The Sun. — London, England, 1841-05-28 00:00:00

MORN'INO 1115ITION stitutional precedent. The authority of Mr. . Burke, the authority of Mr. Fox, and the ati thority of all who have advocated the popular principle of representative Government are in unison with my opinion;; on this point and confirm the position whichd hold. Take the opinions of Mr. Burke. Mr. Burke says—" That the House of Commons should respect his Ministers is essential to his Majesty's service. It is fit that they—that is, . the Ministers, " should vield to Parliament, and not that Parliament should be new mo delled until it is fitted to the Ministers. If onrauthority is only to be held upwhen we coincide in the opinion of his Majesty's advisers, but is to be set at nought the moment it differs from it, the House of Commons will sink into a mere appendage of the Administration, and will lose that important character which, inseparably connecting its heileur and representation with the acts of this House, enables us to afford a real, effective, and substantial sups :Tort to his Government. It is the deference shown to our opinion when we dissent from the servants of - the Crown which can alone give authority to the proceedings of this House when it concurs in their mea sures." What were the opinions of Mr. Fox ? Mr. Fox says, that " the true, solid, and incontrovertible basis upon which a firm and efficient Government can be built -is on the confidence of the House of ,Commons." lire Fex spoke of that cordiality and union which con stituted the vital spring of the British Government. He said, "Had not the majority of the House of Commons almost from time immemorial, governed the country ? Was it not the confidence of the House of Commons which hal given energy and efficiency to every Administration ? Was it not the confidence and et ineurrenee - of the House of Commons which hat given stability to every act. Was it not through a clashing with this primary principle that so many cala mities happened in some of the reigns prior to the Re volution ?" Mr. Fox said again—" However disagree -able the issue,' it must be imputed to those who thought themselves wiser than the House, and they al me.must answer for it to the country." Did Mr. Fox say that it was the duty of a Minister constantly to defer to- the House of Com Mons ? Did not Mr. Fox claim for himself the right of proposing such measures as he deemed important for the public welfare, notwithstand ing the difference which there might be with part of the House of Commons ? He did so. He said that he was far from meaning that he thought a Minister was never justifiable in differing in opinion from the House. No man in the situation of Minister would • be more likely to differ from that House than he should, but then he would adhere to his opinion, and when he found the House and he tholight differently: he should resign his oflise, and say to the House of Commons, " Choose another instrument to carry on the public business, I am no longer fit to serve you." Those were the opinions of Mr. Burke and Mr. Fox. No, Sir, allow me to refer to another constinitionalauthority, the autho rize,- of the Noble Lord. Sir, in that work to which I have before referred, and to which I have referred with sincere respect, repeating again that I think it takes a .moderate, dispassionate, and able view of the principle of the British Constitution, we have not the dictum of the Noble Lord, .amid the heat and excitement of the House, but his deliberate opinion as a writer on the Bri tish Constitution with respect to the relative position of the Crown and the House of Commons. The Noble Lord says. that the accession of George I. was the era when Go vernnent by party was fully established in England. He says the financial difficulties which followed the winding up of the war, contributed to give greater importance to the House of Commons, and he uses that expression to which I have before referred, " and to place within the House of Commons, if I may so express myself, the centre of gravity of the Constitution." The Noble Lord justly describes, in powerful langsage, the consequences which must fellow from a departure from that rule. He says, "otherwise these measures will be thwarted, the..e promises . will be distrusted—(Cheers)—and finding all their steps obstructed, their efforts will be directed to the overthrow of the Constitu tion."—(Great cheering.) Now, Sir, although the Noble Lord ie in office, yet I will not take se extreme a view as he has taken of the consequences of perseverance in this system. •It May not follow that Minis ters so obstructed will meditate the overthrow of the Constitution ; but the other evils will follow, for they are the consequences of attempt ing to govern by a minority. You cannot resist the influence in this country of party-disaffection. They say van meet this Government with party motions, why • - don't you come down and lend it your cordial earsort without reference to its merits, and if you do so • you ;7411 .enable it, to proceed. But the Noble Lo r d seouted nose things. He says that from party arose strength, and' said, turther, that he never found any one fear party conflicts except mock philo eoph ers--(Long ancl continued cheering)—effeminate men mold sentimental women. Those who attempt to govern with a minority will he met as I was every night by some reotion or other for the purpose of preventing the public business going on. In consequence of the .continuance of those motions I was obliged to yield, and such will be the case with the present Government. — (Hear, hear.) • But this I will say, that of all adminis trations there never existed a Government that had met with less obstructions than the present. They had never met with mere factious and • vexatious opposition. I say, without any extended ap resliension of the overthrow of the Government—this Ido say, that practical experience proves to • us that • the Noble Lord is right—that there - will be great evils, absolutely unavoidable evils will result in the administration of public affairs from the incursion on the , constitutional rule, of at temptins, to govern without a majority. L ook to the state of affairs since the present Government came into ofice. Let me take three measures; one brought for , ward at its eolith:ewes!: (int, one at its maturity, and one supposed to be, brought . forviard at its close. Let rue take the history of the Arorepriation Clause—let sue take the history of the Jamaica and the 'agar Duties Bill, and can I see what has hiked ulttee on these Alyce . :estions, without coming to the cone!nsion that, the authority of the llouee of Commons was, na't sup ported by the course pursued.—(Hear.) Sir; I noel' eeunted the Noble Lord with abandoning the appro priation clause; I thought he was placeel in a situa tion of necessity, which upon the whole made it advisable for the public interests that there should be a ;settlement of the question—without the appropriation clause. But can I conceal from myself that the necessity etrese out-of the weakness of the Government, and the want of the confidence of the House, which left the Gov, rnment no other alternative than to recede from their most express engagements ?—(Cheers.) Take the Ja maica IEII, and look at the evil consequences that arose on account of its abandonment. The Government brought in a Bill, the object of which was to ceeinguish the Representative Government of the ea t e uy of Jamaiea. The , failed—we opposed them, and they were compelled to bring in another in confoOmity with our suggestions. But what was the s t a t e ment .td . the evils anticipated from the course which was made by the Noble Lord at the head of her Mejesty': overnmect, and the Noble Lord the Secretary for the colonies ? The latter Noble Lord said "It was obvious that in Jamaica the authority of the Crown would be greatly wecktmed by any vote of the House of Commons giving support to the contumacy of the As sembly. of Jamaica against the proposition of the Minis ters of the Crown,' and by continuing in the ad ministration of affairs, not having a sufficient degree of the confidence and support of this House • to carry on these affairs, we shall be exposing , to jeopardy the colonies of this country."—(Hear.) Lord Melbourne e s id, " I say that the Jamaica Bill is of paramount, indis ege sable importance-for the great object of emancipation, and that the vote of the House of Commons is fatal to this measure. Not only that, but it demonstrates with su ffi c i en t clearness such :a want of confidence in a great • _body of the other House of Parliament, that we could n c , t continue tee administration of the affairs of her 3.ltti esty'e Governsnent in a manner that would be useful or benefice al; ' --( Conteatted cheering.) That wasitheopi n i on - you yotiese ie gave as tt, the degree in which time colonial interests of time empirtis would be co.npromised by an attempt to govern, without p ossessing sufficiently th e confidence of the H ouse of et mmous. Take again the case of the sugar duties, and can any one say that the position of the Chancellor craw Exchequer was a 'satisfactory or a proper one ?-1 Tear, hear. hear.) After stating the grounds upOil which he brought forward , his proposition—Hear)—after holding out expectatioes of relief to the eseuntry in consequence of these. measures, was it a course calcu lated to exalt the authority of the House of Commons, to find the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on Thurs day last, having been_ over-ruled in his proposition, and after the declaration of the Attorney-General that we must consider the Budget as a whole—(Opposition eers)—was it a becoming position of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to move, without a word of apology, the adoption of the existing sugar duties precisely in conformity with the previous resolution ?—(Hear.) These are conclusive proofs that the Nole Lord's prophetic anticipations of the evil arising from the obstructions of Government was practically re ' alized, as we, ourselves, have had an opportunity 'of ob . serving-. Is this for the credit of. the House of Commons ? Is it for the maintenance of its,l-'N autho ;nay as a branch of the Leg islature ? ty, have you the consolation, that whatever authority you detract from the House of Commons is conferred on the Crown ? Alas ! no.—(Heer, hear.) Your measures are subversive of the authority of the Crown. It may ap pear to a superficial observer that this is a proof of the i.trength of its prerogative, that the Crown should „be ms bled to support a Ministry without a majority in the House of Commons, but that is an imperfect view of t h e case.. , -(Opposition cheers.) The interest o f the Crown ants the House of Commons are identical — (Hear, hear) --and the only authority required for the interests of thel.: ,. .stte. You cannot aim a blow at the just and legitimate authierity of the House of Commons without inflicting one on the Nnarchy. But character is said to add .ao the authority of the li tonarchy—to those Ministers and representatives of it in this House—to those who counsel measures in this House on tree authority of the Crown. Cannot it be supposed, Sirs that the triumph of this is maintained in the :House without a majority, or where is the compensation for the positive evil—the dan gerous spectacle of inefficiency and want of authority ? Perhaps you may say, as Mr. Pitt said to Mr. Fox, "" though we have not the House of Commons we have seificient indication that we possess the confidence of the cotiatry."—(Hear, hear.) • First, I should say . with Mr. - rox;it is dangerous to admit any other recognised organ - labile opinion than the House of Commons itself— **kit, is dangerous to set up the im p lied o p inions of ecinstituentg kgainst their authorised representatives— the House a mons. It is important that we should not be e brw ea hr this unseemly co nflict, and that it 'eel that the House of Commons did .