The Sun. — London, England, 1853-06-17 00:00:00

4PERIAL PARLIAMENT. lION T , ~________ .-Q , OF COMMONS --(YESTERDAY.) abe 1,8 kr. 1141 ER took the chair at 4 o'clock. One fiIINN presented a pe ti t i on f rom Bath, i n 4 t ocean penny p ostage. 14 1 AND PRESENT GOVERNMENT AND k a 1,.-14, IiEOGII.—EXPLANATIONS. aaLtoe4ntE°G/I.—Mr. Speaker, in rising to make the ba, te , of which I have given notice, I am sure I shall f th e h k lo vain the indulgent attention of both sides of l'Atlfl"hear hear) —whilst I endeavour to defend tk kry - 'e nat charges impeaching my veracity and dero 14t illY personal honour. (Hear, hear.) I have lat e : n 'l.ence, because I have observed that no . matter 4 al wo Y u e our individual or party conflicts, this house 1'444;1' prepared fairly and candidly to listen to • 144 1 a I, l l l !, w h_ . ich any one of its members may he driven to at 'lndication of his character Sir, lam not wi .i th . - % e ,,,„ . , • . t, t , , eviction that discussions of this nature are ilc tar!) t r i etts, and disagreeable to the house. (Hear, , It thl a „ 414 not without the conviction—to mo a most ta'eek,o-'t not altercations of a personal nature e 1 / 4 4 (1, ,Iten arisen between the representatives of Iron lieti 4qesr, hear.) But this I wish to impress . u ll p ho ''oa ta,e! of the house, and I hope that justice will am et il •la this respect, namely, that in this case ' t ' 4gre'er—(hear, hear)—that I have neither sought t 14icated this cause of quarrel ; that it has been e p m u . kr of nutter circumstances which I do think evera, - t m hem *a Let ', house, when they are fully explained to . t4aetel,,,eve are.ilsither consistent with fair play nor with 44 t-..;',.' which are conceded to every political oppo 4kat • ulell aro never denied by any generous man to h a n n. lakbeitclivithial. It will be in the recollection of hot. ka t , „ .. r k that on Friday last, in another place, a d 'ia, t ' i 7rrea i n ,„ Which my name was much brought . into 11 ta ll '_ 4° that discussion and the object of it it is not y k l a i3:l:4tentin to allude further than may be necessary 144_, Nection to the issue raised between myself sea. 1 4 tZle lord the member for Coleraine (Lord Naas.) For btl e, ll ‘ 34 in I was perfectly unprepared -11ItlIrt: - of it to any of my friends, and it was N n e o: ee nn .n ti g l Iz.rfafter five o'clock on that day, that ? on m lobby,l4 ea 'lend the member for Roscommon in . the . s. ' l l4l 4 : l ! ‘ ri ti tt I °,3' name had been introduced into a T . t r i b on I , to 1 rious e of Lords ; but as I perceive that dis l 'Y 111141 I lee renewed in a formal manner befrea proper s k e . sh all not follow the example of other tvlikliaj*lgin that 461 ill i ` z. k 0 e otivtiit all et f rale e h inquiry, ara e a t n e ( r l . shall ehm confine eu fl u i i i ss e s, ated by i t n e t myselfwep h w e h t m e i c h l a a noble entirely passing over sbie (A im:1,11.) forthe purp9 11 s l e ved in that discussion b i ' t rt o 4 tehl Y til'lti l e4rllatel at t.heliead fo of e her Mesty's Government, I a e earl in the course of his speech thought pro a‘,. a hold ~... ns.considered kW Y4 ' he m appointment to the office at ce tai,, '3' ta:`,.7, t unfortunatec . ir m cu a m y stance. Now, 'eN'tec. nowerer painful it . have bep t? my 110 4 a ro heard that observation from so . dista . ngui shed ,L t tis ' 3 ' 4 t hat I d tp e •ve anything in it which would ~,Na, li t l i e to challeenage 't r a e s el l am ' about to challen the o h % •tts of alioth e er i noble personage. ~ follow lbas S I i r, have th e a g l e noble s "471'4 very _t. y another, a nobleanwda,sp leased to say, taV'e e,,,3Vnivalrous earl ; and h V 414 (1e 1 1 3 " r ° ,1 my appointment he was be thelelasstearreepeilly to th e Y the present Government. .._ Now, __ _ h ._ ttakeewlpre. salon I have quoted is justibeq.ey e auy .e u ra. ~, ° f use eich the noble earl can mention in d an te y n you4thtior eharacter—l scarcely think there is ra a n n k y inilpirohowever exalted, which would justify terTi,eabererincing, such an opinion — on made kN ,me tra p got at second hand,bytwelve statements,months Ititillicit 41esTaction, and conveyed persons whose names 14, . 4 114 the,',•.!oned— (hear, hear) cm made, likewise, a ost interested in taj lr ali t ,. 4naerledge of the person k t 4, 1 4 4 1 , Sir, I do not think such language is justa ta,Vaeiii ~,,l a. h e r any other house—(hear, hear)—without n accused of ex- N -.) i t , 'ein t a given for, the ekh ee s_ touduct. But it so p P l e fas e ed the noble earl to `Jtt l 't6l .. 0ft.:7 1 lilY appointment. I was d at tp i e ra b m ar ed o i f at t e h ly e des:Rthi c ;nla and heard the words use . . ka t , t te 3 ~71( with a noble duke, who in a kind and c I thought the r, Ilia OF4,llner undertook my c, 1 1 : t it , 3 , r,,stue noble lord ought not t e o . have proceeded ili t rv4 ti o ',"` e ; but I confess I was surprised re to hear the in Ireland, Dr : I I k,": °f one who had been Vice k 4 % that--14---When many others knew, an y dl t s m ha e ll , I. letli., l Pli o he;ati,e noble lord who now sits opposite o , gle Ftsa t, 1L the office of chief secre e ta ss ry im t m o e t d h ia at tel L y o e r n d t til k ' t ) rita ti u 4 d sought me with eagern , 4 '4 to 4° ll of his Government—had pursu h e a c v l in re g e h f i r r o e m d 1, ple :4,'eet, and from house to house— . +j,,,,a hi two but friend after friend in his eager haste le' ttl t tla ii - , 4 e i teli in communication with me, in order . ta N kl e eLtioa, which I shall p h r e e ug se h n t l itt Y h m ewe e sa n sr t l if t ,,Y th e gat uoble lord. I t miht li It, " lay of TBe cir cumstances had reached etlhye thatiate li iti ttl iill ii, l.°l4ll d--I thought some of them l l c a o t u e ld th n e ot F tu s t eta. "'`e k nowledge of the noble earl f n i i ) te%_ t he e , and I asked the noble ta d t u e k m e n ( n N t e o w n " 4;4 t he so th r e ow fa n etto the house—he i that when a"4 1 ," tiolole lord has joined issue— a_ the possible y cl Ott 41 t, e 'i. 1 , a s Chief Secretary for . Ihrntelhmaend, someon "t •*taa," 'imaelf stated, there might It,, bi "itlA t (ter he Would accep t the office i kal l ‘cZ l t in terview with me, an Government of Lord Derby.. ilia,tri,r" ?face under the a sokfed Chief me Secretary, whether I k 4 4 ' h thi t t 1 q lerk) The s ta G ta cn nt sa l me ma a d s e w t a h s e m n a i d s e tt y e d tll4 ti, lb clt,:lian. make now—is the behalf—namely, ,:1 1, i 2 ? in another place on m y 11—° nAt an interview the noble l e ord un opposite '''vkae'tlllll,,k: w hethe r I would ,Nl -1.4 , t h e- ' q Lord Derby. (Hear, he r ) t take with an 11se,,;_,Ltit,Porilous issue for any accept e c I admit it N . ii,' l la ee n fi ded in the noble m lo a r n d s e h s a o u n t ou s r i , r , , aa w d ha l t ti o , e() • e i, ',Jae accurac of his memory. 4' l'ef,:etiresta ce which it will be necessar ' y to men 115b.th fi r I ros;lthe d cximent to which I desire tie brat it will e be in the recollection . th o r f ete th r e ? i)0', 41 t' i ;ce or ten days after all the app for Ireland. IN ' f. t4 )4. "etb Y ' R Government were made th el e a n tm ob e l u e t l s o o rd f "ttaT'a tja%llained for the Chief Secretary N i . 4 t,o4i d a t, not at the time having h r e y n r e e e m rn o e t d es i t n id th ea e 11 th:‘ 1 5e e'f.''c Lola any way interested th e to atibi' ird Derby's Government e , r l c t o oo e k hi n e o l i e n r t d er e e p st . !ite b ` a14",,e• (A. laugh.) However, the noble urable friend t4l,Ne'll co mmunication with my i , C a t, t ies LI,. Tipperary, '' '4 l'c411111 "l at 1401- He asked n e th w e a m s e v in ehrY b ° e n r :a fo x r ie T a i a pp in era h r i y s nt r t' tlf7 41_ 14 3 r 1; • te residence ;he could n hi ot e fi h n Id wasi, C4411e4 b'lert went to the Reform Club, of w e I do not I.;„l'll44eiber. He inquired there for 111 411'111. A. ' et t his has escaped the noble lord's.memory— ts4fth' ktoa—No. Zt : 11 o 1 )1,7 1 . - --At all events, I will r l efr h e a sh ve th s e ta m d, em we or n y t ‘1 11 " 4 tef o - t° td• The noble lord, as he inquired . bat,,Mcha,4lll..,_Club, and not finding me there, laiiitrie'3-• tie waited in that great hall,•vh b i e ch e , al N i v e h d e when ti t !Nl „ ttte Changing, may not improperly h n members w e I°4 tt l ,N 4 1 : 04) P merit. - C.A. laugh.) Ido not supposheelsaumr. t t tsktc,lu e ~,4 „..4%rave charge against 0 • .i.`, eire„...4.lunrl,, say that that tfie were seized titara,teatiaablt•nre.e, and o f his noble hen . re lo e r m d' h s e p r r s esence tlier In y t{ ascertain the was 114 11. 41 tf (A l ' la lig l 7l.l ll° l n i fact, the noble lordesevtlyssetkhneeowbn kka„ 1 .,,,1 ( ti a , a !i observers, and it became en ,:at f a g iu 11,reati In having recourse . to , P th t club was to 14 0 4 iae °re could be found, in o.de a r ie t a o l eee l m h e m o v n e tta klaciu.4t With which I shall presently . ( • It h" , e7;kla l t red ,,, ; 58 tO What I knew at the tame,.and l this to '' k T v eti by the hon. member for Midd esex, Dpheil en the subject : last sentence I have read in the presence of the hon. mom now read to him this letter, and he perfectly concurs with me as to the accuracy of my recollection. " I remain, dear Lord Naas, yours faithfully, " WILLIAM Kzoon." Whatever else this letter proves, sir, I think at least the ber for Galway disposes of the issue put forward by a noble earl in another place, that this rumour first transpired after my appointment. I sent that letter to the noble lord on the Friday evening, and I had no reason to think the noble lord was not in own. I saw him myself very near town on the previous day. I waited for an answer until the Saturday, and towards evening I asked whether he had arrived at his club. I was told that he was ex pected. I inquired on the Sunday, but could receive no answer. On the Monday, being very anxious that this matter should be decided here- Lord NAAS—(Hear, hear.) Mr. KEOGH—The noble lord cheers, but has he been anxious throughout that it should he decided here ? Has he been desirous from the commencement that the whole matter should come before this house as the proper tribu nal. Was he anxious yesterday—to -day—or even half an hour ago ? But, sir, on Monday I wrote another letter to the noble lord in these words ! " Reform Club, Monday. " Dear Lord Naas,—l addressed a letter to you on Friday evening to the Carlton, and on inquiry on Saturday and yes terday was informed that you had not been in town. I called this day at your house, and was told that you are still absent. May I beg the favour of a reply as soon as possible after your arrival. " Dear Lord Naas, truly yours, " WILLIAM ICzooli." Now, I am quite sure the noble lord was out of town on the Saturday and Sunday, but he arrived in town on the Monday, and he had my letter before he came to this house. Of this the house may be sure, as he significantly enough asked a friend of mine whether this question was likely to be brought before the House of• Commons. He was in the divisions which took place in this house on that day, and he received my two letters. About two o'clock on the second day, before the noble lord and a gallant friend of his entered the house, they left for me at the Reform Club the letter I shall now read to the house. I do not wish to deprive the noble lord of any advantage he may derive from this letter. I will give his letter word for word, and will read it with all the emphasis I can command. