The Express.
London, England, 1862-08-02 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, SATURDAY' EVENING, AUGUST 2, 1862.

also into aooount this fortification scheme, which we must
I accept as part of his increased military estimates, I put the
noble loni dews to have cost this country not
less than 100,000,0007.—(cheers and laughter) and
I think with all his merits that price is very
dear. (Renewed laughter.) Well, now, how has the noble
lard managed to get this expenditure increased shoe 1858
to • budget this year of more than 8,300,0004 ? By •
constant system of agitation. (Hear, hear.) The noble
lord a the greatest agitator I know of in favour of extra-
vagant estimates. Whether in this house, or at • Lord
Mayor's feast, at a school meeting, at a rifle meeting, or
at a mediaeval ceremony at the Cinque Ports, there has
always been a cry from the noble lord of danger from
France. The noble lord and his friends came into power
on two grounds : one was that they would give us a better
reform bill than thatofLordlerby'sgoeernment—(opposrlion
cheere)—the other, that they would keep on frieodlyterms
with their neighbour. We have ended by kicking reform
cut of existence—(" Hear, hear," and laughter)--and we
have heard of nothing but • cry about invasion from France.
(Hear, bear.) Now this policy of the noble lord has had
two consequences. I am speaking of his policy sincerely.
longer I live, the more I am convinced of men's sin-
cerity ; sod I do Dot accuse the noble lord of more than of
having singularly misapprehended the facts. The noble lord
has talked of the monomania of my boo. friend the member
for Liskeard (Mr. Osborne). I won't use any harsh words at
all, bat I eay that in consequence of the noble lord's
idea of a French invasion—of his agitation, and
his constantly keeping up this alarm—there has been
this consequence, that it has prevented the people of this
country from entering into their own domestic affairs, and
it has prevented them from exercising due economy in the
state. 1 do not my that the noble loot intends it, but there is
a passage of a very curious work which is completely illus-
trative of the position which the noble lord occupies, that I
cannot help reading it. It applies directly arid immediately
to the case before us, but I don't for a moment suppose
that the noble lord has been intentionally bringing shout
the state of things which is thus humorously and ingeniously
described by Archbishop Whateley in a patnphlet written by
him, entitled "Historic Doubts rellitive to Napoleon Boas-
pas te." This book was written some 30 years ago against
the sceptics, to show that pretty good arguments might be
adduced against the existence of Napoleon Bonaparte. He
says.—` Now it must be admitted that Bonaparte was a
political bugbear, most convenient to any administration.
• If you do not adopt our measures and reject those of our
opponents Bonaparte will be sure to prevail over you
if you do not submit it to the government, at leant
under our administration, this formidable enemy will
take advantage of your insubordination, to conquer and
enslave you : pay your taxes cheerfully, or the tee.
mendous Bonaparte will take all from you.' Bonaparte,
in short, was the burden of every song ; his terrible name
was the charm which always succeeded in unloosing the
parse-strings of the Wiwi. And let us not be too sure,
safe as we now think ourselves, that some occasion may not
occur for again producing on the stage so useful a pernonap;
, it is not merely to naughty children in the nursery that the
threat of being ' given to Bonaparte' has proved effectual."
It is not merely ignorant children in the nursery to whom the
threat of Napoleon Bonaparte is perfectly successful. (Laugh-
ter.) So far this proves the popularity of the noble lord ; for
whatground of popularity tan there be in the character of an
alarmist? I am often told by my friends around me--" 014
nothing= be dope because the noble lord is so very popular."
(laughter.) Assuming that popularity, I think I oaa
imagine it to rest on uo other ground than this, that it is
assumed he is • vigilant guardian of the national safety.
(Government cheers.) I see that Archbishop Whatdy
was quite correct. (Opposition cheers.) There are • good
many children behind the government benches. (Renewed
(cheers. But the noble lord's phantasy has done more than
spend this money and put reform out of the nation's head.
It has prevented en investigation into the mismanagement
going on in the administration of our own navy. (Hear.)
After reading extracts from French and American publica-
tions to prove the mismanagement of our naval
resources, the bon. member continued—l have said
something to account for the way in which money
has been wasted on our armaments, but the present govern.
meat, of which the noble lord is the head, does not confine
itself to that, but is laying the ground for future expenditure.
We know not to what magnitude it may grow, and I warn
hon. members at this side of the house that unlearn we
detach ourselves from such • policy we shall as a party rot
out of existence by and by with such • load of odium that
such • thing as the liberal party will never be tolerated ;
it will stink in the scatrils of the people for ever after.
