The Press.
London, England, 1858-03-06 00:00:00

THE SECRETARY FOR THE COLONIES.

KING'S LYNN.—Lard Sumley, NI P., Secretary of State
for the Colonies, was re-elected for Lynn on Thursday
last, without opposition. The noble lord, who was re-
ceived with great cheering, adc'ressed the electors at
some length upon the political questions of the day.
Alluding briefly to the few measures brought forward
in the last session, Lord Stanley said that three
great questions occupied the public mind at present—
viz., the future government of India, parliamentary
reform, and our relations with foreign powers. The
transfer of the government of India from the Com-
pany to the Crown he looked upon as a necessary
consequence, as the legitimate and natural conclu-
sion of former measures, and that whether the effect
would be good or bad it. was a result out of our
power to control. Lord Stanley did not enter into
any detail of the measures about to be proposed ;
hut, with respect to the religious aspect of the ques •
tion, expressed a decided opinion in favour of a strict
religious neutrality. On the subject of parliamentary
Norm, Lord Stanley reowlied

I believe there is no statesman now, in whatever
of either house he may sit, who considers or calls the
Reform Reform Bill of 1832 a final measure. ( Hear, bear
one denies that some modification of that hill is re.ut q •
But having said that, I am bound to add that the
con.
duet of public men—and perhaps I may say of Parr.
meat itself—upon the question of representative reform
has not been altogether satisfactory. It is now just seven
years since Lord J. Russell promised a new Reform Bin
and, as far as one can judge, we do not seem to be nearer
the result now than before. Considering the length of
time during which this question has been, as it were,
hung up, and considering—what I believe none of yet;
will doubt—the utter unexpectedness of the events which
have brought the present Administration into power, I
think you will admit that it would be acting unreason.
ably to call upon the members of the Government, en•
gaged as they must be both in parliamentary and in depart.
mental duty, to frame a plan for the alteration of the
constitution of the country during the present session. I
do not think it is too much, considering the magnitude of
the change, considering that every step which you take in
such a matter is one that cannot be retraced, to ask fur
that amount of delay. Bat I do not hesitate to repeat
here and now what I said upon a former occasion.
think that in our present parliamentary constitution
there are anomalies removable by legislation, and anima.
lies of which the evil is not merely theoretical, but result;
in practical abuse. I think that the excessive value which
belongs to every single vote in very small constituencies
has a direct tendency to produce corruption. Heir,
bear.) I think that many districts of this country have
reason to believe that they have not their adequate share
of representation. ( Hear ) Although that state
things has arisen rat her from accident than fiom any
settled purpose, it is doubly unfortunate, because, apart
from the practical inconveniences which it causes, it pr ).
duces a suspicion—an unfounded, but, nevertheless. s
very general suspicion—that our present representation
is arranged in such a manner as to be rather delusive
than real. But the whole subject is full of difficulty—
difficulty which seems to increase in magnitude the
more one considers it. Any plan that is proposed
requires care and consideration, and I think, there-
fore, the demand which we make for time will not be held
unreasonable. There is just one word of explanation
which I should like to offer upon this subject. If any mo-
lions are made suggesting this or that partial alteration in
the franchise, and not dealing with the subject as a whole,
I repeat to you now, what I said befare, that I shall be
bound to give my vote against any such propositions. I
shall do so, not as necessarily condemning the proposals
themselves, but simply because we should refuse to con-
sider in a fragmentary and partial way a question which, to
be dealt with effectually, should be dealt with as a whole.
( Hear, hear.) It is quite idle to suppose that a question
involving such important interests can be discussed with-
out a certain amount of excitement, and even of asperity.
But I am confident that whatever discussions may take
place on the subject, either in the present or in any future
session of Parliament, will be carried on in a very different
temper and with very different feelings from those of
twenty-five years ago. I say that not merely on account
of the gradual approximation of opinion among leading
public men, which is one of lie most remarkable political
phenomena of our time, bat also because I think—and you
will not, I am sere, misconstrue what I say—the question
itself has lost a portion of the importance which it for-
merly possessed. Fifty years ago Parliament had an
almost exclusive power of forming public opinion upon all
questions of the time. That state of things has changed.
The vast development of the power of the press during
the last quarter of a century has introduced into modern
politics an entirely new element. ( Hear, hear.) It is
impossible to sit in Parliament without seeing how far and
to how great an extent modern journalism affects even our
parliamentary debates. That power of the press is in it-
self a representation. (Hear, hear.) It is the best pro-
tection. as I believe, of the poor and the humble against
the powerful. It is a protection which no legislation
created ; it is a protection which no legi-lation can take
away ; and it is not one of the least subjects of satisfaction
to we, looking b .ck at the few years which I have passed
in public life, to think that I was one of those who took
part in a measure—l mean the removal of the stamp
duty—which has given an increased development to
journalism, and of which we have seen as yet only a
small portion of the effects. (Hear, hear.)