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) That part of the letter which appears to give the most direct negative to what I have asserted is the part on which I most rely — (hear, hear, from the Ministerial benches)—because some thing tells me that, although the noble lord was of this mind at two o'clock on Tuesday last, he has seen reason to think very differently, and that he will speak very differ ently when he now rises to address the house. Here is his letter : of the Crown ; he is consulted on various subjects of public interest ; ho is absolutely assisting my noble friend ; and my noble friend is endeavouring to ascertain what may ho the future conduct of the honourable and learned gen tleman and his friends, speaking to him in this wise - " Now, what would you have done if office had been offered you by Lord Derby ?" I say it is not at all re markable that the hon. and learned gentleman should have put an interpretation on that conversation which it was not intended to bear by my noble friend. I really think that my noble friend and the right honourable gentleman, from the same state of facts, have arrived at opposite in ferences. As far as I can collect, I think that is a true and sound view of the case. I wish now for one moment to refer to an appeal made to the honourable and learned gentleman which seems to have created some misapprehen sion in the mind of my right honourable friend the mem ber for North Essex (Mr. Beresford). It seems the hon. and learned gentleman had indulged in a vein of great in vective against myself on one occasion. (A laugh.) I appreciate and admire the talents of the honourable and learned gentleman ; but so much has happened since that time that I do not exactly recollect the particular invec tive to which reference has been made. lam convinced, however, that the invective even of the hon. and learned gentleman, however continuous and sustained, would never have influenced me, directly or indirectly, not to send him a message of the kind which seems to have been forwarded to him. I always think that invective is a great ornament of debate—(laughter and cheer)—and I really hardly know how we could endure attendance iu this house, if our dis cussions were not sometimes varied, and rendered more buoyant, by that arm of eloquence. (Hear, hear.) I can assure the house that, although I had innocently for gotten the invectives of the honourable and learned gen tleman, which seems so much to have alarmed my right hon. friend (Mr. Beresford) at that time, and which have been of great service in leading to these misapprehensions, I am confident I always listen to them with approbation, and, on the whole, with pleasure. (Laughter.) I trust the house will take the right view of this case. There is nothing in this case which at all affects political principles of any kind ; we are not to find fault with au individual because he has accepted office uuder a party whom he had pre vious opposed. Every oue will admit that the Earl of Derby was perfectly entitled to offer office to the hon. and learned gentleman, and that it was equally competent to the hon. and learned gentleman to accept it. This is a dis cussion limited—and limited only and strictly—to the opinion which the House of Commons may have as to the veracity of two of its most distinguished and respected members. I confes that, having listened with the greatest attention to the statements both of the hon. and learned gentleman and the noble lord, I do find them reconcilable with the different conclusions to which they have arrived — (hear)—and I warn the house, under the circumstances, not to visit every expression on either side with that keen scrutiny which we only apply to official documents and public conduct, and that we shall render the intercourse between man and man and between gentleman and gentle man more difficult every day if we take always the most uncharitable construction, and avail ourselves with so much eagerness of every word and circumstance in the in tercourse of daily life. (Hear, hear.) I think that both the noble lord and the hon. and learned gentleman were influenced by kind and gentlemanlike feelings ; and with respect to the conduct of the hon. and learned gentleman since that time. I must decline to pronounce any opinion until the facts are fairly before us ; and shall consider that so far as the present discussion is concerned, he has done nothing but what has become him as a gentleman and an officer of the Crown. (Cheers.) lam of opinion that, so far as the question before us this evening is concerned, the honour of both the noble lord and of the hon. and learned gentleman is clear and unimpeachable, and I shall be glad to find that that is the general opinion of the house. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, I trust the house will not lose sight of what I think are the material results of this , discussion. The right hon. gentleman and the noble lord opposite have complained that private communications i have been disclosed, and private letters read ; but be it re- membered that the whole of this discussion has arisen from a personal attack made upon an hon. and learned gentleman holding the high office of Solicitor-General for Ireland — an office than which there is hardly one which requires more the confidence of the public at large in order to carry on its functions with advantage—by a person of no less station and dignity than one who was lately the Lord- Lieutenant of Ireland under the Government of the Earl of Derby. (Ministerial cheers.) That nobleman stated that the appointment of the hon. and learned gentleman was the least reputable of any made by the present Govern ment. With respect to this point, let the house observe what has been the result of the present discussion. The noble lord opposite says that when the late Government was formed he was in friendly communication with the hon. and learned member, for the purpose of ascertaining what were his feelings with respect to the Government then about to be formed. A right hon. gentleman holding the office of Secretary at War, and who was in immediate communication with the members of the Cabinet, au thorised the noble lord to state that the feelings of the then Government towards the hon. and learned gentleman and his friends would be of a friendly description. The right honourable member for Bucks has said that the talents and abilities of the present Solicitor-General for Ireland, and the course which he had pursued in political life, would have led him to think it quite natural that an offer of office should be made to him, and that he, at least, would not have been surprised, nor would he have disap proved of such an offer had it been made. (Cheers.) This, then, is the result of the discussion ; and it is one which the honourable and learned gentleman may, in .the first instance, be proud of obtaining from the discussion of a question involving imputations made upon his character by one who had held so high an office as that of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. That accusation is now swept away. It is gone, and gone for ever. (Cheers.) With respect to the point under discussion, I can hardly say that there is a doubt as to the veracity of two members of this house. Recollections, no doubt, may be imper fect; but the statement which the noble lord has made confirms that of the honourable and learned member for Athlone. There are state ments of different words and of different expressions, and the noble lord, understanding, perhaps, more fully does not attach the same sense to the words as has been done by the hon. and learned gentleman. But even supposing the noble lord's own account to be precisely accurate, and his memory unfailing, I would defy any man, with a Go vernment in the act of formation, to have such a commu nication made to him and not have believed that the ques tion was whether, if he was willing to accept office, some office was not likely to be offered to him. What are the circumstances under which the communication was made ? The Earl of Derby received a commission from her Ma jesty on a Saturday evening to form a Government, and we aro told that upon a Thursday evening following all the appointments were made. I very much doubt if that is the fact, but even if it were so, still the public and honourable members of this house would not have been fully aware of it ; and it constantly occurred in such cases that some of the arrangements proposed did not take place, and some persons who would have proposed to accept certain offices had declined, thereby creating vacan cies of which the public cannot be immediately aware. The impression which the honourable and learned gentle man might fairly have obtained from 'the communication made under these circumstances may have been confirmed when, as the noble lord himself says, he was asked if be had any authority for making that statement, and replied, " Yes ;" and that the honourable and gallant member for Essex, known to be intimate with all the concerns of the party, was his authority for the question he had put. If that is the case I do not think there is any difference, which can be said to be a difference, affecting the vera city of the parties, particularly as regarding a conversation which it appears was of some 20 minutes' duration, and which occurred some months since. But there is another circumstance which, in the words of the noble earl the late Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, are, I think, " not respect able" to the noble lord opposite. I think when the case being such as he himself admits, when the noble lord re ceived from the Solicitor-General of Ireland a letter asking if he had not one day been asked if an offer of office were made to him he would be disposed to accept it, or any similar proposal, I think the noble lord should. have said, that " when so and so occurred, the question I asked you was of this nature, it might have given you the im pression—l cannot think it could have done so—but, it may have produced the impression that I meant to offer you some office. That was not my meaning, but you were fully justified in supposing that was the case." I think in fairness the noble lord should have acted in this manner. (Cheers.) I cannot conceive any man receiving such a let ter, having had such a communication, and answering it by saying, "I have to declare that neither directly nor in directly, was any offer of office made to you." Yet that statement was conveyed by a message to a noble lord in the other house, and brought forward there in the most direct and positive manner. Such a want of fairness, candour, and of honourable oonsideration for the feelings and cha racter of a person with who'si the noble lord had been upon terms of friendship, it has seldom been my lot to witness. (Loud cheers.) All this, be it observed, too, from a noble lord who, though he has said he was not much used to making speeches in that house, yet is one who is particu larly nice with respect to public conduct, and who, not very long since, constituted himself a public accuser, and should therefore be remarkably careful in the conduct which he pursues towards those to whom he happens to be particularly opposed. (Loud cheers.) Ido not think that as the result of this discussion, there is any reason to doubt the veracity of either the hon. and learned gentleman the Solicitor-General, or of the noble lord opposite, but I think, by his own showing and that of the right hon. gentleman opposite, that there was every reason for the hon. and learned gentleman to suppose that the Government of the Earl of Derby would have been willing to offer office to him ; but whether it wore so or not, there is no reason to doubt the veracity of either of the honourable members of this house. (Cheers.) But there is no reason to regret that it should be necessary to state private communi cation and read private letters in order to meet the rash and reckless accusations which have been brought against the hon. and learned gentleman, and that the late Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland should have taken the oppor tunity, in the absence of the hon. and learned gentleman, to make an unfounded attack upon his character. (Cheers.) Sir J. PAKINGTON said the noble lord in his address had assumed a tone of triumph which the circumstances by no means justified. (Hear.) And the speech of the noble lord was more open to remark and comment from the marked difference in tone between his speech and that of his right hon. friend (Mr. Disraeli.) (Hear.) Any speech more judicious, more conciliatory, or more consistent with the fact than that of his right hon. friend he had never heard, nor did he ever hear a tone of triumph which was less justifiable, or a tone of sarcasm which was less called for, than that contained in the speech