*F.Litircmy ,- * blic sentiments. If you deny the Sea ;,,44 • meat you say that, I should ority of the constituents as opposed .. t 0.... . e Cummens Can you show to the et a, • g the present Parliament, that you possess ce which i s w i t hh e ld from you by the tha. of C o mmons.? I ,know not actually how many Hon scab c i es h e ve arisen since the assemblin g of the pre- - sent Parliament, but I believe a great number, upwards of a hundred. But the vast majority, I would say, in many cases, the same person has been returned, and in some cases persons entertaining similar -views. But this I state with confidence that in 20 elections in which the former Member has been changed—in large towns—in agricultural constituencies—in every description of con stituency—out of these 20 vacancies in which a change has taken place, there have been 16 returned adverse to you and four only in your favour.—(Cheers.) And in the vacancies in which there hare been changes during the present session there have been a positive loss of not less than twelve. I say, therefore, whatever may be your expectation of future appeals to the people of this country, you have no right to assume that the re sult of the elections has hitherto proved that on your abstract merits as an administration, the opinions of the constituency differs from the opinion of their represents tives.—(Cheers.) I know it may be said that all my general doctrines may be true •, that it is right, under ordinary circumstances, that the Ministry should have the confidence of the House of Commons, but it will be said that here are special and peculiar circumstances which exempt us from the ordinary rule, and entitle us to remain in office. Sir, this is the ready excuse which maybe made by those in power at any time. — (Cheers.) Who can deny the important position of this country—the complicated affairs to be admi nistered ? There must be at all times special and pecu liar circumstances, and if at once you, being judges, you the Executive Government, may discover special and peculiar circumstances by which you are exempted from the ordinary principles of Executive Government, there is no limiting the application of this principle.— (Cheers.) Moreover the men to determine on that principle are not impartial judges—(Cheers)—as to the circumstances constituting these special cases.--(Cheers.) Perhaps it may be said, however, that you contemplate an appeal to the people, that you are holding office for the purpose of making that appeal. Sir. I know nothing whatever on this subject. As a Member of this House of Commons I can have no evidence of the intention of the Government. I see you perpetually in a minority — I see indications that you have not the confidence of the House of Commons. I know that you have the power at any time of dissolving, and that you can choose the most favourable time, unless some particular Bills are before the House. I know this is a delicate prerogative. But the existence of that prerogative, and any concealed motives actuating you, cannot make it less my duty to call upon the House to say whether it gives you its con fidence or not.—(Cheers.) I shall have no additional confidence in you after you have greatly excited the pub lic mind on a subject of no less importance than the sub sistence of the people.—(Cheers.) I firmly believe that you are not advancing by that course the measure of which you are the advocates. I don't underrate your power, nor do I underrate the evils which your course has and must produce—however I do doubt your power to carry the measure which you have propounded, of a duty of ls. per bushel on corn.—(Cheers.) My belief is, that you have less power to carry it than you had to carry the Sugar Duties—(Cheers)—and, although I have no right to anticipate what may be the decision of the House upon the question of the Corn-laws, does not every man within the House concur with me in thinking that you bring forward the measure without a hope to carry it ?—(Loud cheers.) You could not have even the most distant hope to carry it in the present House of Commons. You bring it forward, I will not say for the purpose, but certainly the effect of your pro position will be, to cause increased agitation among the people, and an increased indisposition to come to any settlement of the question.—(Cheers.) Still you con ceal your intention, and say that after a debate upon the Corn-laws, you reserve to yourselves the right to come to a decision as to your future policy. That, in my opinion, is a reason for bringing forward my resolution, and I am fortified in that position by the course which you have taken with reference to a Lieasure of scarcely less importance—l mean the consideration of the. Poor-laws.—(Loud cheers.) And see what that course has been. You propose, without sufficient authority • as a Government—you propose to submit that measure, and yet at the same time you will not bring forward that measure which you deem essential to the public welfare —the Poor-laws. On what ground do you withhold that measure from our consideration ?—(Loud cheers.) I have your own authority, the statement from your own mouths, of the grounds why you withhold from discus sion in the House of Commons so important a measure as that of the new Poor-laws.—(Cheers.) The Noble Lord said that in the present state of affairs he thought they had better not go into the consideration of the Poor-law Amendment Bill, and what was his reason ? because, in the first place, he thought it would lead to protracted discussion without any final result.— (Cheers.) That is the ground upon which it is urged that the consideration of the New Poor-law Bill should be withdrawn from the cognizance of the House of Com mons—that it will lead to protracted discussion, without producing final results.—(Hear.) Nov, if you may anticipate as to the Poor-law, may not I also anticipate as to the Corn-law.—(Loud heers.) If I am deficient in forms, and non-observant of technicalities in antici pating the result of the discussion on the Corn-laws, are not you as non-observant of technicalities in antici pating the result of the discussion of the Poor-laws ? If you antici-.2te a protracted discussion without final re sult, as the consequence of the discussion of the Poor laws, may I not anticipate the same with regard to the Corn-laws ?—(Loud cheers.) The next reason you give for postponing the consideration of the Poor laws is, the expectation that every honourable Member will soon have to give an account of his con luct at the hustings. The Noble Lord thought a great many motions and speeches would be made, intended rather for the hustings than for any useful purposes of le gislation.—(Lould cheers.) Now, the reason you give is not the unpopularity of the law, and not because you suppose that the discussion of the law might be incon venient to Members just prior to an election ; but the ground for withdrawing the consideration of the Poor law from the cognizance of the House of Commons is that it will lead to protracted discussion without pro :hieing final results, and that Members will bring for ward motions and make speeches addressed rather to the hustings than to useful purposes of legislation. For these reasons the Poor-law is withdrawn, yet the Corn law is proceeded with. Now, is there more prospect of final legislation with respect to the Corn-law than with respect to the Poor-law ?—(Loud cheers.) Is there less expectation of long speeches addressed rather to the hustings than to useful purposes of legislation ?—(Loud cheers.) Is there a prospect that the discussion of the Corn-laws can lead to any final result ? Is there any prospect but that the discussion of the Corn-law ques tion must at the present time lead to the aggravation of the agricultural and manufacturing distress ? And it is .vith those opinions to which I have already adverted AS to the discussion of the Poor-laws that I am informed, Although I can hardly believe it, that her Majesty's Ministers propose to bring forward the question of the Corn-laws, and on the result of that discussion to ap peal to the people.—(Loud cheers from the Ministerial benches.) Sir, if that appeal be made, and on such grounds, so far in my opinion from tending to remedy the depressed state of trade it will tend greatly to aggravate it by the continued agitation which it will introduce into the public markets by the interruption which it will occasion in all retail transactions, and by the state of uncertainty in which the public mind must be for months, as to what may be the ultimate decision of the House of Commons. I believe, Sir, that the agitation of this question of the Corn-laws will only tend to aggravate all those evils from which the country is already suffering.— (Cheers.) And so far from the expected discussion of the Corn-law ques tion being a reason why I should not press my motion to a division, it constitutes an additional ground in my mind for so doing.—(Loud cheers.) There are other reasons for this motion, into which I will not now enter. My plain and simple proposition is that you do not pos ,ess the confidence of the House of Commons, and there ire o ther reasons besides those I have mentioned on which I withdraw my confidence from ) ou. I have no con ridence in your administration of the finances.—Cheers.) I believe that the evils of your financial administration ire owing to the same causes—to your attempt to admi lister the Government without possessing the confidence ,f the House of Commons.—(Cheers.) I do not believe that if you had possessed the confidence of the House of Commons you would, in the face of an increasing expen liture and an increasing deficiency, although not with a decreasing revenue--.I do not believe you would have in uirred the risk which you, have incurred, by giving up 1,200,0001. of y our Post-otk-.4 revenue.—(Loud Tory sheers.) I believe the same causes induced you to have recourse to that expedient which are ac: ll4 4 in g —(Cheers.) You had b een f or some time you now. n i g t be tween Conservatism and Lib era li sm. Y ou fout ne cessaryprineipletos, anti co when nduct you your attempted Governmentto on d o Csoo 47 n se o r a v for feited the confidence o f t h ose Gentlemen opposite, who had up to that period been y t o o ur r s e upporters --(Loud .:lieers.) It was necessary opinion ; some means weretheir good pose ; you were pressed on the necessarysubjectersg.)oa fin And ohuredPost-officewhen that he pu was r - revenue, and you gave it up.—( the Post-office Revenue given up I After your failure in the Jamaica question.—(Cheers.) the recesses of your counsels—l do noteasna yn that dive of cannot measures stand in the relative situation cause and effect, but it is remarkable that the Post-officeßevenue should be given up just after you were defeated in on your colonial measure. I resisted and opposed that measure 'or giving up the Post-office Revenue at the time, not )ecause fwas insensible to the advantages which might • g a ccrue from a diminished rate of postage, but because li .h l t t hought you could not afford, with your deficiencies, to give up such a source of revenue; because I could not ')elieve that your resolution to supply the deficiency of the revenue by increased taxation could be trusted to after the revenue was gone—(Cheers)—and I believe that the same cause—your weakness as an Administration— induced you to propose that measure, that has induced yo u to bring forward this measure relating to the Corn-laws. —(Cheers.) The Chancellor of the Exchequer has never explained how much he calculates to raise by this t a x upon corn ; but unless he can raise 1.600,000/. by ads tax upon corn his budget is worth nothing.