Lord Stanley then came to the question of our
foreign relations, and especially those which we
held with France. A close and intimate alliance
between England and France he held to be essential
to European civilisation :

We are locally too near, we are too important among
the nations of the world, we have been too long and too
often rivals, to make a state of indifference possible-
We want a close and intimate friendship as a guarantee
against national jealousy and rivalry. (Hear, hear.) That
a war between the two nations would be the worst evil
that could afflict humanity is a proposition which, I think,
needs no words to prove ; but I will go further, and say
that a disunion between the two countries, falling short of
war, would be in itself a great misfortune to Europe. It
would leave European diplomacy without guidance, and
.
the weaker and inferior nations without an arbiter. for
is this al. In every age that old question of the balance
of power " assumes a new form. That question no longer
concerns Western Europe alone. Two empires are
springing up in the east and in the west ; they are ahead. y
of first-rate magnitude, and both of them are increasing
—not mainly or necessarily by aggression upon others,
but simply by natural means—at a rate of progress which
far exceeds that of our-elves. Looking
merely at the
matter of population, it is impossible not to see that.
unless some unforeseen events take place, Ametica and
Russia will 100 years hence, perhaps evert ft yews

MIL

bence, be numerically the most powerful empires upon
the globe, I say numerically, and of course in that
reckoning I do not include India, because it can hardly
be considered an element of strength in respect of popu•
'Aim. Now, of both these great empires I speak with
so feeling of jealousy ; 1 speak of them both with respect ;
I speak with sincere admiration and sympathy;
as society is constituted, it must happen that
independent still,dten peentent nations will have different interests. A
position of inferiority is never satisfactory, and it is not
always even safe. What I say therefore is, that if
Western Europe—at this moment the very focus and
centre of civilisation throughout the world—is to bold
its own—is to hold in another generation the place which
it occupies in the present, it must be by a cordial and
friendly union among its leading powers. ( Hear, hear.)
Such, gentlemen, is to us the value of the alliance with
FralCe.

Lord Stanley briefly recapitulated the leading inci-
dents of the attempt of the 14th January, traced the
conduct of Lord Palmerston's Administration, and
explained its overthrow. The question than re-
mained, what course of action did the present Go-
vernment intend to follow with respect to Lord
Palmerston's Conspiracy Bill :

To that I answer, we are in no sense pledged to the bill
brought forward by Lord Palmerston, and with that bill we
have nothing to do. Whether any change in the law of
England he required is a matter in dispute among lawyers.
Lord Campbell, one of the greatest living authorities, says
that no change is required, and that the powers of the
common law are sufficient. I hope, and shall be glad to
believe, that be is right; but that is a question which will
probably soon receive an authoritative decision, for it is
one which must probably be raised and decided in the
course of some proceedings now pending; and until it is
so raised, and so decided, it is impossible to give any deci-
sive reply to the question as to what we intend to do. Of
this only I am certain, that if it should be necessary to
frame any measure for the repression of attempts at assassi-
nation, which I think—at all events, I hope—ia unlikely,
it will be a measure, not founded upon the demands of
even a friendly power, but based solely and simply upon a
sense of what is required to make all residents in England
amenable to the law of England, to that law which, while
it affords them the protection and the rights of citizens,
expects from them that obedience and duty which citizens
are bound to render. ( Hear, hear.) Above all, gentlemen,
never dream that at any time, under any Minister, there
can exist even a question of surrendering—nay, nor even
of modifying in the minutest degree that right of asylum
which has been through all ages our proud prerogaive,
and which has been claimed, and claimed successfully, by
a candidate for the Imperial throne of Napoleon, by two
members of the house of Bourbon successively, expelled
by an indignant people, and by another class of exiles, men
varying no doubt in character and in shades of opinion,
but men by a great majority of whom I am well convinced
no sympathy ever has been or can be felt with assassins or
assassination—(cheers)—men who have left home and
friends and property, and have fought and would have died
for a hope which failed them, and for an idea which they
could not realise, but a hope which, even in failure, was
noble, and an idea which at least was unselfish. (Cheers.)
Honour, I say, to the victims of political conflict, be they
whom they may—honour to conrar, to self-sacrifice, and
to misfortune, fur in self-sacrifice conscience is honoured,
and it is that firm persistency in political convictions
which we respect in others that to Englishmen has been
the permanent security and the truest guarantee for their
national rights and their constitutional freedom. (Cheers. )
I say, then, you need have no fear, whoever may conduct
the government of this country, that that right of asylum
'hall be in any degree diminished. Whatever mistakes and
misapprehensions may have been produced by the docu-
ment to which I have referred will, I hope, be removed by
a friendly and temperate reply, and in the meantime we
are not prepared to introduce any change into our law
until we are well satisfied by actual right that the present
law as deficient for the purposes of justice. (Hear, hear.)