Look, for instance, at the question of fortifications. Does
anybody doubt that that is entirely the work of the noble
lord? It is the price we pay for the noble lord's *bath
nacy, as I suppose I may call it. But we are
very much mistaken if we suppose that the expense
of the fortifications is intended to end when the bricks and
mortar are done with. I was told by a distinguished Artil-
lery officer who heard the debate in this house on the sub-
ject, that in his opinion the fortification scheme was sot
meant to defend us against a foreign enemy ; if the enemy
landed such fortifications would be an inoonvenience and
danger to us i it could mean nothing but this, that
they were Intended for a future excuse for
maintaining 30,000 more men in time of peace than
heretofore. Well, but this is done by the liberal party.
(Hear, hear.) Why our children will shrink from the
im-
putatiou that their fathers belonged to so foolish, extrava-
gant, and profligate a party. Again, take the affair of
Chins. The charge for the China war wee stated by the
right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer in
his budget arch on the 3rd of April last as 7,550,0004, and
Le added, which I trust will be the end strictly
spmking of the charge for the China war."
You hare since launched into another great
war. You have gone headlong into an intervention in that
country, and no one knows what it may lead to. (Hear,
hear.) It is entirely taken out of your own hands and
what I beer in all directions is that you will have China
upon your hands as you have ladle. The Narita Clues
Herald, writing on this subject, mys—" The end may not
be far off ; and if any of our readers inquire what that
end may be, we reply, nothing short of the oc-
cupation of this rich province by Great Britain."
Now, when I saw the maority of this house, including a
great number of that side (the opposition), led by the right
hoe. gentleman the member for Cambridge, support the
noble lord on the motion of the hon. member for Halifax
(Mr. Stausfield). I could not help exclaiming. " Where is
the conservatism of this land ?"—(cheers)—for I do not
know anything more rash or reckless than not merely for
the liberal party but fur the conservative party to lend
themselves to such a proceeding as that. You are about to
engage in war with a country to which you export about
3 per cent. of your entire exports. You are about to inter-
fere with the internal affairs of • country eight times as
large as France, tea times se populous as France, in • state
of complete revolution ; and all because the noble lord
happens to be at the bead of affairs. (" No, no," and
• Hear, bear.") This is one of the evils arising out of the
idiosyncraoy of the noble lord for intervention. (Laughter.)
The noble lord in known to have such a predilection for •
filibustering—for • sensation—policy that there is not a
general nor an admiral who commits an act of intervention
who is not stye of the thanks of the noble lord, and who
does not know that he will be backed and promoted by the
noble lord. In this case of Chins, the instructions sent out
by Earl Rumen against intervention were most explicit,
but our representatives there knew well that they would
be supported by the noble lord for the course they adopted.
They have bad their reward, and this house, in an incautious
moment, was committed to that rash policy. The right hon.
gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his budget
speech showed that he left himself with • surplus of but
150,0001. That was considered very close shaving,
but to get even that surplus it was rimmed
that the trueps were coming home from Tieo-tsio. They
are now ordered to StIADB443, so that the surplus has
altogether vanished. Looking to the state and prosperity of
the revenue, looking at what must happen during the next
winter I ask, is it not a most nub and lamentable dilemma
into which we have rushed under the leadershipof the noble
lord? (Hear, hoar.) Then there is the expedition to
Canada, which is entirely due to the noble lord. (Cheers.)
I know that country and the population well. I have been
there more than once, and I tell you that what the noble
lord did with respect to that expedition was • piece of his
sensation policy. (Murmurs.) The noble lord heard before
the middle of Lieber from the American Minister that
the affair of the Treat occurred without the cognisance of
the American government, and he bad reason to be-
lieve that the whole thing would be satisfactorily explained.
(Cries of "No, no.") Well, then, I semme that
he had DO reason to believe it. (Hear, bear.) It makes DO
difference is the case. That frontier is hermetically closed
up by the ice until the mouth of March, and it would be
impossible for military operations to be carried on until
then, and yet the noble lord hurried off 10,000 or 12.000
troops to Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, many of whom
have not reached Canada to this day ; and he also sent off •
large supply of sledges to Canada that all the horses there
I would be unable to draw—and all this hasty and irrational
, proceeding was adopted before the noble lord received the
answer of the Amerman government. (Hear, hear.) The
noble lord thus spent • million of money, which if we had
it now would 'oleo* the hearts and homes of • famishing
people. It was, however, a part of the noble lord's seem-
tiou policy. These are the grounds why I say I do not think
wean a party have any reason tocongratulate °measles* at the
close of this session. (Hear, hear.) But now I want to
my • word upon the relation of parties in this house.
