The Sun. — London, England, 1840-02-01 00:00:00

E 14.;N1N G EDITION., laws are like the laws Orthe Medes and Persians—we will change them not Is this language likely to gain the con fidence of the country ?—are those wise statesmen who, be cause the aristocracy and the clergy give them their support, refuse to he'er the labouring man who he is pleading for the rights of industry ?—( Cheers.) There is another topic o n which you have given us no kind of information. A great deal has been said on the subject of finality. The word dropped accidentally from some Member of the Ministry a f ew years since, end was immediately fastened on by some friends, but by more enemies.—( Cheers. ) But there could be no doubt in the world on the subject of your finality.—(Loud cheers.) While I regret the secession of the Noble Lord ( Lord Howick) from office, I cannot but admire the sincerity of his conduct in so doing, although I certainly doubt whether his sincerity was equalled by his good sense.— ( Cheers and laughter.) But, at all events, his secession shows this, that there is progressive reform on this aide of the House. He stated expressly that he seceded from the Ministry, because they were in favour of progressive reform ; but how is it on the other side ? There is certainly no progression there —there is not one increase of the franchise with them ; they take their stand on the position of finality. There is not one other. Englishman to whom they will give the franchise, except those who have had it bestowed on them by the Reform Bill, and the community mug rest for ever satisfied with that paltry measure. Oh, what sanctity is there in the Reform Bill, that you should refuse the franchise r to other s equally ent i t l e d to i t ? l am spea ki ng now, ;not to you alone, but to the people of England, to those who are excluded by the Reform Bill from the exercise of the franchise, and to those who are excluded by your rate-paying clauses—they all desire th e f ranc hi se , an d you tell them to turn from you, to stand afar off, they are not worthy of you, that You have placed, yourselves before them, that .you are superior to them, and that they shall never be entitled to the franchise. The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Pembroke is of high descent ; he numbers John of the Bright Sword among his ancestry. The Noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire is of still higher descent; he is descended from Edward the Confessor. They may deem them selves entitled to tell the unenfranchised not to presume " to come between the wind and their nobility."--( Cheers and laughter.) • But is it so with the Right Hon. Baronet, who, in my opinion, is of still more illustrious descent than they ? He owes his station to the exercise of successful industry, guided by upright integrity.—(Load cheers.) Yes, for that industry could not have been so successful had it not been joined with most high integrity.—(Leud cheers.) Is it right in him to act thus?—( Loud cheering.) He belongs to this class ; I have beard him say that lie is proud of belonging to it _ (Cheers.) Why does he stand between them and the men deny 0, em their right t o theirportion of the Legislature ? ( Hear, hear.) By the theory of the Constitution of England, taxation is ri g h t, because the people consent to it by their re-, p resent atives, and t axa ti on is robbe,a, if it is not founded o n the representation of the people. The - theory of the Consti tution says, you rob the people if you tax them without repre sentation, and do you claim to be Ministers of the country, when you say to the people who ask you not to rob them? We have told you off into differentclasses ; we are a master class, we will monopolize the whole of the legislative power. You are a slave class oyou are not in our category ; and you shall never have any share in the Legislature ; we will never comply with your Prayers ? Now, I appeal from you to the people of England. Holding these principles, is it safe to entrust you with the Go• vernment of the country in its present disaffected state ? Why, you tell th e people that you will never give them the franchise—that they must never expect to have their grievances redressed. Oh, give them hope at least.—( Hear. ) Do not deprive them of the pleasure of hoping that at some distant period they may be become entitled to the exercise of the franchise. But you take your stand on this refusal—it is your great principle--I am doing you good with your party by • saying 50.-( Cheers from the Opposition.) I know it, but I am not doing you good with the people.—(Cheers from the Ministerial benches.) At this same meeting at Manchester, on Tuesday, an address was agreed on to this House, by the artisans there assembled. In this address "to the Members of her Majesty's Government and both Houses of Parliament," they say, " Still we are burdened with a political State Church, that by its extortions and intolerence, under the cloak of religion, brings the sublime and hallowed doctrines of Christianity into disrepute —a, standing army as numerous and expensive as if we were at war with all Europe—a ponderous debt, that presses mist disastrously on the financial interests of the country—a new Poor-law brought into existence, whilst the cursed and abominable Corn-law exists, by which the food of the people is restricted ;" and that is all they say about the New Poor-law. "At the same time, " they are starving by thousands in the land of their birth, and in the midst of all this we are told that the reforms already effected are to be final, and that further relief from our present state of political slavery shall be afforded us by you. Already has this doctrine of finality been . productive of the most disas trous effects. A spirit of disaffection has exhibited itself in dif ferent parts of the empire, and the lives of some of our fellow subjects have been sacrificed. We deeply deplore this ; we are as much opposed to. viol ence as any c l ass of men in her Majesty's dominions. We have never joined in any effort that has been made to alter the present state of things by force. W e are d etermined to seek for and obtain our rights by all lawful and constitutional means, but we hesitate not to express oar apprehension that unless such concessions be speedily made by you as shall meet the wants, the wishes, and the intelligence of the people, the recent outbreaks are only the forerunners of an amount of destruction and loss of life that will be productive of incalculable mischief to the best interests of the country, and will leave a stain on the charact r of its Legisla. tion that will not be easily obliterated. But what ate we to expect; when we see a nation angered and vexed by a continued denial of the redress of wrongs which common justice and common honesty alike demand ?" This, then, is . the declaration of men who are precluded by Hon. Gentlemen opposite, even from hope ; who will be prohibited, I suppose, from complaining, for Such must be the meaning of those declarations against the illegality of public meetings. Do you mean to say that you will do way with those meetings, which are the safety valves of the nation, . allowing the political steam to evaporate If you refuse to redress these grievances, hew can you undertake the Government of England. The Noble Lord has said he is per. fectly ready to undertake the Government; but I want to know if these are the principles on which he is prepa re d to un dertake the Government? For if they are, th e t o tt er i n ge difi ce the' But State will shake to it s f oun d at i ons ?—( Hear, hear.) what Will you do with Ireland?—(Loud cheers.) how willyou govern Ireland ?—for whom will you govern Ire land ?—by whom will you govern Ireland ? Will you govern her by means of the Learned Sergeant who has this evening given us such sp ec i mens o f meekness ? Is that ono of your J udges ? I know that the Right Hen. Baronet will give us most excellent phrases of conciliation—he will make professions of impartiality, and he will profess his readiness to do equal j uEtice to all,. We have bef. re heard from him the same language. and with the same sincerity.— Hear, hear, and cheers. ) I cannot doubt his sincerity. Hear, hear.) Was he not equally sincere when he took the Government the last time ?—( Hear, hear, hear.) Was not the brave and gallant Officer who sits near him equally sincere? and yet when he entered Dublin, over whose head was it that the Orange flag was waved ?—( Cheers ) Who were his Privy Councillors?—(Cheers ) Wk c those who supported him, and the same thing would happen again. Why, the Right Hon. Baronet has confessed that Ireland is his great difficulty. The Hon. Member for Wakefield, whO he was sorry to see had withdrawn his protection from Ireland, had talked of governing Ireland as if there were two parties, into which that country was divided. But is such the fact? -Is it not that there is the people on the one side, and a party on the other ? Yes, the universal people on the one side, and merely a party on the other. You dare not govern Ireland, except by that party. I implore the H use to recollect the history of Ireland. I will merely allude to what passed before the Union. Ireland pre vious to that suffered 600 years of misgovernment.—(A laugh from the Opposition, answered by cheers from the Ministerial beeches.) Is that laugh meant to deny the fact ? If so, I pity your ignorance.—(Loud cheers.) if you admit the fact, cannot rest ect your sense or your feelings. Ireland has suffered 600 years of cruel oppression, and you laugh at it.—(lmmense cheering.) But I will allude only to what has taken place since the Union. For the thirty years succeeding that the Tory party governed Ireland, and of that. period, for twenty five years, the dabeas Corpu s A c t h as been suspended in Ire land, and there have been Insurrection Acti and other means to deprive the people of Ireland of the benefit of the Constitu tion. The Tory party governed Ireland for twenty-five years, and I now ask you why you did not quiet Ireland during that You? B ecause you preferred the faction to the people. You could not control the faction, yet the people of Ireland are tranquil. Yet is there one amongst them whose face would not be like a bonfire if they were told that you would come into office to-morrow ? The facti in would rejoice, because they would know that their reign would commence at the same time. The Learned Sergeant (Jackson) has wasted all his declamation upon my poor self, but he was obliged to admit the tranquillity of Ireland.—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) Was that ever admitted before? Has there ever happened a four days' dsbate without the Learned Sergeant, or some of his bigoted ceadjutors, getting up with a list in his hands of t hreatenings to Magistrates or to Clergymen, or recent as.. saults, or even murders. English Conservatives, I appeal to you, has there ever been a period before when it hat been ac knowledged that. Ireland was tranquil ?—( Loud cheers.) :That tranquillity was not your doing; for, thank Heaven, you were not in office. Perhaps it might be a recommenda tion to the Irish people that you have now changed your politics ; has it been shown in your meetings ?—(Lottl cheers.) Has it been shown in the manner in which your Press has worked? Have they not poured out the vials of their wrath upon the people of Ireland? Your Leading Jour nai, whose proprietor went to a very great expense only a few days ago at an election, in order to put you into office ? ( Loud cheers.) They called the people of Ireland har t arians, savages —they even called th em worse than the inhabitant s o f New Zealand. And how was their priesthood used? In the same Journal they were called surpliced ruffi ins —sanguinary scoundrels—a demon priesthood. Yet Ireland is tranquil.—( Loud cheers.) Am I in a civilized country? Are the leaders of a large party in this State to allow the people of Ireland, who have endureda persecution unexampled, to have their pastors traduced in this way—a priesthood who, after all, were the only friends of the poor man, who was his comfort and his friend, and shrank not from approaching the bed of death, inhaling the effluvia of the typhoid fever—a demon priesthood ! Yes, such was the name that was given to them. What would be the shout—what would be the yell wore the case reversed? The people of Ireland may be wrong, but yet they t ow o e f r do say, and th ey b el i eve, that life and property are not sae when is placed in Tory h an d s . T hey complain, and ju h, s e ti p y, partisan Judges,. of partial Sheriffs, and of packed Juries. That is the feeling of the people of Ireland. Can You recover them from it 7---( Cheers ) If the people of Ireland enjoy tranquillity now, it is not under the Government of the Tories.—( Cheers. ) I have been informed,-1 was not p r esent myself,—and I .hope, if I state a n ything wrong, that the Noble Lord will set me right • but I was in formed th a t th e N o bl e Lord (Lord Stanley) is reported to h ave passe d a high ealogiurn upon Mr. ; he spoke of him in terms of great praise. Lord STANLEY—The words I used were " moderate, sober, and quiet." Mr. O'CONNELL—The Noble Lord, at all events, did Pronounce an eulogium upon that Gentleman, so far as it went, and the Noble Lord is to be your Secretary for Ireland.