The Sun.
London, England, 1854-02-01 00:00:00

_:'

• -

Til

nected with a measure for checking bribery, corruption,
and intimidation ; and let mo observe in what spirit I shall
consider this large measure, which has been so long. pro-
mised, and which is now about to be produced. It is, in
my opinion, most unwise, especially at the present time, to
introduce any measure of Parliamentary reform. Under any
circumstances, I should perhaps be disposed to rest upon
the great measure of 1832—which, however, I think was
in many instances most unjust in its arraßgements with re-
gard to the influence of the party that was opposed to the
Government which introduced it. But the remedial
agency of time has remedied a great deal of that injustice,
and I should be disposed to place against the advantages of
an equitable arrangement of the claims of that party for
redress, the immense advantages of tampering with the
constitution, and of perpetually disturbing that which,
above all, ought to be hallowed by prescription. But if
that famous bill—the whole bill, and nothing but the bill
—is again to be brought before us, and placed on that
table for execution by those who were its prime projectors,
and who sailed into power and authority on the heady
current of its agitation, then I shall analyse the parties of
which this house and the country is ccmposed, with the
view of attempting to effect an adjustment among the
various classes in the country and their representatives in
this house. (Cheers.) I have taken occasion before to
point out to the house, when a large measure of Parliamen-
tary reform was proposed by the hon. member for Mont-
rose, the extraordinary injustice with which the landed
proprietors of the country have been treated with respect
to the representation in the house, and all classes connec-
ter with the land. I have placed before the house statis-
tics of property and population, and I have shown that the
greatest anomalies brought forward by hon. gentlemen op-
posite in a thoughtless vein are equalled—nay, they are
not equalled, but they are infinitely surpassed—if you ap-
ply these principles and test by these dogmas -- the
arrangements for the re: resentation of the inhabitants of
the counties of England in the Commons House of Parlia-
ment. We have lately had some important returns ordered
by the late Government, and I am not now going into de-
tails with reference to them. They only illustrate, by
fresh and still more striking evidence, the principles which
I have placed before the we with reference to this sub-
ject, and the facts which I have before stated. But this is
not to be denied—that at the present moment more than
one half the population of the country is represented in the
House of Commons by a body of 160 or 170 county mem-
bers, while a population of more than 7i millions are re-
presented by nearly 400 gentlemen, who are called bo-
rough members. So much for the facts at the present
moment. These are not considerations which would have
induced us, especially at the present moment, to come for-
ward and ask for Parliamentary reform, though we
think that great injustice has been done us by the present
arrangement. Thu appeal to the passions, and you
dwell upon the importance of what you call the large towns
while the fact is that there are vast populations, still larger
than the largest towns which are represented only in a most
imperfect manner, and who have not nearly the number of
members which, according to your principles, they are en-
titled to. When we come to this large measure—when we
come to this bold proposition, as we have been informed,
of disfranchisement—when we have to add them to that
horde of forfeited seats which the noble lord has been so
long and so sedulously accumulating—we shall come for-
ward not with clamour—not with that organised arrange-
ment which is brought into play whenever anything is de-
manded by what are called the large towns, but we shall
come down to the House of Commons and appeal to facts
—we shall appeal to principles—we shall ask you to do us
justice, but remembering at the same time that if you
award to us that which we supplicate you to grant us, you
will at the same time add strength and reverence to the
constitution of England. (Cheers.)
Lord J. RUSSELL—Sir, the Government have no rea-
son to complain of the manner in which the Speeeh from
the Throne and the Address this evening have been treated
by the house. On the contrary, I have to thank the house
in the name of the Government for the general spirit of
moderation which prevailed in the way in which hon.
members have declared, with respect to the great Eastern
question, on which opinions are so divided, that they are
ready to wait to consult the papers which have been laid
upon the table of the house, and that not till they have
examined them will they be prepared to give their judg-
ment upon them. If there was anything in the beginning
of the debate which may have been considered to criticise
the policy of the Government, I am quite ready to rest the
answer to those observations on the speech of the hon.
baronet the member for Tamworth, who spoke with great
eloquence and ability on our foreign relations. (Cheers.)
The right hon. gentleman who has just sat down has made
some philological observations on the Speech from the
Throne, rather than found fault with the policy which it
embodies. Of that policy I have only to say that I think
it has been carried on with a view to preserve, if possible,
the blessings of peace for England and the world, and that
it has been directed, in any event, either in a peaceful or
in a warlike termination of our negotiations, to preserving
the honour and interests of this kingdom. That honour
and those interests would not have been preserved if, when
we saw the aggressions of Russia on her unoffending neigh-
bour, we refrained from lifting up our voice in her support,
and by demonstrating that, if necessary, we were ready to
take other means to prevent the success of what appeared to
us to be an unprincipled and an unjust invasion. The
right hon. gentleman has alluded to the terms of the
Vienna note. That note, as I stated in the former session,
was framed not by the English Government, but by the
Government of the Emperor of the French. Some addi-
tions and alterations were made to it by the Austrian Go-
vernment, and we accepted the note as a means which we
hoped would prove for the benefit of Turkey and conci-
liate her claims with those pretensions which the Emperor
of Russia had put footh. It is quite true, I readily ad
mit, that when that note arrived at Constantinople, and
when the Turkish Government showed that, not in the
plain sense, not in the sense affixed to it by the re-
presentatives of the four Powers, but in the sense that
might be affixed to it by her hostile and jealous neighbour,
the note might infringe upon her independence, we had
then no hesitation in recommending the modifications pro-
posed by the Turkish Government to the con ideration of
the-Emperor of Kussea.--TtleligitWeralNG was MIRTI3, snore
all the explanaiions that wee given by Count Nesselrode
as to the sense in which the Vienna note was understood
by the Government of St. Petersburg, proved not only
that the Government of Russia was not prepared to recede
from aty of its pretensions, but that to its unprincipled
and unjust aggression it added something which I cannot
designate otherwise than fraudulent in tho manner in
which it pursued its policy. (Loud and long-continued
cheers.) I should be misleading the house if I were to ex-
press any confident expectation that the offer now made
will be acceded to by the Emperor of Russia. But this I
may say iu reference to the remark of the right hon. gen-
tleman that he hoped there was nothing contrary to the
integrity and independence of Turkey in the terms pro-
posed—that the terms now proposed are terms agreed to
by the representatives of the four Powers and of the
Turkish Government, and that the Turkish Minister for
Foreign Affairs himself framed and signed the note in
which the propositions were conveyed ; so that in advising
the Government of St. Petersburg to accept that note, we
cannot suppose that we are in any way trenching upon the
integrity or the independence of Turkey. (Cheers.) I
think it is very obvious from the terms of the Speech that
whilst the British Government is most anxious, if possible
to effect a pacific settlement of the question, we are not
disposed to let the Government of Russia so far take ad-
vantage of the time that may elapse as that, while she is
owualrdl i
al crer
ipvree,p awr sot isohnosu, whend
b o t
fhoeu enndd
to
of
ttahl el
yn eugnopt
ri ao
i oa nk usgh
pared. (Hear.) I know no injury—l see, on the contrary,
very great advantage—in protracted negotiations, as long
as there is a hope that peace may be the result, if we
do not allow the consequence to follow that an advantage
may be gained by Russia during that time, which an ear-
lier termination of the negotiations would prevent. (Hear,
bear.) When the papers are laid upon the table, I shall
have no objection, on any motion that may be made, or
discussion that may arise, to go fully into these questions.