of the noble lord. (Hear.) The speech of his noble friend contained nothing to justify the terms of harshness and censure in which the noble lord spoke of him. His noble friend told a plain tale, and his tone and manner were so consistent with the facts of the case that they must have carried conviction to the mind of every member in the house. (Hear.) He ad mitted that there was nothing irreconciliablo in the state ments of the noble lord and the hon. and learned gentle man. His noble friend admitted that he asked the hon. and learned gentleman whether if such an office had been offered to the hon. and learned gentleman he would accept of it—that office being at the time tilled up. (Hear, hear.) That was an important fact to remember. Ho spoke from memory, but his impression was that all the offices of the Government were filled at the time, and he believed that the Irish law offices were actually filled. There were two issues contained in the discussion which was raised that night, one referring to the conversation which had taken place, and the other relative to the appointment of the hon. and learned gentleman which had been described in another place as the least reputable appointme n t ma d e b y the present Government. The immediate a nswer t o that was that the same offer had been made. by the late Government.: His reply to this was that the circumstances were different, even supposing that an offer had been made to the han. and learned gentleman by the late Government. The hon. and learned gentleman said ho stood face to face with his noble friend. Ho (Sir J. Pakiugton) stood face to face with the hon and learned gentleman. He did not come down prepared to speak, and therefore he had not the documents with him, but if the language attributed to the hon. and learned gentleman dmine the last election was correctly reported—if it was true that he had spoken as he did of the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, and that he had. physically trampled it under foot—if it was true that the hon. and learned gentleman made one of the most solemn appeals to the Deity, in words the most solemn that could be used, that he never would take office under any Govern ment which did not make Mr. Sharman Crawford's Tenant Right Bill a Cabinet question—if it were true that he made the speeches attributed to him at Carlow and West meath. then he (Sir J. Pakington) would say that the noble lord (Eglintou) was justified in characterising the appointment of the hon. and learned gentleman as he had done. (He.er.) His noble friend (Lord Nees) had made a clear, manly, honourable, and straightforward statement, which left nothing to be desired. The other issue iu the cpleetion reinnined to be cleared up. (Hear, hear.) Mr. KEOGH hoped the house would indulge him for a. few minutes after the speech of the right hon. baronet, which opened up new ground. But before doing so he begged to express his acknowledgments to the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) for the kind, generous, and, he feared, undeserved expressions he tined towards him on the je i hi l apa g to l : i no t bnheeninmi hon.ul engaged esgoen:nwtglpheeldieenr elsewhere. present occasion. (Hear, hear.) As far as the attack on d his personal character was concerned, the language of the compensationds.:: c us s e s ,i jug vas tofo for the m ho an im p alll util l t e io N n in e d as i t: (Hear, hear.) But after the house gentleman, to a l t : rh i g m ee a a ner cl o, after tafhr oe:f ie i h ege e h\t‘to, complete ahhi insignificant a question as (h . thef uy tiI : ; fuer, justification h e st n e ) so r n o w n . ) With regard 'Co the physical performance attributed 9' to . him in respect to the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, he • • l disavowed it. (Hear, hear.) And so far from mak e i n n t g lre i 0:2n1 a i,o n e n falt'e;.hciointefunitoyferilt3c.uta,nl unsafe. t ea tsia at o ; onf il ef- preferreda a4 ' ed Personally speeches on that subject, no meetings were held to any knowledge with respect to it since the late Government came into office. (" No, no—that is not the question.") That was the whole gist of the accusation. (Hear, hear.) ar .) He had stated at the commencement of his speech that he would not be dragged into any other matter but the one before the house as long as an investigation with regard to it was pending in the other house. Let any new charges be brought forward against him, and he would be prepared at the proper time and place to meet them, and to dispose of them as satisfactori l y and effectuall y as he (lid the pre sent. (Hear, hear.) If there was a difference between the noble lord and him, he asked the house and the public to contrast the statement of the noble lord with all the ad missions made. Let them consider and weigh the statement in leis letter, in which he gave nothing but a dry denial, and in comparing the admissions and denials let them take up the letter of amen whom the noble lord did not venture to impeach, whose veracity he did not even suggest that he could call in question, and let them reconcile that document with the declaration that the noble lord never mentioned the conversation to any human being till within the last week. • Mr. WHITESIDE said , that the noble lord having re ferred to the motion made against Lord Clarendon, in which he took no part, considering it would be contrary to etiquette, as he had been one of the counsel in the case, could never listen to a minister of the Crown in a country where public morality and public principles were professed to be respected, eulogizing and justifying that transaction, without giving to that justification an indignant denial—a denial of its propriety and justice. (Hear, hear.) He could not forget that it had been proved that gold had been rolled out by the Lord-Lieutenant to obtain the panegyrics of a newspaper for the Government. (Hear, hear.) But he would not speak on that subject, as the hon. and learned gentleman had abstained from doing so. Mr. KEOGH was understood to say that the hon. and learned gentleman had offered him his notes of the case in the lobby. (Hear, hear.) Mr. WHITESIDE said, when he next spoke to thehon. and learned gentleman, he thought it. would be desirable to have 300 persons present. (Loud laughter.) If the speeches and conduct attributed to the hon. and learned gentleman by the newspapers were correct, then he would say that the noble lord (Eglinton) was justified in the use of the language he applied to the hon. and learned gen tlemen in another place. When a Minister of tho Crown should be found who laid it down as his rule that those should be elevated to the offices of State who were the most distinguished in the walks of agitation, the effect of that principle in reference to Ireland would be, that learning, industry, and the quiet pursuit of a n y profession would he regarded ratheras impediments to promotion, and it would be understood that the true mode of obtaining the favour of the Minister was to open a school of agitation, or a nur sery of sedition. (Hear, hear.) Lord H. BENTINCK fully agreed with the hon. and learned gentleman, the Solicitor-General for Ireland, that nothing could be more painful than these personal discus sions. Much time had been wasted that evening on matters of comparatively minor importance. Out of that house, if not in it, the lion. and learned gentleman had been charged with having pledged himself in the most distinct and so lemn manner, not only never to hold office in, but never to tolerate the existence of, any Government which was nut prepared to carry out certain conditions. The conditions had not been fulfilled, and yet the hon. and learned gentleman held office at that moment. (Hear, from the Opposition.) A more serious charge than any preferred that evening was made against the Government a short time ago by the hon. member for New Ross (Mr. G. Duffy)—a charge of profligacy of the grossest description—(oh, oh)—and no explanation had been vouchsafed. Mr. VANCE said it was very seldom that he differed in opinion from the right hon. gentleman for Buckingham shire, whose Administration he came to that house to sal . port ; but he was compelled to differ from him in reference to one observation which he had made that evening. The right hon. gentleman saidehe should not have been sur prised or displeased had office been conferred on the hon. and learned member for Athlone (Mr. Keogh) by the Ad ministration with which he was connected. He (Mr. Vance) could only say that the constituency whom he re presented would have been both surprised and displeased at such an event—(hear) —and one of their gravest grounds of objection was the fact of his having always avowed and supported ultra-niontane principles. (Hear.) He felt bound to give this honest expression of his opinion. SUCCESSION DUTY BILL. On the order of the day for going into committee on ths Mil Sir W. JOLLIFFE said he was sorry to interpose any delay to the Speaker's leaving the chair; but he must take that opportunity of making an appeal to the right hon. gentleman with regard to the mode in which the object of this measure was to be carried out. He wished to give the Government full credit for believing that the burdens of taxation were at present unequal, and that the landed in terest was not sufficiently taxed. While doing this, how ever. he must observe that the infliction of the tax itself would be far less disastrous than the mode in which it was to be levied. (Hear.) For many years it had been part of his almost daily occupation to have a good deal to do with rateable property, either as trustee, guardian, or as executor. If he were informed on any subject what ever, he was on that ; and the result of his experience generally was, that whereas the legacy duty generally pressed very severely, and was a cruel and most ungracious mode of taxation, the pressure of the evil was immensely exaggerated when the tax could not be levied without calling in legal aid. (Hear, hear.) H e wished to impress on the ri c ,elinion. gentleman and the Go vernment that, by passing the bill with its present extraordinary provisions, they would inflict upon rateable property a degree of ex pense and of inconvenience, and would insure the exercise of a degree of tyranny which had never been caused by the institution of any previous tax. (Hear.) If it was neces sary that rateable property should bear the proposed burden, he for one was ready to bow down his back to the yoke ; but he entreated the Government and the house not to inflict the tax upon land in the manner proposed. The proposition which he wished to make was not at all origi nal, nor was it in fact inimical to the spirit of the measure. The more he looked at the measure, the more it seemed to him to have the joint operation of a postponed laud tax and a postponed property tax. The proposition of the right hon. gentleman with regard to corporations aggregate was, he understood, that they should be subjected to a perma nent property tax, that that tax should, during the conti nuance of the property tax, be 3d. in the pound, and that after its cessation it should be raised to 6d. He entreated the right hon. gentleman and the Government to concede to him that arrangement. He entreated this for the sake of themselves—he entreated it for the sake of that house, which must be detained for an extraordinary length of time by the consideration of these complications ; he en treated it in order that the Legislature might be saved from the discredit of inflicting a tax which they had never borne, and which in all probability, indeed certainly, the great majority of them could never bear. His appeal to the Government was, that they shoul that d postpone uld for take one night the committee on the bill ; they sho twenty-four hours to reconsider the matter, and then tell the house whether it was not possible to extend a proposi tibn which had been considered just, as regarded ono par ticular class of owners of property, to all who might be in terested in the measure. (Hear, hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said ho was very sorry that, in