— (Cries of " Oh, oh," and laughter.) Well, he is to be a Cabinet Minister at all events; and what is the language of that Reverend Gentleman at Manchester ?—" War --war to the knife."—( Loud cheers.) " They tell you that we are ministers of peace. Where do you find that, I ask you? Not in the Scriptures, that I know of —there is nothing like it in the Bible." Now look—l - hind what a clergyman says—the Clergy ministers of peace—there is nothing like that in the Bible. That is not my language, but the language of the Rev. Mr. APNeil. "We are Ambassadors of Christ." And here the Learned Sergeant probably would make an allusion to Lord Howard de Walden.—(Cries of " Oh, oh !") " And what said Christ? Do you think I cams on earth to bring peace ?—no, but the sword. It is so that we have peace within, but our ministration is not peace, but the sword. What peace can you expect while the woman Jezebel lives 2—( Loud cheers.) That was the language of one of your moderate supporters— that is the language of the man upon whom the Noble Lord has thought prop er to pass that high eulogium. I know per fectly many people have said th a t i n t h at passage the "Queen was pointed hate said the woman Jezebel. Mind you I don't say so, but when I read I did think 50..--( Hear, hear.). I do not say so now, because• the Rev. Gentleman ha s s i nce said that he did not , mearthe Queen, but if h e did not moan the Queen what did he say his meaning was?—( Loud cheers.) He said he meant the religion of the great majority of the Christian world.—(Cheers.) I do care for the insult to the Queen, if it was so.—(Cheers:) Am I not allowed to put an hypothetical case respecting the opinions and sayings of such a man ?—( Cheers.) If it was not the Queen he meant, then it was the religion in which I be lieve.--( Loud cheers.) There is no escaping from the dilemma —it is either the Queen or the religion of the great majority of the people of Ireland. Yet the Irish people are still tranquil. Would you, the people of England, be tranquil, if the Popish priest were to get into the pulpit and launch forth such foul assertions?—(Cheers.) Yet it may be said that this is but a single person ; but who, let me ask, invited him, and the equally celebrated M'Ghee to Sheffield, to calumniate the Irish people ? The Lord Wharneliffe, who I will not accuse of fanaticism ; knowing the man, and that he gave the invita tion, I leave the House to draw its own conclusion.—( Cheers. ) These are'your instruments,—with them you prepare the way for governing Ireland. I have been taunted more than once, and sentence of death has been pronounced against me by the Learned Sergeant opposite, and that with a countenance that was truculent enough, even for the finisher of the law.— (Loud laughter.) Now, I want to know what has been preached on this subject. Has there been no treason against the Queen? lam now about to read the speech of a Member of this House ; but let me, before I do that, cell your attention to sermons Frank Hewson delivered on the sth of November, in which a parallel is instituted between the Queen and James 11. He says "we see a striking resemblance to the dispensing power whirls James 11. assumed, now pursued by the Government in not enforcing the laws against Popery. We see a striking resemblance to the foreign influence which James was under in the present position of affairs at Court, in the crowd of followers who infest the palace of our Queen, and fill her mind with Popish and un-English sentiments." I will not trouble the House with the whole, but I beg to call your particular attention to the last paragraph. He says, at the present time, " lastly, there is a striking resemblance to the supposed birth of a Prince of Wales in the times of James 11., and the supposed marriage of our Queen or a German Prince, whose family are all Papists. When an heir was born to James, the hope of England fell to the ground in the prospect of a nominal Protestant. Is the prospect any better now ?—(Cheers. ) James 11. lost his throne,•and deserved to lose it. Is the Queen also to lose it---for what? I now come, Sir, to the celebrated speech delivered at Canterbury.— (Loud cheers.) I have to say, Sir, that the person whose name appears at the head of this speech has denied that he at all alluded to the Queen, but that he alluded entirely to the Ministry.—(Hear.) Let those who know him best believe him most.—( Cheers.) He says, " Her Majesty's Ministers have recognised." The speaker is alluding " to the fearful growth of Popery, allied as it is with Atheism, Infidelity, and the Voluntary, or Anything arian principle." " Her Majesty's Ministers have recognised this medley as their rule of faith, as exemplified in their pre cious scheme of education without religion, and I grieve to say that her Majesty herself has shown too much countenance to the enemies of the Protestant Church. Brought up under the auspices of the Citieen King of the Belgians—the serf of France, and guided by his influence, the Queen thinks that if the Monarchy lasts her time it is enough." Meaning by inuendo her Majesty.—( Hear, hear.) "But the people of England will never consent that the Crown should be degraded and debased for the inglorious ease of any created being—( Tremendous cheers)—nor that the personal wishes" —this is the Ministry still, take notice—( Langhter)—" and caprices of the Sovereign" all the Ministry (Renewed laughter)—" shall direct the conduct of the executive.—( Re newed cheering.) The monarchy has rights, but it has also duties. The people of this country will not be trampled on by Pope or Sovereign"—still meaning Ministers—" still less will they endure that a petty German Prince should hold the fair realm of England in fee-farm.—(Laughter.) We have not forgotten the forced abdication of the second James"—how the preacher and the speaker agree—(Cheers)—and that's the Ministry still I suppose,—" nor are we ignorant that the title to the throne of these realms is that derived from aProtestant Princess. No man can regret more than Ido the growing un popularity of the Queen"—that's the Ministers !—( Laughter. ) I implore the House to permit me to read a passage or two more:—" The Courts of former Sovereigns have been as fri volous, more vicious even, than the present, but the Govern ment of the country, and the direction of public affairs, has been carried on by statesmen of known and recognised ability, ho nour, and independence._..( Cheers.) Men who were neither the boon companions of the Sovereign nor the willing slaves of his follies and caprices. —(Loud cheers.) I believe in my conscience that the favourite Equerries are younger, better looking, and better dressed men than Sir R. Pees."—( Great laughter. ) " That Lord Melbourne can tell a tale meet for a lady's ear far better than the Duke of Wellington, and that neither Lord Stanley nor Sir James Graham can compete with my Lord Normanby in the getting up of a pageant."—( Renewed laughter.) I suppose every loyal man in the House wishes -to have the Queen spoken to in that manner.—(Loud cheers.) Is there a gallant officer among you that does not feel indignant that such language should be uttered or tolerated?— ( Cheers.) Is there a really loyal man among you that must not deplore that ribaldry ?—(Cheers.) How many insinuations are there? Would you permit your sister—l beg pardon, Ido not mean to offend you—to be spoken of in that way ? (Cheers.) Then, he says, " Look at the appointment s that these men and wom en h ave lately made. There is not one of them which is not a direct insult to the nation. See the Irish Papists preferred to place, to favour. and to patronage"---this is one of your votes to-night.—( Cheers.) " I shall take care, in thus referring t o th em , to con t ras t t h e solemn oath sworn by her Majesty at the Coronation with her subsequent acquiescence in these acts." Every thing that is bad was said. " This oath is the compact made between the Sovereign and the people—its obligations are mutual.—( Hear. ) I will now read it to you, and be ye judges whether or no they have been truly fulfilled. Here are the late appointments of . Papist Councillors. I take them together, and thus I east them from me with disgust and indignation." How the Catholics will be pleased—there is your supporter —have you rejected him ?—(Cheers.) Well, then, he speaks of the Ministry ; with the exception of one passage, the rest certainly does relate to the Ministry, as a man of con science.—(Laughter on the Opposition benches ) I am bound to say so. But is there a man among you who would stand up and say the former charges did not apply directly to the Queen ?—(Cheers. ) He says—" But his Ministry—his sheet anchor is the body of Irish Papists and Rapparees, whom the priests return to the House of Commons. These are the men who represent the bigoted savages, hardly more civilized than the natives of New Zealand." Is he a repealer I want to know ?—(Hear)—" but animated with a fierce undying hatred of England. I repeat, then, deliberately, that the Papists of Ireland—priest and lsyman, peer and peasant, are alike our enemies—aliens as they are in blood, language, and religion."—( Hear, hear.) I believe that is a quotation from a much greater man, the leader of the party whom you told us made us weak in the House of Lords, and made you power ful.—( Hear.) " Yet on these men are bestowed"—again we come to the Queen—" the countenance and sup port of the Queen of Protestant England, but, alas, her Majesty is Queen only of a faction—( Hear) — and is as much a partisan as the Lord Chancellor himself." That means the Ministers.—(Loud cheers.) " But shall we quail at this impending danger, and meanly submit without a struggle ?—( Hear, hear.) No ; we will present the same bold front as did our fathers of old, and God defend the right." The right between him and the Queen.—(Cheers.) "We will resist, to the death ill government and unjustly-usurped au thority." He says, " Petitions to the Crown are idle mockery. We will no longer submit to be governed by a profligate Court. It is in your hand, my friends—it is in the hands of the people of England that her destinies are placed, for good or for evil." The Learned Sergeant (lid not tell us of high treason in that speech.—(Cheers.) The Learned Sergeant was silent upon it, because it was from one of his own party. It was from one of those with whom he will probably go arm in arm out of the lobby to-night. The Hon. Member for Coleraine did not talk of that speech, but they both talked of my reply to it ; and I did say that against the Tory dominion of such traitors. I did say that against such rebels I would and could bring into the field 500,000 fighting men.—(Cheers.) I repeat it. have some hereditary title to it, for an ancestor of mine fell fighting for James IL—(Laughter from th e Op pos i t i on. ) T he lion. Member for Maidstone (Mr. D'lsraeli) uttered some pe culiar infelicities the other night—(Laughter) —he talked of the House of Commons having in the reign of Charles the First ordered a Quaker to their bar, and having his tongue cut out. Now he was out in history. It happened five years after Charles the First was in his grave—( A laugh)—under the House of Commons chosen by Cromwell, with the dictation of a tile of grenadiers. But that was the result of fanaticism— fanatical missionaries were sent then, as now, about the country. 'f hey did not scruple to speak of " Jezebel" without disguise. And do you not think the same melts might flow fion miller fanaticism? I have been speaking of what ap peared in the daily press ; but it seems it has all been collected into a volume, under the title of " The Spirit of the Metropolitan Conservative Press"—and in the pompous list of subscribers I see the names of Sir R. Peel — (Cheers)—Recorder Shaw, and J. Bradshaw, Esq., M.P.—(Cheers)—dedicated to Lord Lynd hurst—( Loud cheers)--and the motto is, " Serve God—honour the Queen."—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) lam Counsel for Ireland here. I plead her cause.—( Cheers.) Your country is discontented and disaffected—lreland is tranquil. The phy sical farce Chartists have illumined the night with burn ing of houses, and the destruction of property has been going on they have led armed men against the Queen's troops—and Irishmen were among the sold'ers—( Cheers) and estimable gentlemen have been threatened with assassination—marked out for murder.— ( Hear, hear.) The, military force has been diminished in e'and. Now lam taunted with wishing to interfere with the just exercise of the prerogative, because I am struggling, and will struggle, against sedition, rebellion, and treason.— (Laughter from the Opposition, and cheers front the Ministerial benches.) A speech of mine at Dublin was quoted from—but not fairly—in this debate. I made an appeal then to the English Conservatives. I addressed.the Gentlemen of England who had property inherited from their aneestors.