(Hear.) One thing I may say—that, considering the posi-
tion of Russia in regard to Turkey, and the frontier which
divides them, and that England and France have taken the
most active part in opposing the designs of Russia, we have
thought that it would be an immense advantage in every
point of view, if Austria and Prussia would combine with
us for the purpose of preventing a war from ensuing in
consequence of the aggression that has been made by
Russia. Our endeavours in that respect have not been
fruitless. There has been a protocol signed by the Micis-
ters of the Four Powers, in which they all declare that it
is a satisfaction to them to be able to announce that no di-
minution of the integrity of the Turkish empire will ensue
from the war that now, exists between Russia and her
neighbour. (Cheers.) That declaration, no doubt, is not
complete, that declaration does, not fully meet the views
of the Government of Great Britain • but still it is a great
advantage that, so far as we can, we shall act together : and
when the Government of Austria shall perceive hat war is
at length near, that the negotiations in which she has
willingly taken part will not be successful in inducing the
Emperor of Russia to desist from his efforts, and that no-
thing but bolder measures and a stronger tone would in-
duce him to do so—l say. I have great hopes that the Go-
vernment of Austria, seeing her own interest—an interest
much greater than that of England and Franco on this
question—(hear. hear)—seeing likewise that the interest of
Europe is involved in the settlement of this question—will,
with the Government of Prussia, act generally with us,
and I have no doubt of the immediate result. (Hear,
hear.) I say, considering all these things, that our time
has not been lost in our efforts for conciliation, and in
doing everything that we could consistently for our honour
and interest for that purpose, and in endeavouring to per-
suade the Government of Austria to take what we think a
more enlightened and more successful course. (Hear.)
In the course of the debate there have been remarks made
upon various subjects—upon some foreign subjects by the
right honourable gentleman opposite ; upon some domestic
subjects by others—which have been omitted in the
Speech. I quite agree in the importance of the treaty
to which the right honourable gentlemen refers, and
I have had the honour to present this evening, by
command of her Majesty, papers connected with that
treaty. (Hear, hear.) But really. considering the import-
ance of some of the principal topics touched upon, there
were so many topics contained in the Speech that unless
the right hon. gentleman would recommend us to depart
from all former precedents, and to frame the Royal Speech
of the length of the message of the President of the 'United
States—(a laugh)—we should not be able to include all the
various topics to be referred to. (Hear.) A most impor-
tant subject has been mentioned by the right hon. baronet
the member for Tamworth—the subject of education ; and
the hon. member for Montrose has also spoken on that sub-
ject. There is not one, I believe, more anxious to see a
good system of education extended and established in this
country than I am myself. But it is necessary to consider
the means by which that object may be accomplished.
With regard to one part of this great subject, taken as a
whole—namely, the question of the English universities—
we have taken that subject into consideration, and I hope
that during the course of the month of February—in the
middle or towards the end of it—we shall introduce a mea-
sure for the improvement and reform of the University of
Oxford. (Hear, hear.) With respect to another depart-
ment of this subject, namely, education in Scotland, my
right bon, friend the Lord Advocate has prepared a bill on
the subject, and when it is finally approved of by the Go-
vernment he will introduce it. Now, with respect to va-
rious measures relating to education, I would rather that
we should wait at all events to see the progress of the nu-
merous measures we have to introduce before we say any-
thing respecting them. The right hon. gentleman has
spoken of the question of reform in Parliament, and he
seemed partly to agree and partly to disagree with his hon.
friend the member for Liverpool. The hon. member for
Liverpool told us that Mr. Pitt, in the year 1793, declared
that he was no supporter of a measure of Parliamentary
reform in consequence of the war to which the country was
engaged. Now, however great may be the authority re-
ferred to, for my part I had much rather that Mr. Pitt had
at that time refrained from entering into the war, and pro-

occasion, that the arrangements, which might be considered
virtually to have been concluded, were arrangements which
with many other advantages he referral to, had this pecu-
liarity—.that they contained no condition derogatory to the
interests or to the honour of the Ottoman Porte. (Hear,
hear.) Sir, I need not remind the house that a few days
after Parliament was prorogued the arrangement which
the Government had referred to made its appearance, and
that appearance took the form of the famous Vienna note.
(Rear.) That note has since been recognised to have been
a proposition identical inspirit, and in many parts of it
even in language, with that celebrated ultimatum of Prince
blenschikoff which has occasioned so much disaster and
dismay to Europe. Now, sir, remembering the tone in
Which her Majesty's Ministers addressed Parliament at the
end of last session, and the confident hopes which they
held out on that occasion of an immediate conclusion of
this important controversy, I cannot but refer with some
hesitation to the language in which we are now addressed
in the present speech. lam not going on this occasion
to enter at all into the conduct of the Government dur-
ing all these prolonged negotiations. The documents
which they may place before us will have all the attention
they deserve, and I shall not presume at this instant offer
any opinion of my own upon any of these transactions,
even in cases in which we have been furnished with docu-
ments .by other Governments, or in that one instance in
which we have received a very important paper from her
Majesty's Ministers, namely, the despatch of my Lord
Clareudon. All I wish now is to remind the house of the
tone adopted by the Government when Parliament was
last prorogued, and the expectation that was then held out
to Parliament of an immediate and satisfactory conclusion
of this question, and to contrast the language used on that
occasion with the language which is now wider our notice.
Sir, I think the house will not fail to observe that we are
addressed now much in the same terms as we were then.