— Xheers.) As I understood the Right Hon. Gentleman, I have a doubt whether he said 600,000/. or 1,600,0001. would have to. be raised, but if I am to estimate the customs at the'same amount as they were last year, 1,600,000/. must be raised upon foreign corn during, the present year. With respect to the duty on timber, I have seen an answer returned by Lord Sydenham to a deputation, in which he stated that he had no informa tion on the subject of those duties. Lord Sydenham had also stated that even if the Government should bring for ward the timber duties it would be his imperative duty to urge that a due regard should be had to all existing in terests, and that there should be ample time for parties who have vested interests to dispose of them. If that were the case, and if it were an imperative duty imposed upon Lord Sydenham, would it be possible to realise in the course of the present year the amount required ? It is not my intention to enter at the present moment into many other matters connected with the Government. I will reserve my opinion on them. I will reserve my opinion on the question of China, though I cannot but consider that we are placed in a position with regard to 1 1 11W8tX, that country in which we ought .never to have stood. I With respect to our relations with America and France, I still retain my opinion, and believe if there had been earlier interference that what had taken place would have been avoided. I feel most deeply our alienation from France, and deeply regret it ; and without entering further into the different subjects ' . I still entertain my opinions upon them ; and notwithstanding the brilliant exploits of our fleets and our armies, I think it would have been better that we should have effected everything which British interests required by peaceable means. Instead of proceeding towards France as we have done, we should have endeavoured to reconcile all parties, for by that means we should have avoided those bitter feelings which have caused such preparations for war in that country, and we should have re-established those reci procal friendly cordial relaiions between France and this country, whieh -I sincerely wish to be permanent, and which I believe to be the essential foundation for the permanent peace and tranquillity of Europe. But on these considerations I will not further enter, because I wish to urge the constitutional grounds only on which my motion is founded. Sir, I dare say I will be met with the taunt that I have brought forward on this occasion no scheme of comprehenisiv• policy; and I shall be told this is an aggressive motion, and that when I invite the House to affirm a resolution which supposes a want of public confidence, I might have been prepared to- make a de claration of my opinions on all public questions. My answer to that is, to ask where is the man that has more explicitly than I have done his opinions on all great questions of national policy.—(Cheers.) When was it that upon any constitutional question—upon the question of the Ballot—upon the extension of the suffrage, or upon the shortening of Parliaments — when was it that I ever withheld my opinion ? The Hon. Gentleman the Member for Finsbury, says to us— " Make a bidding against the Government, propose something more popular than the Government and then you will have the support of Gentlemen of extreme opinions like myself ? Sir, I will do no such thing.— (Loud cheers.) I make no bidding for popular applause. —(Renewed cheers.) I maintain my opinions upon all great constitutional questions ; and I will not for the purpose of filching some support from the Government on the present occasion, indicate opinions at variance with those . which in detailed discussion I have con stantly professed. But did not I when subjects like these were formally under discussion—on the vote of confidence of last year, for instance—did not I explicitly state my views with respect to all the ordinary subjects of Legislation ? Have not I, when any question was brought under the consideration of Parliament, whether Church Reform, or Church-rates, or any other measure ? Have not I uniformly adopted the same line of policy ? What is the public question of ordinary legislation in respect of which any rational doubt can be entertained as to my views ? I do draw a distinction between all financial questions and questions of ordinary policy ; and it is absurd to call upon me for the expression of an opi nion with respect to our financial difficulties. I stated before that I would not express any opi/ion on this sub ject, and I now repeat it, giving the full advantage, inde pendent of saying that if I was called to power to-mor row I would claim the right deliberately to review the financial difficulties of the country, and I would not be forced into a precipitate measure for the purpose of ex tricating myself from the present inconvenience.—(Hear, hear.) These are the grounds on which I submit with confidence my resolution to the House of Commons. I have never been the flatterer of the House—l never have encouraged the House in any attempt to carry a measure which I thought would have the effect of unduly increas ing the privileges and the powers of the House of Com mons at the expense of the prerogatives of the Crown On the very last occasion on which I gave a vote, I gave that vote in support of her Majesty's Ministers, in the attempt to resist a motion which would have the effect, in their opinion, of widely encroaching on the prerogatives of the Crown.—(Hear, hear.) I did what I could, and my example was not followed by many members of her Majesty's Government.—(Loud cheers.) I did what I could to resist an attempt of the House of Commons to interfere with the rights of the Crown. Sir, that attempt was defeated by your single vote. You were a single obstacle to a motion which, if carried, would amount to an interference with the prerogatives of she Crown. You had the manliness, though the organ of the House of Commons—(Cheers)—you had the man liness, which I expected from the consistency of your character—(Loud and continued cheers)—you had the manliness to expose your single, but exalted, but effec tual, authority against a measure which you deemed in furious to the principles of the Constitution. I expected that vote, and I expected the declaration of the principle on which it was based ; but when I saw how great had been the risk, I could not but feel confirmed in my opi nion that the prerogatives of the Crown were not safe in the hands of a Government—(Loud cheers)—which, even with the aid that I could give them, felt themselves com pelled to call in the aid of the Speaker to form a majority.—(Loud and long-continued cheering.) But, Sir, although I have always resisted on the part of the House of Commons, and always will re sist, any unconstitutional, proceedings on the part of the Ministers of the Crown, yet I have attempted to main tain for the House of Commons the possession of every just prerogative and right. I supported the Noble Lipid . last year in the maintenance and defence of the privi leges of the House of Commons. I might have been seduced by the temptation of party advantages. I had to encounter the painful sacrifice of differing from perhaps a majority of my former friends, but I thought that vital and important interests were at stake, and I was determined that I would not conciliate the favour and affection of my now esteemed friends—that I would not put to hazard the legitimate privileges of this House, and subject it to the control of a Court of Law.—(Cheers from both sides of the House.) It might perhaps be more wise not to refer to these things—it might be more politic to conceal the differences I have had with my Noble Friend, but I will not be guilty of any such unworthy concealment.—(Hear, hear.) I acted from a sincere belief that it was absolutely neces sary for the vindication of the privileges of the House of Commons, and that the privilege of free publication was essential to our interests. Why should I shrink from a reference to those opinions—is it not rather a subject of pride to me that I can be permitted to take my own course—(Much cheering)—to maintain the vital privileges of the House of Commons, and yet that due justice should be done to my motives, and that I should again rally and bind, in common connection and com mon esteem, those who, in their honest views, differed from me ?—(Hear, hear.) Acting in conformity with these great principles, which teach me to resist encroach ments from whatever quarter they come, I think the House of Commons has a right to expect that the Minis ter of the Crown should possess its confidence. This House has been conducted and modelled upon the views of the Noble Lord the Member for Stroud. The Noble Lord was the author of the Bill by which the House of Commons was constituted. It was the Noble Lord who thought it expedient to abolish the system of nomination. It was the Noble Lord who thought it to introduce more of a popular spirit into the constitution of this House, that he might make it more in accordance with the progress of popular intelligence and freedom. The Noble Lord it was who thought we ought to make the House more an image of the public mind—more sympathising with the people-- 7 more origi nating with the people, and more expressive of the pub lic feeling.—(Hear, hear.) This House of Commons was • constituted according to the views of the Noble Lord, This House of Commons was elected under his auspices. Whateverbenefit there may be in having had its election at the time when her gracious Majesty came to the Throne of these countries, that benefit the Noble Lord also was possessed of. Sir, I trust I have executed the duty which I have imposed upon myself, in conformity with the spirit in which I intended to execute it—with nothing of that asperity of party—(Hear, hear, hear) —into which I may be betrayed at times when rising at . the end of a debate—when I speak under that excitement and agitation which belongs to such an occasion. It is not consonant to my own feelings to do so, and I should be the more inexcusable in giving way to such asperity when I could not plead the excite ment of debate. It is not my intention to treat with dis respect those who hold the executive office, but it has been my intention to say to you it is your duty to show to the House of Commons—if it has this additional claim to public confidence—it is peculiarly your dnty not to de prive it of any of the legitimate influence which it pos sessed under other circumstances. If the House of Cons mons confirmed your suggestion you would have been the first to acknowledge this decision, and when that House of Commons took a different course, it was your bounden duty not to reject these decisions with scorn because they are unfavourable to your views and opinions. Lord WORSLEY (who was yery indistinctly heard) ':41(.1 that he trusted he should be pardoned by the House, for st;:ting the manner in which he proposed to vote, s ß on a s ..o ;which that vote was founded. The t had founded his motion upon two and theßight h e H r n points. First, e1;1: :the coOtitutional point; and he had stated i rli r ou jl g la h. r t e a s r i t y o , u s s p r reeasseonnts. Ministers.why h had in ) ( c ) o r c n i fi I d v e n n r c s e i e i y n ) that many of the reasons on which the Right Hon. Ba ronet had grounded his want pf confidence were under discussion in 1839, and since that tinie he believed a vote of confidence had passed in that now in favour of her lie d t i r o ' rd he N t) V r o .) rsle l y - ) 1 , % to llS, there fore, Majesty's nnn dtihsceuress that House, Another point, to which the Right Hon. e e G e s o s v a e r r r y n f( e n n t . h — i n points that had been already discussed and dacitifiti in Baronet had adverted was their financial policy, as ex emplified in the reduction of the postage; and he stated without," But .ep - n measure by the " press ure from had received a vote Pf con fidencesince in that House, a nd upwards of 100 Mem b er s . the R ight ? Hon. B arg net,.vot ut d e who generally supported exception, supported the policy or t he p resent Govern meat ; and he did not think this vote of gO nfidence should be narrowed to the three questions the ottia, Fkight pro posed to the House, because he thought it was tiltaike In the House of Commons to pass a resolution . respecting any particular exhibition of the policy of the Govern ment.