e their he had beard of one in strenuous opposition to the nev. _ against their opponents in getting returned, because tut, .._ outbid them ; and yet those gentlemen had, in opposition to their the circumstax“..... , professions, and in violation and breach of their pledges, suddenly considered the position of Lord Althorp in tue nouse of ,om ; turned round to the supp or t 0 the present Ministers. Those were mons as - essen ti a l to the continuance of the Government. H was sure., it .would ,be found, when their principles and, inr - ^''',T e _° •.c ere more fully (levP.ored. that . i! , ey mere piirsumg a eon L 0" was worthy the sanction of the c,onntry,—( Cheers. ) He was sure . , that the House of Commons would follow a course consonant with the liberal feeling of the country, and those principles which were founded in justice.—( Cheers. ) Lord BROUGHAM—The Noble and Learned Lord has thought proper to charge me, if he might use the expression, though it was an odd way of using it, with uttering an t e t h i n r e t:Ft i h ir : The Noble Lord must know the difference between an , , opinion and a mis-statement of a fact ; and this is the fir e s f t t , i , in cl e r.. , ever heard of any but a wrangling clown—( Loud cries der")—l repeat, none but a wrangling clown would c:mfuse the difference between an erroneous statement and a false opinion. I stated the fact in nearly the same words the Noble Lord chose to repeat it ; I stated that thbir enemies—l (lid not entertain the , no tion, for I defended them against the attack—their enemies said they had sacrificed their principles on the Catholic question for s the sake of keeping in their places, meaning thereby that the Govern ment_ ought to be broken up, that any other hands rather than theirs might have brought forward the measure ; not that I e" my opinion, but I suspended it ; and the great anger of the 1_ Noble and Learned Lord makes me think that now I ought to do N m than susliend it. ' The LORD CH AN C! e L s L r O r y for he R— Ift vin heN g s o p b e l k e e a n n ads I d I. eaird, bu n ed Lt ro Lord says he did not say so, I a warmth was occasioned by my conceiving it to be an offensive at tack. However, I must apologize after this retraction— Lord BROUGHAM—No, no • I must not be understood to re tract. I stated that I defended the Noble Lord in 1828, but I said that when people repeated conduct a second time, which was suspi_ cious and equivocal before, but which I had then defended, I might suspend my opinion uow.—(Cries of " Order." occasioned eee A d lU b L y G se ß ve A re V l E then Peers leaving b gt u h t in consequence of the noise eneuse,hisLerdshipwa. inaudible for some time. The Noble and Learned Lord had said that the dismissal of the late Ministers was entirely satisfactory to the country, and he instanced a meeting at Manchester, which con sisted of the friends of Mr. Cobbett, and. he said the people saw Peel, that there was no alternative bat Mr. Cobbett or Sir Robert _ as they did not wish the return of the late Ministors. But there was no alternative ih the question, Mr. Cobbett and Sir R. Peel being both on the same side. The reason why Mr. Cobbett Nobleo posed the return of the late Ministry was one which the„ t Duke would not wish to have urged against him—the passing of the Poor Law Bill.—(Hear, hear.) That was the reason why n adverse resolution was carried at Manchester. But what we,: the real e real opinion of the respectable inhabitants, as displayed in the general election -? They - returned Mr. Poulett Thomson and Alr. M. Phillips by a triumphant majority, against the sup porter of the Noble and Learned Lord's Governmen e t, bbe w t r split his vote and combined his forces in favour of c The result of the elections in the city of London ; the metropo litan boroughs, and 'the great provincial towns had been e,„lr tirely different to that which the new Government anticipated. sf Robert Peel had declared at the dinner given at the Mansion house that he must be supported by men on whom the country could also rely. But what had become of the men upon whose support he had calculated? What became of Sir George Mistral . in Scotland , and what became of the newly-appointed Lords of the . ) -Admiralty, who sought to be returned to Parliament after they had accepted office ? Why they were as much scattered as ever a con voy was by a storm. It was quite true, as the Noble Duke had mentioned, that Lord Palmerston had been ousted from the repre sentation of Hampshire, and that the reformers had also suffered a defeat at Chatham, but the triumph of the principles of reform was notwithstanding, fully established by the result of the late elections. But then the House was told that the present Government, ought to have a fair trial. Had they not, however, been tried already and found guilty, for four years, of incapacity to guide the helm of the state? They were condemned by the country simply on the evidence afforded by their previous character ; and they Were, not fit to be trusted by the country, they were no t en titled to the confidence of Parliament. With respect to the question of the Irish Church, it appeared that his