We are still told that negotiations are going on, a hope is
still held out that these negotiations may be successful ;
but I think her Majesty's Government, after the complete
failure of the expectations which they held out to us six
months ago, after it having eventually been proved that
the plan which they protected was a plan which they
themselves now would not for a moment sanction—l think
her Majesty's Government, while they told the house that
negotiations are still proceeding, and that they do not en-
tirely despair of these negotiations effecting their object,
ought to have assured us that the object of these negotia-
tions is not one in the spirit of the Vienna note, which, six
months ago, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in
another place, held out to us as an arrangement not dero-
gatory to the interests or to the honour of the Ottoman
Porte. (Hear, hear.) I think, sir, it would have been
more satisfactory to the house if the Government on this
occasion had advised her Majesty to use words which would
have assured the country that if the question can be settled
without the fatal arbitrement of which we have of late been
accustomed to speak, and to speak too familarly, the settle-
ment would be one which would maintain not only the inte-
grity but the independence of the Ottoman Porte, and not
one similar to the Vienna note, which, if carried into effect,
would in fact only operate as a ruse, giving to Russia an
opportunity of effecting those objects which all unnecessary
delay and precaution can only aid and serve. (Hear, hear.)
Although I shall not on an occasion like this, with so impor-
tant a discussion of the whole question before us, propose
any alteration in the Address to her Majesty, I feel it to be
my duty to express my conviction that the language held in
this Address is not sufficiently expressive, is not sufficiently
firm, and is not so explicit as, I think, the circumstances of
the case require. (Cheers.) There is a timidity of tone, I
think, in this Address which appears to me not only unwise
but also unnecessary. (Cheers.) I think that if we still
feel it our duty to support her Majesty's Government in
that attempt at negotiation which they may not yet con-
sider altogether desperate —and I am sure there is no mem-
ber in this house that will blame her Majesty's Govern-
ment for still clinging to negotiations if they themselves
have a conviction that there is still a chance of accomplish-
ing the desired end by such means—(hear, hear)—we must
yet be convinced that the tone taken in the Speech and
Address with regard to these transactions between the
Ottoman Porte and Russia should have been of a higher
character than that which seems to pervade the documents
before us. (Hear, hear.) Sir, I cannot say, with regard
to our foreign relations, that the language of this Address
is in other respects altogether satisfactory. We hear—and
I, for one, hear with pleasure—of the cordial co-operation
of her Majesty with the Emperor of the French. I cannot
fail, sir, to remember, though I have no inclination to
dwell upon the circumstance at this moment, that little
more than twelve months ago I felt it my duty to call the
attention of the house to the relations that then were sub-
sisting between this country and France. I thought it my
duty to attempt to call the attention of Parliament and of
the country to certain expressions and certain conduct of
eminent personages who, from their abilities and their sta-
tion, were able to influence public, opinion—which expres-
sions I was convinced had a tendency to weaken that good
feeling between England and France which, under all cir-
cumstances, should be cherished, but which, under the
then and present aspect of affairs, was doubly desirable and
important. (Hear, bear.) I remember that I was told
then that my observations were factious observations ; but
I appeal for my vindication to the language which is now
held in her Majesty's Speech. (Hear, hear.) lam grati-
fied to find that her Majesty is in cordial co-operation with
the Emperor of the French ; and I have no wish, or need,
to say any more upon that subject. But, sir, there is a
suspicious omission in this Speech, which I think the house
ought to notice. Her Majesty is in cordial co-operation
'with the Emperor of the French ; but so far as the Speech
from the Throne is concerned, and so far as our Address in
answer to that gracious Speech is concerned, there is not
the clear and manifest evidence that I for one could have
desired—that her Majesty is in cordial co-operation with
other powers of very great interest and importance in this
question. (Hear, hear.) I wish we could be assured by
the noble lord opposite that there is no ground for any suspi-
cion of that kind. A statement to that effect wouldjbe very
satisfactory to the house and the country. I should hope
that upon this question her Majesty is not only acting in
cordial co-operation with the Emperor of the French, but
also with the Emperor of Austria and with the King of
Prussia---(cheers)—and if her Majesty is in so satisfactory
a position, then I think the language of the Speech and the
Address should have been of a bolder and firmer character
and one more calculated to cheer the heart of the country
at a moment when it may be entering into a trial of so se-
vere a character. Sir, the whole manner indeed, in which
our foreign relations are treated in the Speech from the
Throne is very peculiar. One would suppose, for example,
that in consequence of the absorbing interest of this unfor-
tunate struggle between the Porte and Russia, all conside-
ration for other great Powers and for other allies of her
Majesty was entirely overlooked and forgotten. I observed
the other day that, in that part of the address of the
President of the United States in which he touches on the
external relations of the great Republic, he particularly no-
tices that there are three great questions of policy connected
with the Government of Great Britain which are yet
unsettled. Now, sir, it does not appear to me that it would
have been an unusual, an unwise, or an unreasonable thing
if there had been some reference in her Majesty's speech on
this occasion to those three unsettled questions of foreign
Policy with the United States, to which the President had
so particularly and so formally referred. (Hear.) There
have also been other incidents connected with our foreign
affairs, not unworthy I think of being noticed in an Address
to her Majesty or in a Speech from the Throne. I remem-
ber about two or three years ago one paragraph of her Ma-
jesty's speech informed the Parliament that a treaty had
been effected with the State of Equador for the abolition
of the slave trade. There were a great many gentlemen in
the house—not, Ithink, much to their discredit—who were
not quite aware where the state of Equador was (a laugh)
—but the paragraph which the noble lord the Secretary for
the Home Department, who was then Foreign Secretary,
contributed to the Speech from the throneon that occasion
was the important announcement of a treaty having been
successfully negotiated and ratified by her Majesty for the
abolition of the slave trade in the state of Equador. Now
sir, there have been treaties this year of still more import-
ance than that with the state of Equador, negotiated and
ratified by her Majesty, referring also to that part of the
world, or at least that quarter of theglobe; treaties in which
the mercantile interestsof this country are interested, in the
successful accomplishment of which they have taken great
Pride, and which I believe are of more real value than
many diplomatic arrangements of greater pretensions.