—(Hear, hear.) He (Lord Worsley) thought that such a resolution ought to be von their general p olic y - The Noble Lord then quoted a p.s44ge in a sp eech . `;' t. ' Sir R. Peel when in office, containing tta meat, but in so low it tone, that we could only taaig its purport. He quite agreed in the sentiments thus ex pressed by the Right Hon. Baronet. No one could re gret more than he (Lord Worsley) the course which he was compelled to take on a remit occasion ; but Hon. Members opposite would remember diiif pu that occa sion he said that it was on account of the agawep in which their resolutions had been brought forward that he felt compelled to vote against them ?--(Hear.) But because he di&red in one point from the policy of the Government, was he, therefore, to abandon all the prin ciples which he held in common with them?—(Cheers.) He would do no such thing.—(Cheers.) Let him ask, moreover, how he could withdraw his confidence from the present Government, unless he was prepared to place confidence in som e other Govern me nt 2—(Loudcheers.) The Right Hon. Gentleman had told them Cul he was against a fixed duty on corn ; that he LOADON, FRIDA.Y. MA? 24, 1,441/, would not pledge himself to a sliding scale ; yet he ' (Lord Worsley) did not know but the _Right. Hon. Baronet himself Might support a sliding scale.—(llear, hear.) He thought the agricultural interest, who had had viewed with so much alarm the proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, would, continue in alarm, unless they were informed of the intentions of the Right Hon. Baronet.--(Cheers, and cries of " Oh, oh.") He ought to make known to the agricultural interest what amount of protection he proposed to give them when he came into office, for no man who heard his speee'a the other evening could doubt for a moment that it was his intention to alter the present sliding scale. That interest had a right to ask that question, because one of the Conservative Candidatea for Manchester, one who had been high in office " under the Right Ho nourable Baronet—he meant Sir George Murray— rested his claims for support upon his being an advocate for a low fixed duty on corn.—(Cheers.) He agreed in the general policy of the Government and could - not see I any reason why he should withdraw his confidence in them to transfer it to one of whose policy, even upon the point he differed from the Government, he knew nothing. —(Cheers.) The Government had a right to suppose that the country agreed with their general policy, and he could see no reason why they should withdraw from office.—(Cheers and laughter.) When the Right Hon. Baronet retired in 1835 it was not so much upon eonsti tutional grounds, but because he found that it was impos sible for him to gain the confidence of the House upon any occasion. He did not consider that he was acting in consistently in supporting the Government----(Cheerslcom the Opposition)—because he felt himself obliged to vote against their proposition the other day—he was not acting inconsistently in voting against the motion, approvine as - he did of the general policy of the Government. Mr. CHRISTOPHER said it •was his custom, as a Member of that House, to confine himself to questions which affected his own constituency, leaving matters of general importance to Gentlemen on both sides of the House who were better able, from their experience and talents, to take part in their discussion. But he was induced to rise on that occasion in consequence of the ob servations which had been addressed to the House by his Noble Friend who had just sat down.—(Hear, hear.) He confessed that he was very much surprised at the speech of his Noble Friend.—(Hear, hear.) He had had the honour to be present with his Noble Friend at one of the largest, most influential, and unanimous meetings of their constituents that had ever been held, convened by the High Sheriff of the county in the Castle-yard at Lincoln, and he would venture to tell his Noble Friend that there was no person who attended that meeting who did not depart from it with the full conviction that he had withdrawn his confidence from the Government. —(Cheers from the Tory benches.) What illusion had come over his Friend's mind since he had returned from the county of Lincoln, he (Mr. Christopher) was unable to explain—whether le air of the city of London was more favourable to the doctrines of free trade and confi dence in her Majesty's Ministers than the air of the county of Lincoln he was also unable to explain ; but he would remind his Noble Friend that at the meeting in question he said, in emphatic terms, and was loudly cheered by his assembled constituents when he said it, that as her Majesty's Government had overthrown the . agricultural interest, he would prepare to overthrow the Government.—(Hear. hear.) That there might be no misunderstanding when he (Mr. Christopher) addressed his constituents he gave his Noble Friend credit for the difficulties which he had overcome in de serting his party after so long a connection. It was true that his Noble Friend qualified his declaration by saying that, with regard to certain measures he was placed in this embarrassment, ithit if •his Right Hon. Friend below him assumed the reins of office he could not by any means give his confidence to him—(Hear, hear, from the Liberal benehes)—but there was no per son who attended that meeting, and he saw several gen tlemen afterwards who were in the habit of supporting his Noble Friend, who did not depart with a conviction that on a vote of want of confidence in her Majesty's Ministers his Noble Friend would give it his support.- - (Cheers from the Tory benches.) . As he had before stated, it was not his intention to take any lead ing part in the discussion of that evening ; but, as far as his own opinion went, he had no hesitation in saying that on constitutional grounds fie motion of his Right Honourable Friend was justified. What had been the conduct of the Queen's Government ? In the first place they had come forward with legislative measures which they were unable to carry in that House—measures which they declared were essential for the full development of those principles of Government which they professed. He was unable to explain why they had withdrawn the Poor-law, unless it 'was that anticipating a dissolution, they feared it would not be favourably viewed in the manufacturing districts. (Hear, hear.) With regard to measures of finance, the Government had failed, for on the question of the Sugar Duties the House of Commons had declared that they would not sanction that system of legislation. They had heard nothing from the Government about the Timber Duties, but They proposed to bring forward the question of • the Corn-laws in the course of a week. Now he would appeal to his Noble Friend, and ask him whe ther it would not be an insult to his constituency to tell them that they were solely to oppose the Government on the question of the Corn-laws, but they were to support them on every other question. If they did so, they would in effect be giving a tacit support to the Govern ment, and, would enable them, in case a dissolution took place, to return to Parliament those parties that would enable them to carry the Corn-law question.—(Cheers.) Lord - WORSLEY,' in explanation, read a report of the speech lie made at Lincoln, in part of which lie state I that there were many questions on which he agreed with the Government, but when he found they were acting wrongly on the subject of the Corn-laws, he was deter mined to oppose them. In withdrawing his support from Ministers on the Corn-laws, it was not to be supposed that he would withdraw his support from them on every other question.—(Hear, hear.) Sir J. HOIMO USE was extremely glad that when he first rose lie gave way to the Noble Lord the Member for Lincolnshire. It was not to be supposed that any gentle man who had so long supported her Majesty's Govern ment, as the Noble Lord had done, because he could not go along with them on one subject, that, therefore, lie was to oppose them upon every question they brought forward.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped that the example of the Noble Lord would not be lost sight of, but whether it was, or was not, his high character, his honourable motives, and the situation he held in the House, and the country, would put him far above any suspicion. —(Hear, hear.) He stated this because he thought from the cheers which he had heard from the other side that it was supposed that some unworthy motive had induced him to adopt the course lie had done. He agreed with the Noble Lord that the Right Hon. Gentleman, in bringing the present motion forward, had done it with the greatest moderation, but at the same time he must say that he totally dissented from the chief position he had laid down. He totally dissented from the fact that the Government, on the whole, since:it became a Government, had been unable to carry into effect the measures it had proposed to Parlia ment.—(A laugh.) The same Noble Lord that had laughed before had done him the honour of laughing again ; all he could say was, that if in the assertions lie had made there was anything which the House and the country contradicted, there was ground for the laughter of the Noble Lord'; but if what he stated was the fact, then the laugh of the Noble Lord was entirely out of place, It was most true that the Government had had to con tend with great difficulties. When it first came into office in 1835,_ the Right Hon. Gentleman took care to remind the House and the country that the Alinistera had not the confidence of the Crown. It was true that they entered into office without having that kindly feeling on the part of the Crown which every Adminis tration ought to have.—(Cheers.) But in spite, how ever, of all their difficulties, in spite of opposition on the part of the House of Lords, they had carried many and most important measures, some of which he would recall to the recollection of the House. The present Govern ' ment came into office in April, 1835, and in their first Session they carried the great measure of English and Scotch Municipal Reform. In 1836 they carried the great measure of the Commutation of English Tithes, a measure which lie would venture to say was sufficient work for a Session. They also carried through in the same Session a measure for the Registration of Births, Deaths, and Marriages. In 1837 the demise of the Crown pre vented any important measures being carried. In 1838 they carried the Irish Tithe Bill, notwithstanding the taunts that had been thrown against them for the omis sion of the appropriation clause. In 1839 they carried several important measures. They carried a general measure for the establishment of a rural police, and also a measure for the reduction of postage,, which the Right Honourable Gentleman opposite seemed to think was a measure for which they ought to be con demned rather than praised —(Hear, hear.) Who, he would ask, supported that measure ? why the propriety of it was urged upon the House of Lords by Lord Ash burton—(Hear, hear)—and in that House some of the most respectable supporters of the Right Honourable Gentleman, and among them the Noble Lord the Member for LiverpOol, had stated their opinions in favour of the measure. Iu 1840 the present Ministers passed the Irish Municipal Bill, the Ecclesiastical Reform Bill, and the Union of the Canadas Bill.