I say that the state of parties in this horns, speaking logi-
cally--for I do not wish to offend say one—is not an honest
state of things. The noble lord is Dot governing the country
by his own party. (Cries of " Hear.") I have no hesitation
in telling the nolde lord that if the party opposite had aaaa 7
time within the last six weeks or two months brought
forward a motion of want of confidence in the noble lord,
it would have been supported by • sufficient number of hon.
members at this side of the house to have carried it. (Cheers
and counter cheers.) Why does not the party opposite
move a vote of want of confidence? (Cheers.) Because •
great number of you—(pointing to the Opposition) ban
more confidence in the noble lord then you have in your
own chief. (Cheers and cries of "No.") What said
the right honourable gentleman the member for
Cambridge (Mr. Walpole) on the occasion that
he refused to stead to his guns? (A laugh.)
The right hon. gentleman said that Lord Derby had stated
publicly and privately that he did not wish to displace
the noble lord. But have bon. members sufficiently con-
sidered the bearing of that declaration ! What, I ask,
comes of government by party? (Hger, hear.) To whom
is the noble lord respoombial of OPreition)
are iti power without Use responelhility of . ill the
country allow such • stab of things to eostanue ! I believe
the noble lord is as great • tory as any man in the
house. The noble lord is antrespoweihie to us as • party,

but you (the Opposition) step in sod enable him
to carry his measures in opposition to • cousi-
derable portion of his own party. He is • despot ;
he is irresponsible ; but low 100 will that last when it
comes to be known in the country. We hoar it in private—
we ought not to mince the matter, or to be mawkish about
it—we hear it in the library, and in all directions, that the
noble lord is liked by you better than your own chief. I
believe the noble lord obstructs reform, sod spends more of
the public money than the right hoc. gentleman themember
for Buckiogbamshire. (Hear.) The noble lord has played
the popular part, and, to use • French word, has had his
clagurars of the press to tell that he has done his work
well, and that he is • very popular minister. (Hear' hear.)
Let us analyse hie title to bee liberal minister. What are his
acts! How does he treat his own party? Take the
question of the ballot. I look upon it as
far more • moral than II political question,
and I believe if the conservatives had the ballot for five
years they would never give it up. It would prevent
violence, get rid of excitement, and is as quiet and orderly
a proceeding as going to church. (Laughter.) The noble
lord has ostentatiously opposed it, and put himself in the
front rank of those who ridicule and throw contumely upon
its advocates. Take the question of church rates.
The church rate party had formerly a substantial majority
in this house. Under the leadership of the noble lord that
majority has dwindled down to • tie, and at but there was
a majority of one against it. Take other questions in
which hoe. members on this side of the Donner* interested
—the Burial Bill, for instance, or the Marriage Affinity Bill,
or the Grammar School Bill. All these questions are going
back under the leadership of the noble lord. Why is that?
Because the noble lord is very well known not to be very
much in earnest about any of theee things, and therefore
the conduct of the whole party becomes slack, and the
principle advocated by a party loses ground. Theo there is
the Patching Bill, which I' es
will not be passed. I
think it is wrong to pus that bill, and that you had better
take the advice of the Nestor of your party, and not proceed
with it. Division after division has taken place on that bill,
but who ever knew the noble lord to vote against it? Then,
again, there is the Thames Embankment Bill—an audacious
attempt to sacrifice the interest of the many for the sake of
the few. Did the noble lord devise • plan to put an end
to the monstrous proposal ? No ;he merely advised that
time should be given to the opponents of the measure.
How does all this operate? It speaks in two ways.
First, the party oppositehave their own way, and next
it weakens the liberal party for the future—for the longer
you sit here and allow yourselves to be treated with con-
tumely with respect to all questions in which you are sup-
, posed to take an interest, instead of growing stronger you
are becoming weaker in the eyes of the public, and as such
you will be regarded by your op . neon. And this oomesen-
tirely from the conductor the u.. • lord. (Hear, andalaugh.)
But we have to consider what must be the alternative of
this state of things, and I warn hon. gentlemen that the
game of the noble lord is nearly played out. (Hear, hear.)