Why, is there not that important treaty which has opened.
to us she navigation of all the great rivers of South Ame-
rica? (Cheers.) If you want to know what is the opinion
of the merchants of England of the importance of that
treaty, go to the Royal Exchange, go to Liverpool, and
there you will hear men, whose opinions ought to influence
the House of Commons. Speak of that successful diplo-
matic arrangement as not inferior, at all events to the
Vienna note. Why was that not noticed in her Majesty's
Speech ? Why was not the house and the great mercantile
community of Great Britain gratified by an announcement
in her Majesty's Speech of that important treaty having
been concluded ? I will not believe for a moment that it
was because the negotiations had been mainly carried on,
and the policy had been entirely recommended, by the
predecessors of the present Ministry. That I cannot for a
moment believe ; but no one will deny that it is a most
important arrangement—no one will deny that it is highly
appreciated in this country—and allow me, sir, to tell the
house—
allow me to impress upon the merchants of our
great manufacturing and commercial towns that they ought
to be very thankful that that important treaty was success-
fully concluded; because, unless I am misinformed, when the
despatch of the distinguished officer who uns
letiuccessfullf hisy ne-
gotiated that treaty, announcing the completion o mis-
p
sion, was transmitted to this country, it crossed instruc-
tions coming from the Secretary of Stateat home, recalling
him from his post, an and telling him no longer to wasteenterpr the
tless i
public time and money upon so frui
(Cheers.) Now, sir, having obtained such a success under
such hazardous circumstances, I think that it is an addi-
tional reason why we should have been informed
ssfully
in her
Majesty's Speech of such a treaty having been su
concluded. (Hear.) Sir, I shall not, as I have already
said, attempt to touch upon the important question which
probably will soon engage all our consideration. I am per-
fectly prepared to give her Majesty's Ministers credit for
the most sincere desire to avert from this country the great
calamity of war. (Cheers.) That is an admission which I
am sure requires no affectation of candour on any man's
part to make. It must be so clearly their interest as
well as their duty to maintain peace, that I am certain
now no considerations but those of that paramount cha-
racter which should influence statesmen will ever induce
them to take a step so vast in its character, and so
enormous in its results. (Hear, hear.) But, Sir, although
I am ready to give them that credit I shall expect to find
—and I am sure every member of the house will agree
with me in this—that they have been the faithful guar-
dians of the honour of the country. (Cheers.) I say the
faithful guardians of the honour of the country, because I
cannot dissever the idea of the honour of the country from
the interests of the country. I utterly deny that in this
great question, which concerns the balance of power in
the East—which, I think, has been unwisely sneered at
to-night—l deny that there is what has been called a sen-
timental portion and a political portion. I deny that there
are things which are impolitic to be done, but which our
honour requires us to accomplish. I say, on the contrary,
that in every instance it can be made manifest that what
our honour requires us to do you will find the interest of
the State sternly demands. (Hear.) If there is one thing
more than another which, notwithstanding the gloomy
prospects of the country on this important matter, still in-
clines me to hope that there is some chance of an honour-
able peace—it is the ample means which her Majesty's
ministers have provided for the occupation of the time of
Tarliament at the very commencement of the session.
(Hear and laughter.) I can hardly conceive that a body
of men who are about to embark in —I will not say a great
European struggle—though that is the common phrase—
which in fact is not only a European question, but an
Asiatic question—which in fact may stretch into a third
'quarter of the globe, for Russia has not only European and
Asiatic but American territories--I say I c conceive
that a body of statesmen, who Wiwi() that we are about
to =bark in such a conflict, who aro preparing to meet

such an awful conjuncture, such an indefinite combina-
tion which they must be prepared to encounter under
such circumstances--I cannot believe that any body of
statesmen so placed would have asked us not only to
reform the whole of our civil service, not only to reform
the ecclesiastical courts, not only to: reform the poor
law, but even to reform the House of Commons. (Cheers
and laughter.) Sir, I came down here to-day with
the sane fear as many of us had, of some awful disclo-
sures, of some terrible announcements that were about to
be made to us. I thought, we were to make war with the
Emperor of Russia. I find we are only to make war upon
ourselves. (Laughter.) I agree with my honourable friend
the member for Liverpool (Mr. Liddell) in the abstract ob-
servations he made as to the very inopportune season in
which the Government is about to bring forward their
measure of Parliamentary reform. Certainly if we are
about to go to war, when all the energies of the nation
should be collected and absorbed in a struggle which con-
cerns so nearly our honour and our interests, it appears to
me in the hthest degree unwise and unstatesmanlike
that we should dissipate our energies—that we should di-
vert our feelings to another quarter, and to a question of
an entirely different charrcter. In the general and ab-
stract character of his observations therefore I agree with
my honourable friend the member for Liverpool. I agree
with him that a period of war is not favourable to the ar-
rangement of a great commercial change. But I cannot
agree with my honourable friend the member for Liver-
pool that his observations apply to the position of the pre-
sent Government. Think that the present Government
have done only that which they ought to have demo in
meeting this question of Parliamentary reform. Let us
look at relations of the Government to that question.
We have had two Prime Ministers, both of them members
of the present Cabinet, who have formed their Admini-
strations on the principle of the necesity of such a change
—that being their great political dogma. We have them
maintaining the same opinions and taking the same course
under circumstances of various kinds. When two Prime
Ministers have given their opinions on a subject of great
public policy—one which ought to engage public attention
—and when they have announced a measure with respect
to it, I feel that it is utterly impossible that such a ques-
tion can be laid aside. The noble lord, three or four years
ago, after anxious meditation on the subject, came down
to this house, and not only gave his opinion that there
should be a measure of Parliamentary reform, but in the
year after he produced such a measure, he being then the
Prime Minister of the country. Little more than a year
ago a colleague of the noble lord, now Prime Minister,
formed his Administration on the clear understanding
that there should be a large measure of Parliamentary re-
form • and we know that another member of the Cabinet,
a distinguished colleague of the two noble lords, made Par-
liamentary reform the condition of his accepting office. It
is clear, therefore, whether we have regard to the public
character, or to our belief in the political truth of the
statesmen who have taken this decided and matured course
we cannot believe—not because I believe it is inconvenient
to them to felfil the most solemn pledges of their public
life, but because I believe it will be felt as inconvenient by
their followers and partisans—that they will now take a
different course, and maintain that the principle which they
have so repeatedly, formally, and politically recom-
mended, is one that is unwise and impolitic to be pursued.
They cannot avow that but at the expense of all their sa-
gacity as public men—with the confession of how little
prescience that they have foreseen what was required for
the honour and the interests of the country—if they now
come forward and say—" True, four years ago I announced
Parliamentary reform on the principle on which my Go-
vernment was to be carried on—true, the year after I
brought forward a highly finished and comprehensive mea-
sure in unison with that declaration—true, that I quitted
office and, on unexpectedly returning to it, I renewed all
the pledges and repeated all the recommendations which I
had given to Parliament and to the country—true, that I
am now acting with those who more formally and solemnly
reiterated the same declaration," and, having placed
themselves in this situation I ask what will be thought of
them as statesmen and men of sagacity if they now come
forward and say, 'We spoke idly—we thoughtlessly gave
in to the cry of the day—we meant little, though we said
much—(cheers)—we agitated the public mind by holding
out to them fallacious hopes ; but now we are placed in a
grave and responsible position—some of our own followers
do not agree with us ; and, even at the risk of destroying
our character as public men for ever, we now tell you that
Parliamentary reform is not necessary—that it is not de-
sirable to consider the question, much less to legislate
upon it ; and that there should be a tabula rosa of all
those principles on which two eminent statesmen founded
their declarations and formed their Governments. But it
may be said, and has been said to-night by my hon. friend
the member for Liverpool, " Look at the case of Mr.
