The Press.
London, England, 1858-03-20 00:00:00

270

member, " What are you going to do about the Jew Bill."
I reply, what did your Government do ? You respect par-
liamentry majorities ; you were proud of the majority you
had upon the measure to which I have always given a
cordial support, but what was wanted from the late Govern-
ment was support in the House of Lords, where the diffi-
culty arose, and what did we find there? We found a
member of the Government in that house always voting
against the measure, which had been carried in this house
by large majorities. ( Hear, hear.) Therefore, sir, this
is not tlie only Cabinet in which differences of opinion
exist, even upon the Jew Bill. ( Hear, hear.) Then, again,
how did the hon. gentleman and his friends act upon the
ballot question? We had a division upon that question
last session, and I want to know how the late united Govern.

meat—whose members all held the same views upon
the same subjects, or who ought to have done so—
how they voted upon a question so interesting to all sincere
and earnest reformers ? T find that upon the 30th of last
June the subject of the ballot came before this house, and
a division took place. I find the Prime Minister, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, the President of the Board
of Control, and other members of the Government voted
in the majority against the ballot. But in the minority I
find the names of a nobleman holding office in the House-
hold, of the Attorney• General, of the Vice-President of a

Board, and the distinguished Secretary for the Admiralty
(" Hear, hear," and a laugh) —that distinguished individual
who is uow alarmed at the prospect of a Cabinet being in
existence which is not of the same mind upon all questions
that can possibly be brought under the consideration of
Parliament. (Cheers.) Now, I think the course that was
taken by my noble friend in another place was a much more
judicious course than that which should have been pursued
according to the views of the hon. gentleman—viz., that a
Minister should state a formal programme of meas'tres
which are never carried, and elaborately develop a policy
which a deluded people afterwards finds to be barren of all
results. I think it is much better when the general
principles of a political connection are known that the
Government should bring their plans before Parliament
than that they should simply give the house a long cata-
logue of measures which are never to be passed and vague
announcements of a policy to which no one can attach a
practical or precise idea. ( Hear, hear.) We represent the
Conservative party. We wish to support and maintain the
institutions of the country, but we also wish to improve
them. (Hear ) We believe that the best way to maintain
the institutions of the country is to improve them when
improvement is necessary, and therefore we can't permit
the hon. gentleman to be such a monopolist of all plans for
the amelioration of society as he and his friends on all
occasions, in a manner so greedy and covetous, aspire to be
considered. ( Hear, hear.)

Sir, it is entirely in adherence to those views that we in.
tend to introduce that India bill to which the hon. gentle-
man has referred with so much spirit. I deny that there
is the slightest inconsistency on our part. ( Hear, hear.)
On the contrary, at the right time I will be prepared to
maintain that our course will be consistent with itself and
satisfactory to the country. 1 never said, nor do I now say,
that this course is taken in deference to the majority of this
house. Majorities of this house are always to be respected,
but not always to be obeyed with servility. When the bill
of the noble lord was opposed, it was on the ground that
i t the present state of India it was rnwise to weaken the
i ifluence of the Government in that country while the revolt
still raged; but what is the character of the influence of
the East India Company after the vote of this house ?
The Company by that vote has been placed in such a position
that we believed it was our duty to deal with a question
which having once been toueleil could no longer be tam.
p red with. ( Hear, hear.) The measure which we have pre-
pared we will introduce before the Easter recess. ( Hear,
hear.) I think the house will admit that as we have satis-
factorily settled the question which immediately called for
our decission, and are prepared before Easter to bring in
a bill to deal with the East India Company, we have not
been idle, but have exerted ourselves to deserve the confi-
dence of our Sovereign, of the country, and of Parliament.
( Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman has also adverted to
a subject on which some years ago he used to be extremely
happy when it was a fruitful theme; he has referred to
Ireland, and asked what our policy will be. There was a
time when the Irish question excited all the acerbity of
political passions—when the Irish policy was sure to lead
to inflammatory debates. No one was then more happy
Cian the late Secretary of the Admiralty in so irritating
questions of an irritable natnre to a climax, that we could
p it but laugh, even in all the acerbity of party bitterness.
It is long since the Irish question has been a source of dis-
turbance; but as the hon. gentleman has asked what is our
Irish policy, I may say that our policy will be such as was
pursued by Lord Eglintoun fiveyears ago. He again fills the
same high office, he is animated by the same feelings, and
will be guided by the same instructions. I hope he will
attain the same result, and that Ireland, under his influence,
will continue to be as good-tempered and as prosperous as
she is at present. ( Hear.) The hon. gentleman has asked,
What will you do about the Orange magistrates? you
mean to make Orangemen magistrates? I am not en
Orangeman, but circumstances over which we could have
no control have led to the institution of Orange societies;
they did not spring out of nothing—circumstances must
have called for their formation ; we must deal with the
establishment as we find it, and if the hon. gentleman
wants me to pledge the Government to the declaration
that, because a man is an Orangeman, he shall not be
made a magistrate, I, for one, cannot assent to anything
so essentially unconstitutional. ( Hear.) There ought to be
no disqualifications for a magistrate except those which the
laws of the United Kingdom proclaim and define. ( Hear,
hear.) If an Orangeman ought not to be a magistrate the
proper plan would be to bring in a bill to declare so, but
nothing can be more unjust or unconstitutional than to
make the qualification for an office of trust dependent on
the caprice of a political officer, instead of the Fold-