I say it cannot be repeated next spring. (Hear, hear.) It
has gone on for many years, but then are many hon. mem-
bers who have too much self-respect to allow it to go on any
longer. (Hear, hear.) Then lam asked " Would you face
this alternative ? Would you like to see the conservative
party in power r My answer is that I would rather see
myself in opposition to the present state of things existing.
(Hear, hear.) Let us be in opposition, and then we shall
obtain some popular support, and we shall be able to
extend our principles. But at present we are expiring
as a piny under the present state of thine. We
are crippled as • party. I am only stating that
which must explode all over the country in • few days after
the prorogation, and I repeat the present state of things
cannot go 00. We must face the alternative of being in
opposition. When I came into the house in 1841, I was
amongst the opposition, and the late Sir IL Peel had a ma-
jority of 91 votes. But during the five years passed in
opposition we were employed in laying a foundation of
public policy and in proclaiming those principles which
have been in the ascendant ever since, and which have, I
firmly believe, added more to the contentment and hap-
piness of the people and to the power of this country than
any measures ever before. (Wear, bear.) Well, that was
the work of as oppoeition, and 1 believe the work will
Fon again if we are placed in opposition.
lew, hear.) If I am asked to compare the con.
adduct of the noble lord when in power with the con-
duct of the right hon. gentleman opposite to him, I think
the right boa. gentleman's presence is quite as desirable on
the Treasury bench as that of the noble lord. (Hear, hear.)
Well, then, if we go on in this way where will be our prin-
ciples? Where will be our party? Where are the Irish mem-
bers? I look with great dread to what is going on in Ireland,
arid if the same thing goes on long we shall find ourselves in
alliance with the Orange party--(oh,
,oh)—and we shall be
sent to an election with the cry of 'No popery." (Hear,
hear.) It had been said that there was a conservative reac-
tion . • but I agree with the opinion of the noble lord the
member for King's Lynn, who said it was a delusion to say
there was • conservative reaction. Well, then, with such
• party in power we cannot go on lung with such
an administration in power. The leadership of the noble
lord mocks our principles. (Hear, hear.) Let us get into
opposition, and we shall get leaders who will rally us round
some pnnciples. (Hear, hear.) I should have spoken earlier
in the session if I could have found my voice. I have now
made a clean breast of it, and if my words have any force or
logic they will have weight in the country ; but if not they
will fall as the wind. lam thankful that I can speak my
sentiments in an ensemble where there is such a spirit of
manliness, frankness, anif tolerance, and I thank boo. gen-
tlemen for having so patiently listened to me. The hon.
nen 'demo resumed his seat amidst some cheering.

Mr. NEWDIGATI and Mr. D. GILIFPTIO toes to speak, but
there being loud calls for the noble lord at the head of the
government,
Lord PALMEBSTON rose and spoke as follows Sir, I
am bound to acknowledge that the hon. gentleman who has
just spoken has adopted the advice of his friends—though
I feel quite sure that from his own feelings it was unne-
cessary—that in his remarks there should be nothing per-
soma with regard to me. (laughter, and "Hear, hear.")
Now, whatever remarks the hon. gentleman has made
upon me personally I can mature him that so far from taking
them amiss I am obliged to him for them, for instead of
doing me any harm, they will, I believe, do me good-
(" Hear, hear," and laughter.) The honourable gen-
tleman complains that the present government has
departed from those principles upon which a liberal
! government was formed, namely, peace, non-intervention,
and reform—[An HON. MENDER : " And economy")—and
economy. (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) With regard to
reform, I must be allowed to say that if that measure has
been for the moment set aside, it is not owing to the govern-
ment, but it is owing in a great degree to the feelings of the
House of Commons, and owing in a still greater degree to
the feelings of the constituencies throughout the country,
and most eminently owing to the course pursued by the
hon. member himself and the hon. member for Birmingham
(Mr. Bright). (Hear, hear.) Because there is no denying
the fact that the tone and course taken by many who have
advocated the question of reform have had the effect of
weaning many other persons from it, and who were more
noxious formerly for reform than they are now. (Hear.)
With regard to the question of economy, the hon. gentleman
entertains a mistaken opinion of what economy really
He seems to consider that economy consists in not spending
money, while I maintain it to be taking that course which
every sensible man would take to provide for the wants of
the moment, and he the best means of satisfying them at
the least expense and with the greatest efficiency. (Hear,
hear.) Therefore it is quite irrelevant to tell the house and
the country that at a given period, pow long gone by, our
expenditure was so-and-so, and that our expenses for the
army and navy now amount to such a sum of money, unless
you goon and say that the circumstances of the world now
are precisely the same as they were at the former period.