Majesty' s Mi n i s t er s had put into the mouth of the Sovereign something which implied an intention to effect a settlement of that important question. He hoped they were sincere in that intention, but he owned that be felt no great confidence that they would fulfil the wishes of the country in that respect, particularly when he remembered the waist ner in which a majority of that House had acted on tha' same question at the close of the last Parliament, when a measure for the benefit of the Church of Ireland was brought in by his gar' jesty's then Ministers ' and defeated by one of th e most f ac tious , votes ever given in Parliament—( Hear, hear .) Th e re j ect i on 0' that measure had occasioned not only the greatest possible distress' to the Irish clergy, but it had also produced party strife and blood shed. The Earl of RIPON commenced by stating that ii, ease sot "big intention to vote for the amendment proposed by his Noble Friend , but, on the contrary, to support the original motion—( Hear, hear.) At the same time he conceived he was bound to state, that although prepared to adopt that step, he was not so fully prepared to give his unqualified support to his Majesty's present Ministers. It might 'goo.. pected from him, considering his former connexion with a t e Isis Government, to explain the reasons which induced him U P withdraw from the Ministry of Earl Grey ; but he did not think tha S he was called upon at the present time to enter upon thrg explanation , further than to say that he felt himself compelled, 'rom a f e eling of positive duty, to abandon the colleagues with whor l he was then Ws: elated, and having adopted that course, he felt slat it was impossible be could give those colleagues any longer his support, differing from thei a as he did on a great and important question. He felt that he could b° longer place the same confidence in Earl Grey's Government that he herd done before, and when Lord Grey himself resigned, he felt that his true in the Government was still further shaken.--(Hear, hear.) With re gard to the present ministers, he felt that he could not give them his unqualified support, but at the same time he was not disposed to oppose them, unless their own acts and measures compelled him to do so. ID was willing, in short, to give them a fair trial, but be would add that 'ilie nature support of ministers would depend upon their acting up to the principles they avowed, and upon the sort of measures which they should bring forward for the sanction of Parliament. His noble and learned friend has argued, that because men on former occasion, were opposed to particular measures, they were not, however, en titled t° credit because they happened to change their opinions and adv d " cate prim iples which they had previously denounced. That, however, was a princ ple utterly untenable. For himself, he hag voted WOs t every measure of Reform brought into the other House of Parliamen" and yet he formed one of the very Ministry that passed the Refotr e Bill, and his Noble and Learned Friend never considered it a degrade" tion to be associated with him when that great measure was brough t forward. In advocating that Bill, he had made personal sacrifices, bu t. ' still he gave the measure his feeble but earnest support, and h e never heard his Noble and Learned Friend say, that because he had formerrf opposed Reform, he was therefore unfit to sit in a Cabinet in which Ole Reform Bill was proposed, although his Noble and Learned Friend WeS fully aware that he had invariably voted against Reform in the }I" of Commons. He would not enter into circumstances which led to the dissolution of the late Government, but with respect to the circum stances which occurred during the interregnum, he certainly agre ed so far with his Noble and Learned Friend, that those circumstances were to a certain extent unconstitutional, and could not be defended, unleet . the exigency of the case rendered them absolutely necessary. He void d go further, and say, that some Parliamentary notice ought to be taken°. those circumstances, unless,' they could be fully justified ; but having heard the explanation of the Noble Duke, Isedid not think there we re any grounds fbr pursuing the inquiry. With regard to the measures proposed in his Majesty's speech, he confessed that they appeared• to him rather indistinct and unsatisfactory. There was nothing tang'ble proposed, and no principles laid down for Minist,ert to act upon, from which the country might feel some assurance that the line of policy intended to be pursued was in conformity with the feelings and wishes of the people. Certainly those who wished fo r something more explicit, and who felt no confidence in the Gore:rumen", might move an amendment for the purpose of eliciting more direct DP formalion s but this he would say, from long experience, that it wit° hardly possible in a King's Speech that the measures to which it re ferred could be distinctly shadowed out an., set forth in detail.' Tite r ! was one thing, h owever, perfectly clear --that the measures intended '"' he brought forward by Government mist be in confOrmity with the prin ciples of telbrin, and