Pitt." Mr. Pitt was a great statesman, though a young
man—he was pledged to Parliamentary reform at least as
much as those men who, though eminent, yet they will
forgive me for saying, are not so eminent as Mr. Pitt. Mr.
Pitt was pressed with a foreign war before he had fulfilled
his pledges with respect to Parliamentary reform ; and
though I believe he was quite sincere in first making them,
yet, in the consequences which followed, he discarded
them. Bat I venture to remark that that illustrious in-
stance will not apply to the present advisers of the Crown.
It was only last year that the present Administration was
formed on the principle of a large measure of Parliament-
ary reform. It is a very short time since the noble lord
chose to renew and to reiterate all the pledges, and to
repeat all the measures on this most important sub-
ject, which he had previously expressed to the coun-
try, and he was wise in so doing. But look at the
circumstances of the case. You—l do not say the
noble lord—l know that he will not attempt to
excuse himself—l speak to his friends who wish to
find an excuse for him—you are about to embark in a war
which, in your opinion, ought to change your views of
pressing a measure of Parliamentary reform. But you
thought of Parliamentary reform last year. Were you not
then in danger of a war— nay, of worse than a war—were
you not in danger of invasion ? Yes, it was then that you
founded your Government on this principle, and you ap-
pealed to the electors on this very ground of Parliamentary
reform ; and yet at that time you thought, not only war
was impending, but that invasion was immediate, instant,
and urgent, was the doom of this country. (Cries of " Oh,
oh.") Why is it not notorious ? Ido not wish to dwell
upon the topic ; I passed it over lightly, but their was one
Cabinet Minister who, the moment he was appointed, left
the Cesbeeet ceeseen, and went- down to the huetings,
where he told the people that we were not only to be in-
vaded, but invaded in a peculiar way—by bodies of about
10,000 men, who, without any previous notice, were pirati-
cally to be thrown upon our shores. Did he not say to
them, how are you to answer for your wives and daughters
under these circumstances? (Laughter.) This is the posi-
tion of the Government of which I am a member ; we are
about to take steps to protect you, and not only to protect
you, but to give you a measure of Parliamentary reform.
(Laughter and cheers.) I think, therefore, the house will
agree with me that there is no possible excuse for the
noble lord, or the right honourable gentleman, or the
Prime Minister who founds his Government on a large
measure of Parliamentary reform, in the circumstances of
the case as they read circumstances—to evade their solemn
pledge. Do I suppose that the noble lord contemplates
evading his pledge ? I know that he will honestly attempt,
to fulfil-it. Ido not speak of the noble lord or of his col-
leagues, but I speak of the devoted and ingenious friends
of the noble lord who are so interested in his position that
they are quite willing that he should retain it at the ex-
pense of his personal honour and his political sagacity. I
dare say that on the 13th of next month we shall have
that large measure of Parliamentary reform which has
been so long promised introduced to our notice. I say
that the present Ministry, in the present circumstances of
the country, have no excuse for not introducing a large
measure of Parlianientary reform. It may be unwise
that Parliamentary reform should be introduced under
any circumstances ; it may be madness to introduce it
under the present circumstances ; but the present Ministers
must bring in a large measure of Parliamentary reform.
(Cheers.) When that large measure of Parliamentary
reform is proposed to us, I and my friends after di-
gesting it, as we shall digest the blue-books—(laughter)—
will take leave to offer our humble opinions upon it. And
here I must be permitted to say at the outset, that I
entirely protest against the adroit arrangement which
would of necessity connect a measure for the purification
of the Parliamentary constituency with a measure for a
reconstruction of our electoral system. (Cheers.) I hold
that there is no necessary connection whateverbetween them.
We all know that long before the great measure of 1832,
in all cases of delinquent boroughs, where boroughs were
proved guilty of organised and absolute corruption, you
disfranchised them, and gave the seats thus vacated to
other constituencies. That happened frequently before the
bill of 1832, but you gave those seats to other electoral
bodies formed on the known principles of the constitution.
You took the seats from the places so punished, and you
gave them to other bodies ; but whether you gave them to
counties, or enlarged the area of the boroughs themselves,
you still conferred the right of sending members to Parlia-
ment upon constituencies framed in the recognised spirit
and in the ancient forms of the constitution. (Hear,
hear.) I shall be as ready as any man in this house to
support the most comprehensive and the most stringent
measures to put an end to bribery and corruption.
(Cheers.) Ido not say, indeed, that any-than can intro-
duce a measure that will of itself put an end to bribery
and corruption. I know that, for that end, you must
look to influences higher than mere Acts of Parliament.
You have put an end to the vice in classes higher than the
constituent body, not by Acts of Parliament merely, but
by giving them a higher tone of feelings by educating the
minds of those classes, by evoking in them a sense of pub-
lic duty, and by a system which cherished and cultivated
a feeling of self-respect. The same influence which pre-
vents judges and statesmen, and members of this house,
from being bribed, and flagrantly bribed, will in time, if
it be cherished, beneficially act upon constituent bodies
too. But I also agree that by legislative measures we
may do something to check bribery and corruption, and I
will support any law, however stringent, which is at the
same time wise and practical for that purpose. It may be
in the recollection of my honourable friends that only last
session I introduced a measure, in conjunction with my
right honourable friend the member for Midhurst, for this•
very purpose. I must here repeat what I have often
stated, that there is no class in the country less interested
in bribery and corruption than the landed proprietors.