—who lived in all the luxuries and blessings ' , which this world could throw around them. I sa id t o th em, w ill you send to Ireland a Ministry who could not govern iv—whose followers would he helloed on by men like this Bradshaw, who has received the freedom of the Co, poration of Dublin—(Cheers)—who have retained Orange Lodges in reality, though in name they are abolished ?—( Hear.) I continue the appeal now from this spot. English Gentlemen, we protected you last year, when, if we had joined with your foes, your insecurity would have been complete. But do not despair. Let not an eternal civil war rage between us—oh beware of trusting to govern us by a Tory Ministry.—( Cheers. ) I appeal to you in this House, I may appeal in vain. You have been brought here by your leaders —you have been gathered from n neh to south, from east to west —you have been brought down here t 3 wake the grind " Waterloo charge," dictated at Apsley-house, by the conclave to which you were not admitted. " Up, Guards, and at them !" is the cry. Oh, in the field of Waterloo were many gallant Irishmen— (Cheers)—and never did the meteor flag of Britain shine on victory more proudly than when, in- the red commingling stream by which the triumph had been gained, there flawed the blood alike of gallant Irishmen, Englishmen, and Scotch men.—(Loud cheers.) I awl said to be a Repealer. t am. Why? Because I cannot get justice from this House. What justice do I ask ? Equality with you! I ask no more. Am I not entitled to it ?—( Cheers. ) And if you will not yield it, what care I for the Un;on ?—an Act of Parliament ! I assert my right, as an Irishman, to apply for its repeal whenever I thins proper—indeed, it has been gravely doubted whether the Iris 1 Parliament had the power of stultifying, of abolishing its powers, and these were the doubts of no less a person than an Irish Attorney- General, the present Lord Chancellor of Ire land. What shall prevent me f rom app l y i ng f or repeal, i fl cannot obtain justice without. ? Now, there is yet another feature in the present state of Ireland worthy of notice. It was hAi a n tte d ha c tie d newl t r o abel olu b antn y ei dt. t sl joi e hoe Now, : N oel dwd o b ,t l bhi e nee .e o om r r d ee m ( b Al e o r e r F i e t t h b ) a t i n 6 0 term o o s 0 I p c e a r n s o n n o s t ta Temperance. n,m e city Society, days under have Father passed without a case at the Sessions, Ireland is admitt ed to be tranquil nWoti.lo),•cou t enacitysay t l o s fonlye Iri h people.atsemporary iey calm? h Oh, you know have shown it often in matters of contest and strife, They will display it in the most sublime pri nc i p l es of morality. I present it, Irish people, before you.—(Cheers.) They have been assailed b y ribaldry and aline ; but th ey b r i ng before you this Government as their friends—as the first Ministry that ever rendered them justice—who were prevented from doing them the full mea. sure of justice they desired tit do—endeavoured to. administer the law in justice and mercy. In the name of the Irish people, I ask you, will you vote against them, with the M‘Neiles, the M‘Ghees, the 13radshaws ; or will you r o t e for then:, as in the name of truth and heaven, I demand ?__(Loud cheers.) Mr, BRADSHAW could assure the House and the Country with respect, to any impressions that rested on the minds of Members wit reference.to any allusions he had ma the name of the Sovereign, that nothing was further from his intention than to make any personal allusions. He must, however, take leave to say that the manner in which the Royal name was mixed up with the Ministers on every possible occasion, made it difficult for any one to approach the subject without referring to it.—( Cries of " Oh.") After what took place in the month of May last, when the persons who had been summoned to her :Majesty's Councils had been so unce remon i ous l y , and in a manner that he believed to be perfectly unconstitu tional, and was never known in that country—( Cr ies of " Oh, oh !" and cheering, which drowned the remainder of the sen tence.) He had certainly been very much to blame in bring ing for ward her Majesty's name—( He no man regretted it more.—(Hear, hear.) It had been done in a moment of excitement—( Hear, hear, and a laugh. ) He would no t however submit to have his loyalty questioned, and attacked in the most violent and unjustifiable manner, as if he had been a most violent incendiary and agitator, or republican for 30 years of his life. If such had been the case he could not be attacked in a more outrageous manner. No one was more in clined to support the institutions of the country, the cl.gnity of the Crown, or the honour of her Majesty, and he regretted most sincerely that that interpretation bad been put upon his words. He allowed that the words did admit of that inter pretation, but he could only say that, he deeply regretted it.— ( Cheers. ) He must say that had it been a King of a mature age who was sitting on the Throne, he would have been jus tified in the circumstances of the country in making these ob servations. With respect to what he had said of Ireland he had read with some attention the report of the House of Lords last year with respect to the mass of violence and outrage that had taken place in that country : he thought it fully justified him in the observations he had made, and of which he would re• tract nothing.—( Cries of Oh," and cheers. ) Sir ROBERT PEEL then rose and said—Sir, I believe there is no Gentleman in this House, however tired he may be of this protracted discussion, how ever anxious he may be to bring this debate to a close, there is no Gentleman who will not admit that, considering the nature of the motion, con sidering the position in which I stand, I have no alternative but to trespass upon their indulgence.--.(Hear.) I am confident moreover, that if I must detail my opinion upon many points, if I must vindicate myself from some accusations that have been brought against me, I am confident, consider ing the prominent part which I personally have been made to occupy throughout the discussion, that I shall not be charged with any undue vanity or egotism, in taking such a course. Two demands have been made by the opposite side of the House in this discussion—the one a perfectly just one namely, that he , who takes a p ar t i n th e d e b a t e and gives his vote of want of confidence in the Gove rnm ent, should specify theground on which that want of confidence is based. The other demand is that those who, from their position, may be regarded as the probable suc cessors to this Government in the event of its dissolution should state upon what grounds of public policy, they purposed to con duct the affairs of the country. The absolute justice of the fit st of these demands I willingly admit. I feel it incumbent on me to specify the grounds on wllich I withhold confidence from the Government. The other demand, that I should explain and detail my viesre of public policy, is perhaps not equally obliga tory on me, but it is a dema n d w hi c h I f ee l it reasonable and politic to answer. I have answered every question that has been put to me on that point, and there shall be no limit to the fullness and unreservedness of the amount I give —the exception shall be your indulgence.—(Cheers.) I know too well the little value that should be placed on that which arises from misconception of real opinion.—( Hear, hear.) I have seen too much of magnificent professions out of office, and meagre performances in office—(Laud cheers) — I have had too much experience of solemn engagements entered into for the purposeof overturning a Government, but neglected when that object was attained.—(Cheers.) I so little de sire to benefit by such promises-1 so little desire to procure a present confidence by concealing opinions or gaining good will from that side of the House by liberal professions which I don't expect to redeem, that I rejoice in the opportunity afforded me by the demand of a declaration of my opinions. I rejo.ce in the opportunity of fully and • freely detailing them.— (Cheers.) But I shall proceed, in the first instance, in compliance with the demand which calls upon me to specify the ground on which, with perfect cordiality, I shall join in the motion of my Hon. Friend, and record my denial of confidence in the present Government. I withheld my confidence from you from the results of your public policy. I withhold my confi dence from you upon your own confession of incompetency. I withhold my confidence from you, on the testimony of your most valued friends. I withhold my confidence from y ou , on the condition of your Government, and on the public princi ples which you are now forced to avow, in order to maintain its existence.—(Loud cheers.) I said I withheld my confi dence from you, from the results of your policy. I compare it not with any former period. I compare it with those results of Conservative policy. I compare it not with the results of which you must be proud, if you have any recollection of the events in which you took a share, and if you have any respect for the character of him by whosecounsels you accomplished them. In 1834, the man under whose guidance you had effected the Reform Bill retired from office, and this was the account which Lord Grey gave in retiring from office, of the condition in which he left the State. I compare then the state of the country, on the testimony of Lord Grey, in the year 1834, with the results of your policy, and the state in which I find the country on the day on which I am about to record my denial of confidence in your Government. Lord Grey said, on the 9th of July, 1834, with respect to the actual state of the country then—and :now mark the contrast in every particular —" With respect to the internal state of the country we leave trade in a sound and healthy condition. Our manufacturers are generally employed, public credit is improved, the revenue is greatly increased, and all our interests are in a better condition, with one single excep tion —the depreciation of agriculture —a depreciation less affect ing labourers than the landlords from the reduction of rents. Political and trades' unions have been repressed. We have asserted the power of the law, as it stood, for their suppres sion, and by administering it with a firm hand, the result has been complete success." That was the testimony borne by Lord Grey to the results of the administration of the Govern ment, when Lord Grey, when my Noble Friend the Member for Lancashire, and my Right Hon. Friend the Member for Cumberland took a part in it.—(Loud cheers.) You held un limited control, except for a period of four months, since then. I call upon you now to render an account of your stewardship, and tell me whose fault it is that this country presents such a contrast to that which it then did?—( Loud cheering.) You tell me that you have effected great public measures, that reform has been progressing, that no obstruction has been sufficient to control the steady march of your progress and improvement. How cemes it, then, that in the year 1840 trade should be in an unsound and unhealthy state—that pub lic credit, instead of being improved, has deterior ated, and that for months public security has been at a discount ? Agriculture, indeed, has improved, and perhaps you will take credit to yourselves for that improvement, and consider that it is to your manly and consistent course on the Corn-laws that it is owing.—( Op position cheers.) But how happens it, if Government has succeeded in extinguishing discontent, and, by a firm admi. nistration of the laws, has suppressed the disorder—if its efforts have been attended with complete success—if , you have been able, by a course of useful reform to go to an extent which no other Government went or could have anticipated—to what is it owing that this country is LOW convulsed by popular disorder, and that the spirit of in subordination and rebellion, and insurrection, rears its head ? What has been the tendency of Government with respect to its constitution, and what are the principles you profess to have held? A Noble Lord, who spoke from the benches opposite, the Member for Northumberland, said, that he had observed, from month to month, the supporters of Government dis appear.