—(Hear, hear.) During this time they had also to carry on affairs of a most com plicated nature with respect to foreign politics. He would not trouble the House by referring to any of him miend the had adm con ductedi flmsegrinettat manner measur h e t sN a v t hich his No had won tion of all Europe, and the reluctan t ac q uiescence of even some of the gentlemen opposite. He would venture to say, if the Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite was asked that it had never entered into h is head till verylately f b e l r e to make such a motion as lie had done that night,— (Hear,) Ties Bight Honourable Gentleman had referred to conduct the Government, and the character it main- tained in the country, and he had stated that as they could not carry the measures that they had brought for• ward, they were not entitled to the confidence of the Ministry had done, that he had taaaved that the Government had carried lTppse. He (Sir J. Hebhouse) tho u g ht in the short review. out the policy they hadaat Akt WA. It was very true - that they could not carry the Irish . Regiatration Bill, to Ireltoid them, because they have motions condemnatory- of emuse views with respect the : , `ll/Vid not carry their like to hut. they had carried the principle of it. If they were if the Right Hon. came into office to leo, should know, viand t aa - e of his carrying what chance there it was true that an ad eashire's Bill ?—(Hear, hear.) amendment moved irerS ft had been come to on the for Liverpool. On that carrying time Noble Lord the Member for :la • T:Ortli'l.all 3 - by the 44e f, (0 4 the Member of humanity, but a more gi" defe.lttpciun the pretext ,cession the Geveittinfent llad Lee •• - lace. The attempt u to set a Government never pool( , raise tha opium cry, and a nti , alaYefy cry ngu ProYfd das'hfailitre t l attern,,pt to ap i Qentleman apperfe 1 abortive. The Right Tionorabft, - • upon any g reat defeated refin,ign Alen they wereusual toy Ministers to N'oWite (Sir,J. Hobhouse) assertc I Hon. Gentleman that such was not the case. The Right nsc:l3::::s.iithrea.ti. it „,,K had alluded to the case of Sir Robert Walpole. That Right Hon. Gentleman proposed a great measure of finance, and he was beaten upon that, but he did not resign. He alluded to the question of Excise. Upon that occasion Sir Robert Walpole stated that he consi dered the carrying of that measure was necessary for the support of the country under its then circumstances. But nevertheless such was the opposition against it, that he was obliged to give it up, but he did nut resign.—(Hear.) Lord Liverpool's Government was beat upon the Pro perty Tax, by a majority of 37, pretty much the same number as the majority of the other night, yet he did not resign. Bat he would give a case in which the Right Hon. Baronet was himself concerned. He was in office when the Test and Corporations Bill was repealed. That Bill was brought forward by his Noble Friend ; he beat the Government upon the question. It was certainly a great measure, yet, although beat, the Government, in obedience to the vote of the House. allowed the Bill to become law, and yet they never thought of resign ing ; and no one that he remembered ever taunted them with it. With respect to the taunt which the Right Hon. Baronet had alluded to, it was an act of in discretion, of which he had publicly repented in that House, and he had hoped that the generosity of the Right Hon. Baronet would have induced him to spare his (Sir J. H.'s) f,clings on that occasion. He then came to the Ministry of the Right Honourable Gentle man, in 1834 and 1835. lie admitted that he had at last yielded to the expressed wishes of the House. He had done so, but at what period ?—he did not yield at the time when, in accordance with the principle he now laid down, he ought to have yielded. He was beat upon the Speaker ship, which was a question which, in former times, was regarded as decisive of the fate of a Ministry. On the Addres, an amendment, not one of mere form, but one strongly condemning the first act of the policy of the Right Hon. Baronet, the dissolving of the Parliament, in which those on his side of the House had a majority of about 240—that amendment was curried by a ma jority of 7. Yet the Right Hon. Baronet said, although the vote was one of censure upon him, he would perse ' yere, because it was not a direct vote of no conti dence. He could not, of course, allude to the case of the appointment of Lord Londonderry, because the Right Hon. Gentleman said, had he been beaten on that subject he would have resigned. He acknowledged that a Government must either have the confidence of the House or they must re sign, or they must, of necessity, lake the course which the Right Hon. Gentleman took. The Right Hon. Gentleman was beaten also on the Chatham election by a majority of 31 ; on the Leicester election by 46, and on the grant of a Charter to the London University by a majority of 110. Then came the successive defeats on the Irish Church. No man could for a moment suppose that he had the confidence of the House, but still he held the reins of Government. At the time, he thought the Right Hon. Baronet was acting against the spirit of the Constitution—he thought so still. He was of opinion with Mr. Fox, that without the confidence of the House of ' Commons a Government is no Government at all.—(Hear, hear.) He was still of that opinion, and nothing on earth would induce him to hold office for five minutes if it was proved to him that he did so against the wishes of the majority of the House. The Right Hon. Baronet had alluded to the occur rences of 1784. The real fact was that Mr. Pitt. actually go verned against the majority of the House, and Mr. Fox was perfectly justified in what he had then said ; but that having been quoted, he might be allowed to state that Mr. Pitt was 11 times defeated. Votes of no confidence were carried against him—addresses to the Crown for his dismissal were carried—mo -1 t ions against any dissolution were carried ; in fact questions were 1 carried against him, which, if now carried, would upset any Mi nistry. But what did Mr. Pitt say ? He was the great example taken by those who followed in the school in which the Right Hon. Baronet was so illustrious apupil. The Hon. Baronet then quoted several extracts from speeches of Mr. Pitt, delivered at that period, to the effect that a Minister being appointed by the prerogative of the Crown, was not constitutionally re movable by the House of Commons. Those opinions coming from so great a ma., in an emergency somewhat resembling the present—(Laughter.) Certainly they had not been in eleven minorities, nor had an address to the Crown for their removal yet been carried, but these were the sentiments of Mr. Pitt ; and would the Hon. Gentleman opposite say that they were unconstitutional? What was to be the test? Catholic Emancipation had been made a Cabinet question by those who had all their lives opposed it, and, con sidering what they had seen of late, he would not be at all sur prised to find the Cern-laws made a Cabinet question.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) When they proposed measures that would give relief to the manufacturing industry of the country, was there any harm in having their whole scheme laid .efore the country? Surely the agitation which existed was no fault of theirs. It was a great question, and resolved itself into mono poly—a question whether they should by forming a scheme of import duties, relieve the industry of the country without creating any additional taxation, or adding to the present heavy burdens of the people. While the people were suffering under the present system, while they were paying enormously for bread, sugar, and timber, he could not wonder at the agitation which was going on ; and if that was agi tation he was afraid that they must plead guilty; at the same time he must say that he had never seen any or great back wardness of the. Hon. Gentlemen opposite, or those connected with them, in appea.ing to the passions of the people when it suited their purpose. The Right Hon. Baronet now stated that he would not give the country any statement of what his policy would be, but in 1834, upon his accession to office, he did not think it condescension on his part to issue the celebrated Tam. worth Address, nor did he think it anything derogatory in him to make that address at the Manion-home which induced many to say that they saw no difference between his principles and those of the Government he had displaced. On another occasion the Right Hon. Baronet had observed, when his measures were opposed, that if his proposal was not approved of he should like to hear what they proposed on the other side. That something must be done, and what that was he had as yet not heard, and that confirmed him in the con viction that the measures he proposed were the only ones that could be adopted. Now her Majesty's Government were equally convinced that, under the present circumstances, the remedy they proposed was the only one that could he adopted. He did not think the Right Hon. Baronet had avoided with success the question that had been put to him as to what he proposed in the present circumstances of the country, and if the present Government was displaced had not the country a right to ask what course the new Ministry meant to pursue ? (Cheers.) Neither himself nor the House; nor the country, could find any certainty or steadiness of purpose in the conduct of the Right Hon. Baronet and his friends. They were charged with division of opinion, but he begged to ask whether they could not find among Hon. Gentlemen opposite a most extraordinary diversity of opinion, a divergence of opinion such as was held or seen among Honourable Gentlemen congregated under the same banner.—(Hear, hear.) He saw the. e sonic of the authors of the Reform Bill and its most vi rulent opposers; he saw some of the framers of the Reform Bill, and close to them gentlemen who declared that such a measure was destructive of the principles of the British Con stitution. The supporters of the Poor-law, and those who de clared it to be anti-National and anti-Christian ; he saw the advocates of the Irish Church Temporalities Bill with those who considered it the first blow at the Irish Church • he saw also the authors of the gold standard and those who declared it to be fraught with ruin and misery to the country ; he saw the denouncers of Orange lodges and the ex-Masters and Grand Masters of Orange lodges; he saw the supporters of the privileges of Parliament. and those who considered these privileges as se much waste ; he saw members of the High Church, and Low Church, and New Church party; in short he saw men of every shade of opinion, from the advocates of those principles which would put down all popular control, down to the very gentleman who would ally himself with the Chartists in order to secure his seat.—(Loud cheers.) With such discordant elements the Right Hon. Gentleman had not the least chance of carrying OR the Government upon any de fined and settled principles. The Right Hon. Gentleman the leader of the opposite party, who had put the Government upon its trial, notwithstanding his great talents, had in his opinion very little prospect of success in his present attempt to conduct the affairs of the country. The career of that Right Hon. Gentleman had been one of ineffectual resistance and ultimate concession. He had striven against public opinion, and he had been beaten back—he had landed upon shoal after shoal, which had sunk under him, and been swept away, and he had hardly recollected one single opinion which the Right Hon. Gentleman had taken up that he had not been obliged to abandon. It was, perhaps, the misfortune, and not the fault of the Right Hon. Baronet; but it appeared to him that he had generally come too late with his political discoveries. He had shown himself deficient in one great quality of a statesman, for be had not been able to read or foretell the signs of the times. He could tell the Right Hon. Gen tleman, that if he administered the affairs of the country, he would not be able to do so upon the principles which he had advocated in his early life. No, he could only administer them upon the principles which the present Government ad vocated, and he did not see any very distingui-hable ground of difference between their policy and that which the Right Honourable Baronet would be compelled to . pursue.