accordance with what he considered his absolute d.uty, he must decline to discuss the general bear ing and operation of the bill on that occasion and that on grounds of a very simple character. He must remind the hon. baronet that, on Monday night, the motion for going into committee having been debated at considerable length, the debate having come to a natural conclusion, no hon. gentleman having proposed an adjournment, and the house having determined to go into committee, the Speaker left the chair, which was taken by the chairman of committees. Upon that, the natural course for him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) to have taken would have been to move that the chairman should report progress, and then the Speaker would at once have left the chair. But there beinc , certain amendments —very slight ones, in comparison with the importance of the bill—which the Government in tended to introduce, it appeared to him that it would be for the convenience of me mbers to have the bill in their hands when it went in to committee as nearly as possible in the exact state in which it would be finally proposed. He therefore rose in his place and said that, if it was the understanding on the part of the house that the bill should go into committee on Thursday, he would on that (Monday) evening move that it should be committed pro handsin_st instance c e the in forma, and put the amendments in the hands of the chairman, in order that the bill might be reprinted with them. After he had spoken there was that silence which e t h h a e d a n m ov e e n r dm be e f n o t re s k in n t o o w t n he an implied consent. Accordingly the bill went into commit which, after such an understanding bad • prevafled, there had appeared the slightest inclination to take ad te ch e air h n:an d ; id an p d uht vantage of the formal right which every member undoubtedly raise subsequently a general debate, had to Speaker from leaving the chair. He did and prevent -the not know whether or not the hon. baronet heard what took night ;he had certainly remained place on Monday silent ; and he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) could breach of the general understanding not be a party to a which was come to on Monday. Sir W. JOLLIFFE w had been ignorantwhat was understood to declare that he course the Government meant to pursue, and that on postponed, he should the question that the preamble be have made the same appeal that he - lad done that e • ng. The evening. house then went into committee. On clause 1, Mr. HENLEY wished to know whether, where a father domiciled in America, left property to an English son settled here, that the son ought to pay succession duty upon property in America ? The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that the universal law was that a man dying abroad had his estate adminis tered according to the law of the country where ho died. But if a man died abroad, and made a will, leaving a variety of successive interests, and the property subjected thereto were brought to this country and invested in th e English funds, then every inte rest arisi ng afte r the removal of the property to England would be taxed. Mr. HENLEY said that he did not ask about property in England, but about property in America. Who SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that lie had already THE SUN. LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JUNE .7, 1853. I N 413 ' d " June 15, 1853. e li:° . ° g / a,—.You wish to know whether . I can ft Chub circumstance of Lord Nans calling at the NC" .4 Rink' • •your residence , i nq ui r i es respecting was , i' l li 'tti ll o 4 ,, his '11141.* periodof. last year when : Lord D il erbe: n _ fzt,°t mistration. I have a distinct reco ec f . °' his Naas in the Reform Club, during that pexio . d kl at '1 1 , 3 r Visit to the Reform Club was the more ea leot - led from the peculiar position of parties at t 'D es Peeiall • (! kpt %t e a th Yas it was shortly . afterwards con:l.- 0 1 ' 4 N, 0% 4 at you had been asked if you were willing t„..,tl;;lvas sub der Lord Derby's government. This ha ke s t - i_sequently confirmed by your stating to me 4, esd u ad expressly asked if you were disposed to er the now admistration of Lord Derby. " I am very truly yours, ?e ll ! (eosi. " R. OSBORNE." "eiti ' 4l :led 'O. IN re 4. • lieoo•h) the noble lord was not successful O. e the e h k O4 t wo . ..te• I think, however, I may conclude ail • tO visits to the club, that he was extremely se e ti,Jeat'lribe l . B4 `_e• Sir, it will be in the recollection of tt th rs q 0„, that the noble y at the head of her Da brianient distinctly ~s tated that he had heard 1;41 ; 0 11 lzy a °l.o k that it had been put about by friends it 4 .llti th il4 th at l'Polutment under the present Administra ,l4cs-`,Yr whi eb e ,had directed a friend to circulate the -°lll4 that repeated in the House of Lords. But tik te "rd./ 4 at after that declaration of the noble earl, a Chard Lie of Ireland should have risen in his e coots ared that this was the first time he had \\ p ‘a te lio n itad irli iT t rr, and consequently he had never hear a nit °I L (Hear.) Whether, sir, that rumour li elih a and e al „ s ca t t 4 or not, I left the bar of the House of ebl e itr'.!3„uere, and without hesitation, and without rd th e I f o u allY other persons I addressed to the tter shall now read " th "ea b e c t Lord o Ne N aas " Reform Club, Friday Evening. e 4; Lord , have just returned from the bar of 4 , et kb ", ( lered 8 ) where I heard Lord Eglinton state that le of tCY nomination to the office I now hold the least 4Jskt of ?se Made by the present Government. cli tel °f li eatin g t his, I at once communicate.' with . the b e we fo re Pon th , and authorised him to state that imme t/1' re' e ch ange of Government in the year 1852, and a Pt ke Q P l eted 1111- aerial I w aB arrangements of Lord Derby had been ,011 th ee ,easked by your lordship whether I would 'lad rLo Derby's Government, a question }betas e b. oit bwered thee native stated this to theirlordshi s and pe rau by in the most eXplicit . manner denied that bibt ~, t res s any such proceeding, and I therefore y ~11 (,:u upon the subject. each aZ 44 I nade u rj a "r , recollection that shortly after Lord ale,oo ray , Len the formation of his Ministry you c asin o 10 ; 1 8 ..t least twice on the ono day, leaving on ca s in o at y ou c ard, and subsequently a note, requesting tos v ,"' did 4 1. house upon the following morning. I "rot e, 'Zist a k e " see you, as you afterwards informed me Z t tcr Ni re rleesti ii °ll the Part of your servant, and you again ‘4.14, Ix _ Me t0 „..,_ g that I should call upon you. I did so ; and Lo rt i'e,eti dire"'eLorsation of no importance you stated that you i"erby . 'd to ask whether I would accept office under 4 11 0 ; Jestin g i, k „, bae k of th o asked you if you intended to make me Chan ri'tiona4ch offelreherr, President of the Board o`f Control, or r es - ki li T L eation. and 011 replied; that you had asked me a Yaelipat ed you expected a serious answer. (A laugh.) jpir e, t he q ues r You had not stated by what authority Derby. a ddin g o , l° a,i and you replied, at Major Beresford s (40rd herb the,' told y o: was in communication with Lord u . y. B hat it was impossible for me to j 4 tie '''' t . lo l' Le7 Yen Thlent. t i teve. ll to re,,, ud tstiLlg t o o s t fzrd of havin gi, subs. .equently spoken to me, in Lor d Derb,,s the opposition I thought it my duty to itrase:t. ins xinrment in the House of Commons, I :d t be.fel4tat I w o b ee e tt p a eseed my surprise at his remon ,-, % Dok e )1137 hostility t 1 :3,ked to take office by you, and in i n or r e ef a c s ren e ec w to as in th y e n p am er e s . on who '''-ford herb}, ti o :L' b eet' e . Zll_ distinct recollection of these facts on my hne4nlrime,-tre,iy say how much Lord Derby's declara tke ship , as , ule, and I have ttoheim•efore.to my interview e, will, in reply, state that yequest that your raatter ofjustice e I have given of with you is sub eall•:)4r e fr e T r n ec a t ', rn ee ';g upeheri„-- Anthony rty cow half an hourlimaft e .l°-\i t l he n i e n t t e e s rv a i s e interview cittl e,„i s t: a Llaly \vtu c it l h ul i ) n . c e frr• Was' awe of your details of our conversation. I have • °--~•.~ -~ " 4, Grosvenor-place, Tuesday. " Dear Sir,—l only received your note last night on my return to town after an absence of some days. " I distinctly deny that, either directly or indirectly I made an offer of office to yourself or to any of your friends, or that I had, or that I assumed I had, authority from anyone so to do. (Opposition cheers.) " As to the interview which took place between us about the period to which you refer, my recollection of it so essen tially differs from the version given by yourself, that I can not admit its accuracy or the deductions you seem to have drawn from it. (Opposition cheers.). " NAAS." " Truly, yours, Well, I say no language can be more positive or precise or more comprehensive than this which conveys his denial that he made me any offer. But does the noble lord mean by that denial merely to deny an offer of office, or does he mean to deny that which I asserted—namely, that he asked me " would I accept office?" If the noble lord means by that denial not only the offer of office, but the only thing I asserted—namely, that ho asked me whether I would accept office—he being the Chief Secretary for Ireland— I ask him what he means by the word " indirectly ?" My only desire is to vindicate my own honour and veracity, which have been impeached in the most sweeping terms by the noble earl at the head of the government to which he then belonged. And what were the words of the noble earl? He said, " I heard the rumour for the first time after the appointment of Mr. Keogh had called forth a great deal of observation in Ireland, and had been loudly condemned." Now, sir, if Igo to those organs of public opinion, not only in Ireland, but in this country, with which the noble earl is supposed to have the most com munity of feeling, and which were known to express the wishes of the noble lord's Government when he was in power, I think that, so far from giving condemnation to that appointment, they rather selected it for approbation. (Oh, oh, and hear, hear.) The noble lord proceeded :—" I heard that it was then put forth by the friends of Mr. Keogh that such an offer had been made to him. I lost no time in authorising every person who had heard it to state, on my authority, that I did not know—that I did not ad dress, neither did 1 believe then, nor do I believe now, that any such offer, proposition sugge stion, or hint was at any time made to Mr. Keogh." Now the noble earl holds the highest position in this country. The noble l and. ord opposite occupies a position to which ono in my humble inferior station cannot aspire. Of course it would be impro per to question the veracity either of the noble earl or of the noble lord; but let me now ask the noble lord the member for Coleraine, who now sits opposite to me—who now hears my words, and who shall hear further evidence —has he been labouring under a misapprehension or not when he says that no cc offer, proposition, suggestion, or hint " was ever so conveyed to me ? I will now turn to the letter of the noble lord. What, let me ask, is the mean ing of that portion of it where he denies that he ever made an offer of office ? I never asserted that he did. (Oh.) I trust, if any hon. member thinks I did, ho will rise in his place and say when and where. lam not now an absent man. I may lack the ability, but I have good heart and purpose to defend myself. I state distinctly, and I have in my hand and in this house a body of evidence to that effect which cannot be controverted, that I never said the noble lord had offered me office. But I stated—not since my appointment, but half an hour after my conversation with the noble lord, and days after to the honourable and gallant member for Middlesex, eo instanti to the hon. member for Galway, that the noble lord asked Me " Would I ac cept office ? ' I have evidence, I say, to establish what I say ; and I trust tho honest