—(Hear, hear.) Will the Noble Lord observe the tendency of those same opinions with respect to the members of Government ? How happens it that every man who has attempted to assert the authority of the law—who has ranged himself on the side of those who adhere to the ancient institutions of the country, as they were according to you at the period of the Reform Bill—how happens it that every man, with one splendid exception I admit, that of the Noble Lord—how happens it that every man conspicuous for his talents, or possessing any great claims on the country from his experience of public affairs—how happens it that they have been driven, step by step, from the Government? Since the beginning of 1839 the following Members of the Government have retired from it—Lord Grey, Lord Stanley, Sir James Graham, the Duke of Richmond, the Earl of Ripon, Lord Brougham—( A laugh)—Sir Charles Grant, Mr. Spring Rice, and Lord Howick, who is the last. Step by step these men for some reason or another, have been gradually expelled from among you. They have been expelled because it was found necessary to make sacrifices of them in order to conciliate the party with whom you are allied —(Cheerr. ) The last instance is that of the Noble Lord, the Member for Northumberland. That Noble Lord has left you because lie distrusted the prin ciples on which you now act, and because he foresees the in evitable consequences of yOur continuance in office. And yet the Noble Lord has read us a lecture on the divisions of our party. On what grounds did he relinquish his connection with the Government? You who are prepared to-night to vote your confidence in Ministers, on what grounds do you dissever your connection with them? You left Government on public principles—it was no personal mortification or disappoint ment—you took little interest in office—you had too high an ambition —you left it on considerations of public prin ciple. Are you now entitled to censure us for with drawing our confidence from that Government, and from recording our public convictions? How strong must have been the motives which could justify your retirement ? The Government was at the tithe in great difficulties—you had re turned last year to office, in order to protect, according to your views, the rights of her Majesty. You thought that an unjust and ungenerous attempt had been made to dictate to her in the appointment of her household. I differed from you, and I thought it would have been humiliating and uncon stitutional in me to have submitted on that occasion.—(Hear, hear.) I adhere to that opinion, but you entertain a different one. How strong, then, must have been your convic.. tion of the danger to which the present Government was exposing the country, when at such a time and under such circumstances yen withdrew from them your aid. You had every tie of private esteem and personal friendship for those men—we had none; we had always opposed —you had always supported them. What strong considerations must have in- fluenced yeu when the existence of the Ministry was in peril —how convinced were you of the danger of the course they were pursuing, and of the views they entertained, when you and another gentleman with you could break your communication with them, and retire from the service of the country ? You retired at a time when, as far as the public is aware, a proposal was made to place an Hon. Gentleman opposite, the present President of the Board of Trade, in office, and when you certainly were not aware that the Right Hon. Gentleman professed any opinions which could form a great contrast with those of his colleagues, and wkich could alarm you as to the consequences of them. Will the Noble Lord allow me to ask him whether subsequent appointments had tended to conciliate him? The Right Hon. Member for Edinburgh, the Secretary at War, had not been appointed when the Noble Lord had withdrawn his confidence from the Govern ment. That appointment had since taken place. And I ask the Noble Lord, whether the lecture we heard on the first night of the debate on political differences has tended much to conciliate his conduct towards the Ministry ?—(Opposition cheers) I now say that I have the evidence of one of your colleagues,one of your own friends, of one who entertains for you both persoaal regard and private esteem. I have his evi dence, that he thinks you unworthy of public confidence, at least, that he thinks you so unworthy of it, that he cannot con sent to commit his fortunes with yours. I shall even say that in your own testimony I can prove that you are incompetent to discharge the duties of a Government, and that you have not that degree of public confidence which could enable you to administer the affairs of the country. I shall redietn the pledge. On what grounds did you retire from office after having carried the sec.ind reading of the Jamaica Bill? You had a majority of five on that occasion—you thought it unbe coming to persevere with the measure —you wished to with draw it ; I presume it was not the increased difficulties Of the country which deterred you. I presume it was a belief that the vote on the Jamaica Rill proved that you had not sufficiently the confidence of this House to enable pin to administer our affairs.—( Hear, hear, hear.) In a debate of the 7th . of May, when you declared the grounds of your withd rawa l from office, the Noble Lord the Member for Stroud, the leader of the House of Commons, gave this explanatio n for the course he was pursuing. .He sa id, it seems to me there is no option but to g{v,e up the Bill. It is then a questio n w h ether, having introduced a Bill of that importance, leaving the affairs of Jamaica, of the West Indies, and of our colonies in general in a state of neglect, with all those interests at stake, we can not now retain office by any contumacy of our p ar ty." We not only gave a vote, but passed the Bill. You said the Canada Dill was pending_,. We cannot calculate on that sup port necessary for settling the affairs of Canada • therefore, not having sufficient confidence and support, shall be ha zarding the state of the country. We must come to a dissolu- TB_ SUN, LONDON, SAT DA Y. FEBRUARY 1, 1840, tion. Government does not enjoy such support in this House as enables them to carry on the affairs of Government." You thought then you stood so much in need of the support you (lid not possess, that you would be placing in jeopardy the best interests of the Colonies—continuing in office, what security can you give them of bring better able to administer their af. fairs ? What said Lord Melbourne? After mentioning the; con versation between Burnett and King William, in which the sub ject of discussion was, which was thebest foam of Government, republican or absolute monarchy, and King William said, " I know not what form of Government is best, but I am sure the worst is that which has the form without the privileges of monarchy," Lord Melbourne went on to say, "I do not know what form is best in itself, but this I do know, that unquestionably the worst is that which does not possess suffi ciently the confidence of the country, to carry those measures it thinks necessary for the' public good."—( Cheers.) That was Lord Melbourne's speech. He did not then draw the distinction since drawn between the executive and legislative administration of Government, which their new ally has brought forward as a now ground for con fidence. Lord Melbourne said that the worst Govern ment was that which had not power to carry through measures it deems necessary for the public good. The Right Hon. Gentleman differs from Lord Melbourne in this respect. He says• that there is a distinction between the executive and legislative administration of Government, and for a vindication of the Government continuing in office without public confi dence, which appears to me a necessary circumstance to the efficiency of all Administrations , is it to be tolerated as a doc trine that Government is merely responsible for the executive Administration ? " Government," says the Hon. Gentleman, " has the paramount duty of executing legislative duties at tached to the capacity of Members of Parliament." Why, if that be true, it is a complete abdication of every function of the Government._(Cheers.) Will you let me ask you, in a free Government how is it possible for a Government to maintain public respect that limits itself to the mere discharge of execu tive duties? Take the case of.ramaica. • You thought it necessary to annihilate the Assembly of Jamaica, and to substitute despotic for a free Government. Could anything more con nect the administrative with the executive department, as distinguished front each other by the Right Hon. Gentleman as the new ground on which to vindicate the Government_e ground against the introduction of which I shall take the first opportunity of protesting, that of open questions—a ground, in troducing, I think, certain intestine discords where there ought to be union, and degrading the character of public men by allowing every species of coalition, however unprincipled ? It will be a fatal policy, indeed, if that, hitherto the exception, and an unfortunate exception, in every case is to be consti tuted the rule--if every Government may say we feel pressed by those behind us, we find ourselves unable to stand ; but still, maintaining our own opinions, to command a majority and retain the confidence of our followers, let us snake each question an open question, and destroy every ob stacle to every p oss ibl e combination.--(Cheers.) The lion. Gentleman says there have been instances of open questions in the recent history of this country ; there have been such. But is there one that has not been pregnant with the greatest evils ? Go back to 1782, when Mr. Fox admitted open questions. Mr. Pitt did the same on the slave trade. The Catholic ques tion was an open question. Why, if ever there was a lesson of instruction against open questions you could not produce three more striking ones. Take first the coalition of Lord North and .11r. Fox, Reform was an open question; in that Government Lord North was opposed to reform ; the coalition was formed and could not have been formed without open questions, and that fact produced such a degree of public disgust and disappro bation that. it led :to' the disgraceful expulsion of the Govern= ment. Well, the 'slave trade—is there any one act of Mr. Pitt's life that has been . more condemned than his permitting the slave trade to be an open question? Read what a recent historian says of open questions; we have great warning and small encouragement to imitate the course pursued. Speaking of Mr. Fox and the coalition, he says, "On such grounds Mr. Fox and Lord North succeeded in overpowering the Ministry, and took their places, which they held for a few months, when the King dismissed them amidst the -universal joy of the country —men of all ranks and parties and sects joining in one feeling of disgust at the factious profligacy in which the unnatural alliance was formed, and beholding with apprehension the progeny which, as Mr. Wil berforce said, was stamped with the features of bath parties— the violence of the one party, and the corruption of the other." —(Cheers.) What is to prevent me, if these doctrines are just, from coalescing with the Hon. Member for West minster in opposition to her Majesty's Government; to make all questions open questions, and consenting to conduct the Go vernment by departments, and so be free from the responsibility of legislation because we cannot command a majority without it 2—(Cheers.) Mr. Pitt and the slave trade is the next happy example given. The same historian says—" These are heavy charges, but far greater remain against the conduct of that eminent person. No man felt more strongly on the subject of the African slave trade than he did. His speeches on the subject are the finest among his noble orations ; Tet did be continue for eighteen years of his life to suffer every one of his colleagues to vote against the abolition. His conduct on the slave trade, is the darkest shade resting on his reputation." The next example is the Catholic question:' /-/ave had sOnae - experience on the evils arising kom that being- ad open question. Afr , Pitt - made it an open ques tion, Lord Liverpool made/ it an open question, and Mr. Can ning made it an open question. The blame attached equally to every party in the State, but I had intimate experience of the consequences that arose from making that an open question. Anything more calculated to promote diScord and alienation, and to render it impossible vigorously to conduct public affairs, or more pregnant with evil to a Government, than such a system, cannot be conceived.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") It was my conviction of the evils of that state of things more than any other consideration, it was not the fear of physical resistance, but the evils resulting from this state of things, which induced me to think that it was impossible that the Government cf Ireland could be conducted with efficiency while the Roman Catholic question remained an open question. So far from facilitating the set tlement, my firm belief is, that if the advocates of this ques tion had asserted their determination to carry through the measure or to retire front office, my opinion is, that the ques tion would have been settled by its original advocates.— ( Hear, hear.) And, therefore, denying to the Right - Honourable Gentleman that his example is . at all encouraging, example teaches me from henceforth that it is a fatal policy to adopt open questions. I believe them to be destructive of the best interests of the country and every honourable man ; andi nvite to office every shabby arid corrupt man—( Cheers —who will condescend to act with colleagues from whom, upon many important occasions, he differed most materiallf. Open questions ! It is upon such examples that the Right Hon. Gentleman can enter into union with the Noble Lord ee er e an • Hot), Gqntke?3,n, with his opiniou,,of . the Obtliil-Vws, act jriEkt, xo'ila of the Treasuesi :vine thinks that, this took tbi,woirien ,qiiostiOn ?