must accord with the feelings and happiness of the people. He would not enter at length into the various questions t ° which the attention of Parliament must be directed, bec au se thele would be ample opportunity for discussing them during the sersifflti but with regard to the question of municipal corporations, he musts' Of that the lorlsrmation contained in the King's Speech with regard VI that question wa s very meagre and unsatisfactory. The Speech did I'" afford any info:rnatiou as to whether the feelings of the country upon that subject were to be consulted or rot, or whether measures were 0 be brought forward to place the corporations on a more sound and e 01 " cleat fboting. Th e Noble Earl, after adverting to the difficulties wiii''' , prevented a full inquiry into the abuses of existing corporations, ob' served that It was Impossibl e the King's Speech could have been more exPliCil on that subject, Upon the grounds he had stated, he repente 4 ' that it was not his intention to vote for the amendment, be c ause be wished to see good measures carried, he cared not by whom.—(o.4oll Lord BROUGHAM rose am i dst l oud cries of " Spoke." Hebeggs; to expiatn, and claimed his right to be heard. He, had been teininde', by a Noble Marquis near him that the Noble and Learned Lord on r h ,: Woolsack had alluded to tl e circu ms t ance o fhi s having filled up o'' commissions of the peace after the late Government had been virtually dismissed. It was certainly true that he had issued 10 or 12 consrot dons of the peace about a fortnight or three weeks before that eve` took place, and it was very possible that some of those convasissions had been brought to town for his approval and signature after the Govern" . ment was broken up, and that circumstance might have led to • lie rni'; take into which the Noble and Learned Lord on th e Woo ,sack h a d fallen. But the Noble and Learned Lord had stated that those coot' missions —whether six or more was of no consequence —were not issued in accordance wi t h th e f ee li ngs of the Lord-Lieutenant of the count for which they were designed. Now with regard to that, he took leave to say, that while lie he'd the Great Seal he neves consulted the feeling s of the Lord-Lieutenant of a county in the appe,intment of new justices' Some Lords-Lieutenant, he knew, were guived in the choice of insitis' trates by their privote predilections, and Rosy generally endeavoured ''' procure the appointment of those gentlemen whose political feel . coincided with their own. He knew of some Lords-Lieutenant who were in ti.e habit of consulting the jeistices themselves as to wheth er, , they required additi ona l assistance--a practice ag a i ns t w hi c h be 0 0 , _1 always decidedly set hi s face. With regard to hi s N o bl e and L e arn'. Friend's retention of the Chief Baronship in conjunction with the sesi i i he did not mean to' s a y th at such a step was incorrect. The urgeneY ° the occasion might rend er i t necessary. In fact, had the Seals bee" P.,S, „- in commission, the C ourt of Chancery would have 'been virtUrso; shut up, The Duke of WELLINGTON observed, that on a late occsssi°°: gentleman was placed on th e Commission in the county of SoutharoPie-; to whom he had mad e an objection when.he was to communicaiiej with the Noble and Learned Lord (Brougham) on the subjeot. B e 4 h ,!, objected to this gentlem an , not on account of his character or qualifie s ' tions, but simply becau se h e was under recognizance, to keep the Pe.-* against one of the Magistrates of the county. Lord BROUGHAM had considered the ca :e, and decided against the Noble Duke. As to the objection of beiog under recognizances ts keep the peace, he (Lord Brougham) hir-,self wall at the time i n q uestifl in a similar situaSibn. The responsibility of the act rested entireil, , with the Lord Chancellor. ' The Duke of WELLINGTON never doubted th e p ow er of ti!, Lord-Chancello r to appo i nt, but thOught that a person bound over '" seep the peace ought not to have been selected. , The LORD CHAN CELLOR said that the fact was fists , that silt were sent to the o ffi ce two or three days after the 14th (the day of the dissolution of the l a t e M inistry), and all of them purported to be eigeeato on that day. The names were inserted in only two of these. Al i so , ! Lord Lieuten an t s complained of the want of communication on t° occasions. Lord BROUGHAM, i n reply, said that the Noble and L ea rned r. — f &ni was ististaken in the day. The commissions had been signed a fortn i ' A before, He himself 6id not know of th e di sso l ut i on of the late Mini Al until II o'clock on the night of the 14th. The LORD CHANCELLOR had made inquiry at the 0f,404 es i : ascertained that th e y h a d b een sent to the office two or three, (iris s ae „ the date on which they purported to be signed. Hire this conversation ended amid general cries of " The Duke of RICHMOND would set out with r' . . eth i ng h i s int el'i tion to vote for the original Address, and to cone en in the rate°t ic ji ,. ° the amendment moved by hit Noble Friend.— csdear, hear.) Son at "i -dicule had been thrown coq the conduct of ths, se Question." 