British public will not allow these facts to be upset by prevarication. But did the noble lord in passing by my statement that he had sought me twice at my club—did he mean to deny or to assent to that statement. Did he mean to deny that he had written me two notes on two consecutive days ' • and, with regard to the offer, does he mean to say that he admits, or denies, or forgets it ? When he passed over that portion of my letter where I alluded to Chancellorship of the Exchequer, and he said ho wanted from me a serious answer, did-he mean to deny, to admit, or to say that he had forgotten that offer ? Finally, I wish to ask the hon. and gallant member for North Essex (Major Berosford) whether, when on taking me from the outside of the door there to the window of that division lobby, he did not (and I do not use the phraso disrespectfully to him) whiningly complain of the attacks I was then making on Lord Derby's Government ? When I stated to him that I had a perfect right to take what course I thought proper, and expressed surprise tit his remonstrance, did the hon. and gallant member say to me " Of course you had ; but we expected better things from you, seeing that Lord Naas had asked you to accept office ? ' I want to know, also, when the noble lord said he had the authority of the hon. and gallant member for North Essex to put to me that question, did ho mean to admit that he had mentioned the right hon. gentleman's name, or to deny it ? The me mory of the right hon. gentleman, I am sure, is accurate enough for my purpose ; and lost I should be mistaken in that supposition, I would remind him that there was a member of this house, an hon. and learned friend of mine , the member for Cork (Mr. Serjeant Murphy), who, at the time, was very close to me and to the right hon. gentleman when the conversation or remonstrance to which I have referred took place. The hon. and learned serjeant was in the house and heard me and the right hon. gentleman in conversation. He hoard the tones of the right hon. gentleman and thought that something very odd was going on. (A laugh.) The hon. and learned member asked mo at once what had been going on between us? And here let mo say, that this occurred, not since my appointment by the present Government ; that this was not got up for the occasion, as Lord Derby would insinuate, but took place when the noble lord opposite and the right hon. gen tleman were both in office, and before the last dissolution of Parliament. Re instanti, and forming part as it were of the res geske of the case, the hon. and learned member asked me what the right hon. gentleman had been saying ? I replied that he had been " rowing" me for my attacks on the Chancellor of the Exchequer. lam sure the right hon. gentleman did not regard them as such —(a laugh)— and assigned as a reason the offer which had been made to me. Now, when I called the attention of the noble lord opposite to that conversation, did he mean to admit, to deny, or to forget it? Ile will have an opportunity of explaining. But the noble lord states in another part of his letter that the conclusion to which he arrived as to the result of the interview was quite different from mine. I ask him when that impression first entered his mind that he had had a conversation with me in which a phrase was used, that under the circumstances might have induced me to suppose that if office would be accepted it would be offered ? Now, I want to know, is that the impression upon the noble lord. I ask the noble lord now to inform the house—no matter what he wrote upon Tuesday last at two o'clock—no matter what he wrote before I came down here, at the very earliest moment after the noble lord's denial was reasserted in another place—no matter what he wrote before then—is he now of opinion that at that in terviow he did use the phrase that " under the circum stances he might have induced the hon. and learned gen tleman to give a reply, in case it had been the intention of the Earl of Derby to ask him to take office, would he accept of it ?" If the noble lord wants the exact words, I can write them down for him ; but perhaps as the noble lord is taking notes, he may have a copy of them. lam defending myself. I only want to sustain my veracity— my own personal honour—for it has been most grossl7 assailed— (loud cheers from the Ministerial benches) and it has been assailed with very unequal odds. (Hear, bear.) Yes, a man in the humble position I hold has been assailed in all the powers, rank, and in fluence of the late Government in another place. I have not been asked whether I could explain anything that has b een ur ged against me. I have not had the common cour tesy of the ordinary notice extended to me. (Renewed cheers.) But no, the noble earl was determined to have me down. (Cheers.) He says, " I do not believe that any suggestion„Proposition, offer, or hint, ever was made by any person on my behalf, or acting on behalf of the Go vernment, of office to the hon. and learned gentleman." ask this noble lord is that true? Well, I now comb to an other branch of this case, which, if all I have already stated were out of the case, would place the noble lord in a very unenviable position. I recollect the noble lord held a conversation with a person beside myself. lam now about to make mention of a friend of the noble lord's, an early friend, not known now for the first time, or since the voracity elord came into Parliament—a gentleman to Venose and high character I have no hesitation in asking the noble lord to speak. I recollect distinctly, in the sum mer of last year, an hon. friend of mine, a brother .ot a ni co no 4 n b m d le u be :ll:r i o d n f , rt andi Parliament. that house, ame n h t telling e. me that he had met the w Th as at lou e d n i t n l his iw t n h t e s b a r t o.t m he y r of the :hon. member for Galway g (Mr. em 0 Flahert an inti matq-fr ieed of the noble lord l ad gentleman Y)' referred to was also a candidate at the ; general election for the Thar t gentleman left England borough of Dungarvan. by the same train with the noble upon the dissolution, and he happened not only to travel hen. direct tf r iee lord,friend mentioning bu t o also thec ros s n o o d .13 noble lord r r w d i w th as h p im lea b s y ea tli th e packet' ii. to Ireland, and as s cenz a e m rsa . tio l n h a a n v d e observations to so humble an individual myy applied to him the moment thisl a cire pe u r u fir i c s t t a r n e c c e o . lleit t i h on ere o f f or m e receivcsd the letter of the noble lord from Ireland, to give me as accurate an account as possible of what had occurre d becau me his statement was at right angles with the letter of the noble lord, and I will proceed to read it ; and the noble I ord is not aware of the existence of such a letter from lion. friend, because, although I have been treated in a vets, different manner, I thought, and my right hon. friend thought, that it was right and proper that the noble lord ohnuld have a knowledge of the existence of such a written statement. Accordingly my hon. friend wrote to the noble lord, that " although nothing was further from his intention than to say or do anything disagreeable to tho noble lord, he felt bound, as a matter of justice, to give the benefit of his testimony, either hero or elsewhere, should my character be attacked." Here is Mr. O'Flaherty's letter : " 37, Jermyn-street, June 15, 1353. "My dear Keogh,—l have a perfect recollection of the conversation between me and Lord Naas to which you refer as having been communicated to you shortly after its occurrence. It took place during a journey to Ireland last summer, when we were both going over to our respective elections. He spoke in terms of much disappointment and regret at what he considered your ungrateful conduct, in maing an attack, a few evenings previous in the house, on Mr. Disraeli, as they had deserved a kinder consideration from you, after the feeling evinced in his having sent for you and asked you whether you would take office under the Go vernment of Lord Derby. (Loud cheers from the Ministerial benches.) Lord Naas never mentioned to me whether or not he made this offer by direction of any other person, but he dwelt much on Mr. Disraeli's kind feeling towards you, and said that the step he had taken entitled them at least to have looked for a more generous forbearance. " I thought ho desired his remarks to be conveyed to you, and I mentioned them when I saw you. I have written to Lord Naas, apprising him of my having given you this letter, but I trust, unless absolutely necessary, you will not bring my name in question, as, independent of other feelings, I should be very sorry personally to take any course disagree able to him. " I remain, very faithfully, - " EDMUND O'FLAHERTY. " Now, I wrote to my hon. friend, begging him to be as pre cise and accurate as he could be with regard to the inter view ; and I again say, that whatever the noble lord may be disposed to offer by way of oxplaaation to this house, I do not think he will venture to throw any doubt upon the veracity of his and my friend. Well, perhaps the noble lord will be good enough to explain to the house how it came to pass that he had informed this gentleman, previ ous to the last general election, that he had expected a kinder consideration from me, in consequence of his having sent for me to ask me to accept office ; and how does he re concile that statement with this contained in his letter—" I distinctly deny that, either directly or indirectly, I made an offer of office to the hon. and learned gentleman." (Cheers.) Now, I well recollect, although the noble lord addresses me in such very curt terms, although he does not think it proper to go into any explanations with me upon the contents of my letter—and I am sure my letter was framed in no hostile spirit towards him—l believe I merely asked him to do me a matter of justice, which I fully expected (cheers from the Ministerial benches)—l perfectly recollect, I say, the circumstances under which my acquaintance with the noble lord grew. He and I entered this house together, and for six years we sat upon the benches opposite together. The noble lord entered the house under the auspices—to use no stronger word— of that great statesman, to whose party, however, he after wards acted in opposition ; but, in conjunction with the noble lord, at the time, I gave my support to the com mercial policy of that eminent man. For a time—indeed to the end—l continued to give that support to the same party, although not in company with the noble lord. But I was frequently in this house thrown into personal communication with the noble lord, and I distinctly recol lect that there were other subjects of conversation between us, which perhaps I may bring back to the noble lord's mind. At the time when the noble lord sought the inter view with me, and asked whether I would accept office or not under Lord Derby's Government, the noble lord was then in a difficulty. The noble lord was offered—and an hon. and learned friend of mine who sits upon the other side of the house has had the candour to tell me that he would Ilse in his place in the house to affirm my statement as regards this matter—but the noble lord upon the very day on which he sought the interview with me, or rather on he very day on which he obtained that interview, had been offered the Chief Secretaryship of Ireland, though he had not as yet accepted it. Now I will ask my honour able and learned friend the member for Youghal (Mr. Butt), does he not recollect my coming out of the house of the noble lord ? I remember meeting him. And I remem ber at the same time I told my hoe. and learned friend that he was a political supporter of the noble lord ; and that, great as might be the disclosure to be made, I did not wish in any way to take advantage of it to his detriment. Greatly to the credit of my hon. and learned friend—(loud cries of hear, hear)—he at once said—he frankly, and with out a moment's hesitation, said—" no matter whether it is disagreeable to me or not—no matter what may be the consequences to me—you have a right to my testimony here or elsewhere—(renewed