BstintbuetrYes facolardloccoa influenception ; and
anindflutheonscees
wwhhoichhaavree
grsuebat-
prdl
local influence are exactly the class who ought to look
with the greatest jealousy on every measure which
n woulden e
e substitutewhich
theyillegitimate
mayproudly y
influencesexerei
exercise.
that local oncoatl
say
that there is not an instance where local influence has not
been abused, as everything has been abused ; but there is
no class who have less abused the exercise of their local
influence than the landed proprietors on both sides of the
house. (Cheers.) Local influence has its source in the
spirit of neighbourhood, in the principles of good feeling
and kindness ; and those influences are sufficient to place
them in their eminent position without having recourse to
those influences which were originally directed against
themselves, and from which, from the days of Sir Robert
Walpole to the present, they have been the greatest suf-
ferers. (Cheers.) I say, then, in the first place, that I
will not connect a measure efficiently to check bribery and
corruption with a measure for the reconstruction of the
electoral bcdy. There is no necessary connection between
the two subjects ; they are put together to confuse our
ideas, and to prevent us from seeing those measures which
ought to accompany them. We have been told that re-
cent experience has shown how necessary it is to take effi-
cient precautions against the evils of bribery and corrupt
practices at elections. But why are we to limit our exer-
tions to bribery and corruption only? Why is intimida-
tion to be passed over ? (Cheers and counter-cheers.) I
want that question to be answered. Great complaints
have reached me as to intimidation at elections. I have
had many cases brought before me of intimidation—I will
not inquire now in which kingdom they took place. (Hear.)
But if we are in the spirit of purity, to put down bribery
and corruption, I protest beforehand against this limita-
tion of our labours, and I would suggesq, the introduction
of the word "intimidation." Ido not mean formally to
move it—(laughter)—but I make the suggestion to the
noble mover, and I trust he may avail himself of it. I
shall for a moment suppose that we have a large measure
of Parliamentary reform before us, and that it ii not COW

•

'

,
-

.

- '

E SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 1, 1854.

Prince so near the throne ; but, recollect, lam now speak-
ing in defence of one who has been injured by anony-
mous slander—(hear, hear)—and this is the first opportu-
nity on which he has authorised any communication to be
made in reply to those slanders. (Hear, hear.) His Royal
Highness, therefore, continued in this position, giving
advice to her Majesty when it was expedient to do so, and
stating to her his opinion when he thought assistance was
necessary, but the most constitutional deference was paid
to the advice of the Ministers—(hear, hear)—and be it ob-
served, that though it may have been the case during the
reigg of the House of Hanover that Ministers may have been
obliged to resign because they could not agree to something
which the Sovereign proposed, or because they were willing
to propose advice that was not acceptable to the Sovereign,
the administrations of the Queen have always ceased in con-
sequence of a vote of this house. (Cheers.) Well, sir, during
my administration there occurred a case in which his Royal
Highness had to consider his position, and to determine
what he should do with respect to a proposal that was made.
(Hear.) I had some correspondence with the Duke of Wel-
lington at a time when the office of adjutant-general was
vacant. The Duke of Wellington went to Windsor, and he
there informed Prince Albert that it was his opinion that it
would be of great advantage to the army if after his death
his Royal Highness were placed by her Majesty in the po-
sition of Commander-in-Chief. His grace said that he had
thought much upon it—that all his feelings and wishes
were for the good administration of the army—that the
army peculiarly belonged to the Crown—and that he did
net think its interest would in any way be so well cared
for, as by Prince Albert consenting to be his successor.
(Hear, hear.) He said he wished to have a decision upon
the subject, because he would make such arrangements
with respect to the office of adjutant-general and other
offices at the Horse Guards as would give his Royal High-
ness all the assistance that he could give him. (Hear,
hear.) Prince Albert could not but feel that it was a very
great compliment to be told by the Duke of Wellington
that he was a fit person to succeed him in the command of
the army, but after some reflection he informed the Duke
of Wellington that he considered that his place was to be
always near the Queen—(cheers)—that he thought he ought
to identify himself with the Queen— with her position and
with her interests—and that he would depart from that po-
sition if he had any separate office of his own, more espe-
cially an office of the importance of Commander-in-Chief,
and thereby became responsible for other duties, and for
the exercise of other powers beyond those which her Ma-
jesty had to exercise or perform. (Hear, hear.) Imme-
diately after having given that answer, I had the honour
of an interview with his Royal Highness, when he read
the letter he had written to the duke, and it appeared to
me, and I immediately expressed my opinion, that his
Royal Highness had judged most rightly—(hear, hear),—
and that he had exactly viewed his own position. (Hear.)
I think there were other reasons why his Royal Highuess
should not take the office of commander-in-chief ; it is
quite unnecessary to state those. reasons—those which
his Royal Highness himself stated were quite sufficient, and
they showed that, while he considered that he ought not to
be commander-in-chief, he likewise considered that, 'when-
ever he could be of any aid or assistance to the Queen—
whatever difficulty she might feel—whatever decision she
might have come to—he was bound to give the whale of
his intelligence, and zeal, and wisdom to the considera-
tion of that question. (Hear, hear.) I regret that there
should be charges made against his Royal Highness.
(Cheers.) Many of them are too frivolous to notice ; many
of them are mere stories, which disappear the next
day ; but having explained now the general constitutional
position of the Prince—a position of the greatest import-
ance—l shall mention with regard to two different branches
of the public service the sort of charges that have been
made. (Hear, hear.) With respect to the army, in par-
ticular, it has been said that his Royal Highness is in the
habit of constaatly interfering. Now, I would say that
when the Dukr of Wellington acquiesced in the decision
of the Prince, he said at the same time that as it was not
likely that the Queen would again personally enter into
details of the military service, he hoped his Royal High-
ness would always give his attention to anything that af-
fected the state aid efficiency of the army. This his Royal
Highness has done with regard to any general question
which he thought affected that state and efficiency. (Hear,
hear, hear.) With regard to the ordinary business of the
Horse Guards, he has never in any way interfered ; with
respect to patronage, he has never at all interfered—(hear,
hear)—and I think the house will agree that, having had
this request from the Duke of Wellington, and seeing that
it was not likely that her Majesty would attend to those
points which the Kings, her predecessors, had attended to,
it is but right that his Royal Highness, with respect to
general questions that might effect the army, should pay
attention to those questions. (Hear, hear.) Sir, it so
happens tkat a short time ago a circumstance occurred
which was so perverted that I must take the liberty of
stating what were the real facts of the case. The adjutant-
general and quarter-master-general are appointed by the
Sovereign, and not by the commander-in-chief. But the
Sovereign, as it may be supposed, usually takes the advice
of the commander-in-chief in making those appointments.