4. persons posed to give the Present Ministry a f a i r tifial. Now he would ' ,rsol' who WC , ~cji1,31,; confess ttasst *statist no confidence in they composition of the pre ,ent A t o tr4istAntion, nor Cou l d he allord ki i l s confidence to the men woo n turned, roifna on the Catholic ipseittlott. But he war not, ho /roe e 0 ,,,, ,;. 1 Pined to allowing them a (air t r i a l, H ow 0 stood the case ? TY co! 0 . • . ~ . stated that that was the second breach which had be;2nt made in the Government, and that he was quite confident! he could not, in the due discharge of his duty •to his King , and to his country, attempt any longer to carry on the Government, Lord Althorp being so essentially necessary in the other House. Everybody who heard the Noble Earl knew that he referred to the position of Lord Althorp in the House of Commons, where he possessed the confidence of the House. The Noble Earl stated that in consequence of that Noble Viscount's retirement, he felt com pelled to tender hisown resignation at the same time that he tendered the Noble Viscount's to his Sovereign. Why did he (the Lord Chancellor) allude to these facts ? Because they must all have been well known to his Majesty. His Majesty well knew the position of the Noble Earl ; he had great confidence in the Noble Earl, and he considered the position of Lord Althorp as an essential part of the Government. Lord Althorp was afterwards induced to re sume office, and it was in consequence of that resumption that the nevi Cabinet was formed. It was formed upon that very circum stance; and when the Nobie Viscount was subsequently removed from the other House, the Noble Lord, who at that moment sat near him, (the Lord Chancellor) went to his Majesty, and said the foundation on which the Cabinet had been formed had been taken away, and it was for his Majesty in this new and altered state of circumstances, to say whether he would refer to other counsel, or whether he (the Noble Lord) would endeavour to re form the Government again. What was the point, therefore, for the consideration of the Sovereign? And when he (the Lord Chan cellor) said the Sovereign, he talked of the Ministers who had succeeded the late Government, for they were the parties who were responsible. Was it not competent for his Majesty to consider whe ther the Government proposed to be formed again by the late Noble Lord at the head of it was likely to be permanent ; and if his Ma jesty was satisfied that it would not be likely to be permanent, but might be broken up at a time when it might be productive of much more mischief than the breaking of it up at that moment was cal culated to occasion, was his Majesty not justified in changing his Ministers, as he had done? He (the Noble and Learned Lord) had had an opportunity of considering these circumstances, and he was satisfied in his judgment and conscience that if he had been called upon to act in such circumstances, he should have acted exactly as Isis Majesty had done—( Hear, hear)—he considered him self as one Of the Ministers who were responsible for what had been done, and he shoUld have been ashamed of himself if he had been called upon to advise his Majesty, and he had not advised him to dismiss the late Ministers—(Much cheering)—not to dismiss them as a matter of reproach, but because under the circumstances, and after the repeated breaches that had taken place in the Government there could be no good ground for supposing it would be perma nent if made up again, but rather for believing that it would break up at a time when it would produce the greatest inconvenience.— , (Cheers.) But the Noble and Learned Lord had talked a great deal of the Government having had the confidence of the House of Commons and of the country. Where had the Noble and Learned Lord been? Where was he when Parliament was dissolved? He (the Lord Chancellor) thought he could say from his own know ledge there never had been a measure adopted by the Crown that gave more entire satisfaction.—(Cheers.) One circumstance in proof of it occurred at that moment to his mind : a meeting was called in Manchester, one of the most powerful and influential towns in England, to addressl the Crown in favour of the late Ministers? and what took place ? An amendment was moved at the meeting, consisting of 10,000 persons, to address the Crown thanking his Majesty for what he had done. Several such instances hail taken place. He asked them upon weat ground was it that the Noble Lords took upon themselves to say that the late Government had the confidence of the House of Commons and of the country.— (Cheers.) They had been charged with misconduct in recom mending a dissolution of Parliament ; yet it was impossible, as the Noble and Learned Lord had said, to carry on the new Govern ment with that House of Commons. He admitted that there was a necessity for a change, and therefore a dissolution took place.— ( Hear.) That was the natural consequence after all. Indeed, was it anything very novel that his Majesty should take the sense of the people? if so, it was the first time he had ever heard of it. The people were appealed to, and what was the result ? A great number of Gentlemen were rejected by their former constitu ents and many sent to their seats who held opinions consonant with the new Government, so that the consequence justified the appeal.