cries of hear, hear)- -and un questionably (he continued) you shall have that testimony, and moreover, you shall have this from me, that I was kept waiting in the noble lord's ante-room during the in terview which you were holding with him." But the noble lord did discuss other questions ; for let not the noble lord think I shrink for a single moment from placing before the house everything of which even I have the most remote recollection in the transactions between himself and me. Well, he inquired of me whether I or any of my parlia mentary friends were disposed to offer him any opposition? I at once shall say what I repeated to the noble lord—and the noble lord sits there opposite to me, having declined to do me justice, although he knows that from that time up to the period of the general election I have remained under a weight of slander and obloquy aimed at me in a manner such as only can be done by the Irish press. (Cheers.) They charged me with having sold the county of Kildare—the liberties of Kildare—they charged me with having made a compact—a corrupt compact—with the noble lord—with regard to the representation of that county. The noble lord perilled my political position—inconsequential as it is—he perilled my seat in Parliament at a time it was of importance to me, when with a line, with a breath, he could have dissipated all that slander, all those calumnies, by proving their unsubstantiality. (Ministerial cheers.) And it was open to the noble lord to have relieved me of that obloquy—it was open to him to have done me that measure of justice which he knew he could have dono by a single line. But I repeat these words—which I hope the noble lord has taken down if they are not fixed in his mind and memory—that "he did use a phrase which might have induced the hon. and learned gentleman to suppose that there was an intention up.. , n the part of Lord Derby to offer him office." Well, the noble lord asked me as to his prospects for the county of Kildare on that or a sub sequent occasion. He asked me whether any of my po litical friends would oppose him ? I told him that, "as far as I was personally concerned," that I would not op pose him, nor would any of my political fri ends do so." I freely confess I sympathised with the noble lord, and I did not wish to see the noble lord's ambition baffled for want of a seat. (Hear.) But the conversation happened at a time in conjunction with other matters, the recollec tion of which may serve to bring other matters contained' in my letter more clearly to his mind. I ask this house to fix their attention upon this solemn, unequivocal, un reserved denial of the noble lord, that "either directly or indirectly he made no offer of office to me." I ask the noble lord, calling these specific words to his recollection, reminding him that I never asserted, that I do not now assert, nor never shall assert, that the noble lord asked me to accept office. But without that being the case, we all know what his words mean. Is there any politican in this house so jejune as for a moment to doubt what was the meaning of the inquiries of the Chief Secretary for Ireland, " Will you accept office under Lord Derby's Government if you are offered it ?" (Ministerial cheers. And recollect that was before the formation of Lord Derby's Government was concluded ; for, according to the hon. and learned member for Youghal, it was upon the day on which the noble lord opposite was offered, but had not yet accepted office. Recollect this ; and I ask any hon. member what is the meaning of such words ? Why, was it not put as if a gentleman were to go and say, suppose I were to ask you to take office, what would be your answer ? Or if, perhaps, shifting the expression in the ingenious manner the noble lord had said, suppose you had been asked by Lord Derby to take office, would you have accepted of it?" Really the position which the noble lord would assume reminds me of that of a gentleman say ing to a lady, " suppose I were to ask you to marry me, what would be your answer ?" and that he were then to turn round and say, be never meant to propose to her at all. (Roars of laughter.) I feel, sir,g should be insulting the understanding of the house if were to ask it to put any other interpretation upon the inquiry of the noble lord. No matter how the noble lord may vary the words, if he admits, as I cannot but believe he must admit—l use the words inoffensively—l have a perfect conviction he did use a phrase which, under the circumstances, was cal culated to lead me to believe that I would be ten dered office if I would accept it. And let me say that I am taught by my experience as a professional man, that when persons have committed themselves by making admissions, that they scarcely ever are able to screw up courage enough to withdraw those admissions. Then, if that is the case, what becomes of the denial of the noble lord, and which was repeated on Tuesday night last a denial that " neither directly nor indirectly" the noble lord had made me an offer of office. I came down to the house as early as f could, and I gave notice of my intention to bring the question under review. I was apprised by the hon. member for Roscommon (Mr. F. French) that the noble earl (Lord Eglinton) intended to bring the question under the notice of the other houso. I sent my friend to the noble lord, saying_ that it was not fair to bring th e ma tter forward until I had made a reply. I thought it but fair that a little time should be allowed me for my defence, but the answer given by that noble earl was, that he was pledged to the noble lord here to repeat his solemn and unequivocal denial, and accordingly it was again re peated. The seen° is now shifted, and the noble lord and I are now in presence of each other. (Loud cheers from the Ministerial side.) The house has heard my statement —it has heard the letters read, which I have placed with out reserve before it. (Renewed cheers.) I ask, then, the house and the country to consider whether the probabilities of this case are with me or with the noble lord, and whes ther, even if the testimony of those disinterested witnesses whom I hate Balled dti vied placed wholly out of view— t ask, may I not presume with reason that the verdict will remain with me, despite of anything which may fall from the noble lord? (Great cheering.) Viscount NAAS —I rise, under circumstances of a very extraordinary nature, to claim the attention of the house, not for an hour and ten minutest as the hot, and learned gentlenum has dent, but for a VerY &diet time ? for the purpose of making a statement which shall be tit:Lorna' niented by the flowers of rhetoric, or by the eloquent words which We have hoard from the hon. gentlem nan? but will be a simple statement of the truth. (Loud chettgi fro& the Opposition benches.) Sir, I have listened for the last hour and five minutes to the betrayal of private confidence —(cries of "Oh, oii, /i from the Ministerial benches, and cheers; from the Oppositien)--I hatze HAMM to the be trayal of private tonfidenCe—i bai=t the hetkipti of (:',ll l .F•eisation, and a distortion of the words used in drawn r h . ni n e atkeh from re, auttis t d l 1 0e 0 ft et f rh e r et : , a O h those conversations. (Oppo' eers.) Under those; y circurastatees, I tin hot think it is indiimbent on me, nor is it iiiegfeti"; 'fol. me, to follow the hon. and learned gen tleman through all the web of deductions which he has befere the house. I have a simple statement to make, and a simple statement o b4 n yc . and learned itiidismayed and my statement will be mate e ri eak al rcin l u y eael :l g i: en er till e fie n dm t in almost all its facts from the ;statement which we have heard from the hon. and learned gentleman, (Cheers.) I think I shall be able, when I conclude that statement, to appeal to the holm and ask them to consider which of the statements they will believe. (Rear.) Unpractised I own I am in debate, and unable I may b e t o f o ll ow the h on. an d learned gentleman through the variety but n o nothing hI n d g o 'a u t y t l h e fee tru l th co : a v n i n d f e c c i i r t 1 aft ° l p e ic v s ery he h w a o s r i d nt i rod ut u te c:d i , B mately my memory is ac curate on the facts lam going to state. (Hear, hear.) I wili first refer to the terms on w'hieh I have been with the lion. and learned gentleman duri ,ng the earlier.:tart of tlie last Parliament. We certainl.T came into Parliament to gether —WO at on the Oppolgt ' Qth e h ° 'do user—the hon. and learned gentleman was a member of the Canton• club, to which I also belonged—and though we differed in many essential points during the earlier period of our par liamentary career, a very friendly feeling existed between us. (Hear, hear.) I recollect that at very many periods during the year I had constant communications on many points of a most friendly nature with the hon. and learned gentleman, both in this house and out of it. (Hear, hear.) When we came to the time to which he has alluded, it is not to be wondered that I should have felt myself justified in communicating unreservedly with the hon. and learned gentleman; but little did I think that, in eighteen months afterwards, such a statement should be made by him, be cause an attack was made upon him in another place, and statements there made which I do not believe the hon. and learned gentleman will be able to confute, though he has already denied them. (Hear.) I do not believe that he will be able to deny those statements any more than he will be able to confirm the statement which he has made this after noon in this house. (Hoar.) A little before the formation of the late Government I was in constant communication with the hon. and learned gentleman on the subject of a mo tiou which then fell to my lot to bring before the house. My communications with that hon. and learned gentleman were frequent upon that occasion ; he called often at my house and I saw him often at other places. The motion to which I allude was a motion which I felt it my duty to make with regard to the conduct of the thou Lord Lieutenant of Ire land. That hon. and learned gentleman was fully conver sant with the facts of the case. He told me on that occa sion that he intended to take part in the debate, and that he intended to speak in favour of my resolution ; but when the debate took place he did not take part in it, because, having been engaged professionally in the case, I believe he did not thinkt inAlamade em i i t laon r itdigohnt defeated, wto a was lo i so. na dt eh eoTntl then hn v y day sdayafterGovernmenttb edtihav wasi o m v o e t r i t o h n r o w w a n s . sion on the motion of the noble lord opposite (Lord Palmer ston) took place on Friday—and on Saturday Lord Derby accepted from her Majesty the task of forming a Ministry. Shortly after—l cannot recollect which day, but I think it was Tuesday—an intimation was made to me that it was very probable I should be offered office—dependent, of course, on the probability of my re-election. (Hear.) I thought it was no breach of confidence—l thought I might safely refer to a member of an opposite party, and a poli tical opponent, and ask him whether it was likely or not that I should be opposed at my election. Between the Monday and Thursday I think I had three or four commu nications with him on the subject, and I think the house will admit that in those communications there was nothing that any man had a right to reproach himself with. Ido not understand what the allusion means that was made by the hon. and learned gentleman with regard to his character and the attacks that were made upon him by the Dublin press. I own I was surprised that the part he took on that occasion had exposed him to such malignant attacks; but I admit that I was met with a most friendly feeling by the hon. and learned gentlemen, and that in a friendly way he did exert himself, without compromising his own opinions, to save me from a contest at that time. On the day to which the hon. gentleman alludes, I had the interview with him to which he refers. It is perfectly true that I did seek the hon. and learned gentleman in the way he described, but