—( Ch eers 5 .14 can you, silo think that Parliaments ought to be reduced 'in duration—who think that the Septennial Act ought not to be maintained—hou can you, with any credit to your self, co-operate in the administration of public affairs ? with the Noble Lord who tell his constituents and the world that he cenSiders those very questions which you profess to censiler (1 the utmost importance, to be tantamount to the commencement of a revolution ?—( Great cheering.) The Noble Lord tells the people of Stroud that changes like these introduced when the public mind was prepared, and the propo sals duly considered, must differ entirely from the proposal to found a new Reform Bill on the basis of Triennial Par liaments, Household Suffrage, and the Vote by Ballot.— (Hear, hear.) No, but you are for quadrennial parliaments —triennial parliainents will be the commencement of a revolu tion, but quadrennial parliaments are necessary. Household Suffrage will not only be dangerous in itself, but it will con vulse the public mind and lead to dissatisfaction. Did youhear the lion. Member for Dublin say that no party who refused to admit the body of the working classes to the exercise of the political franchise was worthy of the public confidence ? Does the Right Hon. Gentleman believe, when he has drawn his line of the 101. householders beyond the limits of b oroughs, does he believe that he will stop a g it a ti on ?—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman was prepared to extend the suffrage • but I think the Noble Lord will soon convince him that if he perseveres in his 10/. household franchise,he will stand alone ; but then there is the Vote by Ballot. The Right Hon. Gentleman is prepared to support this question, which is to carry all the rest. flow, I would ask, can the Right Hon. Gentleman, differing, as he does, from the Noble Lord, meet in the Cabinet and dis cuss these subjects ? The Right Hon. Gentleman defends the sacred duty of agitation. He says that no great measure can be carried without agitation. Are these eloquent claptraps, I would ask, to be put forward by him for the per pose of deceiving the Radicals behind him ? Does the Right Honourable Gentleman intend to agitate as a Mem ber of the Government? , He believes that the Ballot is es sential to the honest exercise of the franchise—he considers that no great question can be carried without agitation—that it is essential. Now, is he to agitate for the Ballot while the Noble Lord agitates against him ? Here is the fi:st result of open questions. Great questions can only be carried by agita tion, but the Ballot will remain an empty sound before the Right Hon. Gentleman can find support from those around him. You have admitted these to be your principles—ynu have told your constituency so —you have avowed to them out of office and in office, from the proud keep of Windsor—not for your own justification, but in order to assure your constituents that you speak from high places. —( Great cheering.) You told them that the principles you professed when out of office you still adhered to and rejoiced in, giving them a cordial assurance not only that you maintained them, but that you only accepted office in the belief that you would be able much more effectually to give effect to them.—(Hear, hear.) The constituency of Edinburgh upon this said, we aro sure of the Ballot and Short Parliaments, for from the Palace of the Sovereign we have received the assurance that all the power of office shall be exerted for the maintainancc of principles which our representative possessed %then out of office. What answer does the :tight Hon. Baronet mean to give to his constituency for the course lie has adopted ? Why, he will say, True, I promised them, but I gave them no pledge.—( Cheers. ) I pronlised 'you that I would steadily adhere to those principles ; I told you that I accepted office in order to give me an opportunity to carry out those not t t t ;h o ezti e c o. u tL t r( e l,egpi them, rsaateuhr b e y u o t i su t a o ? principles, but pledges I gave you none. (Hear, hear.) e ill You returned me to Parliament. I said I would adhere to What would the electors of subordinate duty.—( Laughter.) a yo tt tl e r nd i he Edinburgh say Laug'eter, ) principles. ti l es w o e f nt n i i n y to d o ep fli a c r e twm , classical for . reproach they not address a you in the lan. in prose—(Laughter)—sill of Dido.—(Laughter.) t fides." " Nusquain tu a and cheers.) Nay, will they not go on with the (Laughter euotat ion ? (11car,(1117aaru,gahntedrI)a—ughter)—or, if too and bearing on its laughter.) And what " eject= littore eg•ntem Excepi, et rogni demens, in parte locavi." Do you forget your pledges ? Are the; eto be no fruits of our mutual loves ?—( Roars of laughter,) No small bill, is se t a att m o i e e es d yy w oou i tt t rr h ap t i , h sr e v re liemtraLgi likeness?—(.Much e o n f e s y s paternity, ty, " Non Inec in fcedera vc n:." —(Continued laughter and cheering.) "No ballot Bill?") Is there to be no suffrage Bill ?—( Laughter.) Will the causituents of Edinburgh be satisfied with the excu se th at you entered is thatedtheCa they n Cabinet on ot : that principle of "ope n quest i ons ?" My belief they w ill c h arge you with violating your plightedfaith, and that they will, on the next occasion, withdraw from your protection.—(Cheers.) Now, the Noble Lord, in that famous letter of his to the Stroud Electors, said, "It is for you to consider—in the spirit of the true Whiggism which has always attended you—what is the danger of the State, and what are the means by which it is to be averted ? I ant persuaded you will not thi n k of l i fting the anchor of the monarchy while signs of stor m are b lackening the horizon."—(Cheers.) This being the danger, the Noble Lord invites into his crew "an able- bodied searnan"—(Laugh ter )—whose only object will be to heave the anchor without delay. —( Laughter.) He will not succeed in heaving the anchor—the Noble Lord will neither succeed in securing it perfectly—the result will be, that neither will be anchored —nor encountering .in open sea-room, the perils of the sea, we shall drift on the shoals—the muddy, dirty, sands of "progressive Reform."— ( Loud and long-continued cheering.) So much, Sir, for the constitutional question of open questions in the Cabinet. Now for their acts :—Look to the state of the revenue. Don't be deterred by this short reference to accounts. There is. and has been for some ti me , an increasing deficiency o f revenue. On the bth January, 1837, the excess of expenditure over reve nue Was 345,000/. ; in April, 407,0001. ; in July, 518,000/. ; in October, 803,000/.—( Hear, hear.) Since the period you have ad m i n i stere d t h e pu bli o affairs, th e National Debt has a deficiency in the year of been au gme n te d ; Th ere .i s 1,500,000/. ; i n th e t h ree yearnof 3,50t);000/. And yet atsuch a period you have, for the sake of popu- larity—(Loud and continued cheering)—though I regret *se will continue to devote all his energies to the propagation of measure was advocated by some of my friends.) You have the doctrines of Socialism.—(.Loud cheers.) By whom was consented to relinquish the Post-office revenues.—( Hear, Mr. Fair appointed Registrar of Births and Marriages? Ilir hear. ) I have a right, Sir, to speak with authority on this mingham, I believe, is not under the operation of the Poor-law question. Suppose I had taken this course on the Malt-t ax Act. If it va re under the operation of the Poor-law Act, the question.—( Hear, hear.) I was in greater difficulties than you Board of Guardians would have the appointing the Registrar; are.—( Hear. hear.) Th e repea l was called for by some of but as it is not under the operation of the Poo'-law Act, Mr. the most, influential of my party. I asked the Marquis of Fair must have received his ai rpointment under the direct audio- Chandos to give my Government his support. He was the rite of her Majesty's Government.—( Loud cheers.) Now I representative of the whole agricultural interest. He would as k if thi s appointment does not offend directly against every have consented, if I would have made the repeal of the Malt- idea of common sense or coma - non decency..—(Lou:) cheers ) tax only an open question. lat once refused. I said, the Go- I a d m it th a t it was probably through neglect that the President vernment, with which lam connected, must offer a United of this Association was presented to the Queen—but how do y ou opposition to the repeal of the Malt -tax. I would retire from vindicate the appointment of the Vice-President to this office? office rather than run the risk of inj ur i ng t h e pu b l i c credit. If you say that this appointment took place through negligence, What was the consequence ? Why, the moment that was and without inquiry, then I hold you only one degree less cul known, my friends, rallying round me, showed that confidence liable, for having neglected to inquire into the character of a in me which now. I am told, they will withdraw—(cheers) person before appointinghirn to an important office.—(Cheers.) _you, throwing into oblivion, as we would have done had our How can you vote for the discountenancing of Chartism, and for position been then, as they are now, reversed—you, forgetting the discountenancing of Socialism, when by the exercise of the ' all party motives when the interests of the revenue were con cerned—aidedins us, and so I- succeeded in maintaining the Malt- those doctre that you do not really wish to discountenanc e tax by an overpowering majority.—(Cheers. ) And such them ? I believe that you exert your authority, not for the might have been your success ; but you boldly and purpose of suppression, but for the purposes of lendingthem en unitedly declared that you considered the alteration of the couragement.—( Cheers.) I will ask now what is the state of Post-office revenucprejudicial to the public interest..—(Cheers.) _the country with respect to the means of repression ? You never sought for the decision of Parliament upon it; you ( Cheers.) What is the state of the militia law ? On what acted upon that principle which has been the ruin of this coun- ground do you vindicate the reduction of the yeomanry, with try. You acted from a d es i re o f conciliating support for a all the presages which you had of the coming disorders?— temporary occasion, and while your establishment s were in- (Cheers.) You may say that you consider the yeomanry a bad creasing, while the debt under y our ma nagemen t h a d increased, force to come into conflict with the people.—(Cheers from the you consented to incur the loss of 1,500,0001. -( Cheers. ) Ministerial benches.) 1 will not now enter into that question, Now let us look at your establishment. What were your pro- but you sent. for them to Newport —you sent for them to Bris fessions on entering and? —Certainly retrenchment formed tol—you sent for them to Nottingham, and you found their one o f th e principal gs, and you roused the country against usefulness on those occasions.—( Cheers. ) You say you are the Government of th e D u k e o f Welli ng t on and myself organizing a rural police.—( Cheers. 1 But would it not have upon th ea r. e • gro ) un You boastd of our waste of public money.— been bett er t o h ave retained your ot h er effective force, not for ( Hof peace at home and abr"ad, the purpose of bringing them into collision with the peg, lc, Ido not believe your esta.ashme n t s ar e too large, but when but as a resource to fall back upon in case of necessity until von you take credit to you rse l ves f or h av i ng p reserve d the peace of had some other effectual means of repression.—(Ch eers .) Europe, let m e exam i ne h ow i t i s t h at your esta bli s h ments Sir, as I see the Noble Lord is not in a condition to hear me, have been going on i ncreas i ng . Where is y our boast of office I shall say nothing of our foreign policy. [Lord Pal:nerston which requires ten or twelve sail of the line in the Mediterra- appeared to be asleep on the Treasury benchs, and the ob nean ?—( Cheers. ) Wh a t h as occas i one d t h e l a , ge increase in servation excited much laughter.] I know well that I must the establishments ? In 1835 the Army, Navy, and Ordnance answer the questions that have been put to me with respect Estimates were 11,4 00,0001. In 1836, while ou were i" to the pelicy that I shall pursue.—(Cheers. ) I am glad t o office, it amounted to 11,800,000/. In 1837 it hail increased hear that demonstration of impatience for my answer; it only to 12,194,000/. ; and in 1619 it had increased to 13,a60,000/. convinces me that I may expect your continued indulgence. —( Great cheers.) In 18.?5, when you took the administra- But, at the same time, in order that I may not detain o ur mote of affairs into yo ur own h an d s , w h en you promised to pro- House too long, I shall not enter on the questior of our mote peace and concord in this country, and when you said that foreign policy, merely stating that it must not be inferred from the name of England was so respected abroad, that the peace my silence that I acquiesce in the policy they have pursued. of Europe was safe—have you fulfilled those expectations There is one only question which I have regarded with deep You have increased the military establishments, and, I believe, anxiety. lam sorry to see . you in an irritable and uneasy most necessarily so. I will throw no odium upon you for that state with your powerful neighbour—the most powerful, so increase, but you have practically increased the military esta- far as regards your continental connexions, and upo n the blishments of tote country, which, at y our en t rance into office, maintenance of a good understanding with whom the peace amounted 14,430,000/. , and your yearly expenses for of Europe mainly depends. So far as one can judge of the that branch of establishment is now 13,5611,0001.