A difference of opinion occurred between Lord Hardinge
and Sir George Brown with respect to the weight that the
soldier should carry, and with regard to other points of
military detail and arrangement. Sir George Brown, whose
correspondence has been shown to me by Lord Hardinge,
wrote a letter in exceedingly suitable terms, saying that as
there was a considerable difference between Lord Hardinge
and himself, and as his own opinion, formed upon what he
had heard from the Duke of Wellington, was unshaken,
he thought it was better that he should resign the office
of adjutant-general, and he, therefore, begged Lord Har-
dinge to place his resignation before the Queen. Now, it
has been represented that this resignation was somehow
produced by the interference of Prince Albert. That story
is totally false. It arose entirely from the difference of
opinion I have stated. Lord Hardinge immediately laid
Sir George Brown's resignation before her Majesty, and
reeommended that Sir George Cathcart should be appointed
the successor to Sir George Brown, as he considered him a
very distinguished officer, and of an age that would enable
him to perform actively the duties of that situation. Her
Majesty acquiesced in the advice that Lord Hardinge gave,
but she said she hoped that General Wetherell, who was
next in that office of adjutant-general to Sir George Brown,
would meet with every consideration from Lord Hardinge.
Now, it should be mentioned that General Wetherell
was the son of one who was in constant attendance upon
the Duke of Kent, and I am sure that the house will
not think it wrong that her Majesty—recollecting the
services of General Wetherelrs father to her father—
should wish that every consideration and kindness should
be shown to that distinguished officer. Lord Har-
dinge said that he was quite ready to pay every conside-
ration to the merits of General Wetherell, that he
thought very highly of them himself, that he performed
his duties in Canada very well, but that ho (Lord Har-
dingo) did not think he would be so efficient au adjutant-
general as Sir George Cathcart; that ho was, however,
quite ready to propose some method by which it should be
shown that no disapprobation was shown towards General
Wetherell. Upon this an equerry of her Majesty, who
was likewise in attendance upon his Royal Highness, came
to London to express to General Wetherell the Queen's
sense of his services, and that it was not from any slight
to him that she had taken the advice of Lord Hardinge,,
General Wetherell, as mi ;ht be expected, expressed his
grateful sense of this mark of her Majesty's condescension
and kindness, and made no complaint of the appointment
which was made to the office of adjutant-general. Pre-
sently, however, it was said that General Brown had been
spoken to by Lord Hardinge, and had said—but perhaps I
had better read the letter in which this assertion is con-
tained

ceeded with the Parliamentary reform. (Cheers.) But I
do not think the precedent is applicable to the present
time. If it were so, indeed, it would be no slight post-
ponement of the question of reform, because that reform
which Mr. Pitt postponed in 1793 was not adopted by Par-
liament until nearly forty years afterwards, and I certainly
cannot consent to postpone reform for that length of time.
(Hear, hear.) But, sir, it is to be considered whether the
excuse was a good or a bad one. What Mr. Pitt was
engaged in resisting, or counteracting, was the spirit of
republicanism and democracy, and he thought it unwise
to allow that spirit to display itself by supporting any
measure of Parliamentary reform. (Hear, hear.) That was,
in fact, the tendency, spirit, and object of his war. At pre-
sent we are in a totally different position. Whatever
complaint we may have to make of the Emperor of Russia,
it is not •that which Mr. Pitt made, namely, that he is
engaged in supporting the pestilent doctrines of democracy
abroad. (Hear, hear.) We cannot say that the 'Emperor
of Russia has issued any decree of fraternisation by which
he hopes to support republicanism. (Hear, hoar.) There
is, therefore, no likeness between the cases, but I own. for
my part, I do not agree in the cogency of the argument,
even without the precedent which my hon. friend (if he
will allow me so to call him) the hon. member for Liver-
pool has used. It does not appear to me that this is at
all an unfit or improper time for introducing the ques-
tion of Parliamentary reform. (Hear.) I know to those
who do not like the measure a fit time is always wanting.
Mr. Wyndham, who was a great master of illustration and
delusion, when a measure was introduced in a time of
public quiet and peace, said, " You are like the man in the
Spectator, who had every symptom of the gout except the
pain (laughter) ; you are going to deal with a disease that
causes you no inconvenience." Times changed, and there
was a vast deal of commotion, and agitation, and excite-
ment, and Mr. Wyndham still opposed reform' saying
" Surely you will not repair your house in the hunting
season." (Laughter.) On both occasions he was ready
with an illustration, and so it is with many of these who
now say that this is not the time to introduce a measure
of Parliamentary reform. I cannot but refer to a pledge
which 1 gave on this subject in the year 1848, a time evi-
dently when a great democratic revolution was flying
through Europe. I thought when the honourable member
for Montrose then proposed a measure of reform that it was
not advisable to introduce a measure of that kind at that
period. I said " Although I cannot concur with your pro-
posal at this time, or with the exact grounds of your pro-
posal at any time, yet my opinion is that when this fit has
passed away, and when Europe shall be tranquil, so far as
regards those democratic movements, that will be the time
to consider further improvements in our representative
system." I cannot think that there is any danger in discus-
sing the question of reform during the excitement of a
foreign war, but the time that really is dangerous for such
a discussion is the time of great popular excitement and dis-
sension at home. (Hear.) It is said there is no feeling on
the subject—that there is a complete apathy about reform.
If that be the case, is it not the proper time to discuss the
question of reform? (Hear.) Lest in the course of war
there should be times and periotis of distress, when the
people should become excited, and large meetings should
be assembled in every town, partly crying out more
wages and cheaper food, and partly crying out for an in-
crease of political power—is it not wise to forestall any
demand of that sort? (Hear.) Supposing we have the
calamity of war, and have with it the necessity for in-
creasing the public burdens, is it not a fitting time to en-
large the privileges of the people when you are imposing
upon them fresh taxes (hear), so that the House of Com-
mons, in imposing taxes upon the people, may, as far as
possible, impose them upon those who have elected them ?
(Hear.) When the bill shall be introduced, the right hon.
gentleman opposite will have an opportunity of making
his criticisms upon its character. I own the right hon.
gentleman somewhat surprised me. After saying that
it was unwise to introduce a reform bill at the present
time, he ended by suggesting that perhaps he should
have a reform bill of his own. (Laughter.) If that is in-
troduced, I shall listen to the righthonourable gentleman's
proposal, and see if we can borrow anything from the stile
—(a laugh)—which he has no doubt given to his bill.
(Hear, hear.) I remember about two years ago, when the
right hon. gentleman held the office of Chancellor of the
Exchequer, he spoke then of the expediency and propriety
of giving the franchise to the working men. (Hear, hear.)