really 1 desired to speak to the hon. gentleman on mat ters of some importance, the most important of which was my own election. (Ironical cries of Hear, hear, from the Ministerial benches.) Honourable gentlemen may smile, but do they mean to say they do not believe what I am stating? If any hon. gentleman does mean to say so, let him stand up in this house, and I shall be prepared to meet him. (Cheers from the Opposition.) On the day in ques tion that that interview took place, the honourable and learned gentleman came into my room. Ido not in the least degree deny that I was not able to find him at the Reform Club, and I wrote a note to his residence requesting to see him, but I did not fix the day exactly. Wh en the ho n . gentleman came into my room, we discussed for some time different topics connected with various interests. Amongst them was the subject of the election, and I recollect dis tinctly what I said to the hon. and learned gentleman. (Hear.) This is the question on which, with the answer to it, this whole charge is founded—(hear, hear) ; and I think when the house hears them it will admit that a more serious charge was never made on such trump er y g rounds. (Hear, hear.) When the house hears the question and the answer, I will allude to the circumstances under which that question was put and the answer was given, and I will tell the house the reason why I put that question. (Hear, hear.) I asked the hon. and learned gentleman in perfect confidence, never thinking that the question would ever be made an engine of to endeavour to damage my character. ' (Cries of oh, oh.) I asked him this queE. tion—" If office had been offered to you under the new Government, would you or your friends have accepted it ?" (Oh, oh, hear, hear, and cheers from the Ministerial benches.) I fully admit that I asked that question ; it may have been an imprudent question, but I can safely say it was not put with the intention which the hon. and learned gentleman has assumed. (Hear, hear.) He made an answer, which I recollect as distinctly as the question. (Hear, hear.) His answer was this—" I think that, after all that has occurred—after the part that I and my friends have taken in the overthrow of the late Government — some such offer might have been made." (Loud cries of hear, from the Opposition.) After that we proceeded to discuss the various topics connected with the prospects of party at that time, and the hon. and learned gentleman in the course of that conversation asked me a question which I thought was rather peculiar. (Hear.) He asked me whether any person in authority authorised me to ask that question. (Hear.) I said—" As you ask me the question, I can tell you that Mr. Beresford knew of my asking this question.' (Oh, and hear.) The hon. gentlemen opposite seem to think they have made a most notable dis covery, by their cheers ; but when I tell them of the inter view I had with my right hon. friend (Mr. Beresford) a few hours before they will not be prepared to sneer in the way they do. (Hear.) I gave that answer because I was bound in honour to tell the truth, and I (lid tell the truth to the hon. and learned gentleman on that occasion. The question was put with a different object from that which the hon. and learned gentleman has given the house to understand. The reason I put the question was, that I had a communi cation a few hours before with my right hon. friend (Mr. Beresford). I was walking in St. James's-square, and met my right hon friend. I stopped him, and asked the news, and commenced a conversation. I said to him most dis tinctly, " I wonder what position in the now Parliament the Irish party aro likely to take with regard to the Go vernment ? He said he did not know. I said—" lam on friendly and intimate term's with an hon. member of that party "—alluding to the hon. and learned gentleman op posite, who makes this attack. (Oh, oh,) "I can have no hesitation in asking the question—and I will ask him the question—for I had intended to ask him the question as a matter of information for myself, whether he would have accepted office, or was disappointed in not getting it." (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman then made this statement to me :—" You may say at the same time, from me, that the Government have no unfriendly feeling what ever towards them." (Hear, hear, and laughter.") This is the reason why, when the hon. gentleman asked me that question, I was bound in honour to say that Mr. Beresford knew of my asking him the question. I put it to him. (Hear, hear.) But Ido say this—that the right hon. gen tleman never authorised me to make an offer of office to the hon. and learned gentleman. He never authorised me to ask the question, because I told him myself that I was about to ask the question ; but he did authorise me to snake the statement with regard to the friendly feeling of the Government towards the hon. and learned gentleman and his party. (Hear, hear.) I had so great an objection to making what are called " authorised communications" of any kind, that I did not give the message of my right hon. friend to the hon. and learned gentleman; and, in further proof of my statement. I may say that I never did, until the day before yesterday, mention the result of that interview to any one single living man. (Hear, hear.) When the hon. and learned gentleman left the room, after our interview, the impression left on my mind was this — that in the answer he gave to me, and in the subsequent , conversation we had, we discussed it ih that spirit, and I thought he left the room with the impression that no offer of office was likely to be made to him or to his party. I will do him the justice to say that my impression was that if the offer had been made to him it would have been re fused. (Hear.) Let me now call the attention of the house to the day on which the alleged offer of OffiC3 was made. (Hear, hear.) It was stated to have been made on Thursday, and every office under the Government was filled up then. (Hear, hear.) The authorised list of the new appointments had appeared that morning in the news papers, and it is quite impossible that the hon. and learned gentleman, looking to that fact, can pretend to say, by any construction he could put upon the words, that any offer of office was then intended. (Hear, hear). I fully grant that, taking the words by themsel v es , unaccompanied by the statement I have made , wh ich I de cl are on my honour to be perfectly true, there is great probability in the in ference which the hon. and learned gentleman drew from him. (Hear, hear.) Bat I can safely say that I put the question merely as a matter of conversation, and not with any view of drawing any admission from the honourable and learned gentleman. I merely asked him for my own information what were his feelings as to the non -offering of office to him and his party , an d n ot with any other view. That is the statement I have to make to the house concerning the interview I had with the hon. and n learned gen tleman ; and when I assure the house again d again that I never did mention the subject of that interview to any man connected with the Government, or to any other p er son whatever, I can lay my hand on my heart and ask the house to believe that every word I say is the truth. (Cheers.) A letter has been produced, which I own filled me with considerable astonishment, setting forth that I had stated, whilst travelling in a railway carriage, that I had made an offer of office to the hon. and learned gentle man. It is perfectly impossible I could have made that statement ; and I cannot doubt that the hen. gentleman who makes that assertion of what is untrue must have been under some strange mistake. Would the house believe that I mentioned such a subject to the hon. gentleman, who was a political opponent, which I never mentioned to any other perecin ? (Hear, hear.) I have now told my story as to those prheate communications, and perhaps, viewed through the light Of parliamentary practice, there nifty be some gentlemen that May not be disposed to attach credence to all that I have said ; heft, be that as it may, in this matter I feel there' is nothing whatever with which to reproach myself, (Hear.) I communicated freely and frankly with the honourable and learned gentleman under the circumstances which I have related ; and when I WU§ asked the question upon which he has laid so mtich Mee t and which I answered with truth, but the answet to Aids has been fixed upon as a mode af tiva i l m e, pl l ica t t h in in g k not only` that certain persons in this countr y have of the honour °cnirlicumffiest'anbel,lets distinguished inguithleidowindiliveia. which aght to characterise the intercom - se of gentlemen ett l t tl h e a m t a t e h h e e i e n e g h e e n w u n ity wi se' ll itie net h eir th eil e itt ( honourable H m ea ; 7h he ea l r i . e a l v n e d i r helletrnplrockifeefges which I have adduced, accom truth caf all dist hey() state d, wil e ent to induce the house and the eenutry to believe that have spoken tittnigd lay the pledge of my own ill and fa word for the &fording to the exact facts of the case. I must . say I freely notof f tt pri ed e a e n ip e l rr e, o h r u i t n e t f h i e ud co gm urs en e t l ; I could confidently, freely, and frankly communicate with e a man who, although a politfcal opponent, I at that time fljt ari ni d kl i tli co it Ihtma It t m t II v a l is e : 9 jy l. h h ea a rry t o e rw r , o r of judgment, because I believed to degenerating into b ol i t ;y r ed tonnibeenataf4ewnds.rfa(reOhseealterr.2 I t r e egret that in . these . days • 4. strife, and that private confidence may mere recrim i na t o r s to damage a political opponent Such, sir, never be my bein violatedthecourse—(cheers)—and such bas neverbeen my course. In public i thatbeen made, I the plausible statement has spite of theestoirebjaectitenb! t anything which is in the least that I have not that y chars ter which the humblest of deny that I ever took that course ; and . I ho . pe . and believe d eg ree derogatory to character of an 5 tl (L o ud cheers.) English gen eman. wit serious (tit d •h Major BERESFORD said he ha ls cue n may always endeavour to maintain—the attention to the charge and the e xplanation that had been but to state distinctly what he knew, and to stand on . what he had done. There were two wholly distinct parts in Mr. given. He-had come there, not to make a long oration, nfficeemade to him .by,Lprit Na as, and as authorised by him Beresford) • and secondly, a private conversation Ic.eogh's speech ; first, as to any offer, or hinted offer, of (Major I • ee which la. Keogh mainta i ned to have u held between them —evidently, by his own account, in a secret and con fidential way, and which had been now brought forth, as was the custom of that house and these times, to be a con demnatory matter against himself, and a matter of reproach against his noble friend. (He: r, hear.) Without treating the words in a jesuitical sense, as to whether they amounted to an offer of office or not, ho distinctly stated, in the presence of the house and the country, that no one whatsover authorised him to offer or hint at an offer of office to the honourable and learned gentleman ; and had he not been authorised, he could not authorise his noble friend to make such an offer. But there were circumstances which proved the impossibility of this, without searching for corroboration, or sending here and there for letters from different gentlemen. (Hear.) Lord Naas and he had a conversation in St. James's square, on the morning of the 26th February in last year. Had ho then authorised Lord Naas to offer place or hint at place to Mr. Keogh, was it within the verge of possibility that from that day to last Monday Lord Naas should never have mentioned to him the conversation ho had with Mr. Keogh, or given him the slightest idea of what had oc curred? (Hear, hear.) The plainest understanding, tho most unsophisticated reasoner, could see how improbable it was that a person said to be in daily communication with the Film() Minister, should have sent an offer of place to a gentleman, and