—(Hear a public mind in France, although our relations are amicable in hear)--and this during a stat e o f p eace . Th e n let me ask appearance, I never saw so many symptoms of growing hostility what have you done for the reduction of the debt—do 7011 look and dissension in the great body of the people of France towards forward to the chances of war ? What have you done to- this country.—( Hear.) Sir, I deeply regret it, because in th e wards laying the foundation of a permanent income for such maintenance of a good understanding with that country, consist a chance ? Have you rid the country of any part ently, at the same time, with the maintenance of our honour, of its ineumbrances? You blame the Government and the exaction of a due attention to our just rights.--( Cheer.. of the Duke of Wellington and my Hon. Friend, the Member ing—upon the maintenance of that good understanding the for the University of Cambridge, yet in three years they redue• peace and the best interests of Europe depend—(Cheers.) ed the public debt—and that, before Reform was introdoced_ But I shall proceed at once to give an answer to the questions they reduced the public debt by 20,000,0001. , and they reduced put to me in such pointed terms with respect to the course of the charge upon that debt by 1,000,000/. per annum. T . y e was policy I m a y pursue,_ if called to office, up on certa i n of the done by the unreformed G overnmen t w hi c h was . I 's:e s ed greatest ouestions that can agitate the country. The Right with keeping up great establishments for the - par- lien. Gentleman who addressed the House last night flattered pose of patronage and corruption. This is a questioes touch me very much by the biographical memoir which he included more important than mere party discussion.—(Heal, hear, in his speech, and from which I must feel precluded from en hear.) In January 1831, your debt amouisSed to tering into any criticism. It appears rather singular, however, 783,000,000/., including funded and unfunded &eta and that at a time when the chief pressure was to defend himself annuities, the charge upon which amounted annually to he should hire considered me of such importance as to enter -28,349,0001. You have had the administration of the tain the House with the life and adventures of Sir Robert Peel. finances of the country since then have you redoced _( Cheers and laughter.) In the whole course of this debate the debt ? Tell me what progress you h ave ma d e i n th e reduc- the chief taunt thrown out to this side of the House is, that tion of the public charges? Why, Sir, in place of doing stiiyou whatever dissensions there may prevail in the opposite ranks, have positively increased the debt, and that during a state of there is much greater dissension here ; and it is said that it peace. On the sth of January, 1839, the debt amounts to more would be utterly impossible for me to conduct the Go than it did when you took the management of affairs. The vernment for a month without so much of dissatisfac charge upon the public debt was then 28,349,000/. What Lion—and I think the Right Honourable Gentleman said prospect have you given the country of relief? You have in- of disgust—that I must inevitably retire. It was also creased that charge by 1,000,0001., that charge now amounts said that I should be afraid of declaring the principles on to 29,300,000/. We reduced the capital of the debt in three which I would conduct the Government for fear of offending years by 20,000,000/. , and the annual charge we reduced by many of my present supporters.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, whatever 1,000,0001. In seven years, during which you have may be the consequence of a frank declsration of my opinions have had the administration of affairs, you have in- on points of public policy, I would rather incur it than attempt creased the capital of the debt, and - you have added to conciliate support by witholding my opinions —(Much 1,000,000/. to the annual charge, and all this when you cheering)—or by pretending acquiescence in sentiments which say profound peace was maintained. I beg pardon of the Ido not entertain.—( Renewed cheering. 1 The first question House for entering into those details—( Loud cheers)-abut II am asked is, what am Ito do with the question of privilege? know well enough that if Ido not, you will tell me that I have Two or three times that question has been asked. assigned no specific ground for withdrawing my confidence It has been said, "We will take the most recent from you, and lam showing that there are substantial grounds for instance that has occupied the attention of the House, the that line of cond uc t. C ompar i ng your conduct with that of other question of privilege. How would you deal with that? How Governments, I looked to the internal state of the country. would you contrive to form a united Government upon that Let us look at the progress of Chartism. Will you give me question? And when you have proposed your measures, how 'any reason for the progress of that great moral evil ? Let me call will you be able to give effect ? The first answer is, that, at your attention to the conduct of the Government of Eat]. Grey, least, I shall succeed in presenting the elements of a Cabinet, who in 1634 announced that. Political Unions were dissolved. which, on the question of privilege, will be unanimous. and I My firm belief is, that it is to the prevalence of the same prin- name my Right Hon. Friend, the Member for Cambridge, my ciples which led you to sacrifice the Post-Office revenue, and Noble Friend near me, Lord Stanley. my Right Hon. Friend, which, by constant eencesaons, have alienated from you the the Member for Launceston, who all take precisely the same support of those whose support you were chiefly desirous to re- view as I do of that question, and who may be inferred to tarn, that disquiet and disorder has arisen. —(Hear, hear, be members of a future Government, from my having pro and cheering.) Take the two great divisions of disorder posed them as members of the past.--( Hear, hear.) But in this country the Chartists and the Socialists. until this debate commenced, until I heard the speech of the Why have the Chartists been encouraged? Because you have Right Hon. Gentleman the Judge Advocate, I had been taught not shown sufficient promptitude in discouraging the principles t o consider the privilege question was not a party question._ by which Chartism has been excited. —(Cheers. ) The mo- ( Tremendous cheering.) It was very convenient in that de merit that you appoint a delegate of the Convention, or an bate to taunt me with my difficulties on the question of privi advocate of Chartism to the functions of the Magistracy, you lege, and the impossibility of my giving any effect to tend to delude the public mind.—(Cheers.) It is no excuse my views in consequence of the divided support I should to say that a Radical Corporation recommended the receive. Supposing I was placed in that position, how Magistrate.—( Hear, hear, hear.) It is no excuse to say would it differ from yours ? How could you have carried that he has acted vigorously and efficiently afterwards in the your question by the mere support of those who generally as maintenance of the public peace. Your selection of the man sist you?—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Before this de possessing those principles, in the name of her Majesty, and bate, before it was convenient to taunt me, did I not receive clothing him with the authority and functions of a Magistrate, an admission from the Noble Lord opposite, that without my does more to encourage these principles, whatever the aubse- aid he could not carry out his views ?—(Great cheering.) I quent activity of the Magistrate may be, than any other act. presume, from what has occurred, that the question of privi -( Hear.) You are abandoning the duty of a Government, lege has been made a Cabinet question. I know that you have which is necessarily the duty of control.—( Hear, hear.) It is long before this been forced to make it a Cabinet question. not your duty to lie seeking popularity by unjust concessions. You have called upon me to exercise the functions of a leader Ido not ask you to pass rigorous laws—l do not ask you to in the House of Commons, and attempt to rescue the House suspend the Habeas Corpus Act—l have every confidence in of Commons and the Courts of Justice from the difficulties of the native vigour and the loyalty of the people, and the position in which they are placed, by proposing some defi the ordinary law—(Hear, hear, hear)—but y ou must nite plan. You would not give me that advice, unless you olhowgeta salotermissestion aa. .exert those powers which made this a Cabinet question yourselves ; and as you have ;YOU have, eintl abcfve all, to discontinue agit a ti on .—( Ch eers. ) made it a Cabinet question, I see the same solution for my 'Above edo not 'admit into your Cabin e t hi m w h o thinks it difficulties, that you have proposed for yours.—( Loud cheers.) his duty to extol and encourage agitation.—(Hear, hear.) I submit this to you with perfect sincerity. I wish to co-ope- How is the ignorant man ta know where the agit a ti on i s rate w i thyou still in the maintenance of the p r i v il eges of t hi s to stop ?—(H ear, hear, hear)—says the Honourable and House; 1 suggest toyou a course which upon the whole I think Learned Gentleman , the Member for Dublin, ‘, I am the wisest to pursue ; I think there would be danger in sending for moral agitation ; " but then he says to his countryme n , up to the H ouse of Lords a Declaratory Bill, danger certainly a I solemnly p l e dge myself from this moment th e great b us i ness there would be in :ending up any other Bill ; but I think if the of my life shall be the pursuit of repeal—that struggl e shall ter- Lord Chancellor will come forward with an authority after such minate either in my death or my success." Why, s h all vein a communication to this House as will prevent all jealousy—if the Lord Chancellor will come forward and say this difficulty to talk to an ignorant and excited multitude, after combining them in oenos ition t o the l a w, th a t h e will exerc i se a control, requires solution, the House of Commons will not appeal to the and prevent m i sc hievous and misguided men from seizing on the Court of Law. If the Lord Chancellor will submit to the House g of Lords a Declaratory Bill containing the privileges of the instruments he has formed, transgressing the laws, and hurryin on to their own d es t ru ction !—( H ea r, h e ar. X What right have House of Commons, and then let that Bill be sent down to this y on t oo complain of Mr. Oastler ? I complain of him--. 1 sane- House, that will be a solution of the question. —(Hear hear.) tion no such agitation—l can conceive nothing megsa s ale- Ido therefore rejoice to hear that you have a united ' Cabinet chievous than the appeals he makes; but o bserve, you cannot upon this great question. The next question asked—it was limit agitation t o those questions, th e success o f which serves less a question than an accusation—that . I and other leaders your porpose s ._(Cheers.) Y o u canno t h ave t h e eagigatro . n . of . the . party, though we were acquitted of encouraging merely on your side. This and that other man avail tett agitation in respect of the . _Poor-la . ws, yet the Noble you, that they attach the same importa nce t o th e qualitions of Lord said we had only refrained from it. On the Poor-law which they are the advocates, that you do to the questions of Bill I gave y ou m y suppor t ; on th a t Bill , so far from showing which you are the advocates; that if a g it a t ion i s g oo d far your you a tendency to ob,truct useful measures, th at P oor-law Bill Purpose, it is good for theirs. And 111 r. Oastler will eivalicate you wou ld not h ave b een a b e to have carried unless I had his dangerous, and, as I think, wicked agitations by exactly taken the course with respect to it I did. If I had not the same principles on which you vindicate yours.—(Cheers.) taken that course, you would not have had the most remote If there is danger in his agitation, why is there not danger in chance of success. It has been said that I took every means yours ?— (Cheers.) (Cheers.) You say he has excited and inflamed the i n my power to pro fi t at my e l ect i on b y ma i nta i ning a silence 9 people against the Poor-laws.—( Hear, hear.) Suppose on t hi s subject. To that charge I give a most flat contradic hthinks the Poor-laws, as no doubt he will allege they den, and I say that that contradiction it is impossible to refute. are, a great grievance, a greater grievance than you think the On the hustings in 1837, at the commencement of the want of the Ballot.