—( Hear.) So much for those two points—but there was another charge brought against his Majesty's Government, or ra ther against the Noble Duke, who, in consequence of the absence of the Right Hon. Baronet (the Chancellor of the Exchequer), took upon him the office of First Lord of the Trea sury. Now either the late Ministry must hare remained in power till the return of the Right Hon. Baronet, or a new Government formed provisionally, as had been done. Would it have been wise or expedient to suffer the Government to remain in the hands of the late Ministers ? It would not, because it would have endan gered the present Government.—(" Hear," from the Opposition. ) Had the late Ministers remained in office, what use would they have made of it? Their Lordships very well knew that no person holding the great seal had ever been in the habit of putting the names of persons into the commission of the peace .without consult ing the lords-lieutenant of the respective counties. He had never done so, nor did he believe that his noble predecessor had. But what was done by the Noble and Learned Lord himself ? He sent for the commissions of six counties, and made out the fiats for the insertion of the names of persons after he was out of office. The names were actually inserted, not only without application to the lords-lieutenants of the counties, but in direct opposition to their known wishes.—( Hear, hear.) He did not, however, say that this illegal, but merely would ask, ought such a power to remain in the hands of any Minister, or be exercised by him after he had been virtally removed ?—(Hear, hear.) With respect to Church patronage, it would certainly ' have been compesent for Minis ters to dispose of it as they pleased ; but was it not right that, un der the circumstances, the Government should be taken up by some person ? and who more fit for the task than the Noble Duke ? (Cheers.) His Majesty offered him (the Lord Chancellor) the Great Seal while he occupied another office; but was there any thing improper in that, or a plurality of offices ? There were re peated instances of the same thing. Lord Liverpool was both First Lord of the Treasury and Secretary of State at the same time. Were the offices incompatible ? If so, they ought not to be held by the same person ; but the law had provided for it. When the Chancellorship of the Exchequer was vacant, who was to hold the seals ? The Lard Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench, who also held another high office. He did not consider that he had acted contrary to the law or his duty, and the Noble and Learned Lord should not say that he had no authority for it, for he told him to do it, and had declared , that it was the best course he could take. --(Laughter.) But how did those who were called to office con duct themselves? There was a pledge, a mutual pledge given ; that no office should be disposed of, and no promise made, and that nothing should be done that was*not strictly necessary for carrying on the immediate business of the country. Such was the course pursued, and reprehended by the Noble and Learned Lord. Lord BROUGHAM—I did not reprehend it. I never said a word about it.--( Cries of " Order.") The LORD CHANCELLOR—But to pass from these.objects to another point--the measures recommended to his Majesty—or rather in his Majesty's speech. The Noble and Learned Lord said we were goin g to bring forward some measure founded upon the report of the Commissioners for inquiring into Municipal Corpora tions. That was not to be found in the Royal speech, but merely a statement of the progress of the question, that the Commissioners were pursuing their inquiry : that application had been made to know if they were preparing their report, that they had declared it would shortly be ready, and when finished it would be submitted to both Houses of Parliament for consideration, and what was done must depend npon the nature of that report and the evidence upon which it was, founded.-,-(Hear.) It would be premature ' then, for the Government to bring forward any measure until that inquiry should be completed and that report furnished.—(Hear.) But the Noble and Learned Lord said they had adopted the commission. He agreed with his Noble and Learned Friend as to the weakness of that commission. It was said to the Commissioners, " You are to inquire into the state of the property of the respective corporations; you are to summon persons before you and examine them cn oath, and require them to produce all deeds, papers, writings, and titles, relating to the property and privileges of the several corporations." He had heard that these directions were illegal, aaid that they could not be acted upon consistently with the law of the country, and the Noble and Learned Lord roust have taken a very superficial view of the matter if he thought other wise. Now, in answer to the charge of inconsistency, he would refer to the measures mentioned in the speech of his Majesty, and