(Hear.) But here I may say that the boa. member is not
correct in his data.. He talked of lie estimates of 1858
beiog the estimates of the tight hon. gentleman opposite,
but the hon. gentleman forgets that those estimates were
framed by the government of which I had the honour of
being a member, and that they were adopted by the go-
vernment of Lord Derby. The estimates of 1859 were the
estimates of the right hon. gentleman opposite, and not
those of 1858. (Hear, hear.) But it is useless to tell us
what took place in 1858, or in 1835, and to say that the ex-
penditure of the country wee so and so, unless you can
show that the circumstances of the country were similar,
and that the wants of the country were not so great at the
time when that expenditure was made. (Hear.) Now,
if the hoe. gentleman contends that the expenditure of the
country for the present year—for our military, naval, and
civil sorvioet is greater than the wants of the country re-
quire, there is no one who will not regret that the toes of
the hon. gentleman's voice prevented him, at the time
when the estimates were under discussion from stating his
opinion. But I maintain that the hon. gentleman's opinion
is at variance with that of the house and the country. (Hear.)
The hon. member for Brighton brought the matter under
the notice of the house, and he wax not supported by the
house. (Neer, bear.) Now, facts are more conclusive
than argumenta, and I ask is the country of opinion that
our military forces or our naval forces are too great ! I
maintain they are not, and I point to the abandon-
ment, in part, of industrial and commercial occu-
pampa of large portions of the people, in
order that they might organise es and be
properl drilled for the purpose of defending their conn•
try. (Hear, hear.) That a a logical proof in their opinion
that the military defences of the country, so far from
having been raised to a prepceterone amount, are not strong
enough, and therefore they have joined a volunteer service,
time and moo ey to support which they zealously afford.
(Rear, hear.) Then I set the opinion of the country against
the opinion of the hon. member. (Hear, hear) I may net
convince him of his error, but I think the country will be
of my opinion. Then the hon. gentleman said we have Uses
prodigally negligent in not adopting in time sesame
to the end to be accomplished; and he said
,the government went on too long building wooden
ships ; that the right hon. baronet opposite then
took to building steamships ; then that the present govern-
meet adopted the construction of ironcased ships, and that
in all these cases we were behindhand in seeing the awes-
sity for the alterations, and that we did not adopt sew
arrangements until our friends across the water had set us
as example. (Hear, hear.) Now that could ant be aeharge
against say goternsessit for realise aspeaditars. It mil*

be said that suxessivegoveromeets had Dot run into waking
amingements far more expensive than former ones until
they saw the necessity for doing so. (Hear, hear.) They
all knew very well that a line-of-battle ship cost 100,000(.,
that a steamship cost 150,004.11., and that ao irou-
cased ship would cast 250,0004 ; and therefore it,
could not be said that the government bad been reckless
in spending the public money, but that they lied shown a I
disinclination to incur large expenses. With regard to the ,
English cavy and the French navy, I showed oo • former
occasion that we had not la many iron-cased ships built or '
building ; but I have reason to think that by the end of this
Tear under the administration of my noble friend, we shall
have as many or more of that class of ships at sea than our
neighbours. (Hear, hear.) Well, the hon. gentleman said
this is all owing to my conduct, and he add that, which I
entirely agree with if it can be shown to be true, I have
cost the country 100,000,000/., and that I am dear at the
money. (Laughter.) Bat I enthely disclaim the origin
of the measures which have produced that expenditure. I
This expenditure has been the result of the judgment of
the gnvernmeat, the house, and the country of what was
necessary to maintain that position of this country among
the other nations of the world to which she is entitled. ;
(Cheers.) It is quite idle to say that the merit of this ex-
penditure belongs to one government or another, for it be-'
longs to the whole of the nation. (Hear, hear.) The hon.
gentleman condemns my conduct by quoting a peonage from'
Archbishop Whately's book. What is that book? Why
it is • satirical boos, in which were plausible and false
arguments to show that no such man as Bonaparte ever
existed. I think the illustration recoils upon the honour.
able gentleman himself. I frenkly admit that 1 I
have been anxious for the honour, interests, and
safety of the country, and that it has been niy
object as far as possible to obtain from parliament and the
country the means to guard against all dangers which might
at any time come upon the country. (Hear, hear.) On that
point I ill]] quite ready to go to the country and take the
verdict of public opinion. I maintain that the very charge
made against me is a charge of merit • but if the country
think otherwise • different course will be taken. (Hear,
hear.) The hon. gentlemen says the fortification scheme is
' a plan of mine. I admit that I have always thought the
militia should be organised and the dockyards defended. The
bon. gentleman may obtain the opinion of an artillery officer
under the gallery against fortiticatiou, but if that gentleman
bad to place himself at the head of troops, he would think
it much better to he behind defences than in the open field.