—( Hear, hear.) How can you deny him agitation, I was taunted by those whom I was addressing with agitation,nister, when agitation is permitted to you a Ca- h av i ng supporte d t h e P oor- l aw Bill . Did I say I was not re 'Mi binet or involve him in the conse quences sponsible for the Poor-law Bill? Did I shelter myself under of agitation, because he inflames the passions of a del u d e d any subterfuge? Certa i nly not. And, I would ask, what multitude, and leads them to violence ? I take the case of the course could any man take more effectual than the course I too k Socialists. Have you given them no encouragement ? Are for the purpose of marking to my constituents what my opinion you aware of the (Minions they formed ? This debate cob- was on th e P oor -l aw Bill ? Mi ne was among the earliest me aced by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Member for elections. I was addressing my constituents in the public Dublin asking you, the Secretary for Ireland, this qu e sti on — streets • and I said, without th e a id which was " Has Socialism extended in Ireland ?" That wa s w ith th e rendered to the Government, the institutions of the country view of showing the good sense and loyalty of the polite of Ire- would be overwhelmed with danger by the supporters of the land, at: he first commencement, at the first ingress of So- Government. Some one in the crowd here cried out —" Did cialism, repudiated it. A cheer followed, and credit was given you not support the Poor-law Bill?" I stated that 1 did, and to the people of Ireland, for this effectual discouragement. f urt h er , th at m y o pi n i ons on th a t su bj ect rema i ne d unchanged. Are you entitled to the Same complin.ent ? Is this House I stated further, that I did not support it for the purpose of re aware of the language of the advocates of Socialism ? during the rates, but because I saw the condition of the poor (Hear, hear, hear.) Vi ho are the two chi e f o ffi cers o f lowered b y the o ld system—that I wanted to see them raised tins Society, which professes to consider that the from the situation in which they were placed, of supporting greatest evils affecting our institutions are the existence of their families from the poors'-rates. I did not shrink, there private rights of property and the marriage s t a t e . I- h ave va - fore, from my share of the responsibility of a Poor-law Bill. ous extracts here, but I will not troule the House with Yet for the last two veers accusations have been made against reading them, but in the strongest terms the marriage core- me that I endeavoured to hide my opinion on the Poor-law for mony is denounced as an unnatural institution. I don't %1 ant electioneering purposes. Now, I think, in what ]have stated you to prosecute Mr. Owen, but I would ask, is there an im- I have clearly shown that I have left no step unturned to show partial man in this House, to whatever sect or party in this that I was determined to support a measure which I believed country he belongs, who would not in private admit that to would be productive of the best results. I have always been be a monstrous violation of decency and propriety ; and I do ready to vindicate the course I took on that measure, and to ask that the Prime Minister of England shall not pre s e n t t o ta k e my s h are i n t h e respons ibi l i ty o f i t, and by those the maiden Queen of England th e President of such a opinions I mean to abide. I believe the leading provisions Society.—( Tremendous cheering.) The Honourable and of the measure to be wise, and I have no wish whatever to re- Learned Member claimed credit, which I willingly give to trace my steps, with a view of resorting to the old order of the people of Ir e land f or excludi n g those mischievous things, which I believe to be contrary to every principle of hu and wicked doctrines—doctrines whi c h countenance, directly inanity and justice.—(Cheers.) With respect to the Reform countenance, infidelity, atheism—the destructi on of property Act, I must say that 1 abide by that Act. Then came a silly as an institution---the abrogati on o f th e solemn ti e of marriage; taunt about a new-born zeal for Reform. 1 sin ready to abide but if the simple-minded a n d ignorant then are entitl e d to by the Reform Act, became haying made a great constitutional credit for their instant and indignant rejection of such shame- change, of which at the time I disapproved, 1 believe that any ful doctrines, what think you of the Prime Minister, who pre- attempt to cancel it world be attended with a thousand times cents to the Queen the president and patron of the Socialists? greater evil than any advantage I could derive from it. Is it not So much for the President of the Socialists. Now, I wish to obvious, that having reformed the old system of corporate bo. put a question to the Government respecti ng th e Vi ce -P res i • roughs, I now may, without any compromise of opinion, be aiming dent.—(Cheers.) The Vice-P res id en t. o f t hi s i nst i tut i on is the most strenuous advocates reasons for de of the changes which Mr. Fair, of Birmingham— an d I fi n d th a t, i n t h e course of have been affected? I h ave additional 1833, Mr. Fair, being the Vice-President of the Congress of fending the Reform Bill, be cause I see the con s t ant Socialists, it was deemed expedi en t b y th e C ongress of Soc i al- efforts made on t h e part .of many of my opponents— ists to issue an address to th e G enera l C onvent i on of the La- of those who support the Government—to innovate ot for the purpose of amending homing Classes, at that time sitting in Birmingham. The on the Reform Act—nut vice-President of the Socialists moved that an address be pre enstitution.—( Cheers. ) I believe I will senteti to the Convention of the Labouring Men then sitting in elements into st ti the details, but m r e at c e: t f t or the purpose of introducing new lairiningliarre—( Cheers. ) This address appears to have been offer the r i ao • . effectual resistance to what is called improve_ st . em of progressive changes in the elementary presented, for I find Mr. Fair, the Vice-President, reporting to ments on i the Society of Socialists that the address had been presented to princip times Constitution, by firmly adhering, not, to every . y. letteran e i d; i detail of the Reform Bill, but by strenuously resist- the Convention, and that it had been received very courteously, imlua,ffvyreadtgreep—zifio,l)rraoQuilivatait‘lereniiial Parliament I slit lion. Gentleman opposite in his measurs fur the but very cautiously—that Mr. O'Connor had complimented the big the . s m eti ai D u ivo principlesn port eons Parliaments, and a ti ° Congress, and moved that it be received, as the Congress was extension h of the composed of men of high intellectual attainments, whilst Mr. tA iv , e t ryth l i n ng th w i l s deil m i and the Right lion. Gentleman the Judge-Advo- O'Brien, I suppose he means Mr. Bronterre O'Brien, had re- Act. premeditatedly loaded with scraps from commended that the address should be taken into coasideration e C a ti e rn-l e a o w m - s i?ng after the simultaneous meetings. I have shown thus that the Vice- , President atlas institution is Mr. Fair ; I have shown that Mr. l Devonporftonretwhe purposespapers,and of the extracts thataintracts f m roa t i v s o p p ee in c i h o e n s s o o f n a t i h r e . Fair moved that an address be presented to the Convention tiltl Dawson, one some great change. The Right sitting at Birmingham. Now, will die House believe that the Corn-laws have under ice- Hon. Gentleman says g : o h loi e fe at , heir have been hearetofoie precursors of changes of opinion that the speeches of Mr. Dawson Vice-President of the Congress of the Socialists— President of that Congress which cleclai ed as on say on my part. 1 tenets, that the marriage ceremony ought to be . d the had :Deg, however, to state, that I have never with, as an unnatural the House believe that recourse to those miserable expedients of putting out feelers d •t incs oc- with respect Vice-President of an association holding these oe r he ,_,L.c.. to any measures.—(Opposition cheers.) And , r Majesty's Government ?. T„I that, strange as it may appear, though I wrote to Mr. Dawson copies a plaee undcr he any ioteetion of at Devon or! i sident of the Institution, I believe, without p , yet I not only never permitted him to express ( Hear, hear) . — p mel ted to the • any opinion on my part with respect to the Corn-laws, but I countenancing the doctrine— I 3 L. holds office Vice-Pr esident Queen—(Cheers)—and the never mentioned, nor had I the slightest indication from him, (Continued cheering.) as the Amid her Majesty's C °moment. — _, of s _ r j to what were the opinions he maintained with respect to And what office do you supp _ gg, he holds? The office lire's- Corn-laws. I assure the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, trar of Marriages in Birmingham,—(lmmense cheering.) that when he found it conven i ent to c h ange his op inions, I Now, it appears to me, a more gratuitous insult mil .d not } never felt that, because he was the relation of the Noble which is likely te bel le _ be offered to the female part of society I Lord opposite, or of Earl Grey, that, therefore, Earl Grey or a t el . in the laws fit by the alterations which have been to , e.respecting , the Noble I.ord had changed their opinions on that tat officer as the iteeistrar o ' ' credit for being regis ' nation than by selecting tl . T , ceremony lio lit Ila that the marriage la •an una I allowed, though a relation of those noblemen, to veer. Marriages, w , s Now gas I have a rieli Right Honour natural tie.--(Loud cheers.) ,tto i cise his own independent opinion. The . , . office with d his know. Doss that, person hold this i your sauetion ? I able Baronet taunts Mr. Dawson with having ell:mgr.. .. . —(Loud cheer's.) 't he office for registration is in th e same ! opinion of the Corn-laws, because •he found it necessary house in which this congy . ess_o e l s .s i oc t a lists is held. Mr. !by that change to endeavour to secure his return. It may t have r acen o f Fair, who is the %I' - r the congress . been, for anything I know, a necessary proceeding onc par same time, the ) • Bon. Gent l eman's of Socialists is, at the s . Registrar of 'of Mr. Dawson; but I must say the liagi t Births arid Marriages. ' The office is in the :same house, ' change of opinion on the Ballot appears to have been evidently . a although 'not in the same room. Mr. Fair finds it necessary change to scenic that very object, - name ly, the success of his relinquish the einee of vi " - Pic , itlent, but at the same election at Da at than to have proceeded from any con to voilpo. , . was a vviae. needful time he continues a Member of the Board, and states that he viction in supposing that the Ballot and - ING .ED I^' ~~,~ s.: measure.—(Cheers from the Opposition Benches.) " was • never in favour of the Ballot," 'says the Right Hon. Gentleman, " and I still doubt its effivity ; but when my const i tuents came to me, and how can we be protected in the exercise of the franchise with out the Ballot, I could not answer that question, and I became a convert to the measure." That mode of conversion strongly leads to an impression that it took place without a view to I election interests. I hare assured the Right /lon. Baronet ; that n e t on l y w ith respect to the Corn-laws at Devonport, but what would surprise him more, perhaps, with respect to the Catholic question—l :assure him, en my honour, that Alr. I law son was never instructed by me to express any opinion on his own part or mine for the purpose of ascertaining the nature of I public opinion, and of communicating to the world any intended ; change on my part. I tell him more, 1 never resorted to such low means of guiding my public conduct. I hold myself responsible for any opinions I ever entertained, but I have never employed any other means to deliver my opinions, and I never will.— ( opposition cheers.) And therefore I tell the Right lion. Gentlemen that when he sees any relation of mine expressing his opinions, to infer that he did that without common eating with me. I should leave him—as I presume the Right Honourable Gentleman himself is left—to the ex ercise of his independent Judgment, without claiming of c e • t e .r n o s t o lh r , s b li e i tg ihe atto 'l at Right sh li sei e ,rreeitv ia,es, Right e i t o i e nu r a a oi l e .: Gentleman e o a v t e i r on hi g ni oi h a g ny s o a n r y i s g , , l . t i with th Baronet that I was not aware of the time the motion would be brought forward. I had no communication with any Friend of mine, and I beg to assure him that 1 have not advised Mr- Dawson on the subject. When I found that that Gentleman had expressed opinions on the Corn-laws. I must assure the Right Hon. Baronet, and fur the purpose of convincine the world, I will say, that I did not resort to a com munication with Air. Dawson. Mr. Dawson did not resort to any correspondenc e on the subject with me. 1 will put the point beyond the possibility of doubt. When I saw the inference drawn from Mr. Dawson's opinion w on the subject of the Corn-laws, I w rote him to say that I found certain inferences drawn as to my opinions, from some speech he had delivered, and that I thought it was of im portance, for the sake of the h C . a sodnnesolttii,vtaeuurttii authorised : n eh d ,ol ,be th y e (mj i p m ei n b it l o i o c e , sap, t e hat ha h it ad sh n ou o ld ref b e e ren k as he had done c . n ' eo ' wton ; m re ‘e' c ' e tah iv na e dt d his letter, which gives rue an op portunity, and gives me pleasure to be able to read an extract from it.