The Express.
London, England, 1852-03-16 00:00:00

LONDON, TUREIDAT, MARCH 16.

LAST night, the DERBY ministry came fully and
fairly upon the parliamentary stage. The first flush
of suoccas—the need for getting into their new
' position—and the delay necessarily arising from the
its-election of those members of the House of Com-
mas who wars named to the new government,
amid a esetain amount of delay, and gave a season
at breathing these to the men who must have been
astseished by their sudden accession to office. The
peopkwho regarded the recent change of ministry with
more indifference than the whigs could desire, were
yet enough on the alert to re-establish an organisation
laid by long since from a belief that such means
were no longer needed. The fact of these re-
organisations was almost the only real proof of poli-
tical excitement. All waited to see what Lord
DERBY would do, or propose to do. The fact of the
installation of a DERBY Ministry wee regarded as
sufficient evidence that free-trade and liberal pro-
gress needed watching, and reformers and fire-
traders showed that their beliefs were ready to
expand into active political operation. Still, all
waited for last night, as it were, for the word of
command for future operations.
The House of Commons last evening was very full.
The tones mustered in unusual force. It was a
nevelt) for them to be on the ministerial benches,
and they seemed to like their new quarters. It felt,
doubtless, like a return of the old times, when their
party had all their own wayandthe people were pooh-
poohed. The proceedings commenced with a great fire
of questions. Mr. Heim., ttwished to know if the new
CHANCELLOROf the EXCHEQUER meant to tax coals
—as had been alleged—and Mr. lksitsem, not wish-
ing, after all that has been said on the subject, to levy
an impost on that necessary of life, declared his com-
plete innocence of any such intention. Mr. WILSON
asked Sir J. PAKINOTON about sugar; and another
hon. member inquired of the new Secretary of
the Colonies his present convictions on the subject
of beer ; and this and other such preliminary fencing
—all told in our parliamentary columns—made up
the prologue to the serious drama of the night. The
real fray was began by one of the members for Man-

cheater readings petition of the Chamberof Commerce
of that city against any interference with the free.
trade policy that had been adopted by the country.
This ended, Mr. VILLIERB stated his case, and_
without any showy pretensions to oratory—he went
on with his statement until the real greatness of the
question, the importance of the facts he had to
muster, the real immensity of the stake at
issue, the proofs that demonstrated the advan.
tages of our present system, the array of illus-
trations presenting themselves to show how emu.
pletely freedom of commerce had tended to increase
employment, to diminish want, to lessen pauperism
to Increase the comforts of the industrious poor, to
leave for large =ameba margin beyond the claims of
mere existence for expenditure upon comforts and
even luxuries from which revenue was derived—all
these points came so abundantly, yet so quietly and
unprctendingly into his discourse, that the hushed
and crowded assembly listened to every sentence th.it
he uttered, and his mild voice filled the whole house
so completely, that every word seemed appreciated.
He concluded by asking the new CH/int:mos of
the ExcuatreEtt whether they intended to interfere
with free•tradel)

Mr. DISH Mil rose to make his first speech as a
minister. lie had a great tusk un hand. lie knew
he was one of a ministry of a minority, and he knew
also that the opposition demanded a clear answer to
their question—" What Lord Denav meant to do ?'
And here his difficulties arose. If the ministry, of
which he is a leading member, knew themselves to
ho in a majority, his course would have been clear
enough. But they knew the very reverse, and uuwil.
ling to succumb to the constitutional neeteeities of
such a position, Mr. Disnaltia had on hand the task
of answering a plain question in a way that it
should stop present inquiry, and yet be as doubtful
an answer as might be. to this task he addressed
himself; but ho stuttered and stumbled, and got
himself into a tangle of involved sentences, from
which it required all the tact and talent of
his race and of his literury training to get
him free. lie talked, and yet said nothing in
express terms: and those who listened had to unravel
the tangled skein of words in which he sought to
make as little as possible seem all that could Le
told. The calm facts of his free-trade antagonist
seemed to challenge him to nn equal calmness and
clearness of reply, and, feeling this, he talked again
and again of answering " freckly " that whirl, the
house and the country demanded to know of himself
and his colleagues. But his frankness was foggi.
ness—his explanations were riddles. Through
the haze one thing was discoverable, and that one
thing is enough for the solution of the difficulty on
hand. Mr. Dlsites.t.t, in truth, echoed what Lord
DERBY had previously told—that the ministry of
which he is a member will not tale, timing the
existence of the present parliament, any step fur
carrying out those views on which they have risen
to power. Nor will they say that, in another
parliament--come when it may—they will be
prepared to stand by any defined policy. They
have obtained place as protectionists. Yet they
refuse to avow protection—not from any want
of desire for re-enforcing a tax on the food of
the people, but because they know that the avowal
which common honesty requires them to make
would shorten their tenure of office. Protectionists
at the hustings; protectionists in their alliance with
any and every section who were ready to damage
the Whig free-traders ; protectionists when they voted
with Lord PALMERSTON to upset Lord Jan hrs.
SELL, they now—in a drawn House of Commons
contest—refuse to avow protection. They tenet, and
beat round about the bush, and talk their given
quantity of words by the House of Commons' cluck,
but straightforward explanation does not suit them.
And the reason 'shy, Lord Jolts lit:sr-ELL, with his
long knowledge of partisan tactics, explained.
The protectionists arc in heart and truth,
as a body, as determined as ever to levy
black mail on the bread and the industry of the people
of this country; but if they consented to raise
their flag in this parliament—if they explained
before the coming dissolution anything on which
the adverse parties could go to the hustings
—on that explanation the coming elections would be
fought. If they avowed protection, the voters might
decide whether they would have a free-trader or a pro-
tectionist, and the new parliament would so far be
an honest one. Such a reference to the com-
mon sense and the feelings and the pockets
of the country, the DERBY ministry do not want.
They will postpone the dissolution to the latest pos-
sible moment, but when it does come they want to
go "unpledged" to the poll. They wish to leave the
whole question to the "fortune" of many doubts and
a full purse at the Carlton. Giving now no pledges
and no explanations, the county members can
go to the counties swearing by protection, and
on that they may get their seats in the
new house ; whilst the borough members may
with equal freedom go to the towns and say " Lord
DERBY and the ministry to which I ant attached, say
nothing of protection'—protection is gone." In
both cases the tones, by their present plans, may play
the game of false pretences at the election %hick
must conic soon—if the reformers let them. Happily
this parliament -has yet enough of vitality to give
scope for a full and clear declaration of
principles, and it is clearly the duty of
honest men of all parties to see that before parlia-
ment is dissolved there shall be such a declaration
of views by each political section as shall make
the course of the constituents clear in the coming
struggle. Every member of the present parliament
should be compelled, preparatory to a dissolution, to
speak out plainly. " Under which King, Bezosisx,
—speak or die." Let us at least know who are re-
, formers, and who arc not—who would tax food,
to raise rents—and who they are that prefer re-
action to progress—and since the ministry will not
explain themselves on fair solicitation so to do, it
becomes the duty of their opponents to obtain, by
compulsion, what is refused to courtesy, to reason,
and to constitutional requirements.