—( Cheers. ) He hoped that in saying that much he was only using the pri vilege of a public man. The Right Hon. Gentleman was the leader of a party, and wielded his power with certainly great effect against the present Government, but he saw nothing in his policy that could hold out the excuse for a change of Minis ters, or that would encourage the hope that whatever (wile op pressed the country would be removed. The Noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire had said that the present Go vernment was tottering to its fall ; but if that were so he, (Sir J. Hobhouse) would be content to fail with the Noble Lord near him. He.would be better satisfied to do that than to rise to any eminence surrounded by men he had opposed in all the earlier stages of his life, and supporting principles at variance, in many respects, with those he had always oppotied.--( Hear, ) Whatever might be theresult of the present division, the Go. vernment felt that they had dome their duty in bringing for ward those measures. It appeared to them that the time was arrived when the changes they proposed were not only just, but inevitable.—(Cheers.) They thought they would have betrayed their duty to the country, to the House of Commons, to their Sovereign, and to themselves, if they did not run the risk of these measures in the first instance receiving the sanction of Parliament, and he was certain that the more they were examined into, the more they would be a pproved.—(Cheers. ) It was only part and parcel of the great principles which had been propounded by the most eminent statesmen in earlier days, which had been gradually developing themselves, and would be brought to bear on other subjects independently of commercial reform, and which he was certain would be ultimately carried.—( Cheers.) He was as certain as he was of his own existence, that whatever delays might occur these three measures would be eventually carried and become the law of the land ; and whatever the fate of the present Go vernment might be, they were satisfied that they had done their duty in having been the authors of these measures, and in de termining in every constitutional; mode to persevere in carry ing them.—( Cheers. ) Mr. B. D'ISRAELI said the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth had been one of the most successful Ministers that had ever held the reins of Government. He had never undertaken a measure that he had not carried to a successful issue. Ile had not carried to the opposite benches principles and propositions which he was not prepared to abide by. and it was only when obstacles were thrown in the way of his management of the affairs of the country, that he had felt it his duty to resign office. The Right Hon. Gentleman had drawn what he considered a happy, but what was, In his (Mr. D'lsraeles) opinion, a somewhat infelicitous comparison between the conduct of the Right Hon. Baronet, as regarded the Catholic Relief Hill, and the proceedings of the present Ministry , but he denied that there was any analogy between a political question affecting the admission or non-admission of a certain religious party into Parliament, and a financial mea sure such as had been brought forward by the present Go , vernment. It appeared to him that Sir Robert Walpole and Lord - North wee the only Ministers, within the last centime who were fili6d letheY'•eamB - pe&ii 6 axlie t as the l' i ei - eli All' nisters ; but the wan t of confidencedisplayed by the Votesol the House of Commons compelled them ultimately to resign. 'Fite House of Commons should not forget that the party it present ip power had exercisid that pewe r in violation' 0 the spirit- of the Constitution. 'When posiessed . 61 influence in the Illii pitßollie, ill'eY "treated' that- Heiiie with ininit, ' arid they now treated the Hpese of Commons with contempt. The Right Hen ! Gentleman who had just sat down, the Presi gent of the Be ar d of T ra de, had given flea}} eonee copselation :that they`wesda hi ve the prospect of a strong Government if Ministers went out of office. The party opposite had corn menced by assailing the House of Commons—they assailed the House of Lords—they attacked the Church—they at tacks d the rich and they attacked the poor, aid slow at the last momAit, at one fell swoop, they at , acked the colo nial, the commercial, and the agricultural interest IS the country. Under these circumstances they need net despair that the prophetic assertions of the Right Hon. Gentleman might not be falsified. Air. T. R. HOBHOUSE thought the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down ought to be the last to reproach Mi nisters with what he might conceive to be inconsistent con duct. The Honourable Gentleman had found it convenient to have a variety in his °pillions which secured to him the support of Tories and Radicals. When the Hon. Gentleman went down to stand for Wycombe, he brought with him two letters from parties of political sootiments far different from those which he now embraced. Those letters were from the Hon. Member for Kilkenny, and the Hon. and Learned Mem ber for Dublin. The Hon. Gentleman should look to himself, belore he indulged in the reproaches which he madertgainst Mi nisters. The Hon. Gentleman had accused Ministers of un constitutional conduct. He (Mr. Hobhouse) denied that their conduct was unconstitutional, and insisted that the unconstitutional proceedings rested with the party on the other aide of the House.—(Hear, hear.) They were animated by the unconstitutional wish to rob the Crown of the exercise of its prerogative, and to deprive the people of the free exercise of their opinions. What right, he asked, had Gentlemen to stand up in that. House, which ema nated from the people, and was the organ of their opinions, and say that the people were not entitled to express their opinions on subjects which so nearly concerned their interest. The Hon. Gentleman opposite and the Right lion. Baronet ( Sir Robert Peel) endeavoured to give a narrow scope to this dis cussion. The present motion must lead either to the renvival of Ministers or to a dissolution. Whether it terminated in their removal or in a dissolution, he felt that he ought to take into consideration the whole of the conduct of Ministers. He was opposed to the motion because it detracted from the prerogative of the Crown, and the privileges of the people. The Right Hon. Baronet in the course of his speech had de nied that the case of 1754, to which he alluded, was analogous to the present position of the Government ; but he (Mr. Hume) conceived that there did exist an analogy between the position of Mr. Pitt in that day, that of the present Government. If the Opposition followed up the pre cedent of 1784, and presented an address to the Cro nn, the House of Commons would then be brought into collision with the Crown not for the cause of liberty but for selfish interests—the House of Commons would then be stand ing up tor monopoly and the Crown for liberty. He was also opposed to this motion, because it was brought forward to avoid discussion. The opposite party found it more difficult to force monopoly down the throats of the people of England than they had at first imagined. If they had arguments in defence of the line they adopted which would be of any avail they ought to wish for an opportunity of discussing the question.—( Hear, hear.) They complained that the Ministerial party excited the public mind about the Corn-laws, and then desired during that excitement to go to a general election. But if agitation prevailed in the country, it was lion. Gentlemen opposite that were to be charged with it. The deficiency in the revenue, which Ministers were taunted with pr.:clueing, arose from what was a great benefit to the country at large—the penny postage; and we were now in such a state, that we must either levy new taxes, or adopt measures similar to those propounded by Government. Those were the reasons that influenced him in giving his vote in support of her Majesty's Government, Whether the present motion went against or in favour of them he trusted that they would pursue their measure relative to the Corn-laws, from which the party opposite had shrunk like timid cowards. Mr. D'ISRAELI explained in a few words, which were al most inaudible in the Gallery. The Hon. Gentleman was un derstood to say that he resided in Wycombe, and had not gone down there with principles different from what he now pro fessed. Mr. LIDDELL was surprised that Hon. Gentlemen on the Ministerial side of the House should taunt that (the Conserva tive) side with attempting to encroach on the prerogative of the Crown, when, but a few nights ago they were not present to support that prerogative when an attempt to in'ringe on it was made by the Hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. T. Duneombe). The Right Hon. Gentleman should have been in his place on that occasion to have supported the prerogative of the Crown. —( Hear, hear.) He had heard the Right Hen. Pre-ident of the Board of Trade present the beat defence tha` could be put forward on behalf of the Government, and he must say that the feebleness of that defence could only be rivalled by the fee bleness of the attack which he (Sir J. C. Hobhouse) had made in return on that side of the House. The Bight Hon. Baronet admitted that if a Government did not possess the confidence of the House it was bound on constitutional grounds to reign office, and he further stated that himself and his colleagues were prepared to set the example if they felt they were acting against the opinions and feelings of the majority of the House. He hoped the result of this division would leave ro doubt on that subject in the minds of the Hon. Baronet and his col leagues.—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Gentleman hal spoken with triumph of the Government's having carried, in the pre sent Session, the principle of the Irish Rsgis.ration Bills. He thought the Right Hon. Gentleman could find but sorry satis faction in that.--( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet might plume himse f, if he pleased, on the second reading of that Bill having been carried by a majority of five.—( Hear, hear, hear.) But what was the result ? Did they abide by that which they stated was the vital prin ciple of their Bill ? On the contrary, with their usual aban donment of their principles, did they not abandon it? Were they not absolutely defeated upon the Bil ? And had they not finally abandoned it, as they had done by many other mea sures they had brought forward?—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet then went on to say that they had suffered no defeat at all, or at least, all the di feat he would admit was, that on the Sugar Duties. But had they not prepared them selves for future defeats in the p-esent session on this mea sure? Were not all their future attempts at financial arrange ment rendered nugatory? The Noble Lord the Member fur Lincolnshire had thought fit to vindicate himself from the charge of inconsistency in the vote which he meant to gi ,, e on the present occasion. The Noble Lord thought they should not limit this question to such narrow grounds. He asked the Noble Lord whether the Government themselves consi dered those to be narrow grounds, which had arrayed all the important interests of the country, and on which they were determined to resort to the extreme measure of dissolving Par liament.