—( Hear, hear.) He says, " I was surprised to see the manner in which a few words I uttered on the Corn-laws had been taken up ; and I h a d no supposition that my words would he used as they were. I was expressing my own opinions only. I saw. that those opinions would put me in opposition to the Conservative party. I thought I had said enough to avoid a misrepresentation on the subject." I now ask:the Right Hon. Gentleman whether I could have been making use of the speech of Mr. Dawson for the purpose of putting forward a feeler? As the Right Hon. Gentleman appeared to have some doubt on the subject I have given this explanation.—( Sir G. Grey here made some observation, which did not reach us, on a report in the News papers). Sir; R. Peel proceeded to say—l have nothing to do with the report. I only wish to show the House, as it abso lutely necessary that I should, that I have never employed, and that I never will employ, any man for me. I hold myself responsible for my opinions, and. I never will resort to such means of concealing them as the Right Honourable Gentleman has alluded to. With re spect to the Corn-laws ;I know that I shall be taunted that I made no declaration with regard to them. I say then at once I adhere to the opinions I expressed in a former debate on the subject. I did not say in that speech—and I presume no man could say that I could never be in favour of any alteration in the existing Corn-laws—but I say at the same ;time. I have no intention of changing the details of those laws, unless I should find good reasons for doing so.—( Hear, hear, hear.) I have no intention to change, but you. cannot, expect me to btnd myself down under all changes and all cireamstanees.— (Loud cheers.) But this I say, I agree with Lord Melbourne, and not with the Hon. Gentleman opposite. I think protec tion to the agricultural interest is absolutely neceisary, and I think that the principle of a graduated duty is better than a fixed duty, which, in my opinion, could not' be ascertained upon any satisfactory principle, and which, in a time of istareity, must at once be abandoned, and if once abandoned, could never be again imposed—( Loud cheers)—not binding myself to any definite plan, avowing myself to be unfriesdly to any change, and stating distinctly that I approve at t f thethe a principleaa e tim o e f a av thal v graduated ttam in ia preferencefavour o tot. a a fixed continuedduty, and effectual protection to the agriculturists.—(Cheers. ) I N vi o sh w, to S e i h r, te w r i i t a h to re a s l p i e t c h t e t a o e q t u he est s i u o b h jet s e ,ha of t if agitation.ldo not I I do Ihow no l t shall be taunted with having evaded that question, and of hav ing evaded giving my opinion upon great public questions. Then, Sir, with respect to education, I adhere to the principle stated by me last year.—(Loud cheers.) I am adverse to your scheme, and do every thing in my power to give effect, and I believe I do niore than many of the noisy declaimers for education, for I give my personal and effectual encouragement to it in my limited sphere. I feel deeply, and I shall always contend that the education in this country, for the members of the establishment, 'tight to be founded upon the doctrines of the Established Church. Yon must not even appear to weaken or impair its efficiency by ap pearing fo tolerate it merely as a legal establishment Which you cannot dispense with, but which you would. So far from taking from the schools the support of the Established Church, I would attempt to add to the efficiency of them, and maintain the authority of the Church by requiring from the Church its proper duty, the effectual superintendence of, and control over those schools. Ido not, Sir, claim for the Church any eon trol over the general education of the country--I do not put forth any such c l a i m . I w ill not refuse —nay, I join in the principle—and I consent to a id i n the education of those who dissent from the Church, but I will not attempt, in order to setup a common education—l will not make any compromisn'of the doctrines of the Church, or exclude ministers of the Church from that proper superintendence, from the fear of offending those who separated themselves from the Church. It is the duty of Parliament to uphold all those schools connected with the Establishment, and make them efficient, by calling in the spiritual aid of those who are the natural guardians of the schools, as belonging to the Church. I call their aid and as sistance, in order to give effect to the religious educmico which I would give to all. Now, Sir, 1 come to that topic which I would reserve to the last—the Catholi c question and, the State. Sir, I will have no reserve on this question. I am asked whether I agree with those who countenance the notion of the repeal of the Emancipation Bill? I confess, Sir, that have hitherto not condescended to answer that question. have never thought it becoming my dignity to state whether 1 contemplated the repeal of the Emancipation Bill. I want to know whether there is any one man living who ought to have a more lively interest in the good working of that , Bill or any one who ought to view with greater pain any obstacleslo the satisfactory and conciliatory working of . that measure. lam asked whether I repent of the share I took in the passing of that Bill, and that because some person at some pliblie meet ing said be very much cloirbted whether Sir Robert Peel did not repent of the share he took in the paising of the'Einivaci pation Act. My repentanearmust arise from the inOtiverunder which I acted at that period. Now, Sir, as to my; motives, I will most candidly say, that if there is one virtnont ant which I have ever performed, it was the passing of that Act.--(Loud cheers.) As far as making sacrifices in the Feerform ance o f a duty. the most pitiful sacrifices I theu made. 1 then suffixed the alienation of friends—the disruptionof Tamil) ties—the dissolution of party connections, the certain loss of power. All this I suf fered, so that, so far as motives are concerned, no man ever made such sacrifices as I did.—(Cheers.) (Here the' Hon. Baronet became much affected.) I have lived indeed to see the day when insinuations are uttered of my having opposed Emancipation so long as it was profitable, and of my having assented to it when it became necessary for the retention of power. I was perfectly certain that the part I took in the pass ing of the Emancipatioe Act must necessarily dead to the alienation and loss of confidence of my friends, and, certainly, ultimately to my removal from office. But now, as far as results are concerned, this I may say—you may talk as you please of results—the passing of the Emancipation Act was in evitable.—( Hear, hear.) It was impossible to resist it—im possible. Whoever these results may have disappointed-- and for myself I profess never to have been sanguine— it was upon a balance:of dangers, seeing Governments divided, seeing Parliaments divided, seeing the House of Commons had in four Parliaments out of five recognised the principle of Roman Catholic Emancipation ; finding myself in a minority, I came to this resolution, that it was utterly impossible with reference to the public safety, or to the interests of the Established Church, it was was utterly impossible to continue this opposition, when the public mind of Protestant:England was united to the Catholic mind and the great strength of numbers in Ireland it favour of the the Roman Catholic Emancipation.—(Cheers.) But what course did I pursue ? I did contemplate retirement from office, and serving my country in opposition. It is said that I provoked the detest and disgust of my friends by concealing from them my intentions. Sir, I never up to this hour have noticed those taunts. It is perfectly true that disaffection—l will not use the stronger term, disgust—but I do believe that disaffection and alienation of my valued friends, arose less from my seeing the rumen. sity of emancipation, or from the mode in which it was carried, than f.om the appearance of concealment of intention. Allow me to say now that these arc becoming matters of history—that of ray whole course on the Catholic question 1 am content to bear the obloquy, from the perfect certainty the time must come when every_ thing connected with that event must be known—when the tempo rary mist shall bedispelled by the force and light of day. Now, Sir, as to the concealment, these are the facts. I never knew till within a month before I brought forward the Catholic Question—[ never knew, nor did my friend, the Noble Duke know, that we should be authorised to submit that measure. It is perfectly notorious that there was on the part of his Majesty a strong disincliaation to the passing of the Bill. We submitted our advice that it was ins , possible, with our sense of public duty, to continue op position to those claims—that there ought to be a united Government either to carry the measure, or to resist it, but that with our sense of public duty, a Governinint 'fotmed on the principle of resistance it was impossible for tis';to' maintain. First we had permission to consider the queetion in the Cabinet impossible for we had not pertnission to bring it forward a s a G overnmant meo snres'innetthiedrenstnillty I t ' i e i n l i i i i i s " l% i' ;a n j , : t s o ly c — on i s t n w le a t s l t t it ii t i e t rl h y a Cabinet' atop me to declare to my friends the course I meant to pursue--I had no authority to state what was to be brought forward. So uncertain were we as to the authority which we should have to bring forward the qpestion, that on the night on which I brought it forward—that is to say, DTI the . Sth of March—that is on the preceding day, the Duke of 'Wellington, Lord Lyndhurst, and myse:f retired from Windsor Castle out of office, and waited upon his Majesty, who had declined to give him au' hority to bring the subject forward as a Government mea suse, and we told his Majesty that we should feel it our • duty on the next day to declare before Parliament that we no longer held office, and his Majesty accepted our resignations. So that on the night preceding the bth of March, my friends and myself were out of otlice, iu ccu►equcuce of our not obtaining the authority we asked fur to bring forward the Catholic question.—(Hear, bear.) In the course of the night I received the authority. It was that night not an open question, but a Cabinet question. On the neat day I proceeded in the fulfilment of my intentions, and prefaced my speech by stating that I did it with:the full authority of his Ma jesty. Now, under those circumstances, how was it possible to make any public declaration to the party to whom I belonged as to the course I intended to pursue ?—(Hear, hear.) Sir, I need hardly say that if I thought the passing of the Emanci pation Act necessary I must consider the repeal of it u the wildest scheme that ever was imagined. The repeal of the Emancipation' Art I Why, do you suppose you could stop there ?—(Hear, hear, (tear.) The repeal of the Emancipa tion Act would leave the Roman Catholic in the posseesion of the franchise, in the possesson of all those powers and privileges the possession of which lead to the removal of their grievances.— (Hear, hear.) It is needless to proced to a re-consideration of this question. Every man who knows the constitution of Ireland must know that to dream of the repeal of the Emancipation Act is to dream of a division which never can take place.—(Cheer•) As, then, the Emancipation Act is not to be repealed, ought it to be fairly and honestly carried out ?—(Hear, hear.) My answer is this: I think it should be.—(Cheers.) But I am holding no opinion on this subject. lam told again that I created illusion— that I permitted persons to talk ot th; repeal of the Emancipation Act, and to make objections to the appointment of Rortian Catholics without lilting up my voice. Where am Ito left up iny voice? —(Cht.ers.) What did I say cn the subject of the Etnand• patio!' Act in the course of last year P Could I speak more explicitely than I did P I said then, that " I think, as the law has decreed civil equality to all classes in , Ireland, without reference to religious distinction, the Crown ought set, by;tho In tetf.rence of its prerogative, to create practically a Vlcreuoa which the law does not recognize. The Crown one+ to act_ on the principle of the law, and not make the religions.Opinioni • on' man the ground of any disqualification from office." , have never taunted the Noble Lord for selecting ilosr..l. raft,- t