(Hear, hear.) Then the hon. member says that all the dif-
ficulties which have come upon this country in various parts
of the world are owing to my meddling policy, and that
those persons who are acting under the government follow
the same course. Now, my belief is that those who
employ officers in any part of the world are bound to sup-
port and defend them so long as they do their best for their
country, and so long as they do nothing which is deserving
of blame. (Hear, hear.) This has been my principle, and
I think that the opinion of officers acting in various
Wof the world will bear it out. But I deny
t. those officers have acted wrongly. (Hear, hear.)
I will not follow the hon. member in his observations on
our former relations with Chita, but I will take the most
recent case. The hon. gentlen.an says we have entered on
• war in China, and that we are going to put down the re-
bellion there. We are going to do no such thing ; but we
are merely going to do this : whereas we have been at great
expense in obtaining certain privileges and ports in China to
which commercial men attach great importance, we are
going to use the means which we possess to defend those
privileges and those places in China which might otherwise
be wasted and desolated, as other parts of that country
have been. (Hear, hear.) We are not going to establish
the Emperor of China on his throne, or to put down the re-
bellion, but we say certain iorts are our, by treaty, and
that they must be respected by all persons. Our policy
therefore cannot be called unreasonable, nor one which I
think the people of this country will be pleased to censure.
(Hear, hear.) The hon. member says that all these things
have been caused by the present government, and that it
ought no longer to pease., the confidence of the Uhouse or
the country. But the hon. gentleman has not adverted to
one feature of our policy which he might
have noticed, viz., our neutrality in the affairs
of America. There have not been wanting those
who have urged us to take a part in those affairs,
but we have declined to do so. (Hew.) The hon. gentleman
says we are much to blame for sending 8,000 or 10,000
troops to Canada in the course of the last winter, and that
it was an unneoessary and expensive proceeding— (hear,
hear)—and he says that we ought to have waited for ao
IM MO. from she United States government before sending
out those troops, as we were told by the American Minister
that the acts of Captain Wilkes had not been ordered by his
government. (Hear, hear.) But the American Minister
did not tell us those acts would not be sanctioned. (Hear,
hear.) He did not tell us they would be disavowed by his
government, nor did he tell us that an insult to the Bntiali
deg would be atoned for by a surrender of the persons taken.
(Hear, hear.) Our communication, with the American
Meader were not such as to justify us in not taking musette
of caution. But every one must recollect the way in which
Captain Wilkes was received at public meetings, in the
Theatre of New York, and in Congress, and the letter he
received from the Secretary of the Navy approving of his
conduct. (Hear' hear.) Then, I say, we were justified in
assuming that the matter would not be terminated in •
satisfactory manner. (Hear, hear.) That being the case,
I hold that we should have been to blame if we had rot
taken the course which we did take. (Hear, hear.) The
boo. gentleman says it is impossible for troops to act in
Canada in the winter. They have done so on former occa-
sions, and great operations have been carried on there in the
winter. (Hear, hear.) But, in truth, if we bad waited for au
answer from the American government, it would have been
as unfair towards that government as it would have been
improper in regard to the interests of this country,
because it would have been misleading the American govern-
ment as to our real feelings in the matter. But I throk the
measures which we took were most materially conducive
to a peaceful settlement of the question which was raised,
and 1 do not believe the house will blame the government
for having determined to take that course. (Hear, hear.)