—( Cheers. ) The Noble Lard (Worsley) said that the people would not desert the principles of Reform, on which they had supported the Government. He thought the Noble Lord would find that rather a stale argument, for whereas those who once clamoured for the Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill, now professed themselves utterly dissatisfied with it as an ultimate remedy, and insisted upon the five points in the Charter. Unless, therefore, the Noble Lord was prepared to join the Chartists, he would gain little by his reform cry. So far as he (Mr. Liddell) was concerned, he had never given a vote with a clearer conviction of its necessity, than that which he should give on the present occasion. Did the present Ministers pos sess the confidence of the House? Had they forgotten their many defeats last Session, the number of which escaped his memory ?—( Hear, hear.) What do they think of the abandonment of their Bill for the amendment of the Poor laws, which the Noble Lord (Russell) hadstated were essential to the welfare of the country ? How did the Noble Lord propose to get rid of the inconvenience that would result from its aban donment? Did he mean the powers of the Commissioners should expire without renewal ? Did they forget the abandonment of their measure for the abolition of Church -rates, and the destination of that great property to other purposes? Were they not aware of the result of the Church Leases' Bil? Again, was not that an important point to which the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) had alluded for the reduction of the postage? Was not this effected by the demands and re presentations of the Radical section of the House? All these things resulted from the weakness of the Government, and from these things the House was called upon to defend the.n selves and the country, and thus at the eleventh hour the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth had become too painfully sensitive, and he therefore stepped forward for the interests of the perplo with a resolution which he (Mr. Liddell) trusted would have the effect of driving Hon. Gen tlemen opposite from office. —(Cheer4.) Was it not the true constitutional principle long acted upon in this country that when the Administration had lost the confidence of the House of Commons their course was either to resign office or make an appeal to the country by advising the Crown to dis solve the Parliament.--(Ministerial cheers.) But when ought that extreme measure to be adopted by;the Government ? Only when there was a distinct expression on the put of the country, and a distinct impression on the n•inds of Ministers thst the opinions of the country and the House of Commons were at variance, and therefore that they ought to appeal to the opinion of the country.—(Cheers.) He did not think that any one Administration, though he had not a very high opinion of the principles of the present Govern ment—( Hear, hear) —would justify a dissolution of Parlia ment for the purpose of agitation ; nor unless they believed the view of the country was with them. What was the simple and natural course for Hon. Gentlemen opposite? They had abandoned two important Government measures ; the ad ninis tration of the Government in Ireland, and their attempt to change the representation of that country, and one great financial project introduced by the Chancellor of the Ex chequer. After these defeats, could they say that they pos sessed the confidence of the House? The Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R, Peel) had been taunted on the subject of the Corn-laws; yet he put the question on most distinct and in telligible grounds. fhe Government said that they advocated a fixed duty ; the Right Hon. Baronet said that he maintained the principle of a sliding scale. That was sufficient grounds for confidence in the Right Hon. Baronet. Would any man in the House venture to say that the present was the very best plan that could be adopted ?—( Ministerial cheers.) Attached as he was to the present Corn-laws he dldnot so consider them, and he lamented that the Corn-law proposed by Mr. Canning had been altered. His Right Hon. Friend (Sir Robert :'eel ) was too wise to enter upon a speech of details—(Ministerial cheers)—but he had spoken out on the principle. He s Mr. Liddle) was surprised that the Noble Lord (Palmerston), the colleague of Mr. Canning and Mr. Huskisson had not been convinced by their arguments, and (lid not maintain their policy. He feared that he had trespassed too long on the at tention of the House. He felt strongly the position in which the Government was placed, and he felt convinced that it would be for the best interests of the country that a change should take place in public affairs, He was convinced that the Right Hon. Baronet had not wrongly estimated the feelings of the nation, and the circumstances of the time, in bringing forward this motion, which, so far from being an invasion. upon the prerogative of the Crown, he believed would bring the Crown and the people of this country more in harmony and unison than they had been since the accession of her present Majesty to the Crown, and that of the weakest and most imbecile Go vernment to office that had held it in the recent history of the country,—(Cheers.) Sir H. FLEETWOOD said that his only apology for ad dressing the House on so important a debate as the present was, that he had not trespassed, on any other occasion, on their attention, during the Session. He represented besides a large and suffering constituency, who felt the deepest interest in the questions now under the consideration of Parliament. The Hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Wakle)) had expressed his readiness to vote for the Opposition in that House, provided they brought forward measures which would have his approval and he, too Sir H. Fleetwood) would ha ve b een rea d y to sacrifice, as it had often before been his fate to do, the interests of party to the general interests of the people. —( Hear, hear.) He was decidedly and conscientiously opposed to the present Corn-laws ; as he did not wish to tax the great necessary of life, and as he thought the present system was prejudicial to all classes. He believed that the present was a crisis such as had never before been known since the British Constitution watt in force. That was the only time When they had before them the questions of a free or a re • • stricted trade. Gentlemen now for the first time advocated the welfare of the community at large in opposition to privi leged bodies. That was, however, the time when N a y Neer called upon to vote against the Adminstratioo tip, reso lution were to be carris,d, he believed it *(Aid lead to a ehaoge of men, and not 'to a clianks of Measures; and he felt assured that ttliatiy Tien. ''Gentlemen opposite would bz posed to advocate principles similar to tor Aniroclticesi by her Majesty's Gevermhent on t.l isrsent oceastol, l • — ( tfrar• The countryw.is new labouring, under the disadvantages of deficiency of, revenue', anti th t ey iVere' caged Upon to provide remedy fOr this evil. Th'ere'Were but two couples (s• sued under the eireumstances—either to, iocrea.se. the taxation, or to diminish taxation, and g\a4 97 ll e V tn i : en h , e 'h a d d e4 v ,, c , l 4 7l7 e t Y os : increased The G the latter alternative, and had e ndeavoured to meet the wants j of the country With ou t a ddi ng the burdens of the people. I He wished thi s ques ti on should be fully discussed before they again appeared before their constituents. 14 however, they MORNING EDITION"; were to go before the country on sub a vote as the c li i r a e r : ! , i cut, they would nut hove had an opportunity of d " clay' i i t y ing their s. iltrrients on the great. subject n w tie ° e public consideration. 'I he question was not whetlier ."_.. side or another sho.ild he in power ; the real quere_lu a at issue was whether a new system of financial policy sn°_7 4 or should rot be adopted. There were many gentlemen--a'• • he had spoken to some of them within the last ,ix houis—l gt approved of the comoercial measures of the Goverementtliw seized that they had no confidence in three who blow:lit Gentle, forward.—( Hear, hear, en tie Opposition b'nclies.) . see _ men opposite were angry because the Goveinment had I . or a s , stalled ihem. They said, hitherto when the Government beery in difficulties, it has been in the habit of applYing, e t . 0 for assistance, but now it has taken a step in aav_ ... alj ed it'tlf. It has proposed that which we had i te u , s a to propose when we should come into office. We . 1 4 ; not any idea that the Government possessed such spiraiit we must intelfere at once, and crush them with a vote of 11 , e of confidence. Such was the conduct of Gentlemen opp o ?! 4 ' they approved of the measures as measures, but theY I r. proved of them because they were brought forward be her ad jesty's Government. He had been rejoiced to hear the , w , te a tons itutional in the Right Hon. Baronet's speech, anel listened with attention to the Right. Hon. Baronet's eilsisll'iee 11 , of constitutional principles ; but the Right Hon. BaroneteLj stead of speaking of the old Constitution of King, Lords ! „ l2 . Commons, had intioduced a new constitutional law of 1• -ii - : b i t liareentary usage. The Right Hon. Baronet might be rt o that there were two constitutional laws, one of Queen, "' sod Commons, and the other of Parliamentary wars' , to but if the doctrine of the Right Hon Baronet, as 1 Parliamentary usage, were to be carried out to its full eate se nt, e• they might perhaps come back to those scenes of former trot in which an ancestor of his (Sir H. Fleetwood) had aell e part when the mace was ordered to be taken off the table of House.—(Loud cheers and laugher from the OK° t be ' benches.) lie would now allude to the distressed state d the i r town which he represented; howev e r they might differ.l o c. , political (pin ens, when they came to con s ider the distress e e , .sting in the neighbourhood with which they were more liale .. „ diately connected they all felt like true hearted Englishmen'_, (Cheers.) He had been the o th er d a y spea ki ng with a, a tleman of Conservative politics and a warm su pporter 0 Lad Noble Lord the Membet for North Lancashire, and 11, „ 0 told that gentleman that in presenting a petition to that 0 10 ;0 he (Sir H. Fleetwood) had stated that there were from 10 ';", to 1,250 houses, which had been in the occupation of ma nufacturing labourers, untenanted in Preston, and eee t 0 1 gentleman had told him that he had not at all exagge';l o the number. The people were in the greatest distress, 4., was cramped, and the whole population was in the most 1 11 _„ k 1 able conditi n. Th e manufacturers were s i n ki ng, an d er t i, not catitend with foreign countries. He had asked that O r tleman's opinion of th e measures recent l y propose d by her„ d irs' jesty's Governme n t, a n d t h e rep l y was t h e measures are g 7„ ~.6.. themselves, but I cannot s upp or t t h em b ecause I h ave nn (sir decree in the Gover nmen t. —( O ppos iti on c h eers. ) He 'lttes H. Fleetwood) always looked t o th e va l ue o f t h e meal us e themselves, and, therefore, he should support them, hee l f ie he was satisfied they were for the ben; fit of the country. ..,ea now came to the question of the P o o r -l aw , w hi c h h a d attreT e r, general atten:ion It had been made the foundation d e o rated attacks upon her Majesty's Government ; fir bit be part he had always voted against the N ew P oor -law, W i e r s did not comprehend how it could be matte the ground '" eni e party- attack on the Gove:nment, when the Right Hon. Blr etie , opposite had uniformly voted with the Noble Lord in its fa llen , Allusion had been made to the recent election of an , Friend of his as 'ha representative of the town o f Notting" • t —(Loud Oppositi :n cheers.) Now it so happened thes es , meeting on the subject of the Poor-laws which he bad as t tended in the winter, allusion had been made to the dice r way is way in which the law was administ e r e d a t Medford, e n h ile Nottingham. At Bradford out-door re li e f was a fforded. ' I 0 at. Nott:rgharn it was relused, end the law was administer"" all it' str etriess. When he asked the reason of this ilifft . l e ! i b i a being made between towns apparently s i m il ar ly situateßk o t. was told that at Bradford the people h a d r i o t e d, while at I he t ting'eam they had remained quiet. H e cou ld on ly say st o knowing those circumstances whatever gentleman had 0 1 ;41 Nottingham, as the opponent of the new Poor-law, h eir ost almost have ventured to have secured him his election. $4 . 