have never once asked for an answer. (Hear, hear.) Reason and common sense told them that was impossible. As to his being in daily communication with Lord Derby more than any other prominent member of the Government, that was not his custom. When he did anything he took the responsibility of it. (Cheers and laughter.) He did not authorise others to do a thing ; be did not bring them in. He did not communicate private conversations which occurred under his roof—and if hon. gentlemen, who were so ready to sneer, would have the same respect as he had for confidential communications— (laughter)- they should not so frequently have friendly words spoken in confidence and in an unguarded moment, retailed again in public. It was perfectly true that on Wednesday morning, the 26th February, he met by acci dent with Lord Naas in St. James's-square. Lord Naas informed him that be was likely to receive the honour of an early call from Mr. Keogh. He said it was most likely, as office had not been offered. to him, and as he and his friends had assisted in turning out the late Government, that they would be discontented. He (Mr. Beresford) said "It cannot be helped, but tell them there is a friendly feeling towards them—(laughter)—and I will thank you to be kind enough to convey that to Mr. Keogh" He wished not to offer him place ; but he wished to say—" If we have been foes, don't let that continue." (Laughter.) It happened that Lord Nass did not communicate this mes sage ; he certainly never gave him (the Major) any account of it. Circumstances occurred which made it impossible for him to see Lord Nass for a few days ; his lordship then went to Ireland to his election ; and after that, so long an interval having elapsed, he did not think it necessary to ask if he had delivered the message, thinking it probable he had done so. He now came to the second part of the charge ; but he protested against any charge being made against himself or his noble friend, which was founded on a private or confidential message. Towards the end of May, Mr. Keogh had made a violent attack in that house on Mr. Disraeli. Happening to meet Mr. Keogh after wards, he had told him that he was astonished at the violence of that attack, said he did not expect it from him and asked " Did you not receive from Lord Naas a kindly and confidential communication from myself?" (Great laughter.) Upon this Mr. Keogh had flown off, and informed somebody else that he (Major Beresford) had authorised Lord Naas to offer him office. As to an offer of office from Lord Derby and his Govern ment, it was only in the brilliant imagination of the hon. and learned gentleman himself. If he meant to say that the office of Solicitor-General for Ireland was offered to him, the wish was father to the thought. (No, no, and great laughter.) He entirely repudiated any such offer being made ; and before sitting down, he would again de precate that spirit which seemed to animate men to make public matter of that which was private and confidential and which must destroy the confidence which gentlemen used to feel and ought to feel in one another. This pros titution of piivate documents and confidential words de tracted from the honour and dignity of that house, deterio rated the fame and character of public men, was inimical to all feelings of honour and friendship, and tended to re duce members of Parliament, like convicts, to the solitary system. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) No man dared speak to his neighbur, or write a confidential letter, not know ing what use might be made of it. (Hear, hear.) Mr. Keogh had complained of the question being prejudged by the statements in the House of Lords. But between the time of those two statements, a lengthy and untrue state ment of the whole occurrence was published in the Morning Chronicle of last Monday, containing the statement now made, and the evidences that had been given. He consi dered that that was prejudging the question, and a secret way of doing it. (Hear, hear.) • Mr. NAPIER said it had been remarked as a singular circumstance that Lord Derby should have stated that he had heard of the rumour. He would explain how that happened. Two gentlemen had applied to him to know if Lord Derby had offered office to Mr. Keogh, and he had given the statement an unqualified contradiction. At one gentleman's request ho had written to Lord Derby about it, and his answer was as follows : " Knowsley, Feb. 3. His lordship, in reference to the inquiry, whether at the time of the formation of the late Government an offer of office was made to Mr. Keogh, says that neither then nor at any other time was any such offer made by my authority or with my knowledge.' He then states that he had enclosed my note to Mr. Disraeli, and had that morning received his answer. He adds these words ; It is as full and satisfactory as it was possible to be, and I enclose it to you for your satisfaction. You may therefore, I think, state without fear of contradic tion that the assertion is destitute of any foundation, and that no offer nor overture of any kind was made to Mr. Keogh by or on the part of the late Government.'" It was in this way that Lord Derby had heard of the rumour. He (Mr. Napier) never mentioned the subject to the Earl of Eglinton. Mr I. BUTT wished the house fully to understand the position which he occupied in this matter. He had an in terview with Lord Naas one night about his election ; and when he called, Mr. Keogh was engaged in conversation with him. He thought nothing more of it till the other evening, when Mr. Keogh met him in the lobby, and stated that it was important to him to have his (Mr. Butt's) evidence that he had been with the noble lord that evening. He promised Mr. Keogh that ho should have it. Mr. Keogh then said, " Do you recollect that you were kept waiting?" lie certainly was kept waiting ; but he was not an accurate judge of minutes. Ho took the first op portunity of informing Lord Naas of what had passed. That was the entire amount of what he said. Mr. DISRAELI—There is no motion before the house ; but as my name has been frequently introduced into this discussion, perhaps it will not be deemed intrusive if I offer a few observations to the house on this subject. I think the real question before us has reference to the veracity of two honourable members of this house. Ido not suppose that any gentleman would really get up and maintain that there were any circumstances that ought to have influenced the late Administration not to offer office to the hon. and learned gentleman (Mr. Keogh) if they wished. (Hear.) I beg the house to recollect the circumstances under which the honourable and learned gentleman was placed in re gard to the great body of gentlemen who were sitting at this side of the house at the time when the Government of the noble lord (Russell) broke up. The hon. and learnet gentleman I think was first returned to Parliament in 1847, and he was returned as the only Roman Catholic who enter tained Conservative principles; and, of course, that alone was a combination which gave him a position when he entered the house—a position which he immediately sustained by his own great abilities. The hon. and learned gentle man took his seat among the Conservative ranks, and he became a member, like most gentlemen who profess Con servative principles, of the Carlton Club. I am willing to state that he upheld the policy of Sir R Peel, but at the same time that he sat by us there were many questions on which he acted with us ; he was in communication with my late lamented friend, Lord George Bentinck, who had a high opinion of his abilities, and at the very moment when the Govcrnment of the noble lord opposite (Lord J Russell) broke up, he was in personal communication with my noble friend (Lord Naas) as to the management of what might be called a party question. The Government, within 24 hours of that debate, ceased, and I can conceive no reason —on the contrary, I can conceive many reasons— why office should have been offered to the hon. and learned gentleman. Though he entered Parliament as a Conservative, he had acted with us on many occasions ; he had been occupied on a motion which had been brought forward with the view to injure the then Government at the very moment when it ceased to exist, and he was a gentleman of recognised abilities and power. I say, then, thero was no reason why office should not have been offered to the hon. and learned gentleman, and, so far as I am concerned, I should not have been astonished or displeased if office had been offered and accepted. Therefore the question is, whether the statement of my noble friend or that of the hon. and learned gentle man on this matter is the true one. Tho house will recol lect that my noble friend has no interest whatever in mak ing any statement which is not perfectly true, because it wo uld be nothing improper, nothing which was not strictly warrantable, if my noble friend had been authorised to make the offer of office, and if he had been pressed by Lord Derby to do so. I was very imperfectly acquainted with the details of this question before I entered the house to night. I have listened attentively to the statement of the hon. and learned gentleman, and I have brought to it an impartial consideration, for I have always very much ap preciated the abilities of the hon. and learned gentleman the member for Athlone ; and, so far as I am acquainted with the details, my sincere though individual impression is, that the statements of my noble friend and the hon. and learned gentleman are perfectly reconcileable with the facts. (Hear, hear.) My noble friend is on terms of ex treme intimacy with my right honourable friend the mem ber for North Essex. He is in the habit of receiving his visits and communications. My noble friend is at that mo meat in communication with the hon. and learned gentle man on a subject of the greatest interest and importance to my noble friend, namely, the chance of his being able h to p r eserve his seat for the county of Kildare, and upon tat subject the hon. and learned gentleman was a very good judge. The very fact of my n oble friend having appealed to the hon. and learned gentleman on such a subject, and the hon. and learned gentleman immediately responding to that appeal, proves the terms on which they were. The interview that had been referred to took place on a day when the Administration had been really formed ; I believe on that day, three days had passed since the appointment of Attorney and Solicitor - Gen eral for Ireland had taken place; the new Administration was complete ; and the only appointment which had not then formally taken place was that of the office which was eventually accepted by my noble friend (Lord Naas). And then my noble friend, not having the slightest authority to make any offer to the hon. and learned gentle man, because irrespective of any other circumstance, there was no place which could be offered to the bon. and learned gentleman—icy noble friend, I say, was extremely anxious—and naturally, look ing to the prospects of the new Government—to ascertain what might be the probable course of the hon. and learned gentleman, and of those with ;whom he tee i acn pulic life, in the new Parliament, and in reference to tl , e b new Go vernment. Well, I ask the house, what was there more na tural than this—relati ons of intimacy existing between those two gentlemen at the time - -the new Government having been formed, and therefore there being no possi bilityof any immediate understanding on that head—what was there more natural than that my n . .oble friend, espe cially as he had recently had a conversation with my right hon. friend (Mr. Beresford), should have sounded the hon. and learned gentleman whether there was a prospect or not of himself and his friends going into considerable oppo sition against the now Government? That I take to be the fair state of the case as regards my noble friend. Well, take the position of the hon. and learned gentleman. Ho finds himself in confidential communication with one with whom he was intimate, and who was now a Minister of IN.- ~.~ 1 . I