The Sun.
London, England, 1839-02-06 00:00:00

most awkward of places in which to introduce it. But, my
Lords, some things must appear—on the mover's and in the
seconder's addresses, and in the emissions in the Speech,
which make it an imperative duty for me to give you my
ideas upon one matter connected with it. The Noble Vis-
count said that he remained of precisely tho opinion of
which he was last session, and then repeated, vvlist he
doubtless, thought, was what he said last session.—( Hear,
boar.) I, being for the abolition of the Corn-laws, rejoice
to hear him give that gloss, for it was very different._
( Hear, hear. ) All he says to-night is, I won't pledge
myself' to bring in a Bill to repeal the Cern-laws.
I think he pledged himself last Session to assist any re-
peal.—(Cheers and laughter.) Now that is one step to-
wards it ; and I hope the next step he takes will be the
easier and cheaper step of giving me his support when I
make my motion. But there was one thing said by the
Noble Viscount last Session which I kini,cisavolliaill very great
influence on certain parties.
itrelivill:ealsasil_;:voidit(,hr,y,lrpitsriuirlidlnegrii..tsifsotiraraicliyio,eiitelr.
teration of the Corn-laws, unless I find that the pew, ap
st,‘lo.iani
icwnohuhanitst country call
situation
tdi
70,
oif
co thetrshaeyr
so,
e
that he did state it, because I, b 'ieg for the relies' of the
Vora-laws; and havingpea acabvleyr.yagurdeitt,txpaiisepsosstiitiicoinNlto,ins:,o--ns
hope not anything like agetatioa in a bad sense—hut to
e
s io
ee rho
tray as meet
trves attentinn—felt cenvinee:ect:syh:
observation would have a very considerable effect in creaing
ttlihrleloim)roccelJe.dpinagrtsm. enMt)yleNtt:ebrlehal:ril(J'san(otitheer (fleet; but
now conies that which alone makes toe broach this subject,
first premising, as I pass, that there lots been undoubtedly a
very great misstatement of my speech in 1827 on that sub-
j. ct, and I have been quoted as it Iliad been for a protective
duty. Now the speech made anis was distinctly against
any such protection. I said at the begineing of it, e I have
no objection to g,tiyifea vt
they:c-:voi
ityfic,i;
trti 10,11-who
their attention;
tisit
re,b);:s.:_l
titled to." I was listened to by the ianded gewlemen when
will
ort of
e ri
(gyi tealywh' protection
.dt ttil us;i. gh ceeint'o'
sat!iiiresiiti;
re(o)oeuntvoineltfraioiett
etilt)vito,
,ott
3,11 else anise!(
say the taxes gave them any title to. That might be a very
bad argument, but I spoke tierce-larteis of an hour in
the greatest uoise I ever heard in any place,—( Laughter.)
My Noble F: iend was then in tile House as Chancellor
of the Excheqt.u.r. I could compsre it to nothing else
but being on the deck a ship in a storm.—( Laughter.)
I could not hear what I Sid myself, and therefore yes may
imagine what my wonder was how any reporters could catch
even a word that I said. However I found an account of
my speech reported. In the midst of all this noise I was
going en to show they had no right to any protection at all.
What brings it to my recollection is, that I remember say-
ing I was exposed to rho land storin—(Laughter)—and
that it was with great difficulty I could make
make myself heard. I have taken, my Lords, the earliest
opportunity of touching upon this question, because this is
the first time I have ever heard it said a subject of this sort
could be considered what in technical terms is called an
open question. My Lords, I know there have at different
times, and in different Governments been what are called
open questions; I know there have been examples (the
Stave Trade and the Catty( lie Question are two) of Go-
vernments who having opinions upon every other subject,
have lost the functions afrulers by declaring that on this sub.
jut they had none. Is the experience of those two questions,
are the results of this ( xperience, such as to tempt you to look
with favour on a prac.ice which is inconsistent with principle,
which is subversive of honesty—which means, I have opi-
nions, but I won't act upon them—which means I have
principles but I prefer my interest.—( Loud cries of
" Hear")—which manes, I admit, as who does not frankly
admit, that upon unimportant particulars—upon the dot ids
of important questions even, the most honourable and well
principled men may compromise and modify, and surrender
their opinions for tile sake of imanimity upon things of still
greater weight and moment? But, my Lords, I now speak
upon those ardua regna, upon those greater nterests ef the
Crown Ecclesiastical establishments—the -Admininistration
of Justice—our Law Reforms—Parliamentary Reform—
aye, toy Lords, and upon such questions as the Corn-laws
which is one of the greatest and the most important, and
the most ireeresting, which can divide the Parlia-
ment, or distract the community. Is it upon those
questions alone opinions arc to be formed ; and by whom ?
By the very men who of all others arc the most impera-
tively bound, by every consideration of honour and of duty,
to form an opinion, and upon that opinion to act.—
( Cheers.) Why du one set of men league together as a
party ? Why do one party assume to govern the country
rather than another? Why, but thou they are knit together
by community of 'sentiment upon great public questions.