0 , contest was not a triumph over h er Majesty's Ge ~. ment; it was a triumph over the new Poor•In t • 0 1 (Hear.) lie rejoiced that the Government had detetr°4 o , to give up the Poor-law, and to bring forward the Coro" t o He was convinced, and any Hon. Gentleman connected ; • I aucashire would bear him out in t e ass r ion, that at the f t ee suing election the question both of th e C orn -l a w and f o e Poor-law would be strictly canvassed. —( Hear, hear. ) fest' was 110 man of liberal politics who entertained the least - f op for his seat except as regarded the questio n o f the Poor - He thought the Noble Lord had committed a grea t error l w , siding the Bill into two parts. —( Loud cries of " Qu e l s rli T hs question !" in which the voice of Mr. Round was ra rtieee audible.) He was not going away from the question. toe Right Hon. Baronet, in the course of his spee c h, had pe;:. o .e. I ,rly alluded to the Poir-law in connexion with the ' bo at law, and he was convinced that at every election throug • 0 the country que.Aii.ll3 would be put to th e can didates a i.f, their sentiments regarding the P oor -l aw an d the Corn;„ _(• • Question !") With regard to the fi xe d d u ty of B ' l ' o o posed to be levied on corn, he would at once conce d e that iii the , of scarcity such a duty could not be levied—(Cheers fro le tty. o Opposition )—but it struck him th a t th e ra t e o f duty l os e matter of miiior cons:ceration. Ou r manu f acturer s sen t l i t lA goods to foreign countries, and could no t rece i ve their efi ieee exchange, because, in consequence of th e presen t mode of t , r e posing the duty, it was impossible to f orm an id e a of sre s te i. price of corn might be when it arrived in this collo; Now a fixed duty would enable them to calculat e 0 0 some degree of accuracy at w h a t p r i ce h e cou ld sell the e ois which he might barter for his manuf ac t ures so as toe,!_ r i s t him to meet his bills. It he were s p ea ki ng as an ae rieu !l b ,' l e to his brother agricudurists he would say rather seek t° 4o aft those undue prohibitions under which you „yourselves I.hel removed than seek undue protection f or your coin. 0 4 damee were prohibited from growing tobac c o ; if they had wheat they were obl i g e d to se ll th a t uns ound cu ff the consumption of the . people ; because they ' to t he proh lilted by law from malting it, therefore speakillg fr eof agriculturists, he would say rather seek to free yourselve! 400 the restrictions which affect you than to enforce restrict bo on the public at large.--(Hear, hear.) Those had heel jo sentime,ti long before he had had th e has of a se t, e rh that House, and he had a l wa y s sa id to his far'—die that, if any alteration were to be matte in i l lo Corn-laws, not that he would reduce , b e rents—(ironical cheers, a n d cr i es o f " Oh, oh," f ro m-' vs Opposition)—Gentle men h a d b etter wa it f o r the conchr io of the sentence—not that he would reduce his rents, but that would take the lea s e o f th e f armer ' s h an d s , a nd take the wh. e of his stock at the value of it before any alteration in the Lis laws took place ; and he wa s p er f ec tly rea dy to do so, W.' be wished it to go forth to the public and his tenantry l o s was, in the event of any alteration in the b e laws, perfectly willing at any time to do so. Heedta lieved that in that House they were too much accustonetii consider measures only with reference to party views and 5 - 10 tactics, but a time was coming when they would all ha 0 meet their con•tituencies, and to account for their votes,ee 4 .• they might affect party facile!, but as they had affected th a w neral interests of the country. That was an ordeal thr s ,'„? which he was prepared to pass, and from which h,t er l 'Oet all the Members would not shrink. The Hon. P i f a% i opposite had referred to cases in which, where there t hei majority of 4, 10, and 37, in favour of the Government tl O had resigned, on the supposition that they did not poss e ,r - ietri, confidence of the co un t ry . B ut t h oug h t h e pres ent Wi l t i lia might mot have a m a j or it y i n t h e H ouse o f C omm ons• l eoe it• not fellow that they did not possess the confidence of th e wool try.—( Hear, he ar .) H e d i d not d es i re to see a dissf es ad• until the subje c t o f t h e C orn -l aws h a d b een f u lly clis`;,.. 101 When Hen. Members had had an opportunity of eaP. nre pe i their sentiments on that subject, then would be the . t r alO P time for a di sso l ut i on . I n nearly all the q u estions orn eo d far recently been discussed i n th a t H ouse , the question of f z e hetr the suffering people had been intr o d uce d ; it was r ight, ' p oi •• e Ohl ' fore, that sh o uld rece i ve th e f u ll est discussion. If thes II of the G overnment were not foun d e d upon r i ght princ re of , would meet with the fate which usually attended Inel i tite th e that des cr ipti on . L et h er M a j esty ' s Ministers boldly / w' principles by which they were guided, and the counift ee tioe not tail to supp or t th em . Th eir motto at t h e' n ext se should he " Anti- Monopoly," g elOt i l Mr. WALTER said his reasons for supporting there,ll h' - , which had been proposed were different fr-orn any 4K; been stated to the House. He did nit altogether di. s %ok 7 :, of the financial schemes proposed by the Governmen t, 04 7 thought that ne beneficial result could be expected 0 0 ° 1 00 because of th e h as ty an d a b rupt manner i n w hi c h thil i• 10 introduced. Those measures were not deeply rooteu it ; fel minds of those who brought them forward; they sce re e ' r r e ififi e the promises of a p o liti ca l d ea th-b e d repentaece.—("„`'ihstii It was on account of the general conduct of Alinistess An uil would vote for the resolution. Passing by their hlf-n;gei infliction of th e rura l po li ce, an d their attempt to slret nl 2 Or stitutionaily the p r i nc i p l es o f t h at H ouse, h e rested I f TO i opposition to the m on account o f t h e i r P oor- l aw Bill. fr o - the promises made in reference to this Bill had bee", • It was stated by the Whig Chancellor of the day th e lf e , entertained the notion of separating husband from ,_ d. parent from child. That, like every other promise , " 2 A violated. The Noble Lord the Member for North lee„, On North w"._.s, P• had accused the Government of setting num.— - hip. 1 against property., Th a t was t h e effect of the Bill , tow referred ; but it was p ro p erty t h at f i rst commenced th e , ' - ii tb e and whatever Admini s t ra ti on would come i nto pove"ti)7 d ` supported that Biil as th e p resen t G overnment had dP n- ', ' would expose themselves to the same condemnation. , ijArd:. I Mr, MACAULAY said ha con gratu l ate d the 11 ° 0 7 1 600, 2 ,': ! net upon obtaining a new ally, wh o w ithd re w his e ul tate m fi ism Government, on the grounds w hi c h had be t Ford Both on the privilege question, and in relation T h i s eleei“,e laws, the Hon. Baronet had given the Governtli t e n ' hat eyien .fi support. —( Hear, hear.) He must say that B e Right Nee. wish some surprise the resolution proposed by th e - doic e es Baronet. The Hon. Baronet had thought fit to laY eeto ti! oe ' general proposition as to what was the spirit of the o lun A ' tion. It was no light matter to place on ree s or d ar e e i ril like this ; that their oourse was inconsistent with she of the Constitution. Great inconvenience might•er . siel result from it. Even if he fully agreed with the Ad lei t ; Honourable Baronet in thinking the present . At -- It s " tration unworthy of the confidence of the 1 -10 ,1 1 ,71it e e r could not agree in his general proposition. He rega"' e S c s an unsound and mischievous dogma. The Hone , Barte - 1 02 ; forth two propositions—the one that her Majesty's 6 ° l * - eotf did not sufficiently possess the confidence of the ilso e l,; ! s er• - _, O able them to carry through measures which they ,e-v: p. 1 .4 highly important ; the o th er , t h at t h e oontinuance offootit.,o stry so situ a ted, was contrary to the sp i r i t o f the, lllVo tion. On the latter point h e wou ld j o i n issue wi th t h e rie Honourable Baronet, on the grounds of reason a1id.?: 11 .1. 0 7,' First as to the reason of the case. It was, in his Pww highly inexpedient to a ffi rm a state of things to liit o jee,..- to the spirit of the Constitution which might lats ioev o e t from which there might be no escape. K ee ls a stag .• he believed to - exist at the present time. Let hV e g 1 that there were 320 strong and sealous Tories, ands 0 0 Pr o strong and zealous partizans of a Liberal policy, t oesa D e tween these two great parties there arose seie in soo. o o eighteen gentlemen who were averse to strong 0 ,4 15 ,5 e either side, and inclined to oppose any s t ieasul indet ,4Pi t t strongly imprinted with the character of party. ea l If sl circumstances, he would like to know how, consist ...), o a f , ; the resolution, any Government could be carried on 7 !,,- 1.1 i Was that an impossible, or was it an improbable ease ' 00 1." . they not had it distinctly before them? r ff i ce the tin t i t fl theriance Irish to the Regisp ublic tration. That we e a quest i o n of woo d po w `! l :..are and it would bora/ he ed tioo o f that it was a Tlestion on which depended the colistlewooloo the i - tetr-e,—it was a question on which depended thodt t oe one-sixth of the Members of that House, 2 wer e . • , e a returning r question oh which the great parties in that H 01 31,050 N o T .,, ‘ A. •I he Noble Lord the Member for North .1e,7004 kad brought 'forward a measure which they on autos Pis, House held to be neoet pernicious, and the Govertt'4o o e j brought o°l tee measure introduced by Government L e st . e:ll eel almost . to Raelioelient e while the measure , -_, , ...-,; be r OS been introcliketA by the Noble Lord the 1 ": civ ilise , N ,- ,‘,11/ 0 ,1.4, 9 caAb• ire was considered by those who " otog „ e ee 0 . lite 4,,,e :is calculated to put an end to elections if li st ;ie Wl6;t was the history of things on this subject? ( "erottiellte 114: If;)aV3W:felAseetyWseea,suTrei;e ‘o7thhieerh side he ofN othbleenLoouirde•7o-"?,eci the Noble Lord, the Member for North Lancashire' it , 0 0 , his int asure. They on that side of House o PW e at icl b e is' Noble Lord had even got the Bill into Committee; g . o r' y b e e a a r te t e he m (3 l ao, q e u r e n ti e o n n t w h h a i t e i h p ‘ r v o a i s m t s h ett e etshseeinrcepietafnt;h into c P :a gn s te i ito Legs duced, end hit a small majority it was carried iot a..., bo if and on the hest division they were beaten. N w k