I think, notwithstanding all the hon. gentleman says, so fey
from being to blame. I take no exception to the manner in
which be blamed us, for he said nothing that any body
could take the slightest objection to ; but all he his said of
me makesme really more praiseworthy than I feel I am en-
titled to. (Hear, hear.) When he bolds me up to the
country as the man who himself led the country to mon-
gers' essentially necessary to their defence, who thug
tocoei:Ltteeti:iper to thcee
parliamentof danger, w
and of theho roused
country,
and who led them to measures which are economical in the
greatest degree, as avoiding dangers which would be infinitely
more expensive--I say when the bon. member pante that
picture of me I feel that he has done me mire honour than
I deserve. (Laughter.) I say that these measures are
economical, because let any man—not any man conversant
with military matters—that is unnecessary—but any man
who reads what paws in every part of the world, judge for
himself what would be the expense of any landing on the
shores of this island, many destruction of our naval dock-
yards, or any material impression on the country—what the
expense of that would be, as compared with the small ex-
pense that we are incurring now to render any such at-
tempt difficult, if not impossible. And when we talk of the
expense of our fortifications we are often told to imitate
our neighbours. What did the French do? They erected
fortifications round Parie—rouod one town alone, which
cost, I am quite sure, six millions—l rather think it was
something like eight millions sterling. Why that is enough
to cover the whole charge of our fortifications, which are
intended to protect variouserints of our naval arsenals
which are liable to be attack and therefore, so far from
thinking this country will join with the hon. gentleman in
condemning those arrangements, my firm opinion is that
the more the matter is looked into the more artil-
lery officers—not those under the gallery—(laughter)—
but the service in general—are consulted, the more they
will come round to the opinion that we have done
no more than our duty in proposing to, and inducing the
house to agree to this expenditure. I do not even despair
for the bon. gentleman if he will go farther than the single
artillery friend, and go to • committee of artillery officers
aodoonsult them on the subject. (Hear, hear.) Then the
hon. member came to the state of parties in this house.
He is kind enough to talk of me as the leader of the house
and of this party, but the language he holds is, that I am
unworthy to be • leader because I am not disposed blindly
to follow him, and those who agree with him, on
every question, whether I concur with them in
opinion or Dot. It may, no doule, be all right
for followers to follow • leader when they differ
from him, but it is a little too much to say that follovrem
should insist on a leader following them. (" Hear, hear."
and laughter.) The hon. member says I have opposed the
ballot. Well, I have opposed the ballot. I oppose the
I ballot because I differ with him entirely in opinion. He
says the ballot would he a moral good ; I say that it would
be an immoral thing. (Bees, hear.) When he oonviaCt4 ins
that 1 am wrong I shall be very ready to adopt his views ;
but until that time comes, sitting here, sent by those whom
' I represent, to act according to the beet of my judg-
ment, I must take leave to set on that judg-
ment, and oppose measures which I think very in-
jurious to the public interest. Then he mentioned'
ether measures. /Id was very much astonished that I did
sot sit till half-past three in the morning to vote against
the Game Bill. Whatever my opinion was it was quite evi- '
dent that there was so large a majority for and so small a
minority against the measure, I should have lost my sleep
whichever way I bad intended to vote by remaining.
(Laughter.) I did vote against reporting progress because
I thought that was sot a proper mode of dealing with the
bill, whether it was objected to or Dot Well, he wars that
in truth the right hon. member for Buckingham
ought to sit here and I ought to sit there. I
can assure the lion. gentleman that I care less
where I sit than he may imagine, but so longish pleases
this house that I shall sit here, and I can feel that in sitting
here I can perform the duty due to the country, I am quite
willing and desirous to sit here, and I should be very sorry,
it, sitting here, I should not lave the support and good-will
of the bon. gentleman and those who agree with him. He
stated himself, and that is the real truth of the matter, that
parliament is no longer divided as it was in former times by
• broad line of separation into two parties in antagonism
to one another. In those times each man classed
himself according to en arbitrary rule, and every.
body knew how each member would vote and
almost count • division as well beforehand as
after it had taken plate; but of late years, and especially
since the reform of parliament, that has ceased to be the
owe. Now, the house Is divided into • peat number of
knots, if I may es say, each 'Ming amording to his
Zaarelta k cc the opinion al some an, member to was ma he
lochs, or according to She sample *aim alike, at whose

those knots consist. Therefore, it is in vain ever to expect
that we shall see the House of Commons assume that
dualism which need formerly to be its cluiractertstie. Well,
what is the government to do? One party may my, "Do
what we order you and we will support you • but
if we do that we may lose support in another direction.
