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

269

Mr. OSBORNE : I bow at once to what you have laid down
as the law, but it is the first time I have ever heard it
enunciated. (Oh, oh ! )

It was said that Lord Derby would take up the
India Bill, bowing to the opinion of the majority of
the house. What hypocrisy ! Did Lord Derby pay
the same reverence to the admission of the Jews,
carried over and over again by numerous and over •
whelming majorities? Mr. Osborne then referred to
the " conflicting opinions " on the Ministerial bench
on the subjects of church rates and education, and a
new Reform Bill :

The right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer said the late Reform Bill was a gross Whig job.
(Ministerial cheers and laughter.) Yes, but how will the
right hon. gentleman reconcile this with the language of
one of the makers of the Reform Bill, Lord Derby, who
said that it adequately represented the property, intelli-
gence, and feelings of the country ? I want to know, then,
what sort of measure we may expect ; for I cannot believe
that the Government intend to carry out the Reform Bill
sketched by the last representative of the late Mr. Feargas
O'Connor in this house—l mean the present Attorney-
General for England. I wish to know what are the princi-
ples on which the Reform Bill is to be founded—whether
on the principle of rational Toryism, as expressed by the
noble lord (John Manners), or on the extreme Chartist
principles enunciated by the Attorney General? It is true
that we have had the speech of the noble member for
King's Lynn ( Lord Stanley), who is, I believe, a true and
rational reformer. But he occupies a very peculiar posi-
tion in the Cabinet—a position which I think we should
all honour; but, at the same time, I very much doubt
whether this Reforming iEneas will be able to carry the
Conservative Anchises. No, sir, I much fear that he will
find some Dido of Conservatism to olAtruct him in carry-
ing out his good principles. Well, then. I think lam
justified in asking what is the policy which her Majesty's
Ministers mean to pursue ?
The late Sir Robert Peel, when adopting the mea-
sures of his opponents, had been denounced as the
head of an organised hypocrisy, and accused of
stealing the clothes of the Whigs whilst they were
bathing. He was the man who bamboozled one
party and plundered another, obtained a position be
was not entitled to, and then carried out no party
questions, but fixity of tenure. Was that to be the
cry now ?

For my own part I am indifferent to mere party cries.
( Ironical cheers and laughter.) But I at the same time
hold that they who when in opposition honestly advocate
certain measures, ought to deem it to be their duty when
in office honestly to carry those measures into effect.
(Cheers.) lam not aware that that is a proposition from
which any hon. gentleman in this house is prepared to
dissent, and of this I feel assured, that any Minister who
assumes the reins of power by a discreditable manceuvre—
( cries of " Oh, oh ! " and cheers )—will advance neither
his own cause nor the interests of his country.
The CHPLNCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that one
of the advantages arising from the recent change in
the Government was that some voices, which had
for a long time been silent, again sounded within
those walls. (Cheers and laughter) :

I for one must confess that when I listened on Friday last
to that wild shriek of liberty which proceeded from the
hon. gentleman who has just spoken it was with no feeling
of alarm or mortification. (Renewed cheers and laughter.)
lie will, however, permit me to observe, now that I have
had once more the advantage of hearing his remarkable
notes, that the weapon which he was wont to wield so ef-
fectively has become a little rusty—(great laughter)—
although I entertain no doubt that with sufficient practice
it will assume that brightness which dazzled us of yore. I
may be allowed to add, by way of consolation to the hon.
gentleman in his present position, that it is only while in
opposition he can find those opportunities which I can
assure him it is absolutely necessary he should avail him-
self of before he can entirely regain that cunning of fence
for which he was once so celebrated. (Continued
laughter.)

Mr. Disraeli then observed that he meant] no dis-
respect to the house in not having given a formal
programme of the future policy of the Government,
but the fact was that such a course was unprece-
dented. Neither Lord John Russell in 1853, nor
Lord Palmerston in 1855, under whom Mr. Osborne
had been a subaltern for the last Live years witbout
opening his mouth, had adopted such a step, and
Lord John Russell had expressed his deliberate
conviction that such a proceeding was unnecessary.
Mr. Disraeli then came to the charges of Mr. Os-
borne :

" What, " says the hon. gentleman, "are you going to do
about church rates?" Well, then, I say to the hou. gentle-
man, " What did you do about church rates?" (Cheers and
laughter.) I find that upon the que-tion of church rates
the late Government was beuten in this session, and although
I may not refer to the speeches, yet I may allude to the
division of Wednesday, February 17. I find that an Under-
Secretary of State, and a noble lord holding high office in
the Household, voted against the Ministerial 'suggestion,
while the hon. member for Dover, like most of the other
members of the Government, stayed away. ("Hear, hear,"
and laughter.) Why do I mention these things ? Not to
taunt the hon. member for Dover—( a lsngh)—or any of his
late oolleagues, but rather to remove ►ome of the difficulties
which are apparent to him, and which he considers to be
obstacles in the way of the present Government. He will
now know how those difficulties may possibly be evaded
(" .11ear, hear;" anti a laugh.) But., again says the hon.