ask where was any inconsistency apparent? First, as to the ques tion of the commutation of the Irish tithes : he had never ex pressed an opinion adverse to the settlement of that question, nor had he ever opposed the measure, though he might have objected to some particular details. But then, it was said, sufficient notice had not been taken of other matters connected with the Irish church. To this he answered, that there was a commission appointed to investigate the entire establishment, and until that Commission had completed its labouxs it would be premature in the Government to adopt any measure. Then there was reference made to some former conduct of his, of which he would only remark that he denied the statements that had been advanced altogether, Could the Noble and Learned Lord charge him with discrepancy, or his Noble Friends opposite with inconsistericy ? Let him, it he could, point out in any one speech a sentence uttered by him against the Oentinu tation of tithes. He had never spoken against that measure. Lord BROUGHAM.—No. The LORD CHANCELLOR,--The Noble Lord acknowledges it ; but he says, " Look at the Speech," and he supposes that the reforms therein proposed are inconsistent with our farmereonduct— LORD BROUGHAM here rose, amidst loud cries of " Order." He said—l rise to order. It is the uniform practice, when a Noble Lord unintentionally mistakes or argues upon a Mis-statc ment, to set him right as he goes on, or there vietnd be no end to discussion. I never said the speech carried iPconsistencies in it, though it is vague and general; but there are pledges enough in it. The LORD CHANCELLOR.—The Noble Lord says we are inconsistent in being Reformers. I say my professions of reform are confined to that Speech, and there is nothing in it that is consistent with my former conduct.--( Cheers.) The net point to which the Speech adverted, was the reform of the law courts, and the ecclesiastical Nuns, the improvement of the civil juris prudence, and church discipline, all objects a great importance. The Commission for reforming the eecleciastical courts, was issued when he formerly held the Great Seal, and all the other measures were equally and perfectly consistent with his whole conduct.---( Cheers.) Then about the Dissenters. It was true the subject of marriage only was alluded to in his Ma jesty's Speech, and the Noble Lord sneered at the manner in which the Government was about to relieve the Dissenters ; but when the bill came before the House be would have an epportiniity of judging and arguing upon it. It was, he thought, a little too premature in the Learned and Noble Lord to sneer at it before he saw it and knew what it was._( Cheers.) He was au thorized to %tate, and he would state, that the proposed measure of relief far the Dissenters would comprehend the registration of births and burials, as well as marriage. This brought him to ano ther most important measure—the Church ,Commission. Was there anything inconsistent in that ? That commission had been appointed for the most important purpose—namely, an inquiry into the revenues of the dioceses and the Clerey, with a view to a more equal distribution of wealth, to promote residence, and, as far as possible, to provide spiritual instruction for the people, by applyi ng the produce of s i necures to t h at su b stant i a l and important object. Did the Noble Lord charge them with inconsistency for that ? Let him point out how these measures were inconsistent with anything they had formerly done or promised to do. As a practical illustra tion he would remind the Noble Lord, that recently a valuable sine cure had fallen in, and it had been applied to meet the wants of a parish containing 25,000 inhabitants, for whom no commensurate provision had been before made ; and it was the intention of the Quernusent to refer every sinecure that might become available to that commission, to point out the beat mode of applying it to the performances of actual services. —(Hear, hear, add cheers. What, theu, became p 1 the charge of inconsi s t ency ? He denied it Op n othing' . There was recommended in the Royal Speech, or,nOw contemplated lay the *GeNernment, that any member of that Goyernmea had on emy former occasion opposed, and persons who made such Oarges ought first to be sore that they rested upon a solid foundatipn.:,-(Cheers.) was quite sure that their Lord ships,and he hoped the other House also, would wait to see what were really tlke na t easures the G ^ , - , --v.eTrAment intended to bring for- NFf'.4l C9,tEiq to haatA c0c,....an upon their estimate of the im p g pl es of the othe( ear, hear.) Whatever might be the result of that night's debate ha upon the judgment of the TT • ." 'souse of Commons, and the good sense of the people of Englcrid, influencing and directing the Judgmen of that Hore, licetiSit% • ' . . . „. oq th At. 4 0.e i e, ho c i sir 14 S.i r e s e e t edit° it tAii )1 r. Gr V 1 1 /Ir ' t ! " (1 le van t 04 . r. 41 ) , cl 4 1 .1 ip th ..e k N of k ti; ist lei fir. t h: ° cl In NI , 't or , ,\ L re •c of th i '11( Bier t it \j h l t ear THE SUN. LONDON, WEDN_ESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1835.