(Hear, hear.) The boo. member tells us that
unless we do so and so—vote by ballot, bring in a re-
form bill next session, and all sorts of things —(laughter)—
we shall not have his support. I should be exceedingly
sorry to lose his support, and I can assure him that the
country at wouldbe grieved at seeing him go, as he
intimated awish to do, to the opposition. Ido not know
that it would make much difference except as to his place of
sitting, but still I am unwilling to assume that, and I cling to
what little support he is kindi enough to give as, and
I hope that the change will not take place, but at the same
time, in the divided state of fractMnal parties which now
exists in the House of Commons, and which is mainly the
consequence of the reform made some years ago. it is quite
impossible for a government to act on that selfish--and I
will say that jobbing principle which was practimdformerly,
'of buying unity and support by submission of conduct.
Now, every government that rowan itself must take its
I own line, and act according to what it thinks its duty to
' the country. We value the support of those who
sit on the same side as ourselves, but if
that fails, and we can get for practical measures support
, elsewhere, why we do not refuse that support—(laughter)--
and we are justified in that so loug as we act according to
the dictates of our own conscientious opinions, and propose
measures which we think good for the country, or oppose
measures which we think bad for the country. That is
what we intend to do, and that is what we Mee done. 1
flatter myself that if any man looks through Abe list
,of the acts of parliament brought io and carried
by the present government during the last few years—
in the sessions of 1860, 1861, and 1862--he will see
ea many useful measures of public improvement and pro.
gressive improvement, as are found in the records of say
equal number of years in any former period of our history. I
wtil not trouble the house by going through say enumera-
tion, but if any one whose memory doss not serve him will
just turn to the list of acts, he will see a great variety of
most important improvements made by acts brought in
by the present government. So far, therefore, as that
course goes, I think we have done our duty
to the oountry, and, bevies done our duty,
think we have deserved that kind and liberal support
which we have received from the members of this house.
I should be very sorry if by anything we have dose, or are
likely to do, we should forfeit that good opinion. I think
we enjoy the confidence of the majority of the house, as
tested by divisions, and really I must say, in deference to
the right hon. gentleman, that I am quite @seabed we do
the confidence of the country, and, most especially,
rt hiseilt that that very act which be so much
blames—the course pursued in regard to America
—has been sanctioned by the general opinion of
the country. (Hear, hear.) Well, it is for the
boo. gentleman and three who act with him to judge,
and I should be very sorry if good friends should part.
I cannot briog myself to think that is likely. The hon. gen-
tleman says he bag disburdened himself of all the objections
which had collected in his mind dialog the maim. I hops
his mind being relieved that io the came . moments of the
recess he will look with kinder eyes on the course which
has been pursued, that he will judge in • more frisodly spirit
the intentions with which we ass animated, that he will
communicate with those in the country who may be lookers
on and see more of the game that is played in this house, and
that he will perhaps take a somewhat different view from
that which he has expressed. I therefore trust to the calm
reflection of the recess, and I hope the hon. member and
those who act with him will And that notwithstanding there
particular differences of opinion on special points, there may
be a more general concurrence than he perhaps seems aware
of, and that next session we shall steed better in his opinion
than lam sorry to find we do at present. (Cheers)

Mr. DISRAELI said he bad no desire to interfere with
the gradual but rapid process of decomposition which was
the inevitable coosequeoce to the government of the lads-
ence and votes of the liberal party ; but, as this subject
had been brought before the house, be could not refrain
from making a few observations. Ile reviewed the con-
duct of the rovernmeot upon the question of reform ; he
inveighed against the pretexts upon which they
had opposed the measure of the late govern-
meet, and severely censured the levity with which
Lord Palmerston had trilled with the question,
and the studied contempt he bad shown towards
reformers. Looking at their course of proceed-
ing upon this subject, and their policy towards Frain*,
Le was not surprised, he said, at the disappointment and
dissatisfaction felt by the liberal party at the manner in
which the conditions under which they took office had been
fulfilled by the present government. Apart from these con-
siderations, were our finances is a state of prosperity' On the
contrary, he asserted the fact, without entering into canoes,
that our financial condition was as dangerous at this
moment as in 1840, and most critical. He denied the preten-
sions of the present government to confidence on the
ground of their care of the defences of the country. They
had expended 12.000.000/. in our dockyards, the results of
which had shown the expenditure to have been thought-
less, wasteful, and inefficient. Of their foreign policy, the
only fact was the war with China, commencing in most rash
and improvident acts, the result of a rash and improvident
system of policy. After a rapid criticism of seine of the
less prominent deficiencies of the government, he claimed
credit for what had been done during the session by the
.conservative party.
After some remarks from Mr. LINDSAY in deprecation of
dockyard expenditure, and from Mr. IC rwuicsre with le-
d gard to the cotton supply, the subject dropped.