" Idem sentire de republics," has been in all times, and
among the hest of statesmen, a bond of union, fair, intel-
ligible, honourable, conducive to the common weal. It is
grounded on honest principle; reared in virtuous conduct;
supporting the public good. But there is another bond of
untion, forme.; of a baser material, a tic that knits together
far other natures—the " eadern velle atque none—and of
this it has been known and been ssid—" ca demum inter
malos est firma amicitia." Tho abandonment -of all opi-
nions, the sacrifice of every sentiment; the preference of
sordid interest to honest principle, the utter abdication of
the power to act es conscience dictates, and sense of duty
co:eine:ids—such is the vile dross of which the links are
made that bind profligate men together in a confederacy to
seek their own interests at the expense of every duty--and
that is the literal meaning of " open questions." It is that
each lute his known and recorded opinions, but that each is
willing to sacrifice them rather than break up the Govern-
ment to which ell belong. The "voile" is to keep in
office ; the " nolle" to keep out antagonists; and
none dare speak his mind in his official capacity, with-
out loosing the firmitas andeitice, by shaking the
foundations of the Government.—( Hear. ) That is.to say,
I wish for one object to occupy the Government—that is to
say, I desire one thing, I will do one thing to keep things as
they are—l dislike another thing, lam against another
thing. And for the sake of those eadem which I co/o, and
those cadent which I nob, I keep my friendship firm with
my confidants at the expense of all principle, and though we
differ upon the subject which the whole country is distracted
by, and thinks of all ethers the most important, one way
or another, upon that subject it is more convenient we
should say nothing of our opinions, and lay our principles
by. The Constitution of this country is ignorant of, and if
'it knew it would abhor such a principle. These are sub-
jects on which I may be right and you wrong, or on which
you may be right and I may be wrong; but at all events
no man can think otherwise that has formed an opinion
upon important questions like this. If they are for the
public benefit, the people have a right to the support of the
Government upon them : if they are for the public detri-
ment, the people have an indefensible sacred right to
the help of the Government to resist them.—( Hear.)
and to resist them as a Government—(Cheers)—not one
man on the Treasury bench answering another, as I long
saw with sham, and disgust upon the Catholic question—
not by men getting up and answering one another, one for
it, another against it, and leaving the whole case to its fate;
and you see what has become of it—(Hear, hear)—that it
was granted at last after the agitation had become too
great to let it produce its good effects. These are my rea-
sons for not being able to endure the name of what is called
an open question. My Lords, I have deemed it my boun-
den duty to ,state fully and frankly the opinions which I have
long held and expressed elsewhere as well as here upon this
subject, and as it was the first time I heard the matter
avowed, and in terms broached before your Lordship, I
have taken tire first eppertunity of entering my protest
against it. —(Cheers.) I thank your Lordship for endur-
ing the length of these observations, and now think it
my bounden duty to abstain from any further remark.
The Marquis of LA NSD 0 WNE did not intend to fol-
low the example of the Noble and Learned Lord, by pro-
tracting this debate. The Noble Lord had gone far be-
yond the example set by the Noble Lords who had moved
and seconded the Address, in introducing othet topics and
further comments, which, with great respect for the elo-
quence with which they were introduced,—listened to as
they had been with delight and amusementyof all ththeeHNooubslee,
and with great rapture, no doubt, by many
Lords opposite,—he (the Marquis of Lansdowne) thought
himself justified in passing over this evening, because they
almost all invariably related to subjects which had been
the subject of notice in this House as practical questions
hereafter, or were topics upon which it had been announced
that papers and communications would be laid before the
House at no distant period. But avoiding all these topics,there
was one which might be liable to much misapprehension, if
the observations of the Noble and Learned Lord remained
unnoticed, and he therefore deemed it indispensably ne-
ce?sary to say a few words. He understood his Noble and
Learned Friend to suppose that the policy of the Govern-
ment of India during the last year, was a policy which her
Majesty's Governnient were not prepared to support. Now,
in justice to his Noble Friend at the head of the Govern-
ment of India, but still more in justice to the interests of
that empire, which he had administered with such zeal up
to this moment, and with such honour to himself, he wished
distinctly to state, that to every word of that manifesto (ac the
Learned Lord had called it), but of that exposition of the
' motives of the policy of the Government of India as there pub-
lished to the world, her Majesty's Government were parties.
as' far as they could be made parties, not only by adopting
the conduct there announced, but by applauding the wis-
dom, and, he would add, beyond the wisdom, the justice,
with reference to the interests of the Indian empire, which
had been there pursued. He would not go into those
transactions now, but this he would state, adopting the
test laid down by his Noble Friend, that the empire
of India was an empire of opinion, when that discus-
sion came to be entertained in that House, he would ask
_it t(ohdieentre,rmikinaer,. whether the empire, as founded upon opi-
nion,a t
ions
ss
in"ootrds)corutnlidliaeetrh
anadondrissaesithan at any former time.
to the country upon misapprehensionntf
tmhmea
ikgnethi these
gre
os
fortho b
topics-
to which his Noble Friend had alluded he considered
the subject. Atilailyy
it unnecessary to advert to ; he had, however, alluded to
the state of Ireland, and their Lordships might perhaps
expect that he should say something upon that subject. No
ore viewed with more horror than he did the crime that
had been committed in that country, but it was not because
particular parts of that country were stained by the
commission of crimes such as had been adverted to, that
it was to be said that the peace of Ireland was in danger,
or that any charge should be brought forward against the
Governor of that country. It was painful for him to advert
to the crimes that had taken place in Ireland long since ;
but the very first year he landed there the part of the
country in which he resided was stained with the commissio
of crime little less in its atrocity to the one that had been
adverted to. A most amiable magistrate had been murdered.
The murderer was never discovered, but at that time it was
not thought that the Government was to blame with re-
spect to that particular act arid the other acts that had
taken place in Ireland; no vigilance or energy was wanting
upon the part of the local Government in expressing their
detestation of the atrocity of the deed, or in their attempts
to bring the individual who had committed it to punish-
ment. His Noble and Learned Friend had spoken about
the seditious language that had been used in Ireland. He
would put it to him whether it was not far better to take no
notice of it than to prosecute the party ? The public policy
and justice of the country in his opinion did not require that
it should bo made the subject of public prosecution, and he
trusted that his Noble Friend would give credit to those
who had abstained from prosecuting, on the ground that if
they had done so, it would only be the means of increasing
the eriminaiiiiy which it was the object of all Government to