That was his doctrine at that time, and we shall see when
this bill is .introduced whether he has departed from or
maintained that doctrine. (Hear.) After having stated
generally the views which I entertain with regard to the
several topics of the Address, I have to call the attention
of the house to a subject of very great importance, but one
in speaking of which I hope I may not overpass the bounds
of due discretion. (Hear, hear.) I rejoice that I have
not been wrong in supposing that no member of this house
would in any way adopt or countenance the calumnies
that have been spread abroad with respect to a royal per-
sonage (loud cries of hear, hear, and cheers) the
Prince Consort. (Hear, hear.) And, sir, if those calum-
nies were like ordinary calumnies, I might be disposed to
leave them without notice topass away in the course of
time ; but they affect so much the highest interest of the
State, and there has been so much of honest delusion, as
well as of violent calumny, that I do feel it is necessary to
make some statement with regard to the position of that
illustrious Prince. (Hear, hear.) I may just say, that
while the charge is generally one of unconstitutional inter-
ference on the part of his Royal Highness, it is generally
admitted—admitted throughout the country, and by all
parties, that there never was a Sovereign who has acted
more strictly than her Majesty in the spirit of the consti-
tution and in the exercise of her high prerogative. (Loud
cheers.) Her Majesty has accepted the Ministers whom
she found were approved of by the House of Commons,
and she has given them her whole and entire confidence.
(Hear, hear) On her accession she found Lord Melbourne
Prime Minister, and he had her entire confidence. (Hear,
hear.) Lord Melbourne was succeeded by Sir Robert Peel, 1
and Sir Robert Peel had the entire confidence of her Ma-
jesty. (Hear, hear.) It was my destiny to succeed Sir
Robert Peel, and during more than five years, in which I
held the honourable position which I then held, I can
say most truly that I received from her Majesty every
support—(cheers)—and every mark of confidence that a
Minister could expect. (Cheers.) I cannot but express
towards her Majesty my gratitude for the kindness with
which I was treated, and for the attention with which all
my representations were listened to by her Majesty.
(Cheers.) Well, then, is it not strange that it should be
said—is it not incredible that her Majesty, during a great
Pari-ofth"--f-imaro‘-nla have lies consort by her side, and
that while the whole of the conduct of her anvernmeut
has been most constitutional, it should be possible that the
Prince Consort during that time should have been acting
in an unconstitutional manner. (Hear, hear.) There is
something absurd and contradictory on the face of it—
(cheers)—but Ido feel it is necessary, owing to the honest
delusion which I have said has prevailed, to enter some-
what into what is the position (not much defined in any
of tbo law books or by precedents) of a Prince Consort in
this country. (Hear, hear.) When her Majesty came to
the throne, being then only eighteen years of age, and of
course inexperienced, Lord Melbourne considered what it
became him to do when her Majesty was pleased to say
that he should continue in the post of First Lord of the
Treasury. (Hear, hear.) It seemed to Lord Melbourne
that it was his duty to advise her Majesty on all subjects
with regard to matters of domestic interest - with regard
to the arrangements of the palace, as well as to perform
the ordinary duties of Prime Minister. (Hear, hear.)
But, doubtful as to whether he had come to a right opi-
nion, he resorted for advice to the highest authority he
could obtain ; he went to the Duke of Wellington.
(Cheers) The Duke of Wellington entirely agreed with
him, and said that if he held the office of Prime Minister,
he would take exactly the course that Lord Melbourne had
pointed out. (Cheers.) Three years after her Majesty's
accession her Majesty espoused Prince Albert, the present
Prince Consort. The position in which Prince Albert
should stand was likewise a matter for'consideration. He
was, as the house knows, naturalised by Parliament, and
naturalised in such a manner that he could be a member
of the Privy Council. (Hear.) Some doubts have been
stated on this subject, but anybody who looks into the
subject will see that he was not only enabled but
fully authorised to sit in the Privy Council. (Hear, hear.)
Lord Melbourne asked nie what was my opinion as to the
course that should be pursued with respectto the despatches
that shoul l arrive, and all the secret communications of the
Minister ; I said that I had no doubt whatever that her
Majesty should communicate them as she thought fit to
the Prince-Consort—(cheers)—and that I did not think, in
his
relation Majesty, it would be fair to have any
concealment
(Loud cries of hear, hear,
a nd c
from recollection, and do not
very
whether Lord Melbourne at that
distinctlyheers .
oo )
Inh
re
a the
mrecollect,
c onlloetcts,sure
r subject.
e
time mentioned the subject, but I am sure that Lord Mel-
bourne and I‘ thought it our duty to advise that that
should be the conduct with regard to public despatches
add communications. (Hear.) I think that any other ad-
vice would be foolish and unbecoming. (Cheers.) It could
Prince, after his marriage, should
Ailnafjormaytio(n from the news-
that hea—and
notdiscub
he should shouldpübliublichappen
e ovtnehluaytt
sgtwahtieht
her
his
papers or public statements, while her Majesty had all
the despatches and official information before her, would not
only be an absurdity, but it would be impracticable.
(Cheers.' Well, then, sir, such being the position of the
Prince, it is quite evident that there is no truth whatever
in the colour which has been attempted to be placed upon
his Royal Highness's relation to her Majesty inethis re-
spect, on nt he statement that Lord Melbourne constitu-
tionally debarred the Prince from a knowledge of those
State affairs, and that Sir Robert Peel was the first person
who introduced the practice. (Rear, hear.) Why, sir, I
believe it is true, that in Sir Robert Peel's time, it first
happened that his Royal Highness was present during the
interview with Ministers, but the house will at once see,
that if his Royal Highness, according to the advice of Lord
Melbourne, was informed of all that was going on, and
knew as well as her Majesty all that was taking place, his
mere introduction into the closet when the Ministers had
their communications with her Majesty, was merely a con-
venience, and established nothing beyond the principle
that had been adopted. (Hear, hear.) If the Prince had not
been present when the Ministers were with her Majesty,
her Majesty would have communicated with him. That
would be a circuitous report of what the Ministers had
said, and would be a less convenient mode of proceeding
than if his Royal Highness had been present ; for in the one
case, as in the other, his Royal Highness having, I need
hardly say, the intellect—(cheers)—the information, and
the general knowledge—(hear, hear)—which belong 10 him,
it would have been quite impossible that her Majesty
would not have spoken to him on every matter of great
importance that would arise. (Hear, hear.) lam now
speaking generally of their relations, without any refer-
ence to the constitutional relations which subsist between
the Sovereign and her Ministers, because, as I have stated
at the commencement, there has never been any com-
plaint that those relations have not been properly recog-
nised. (Hear, hear.) It was Lord Melbourne and I who
advised it, and we thought we were acting entirely and in
the spirit of the constitution in giving that advice, that
his Royal Highness should b
ar, e fully informeddid LordM with respecel-
t
to all that had passed. ( hear.) But
bourne consider that there was no advantage in her Ma-
jesty taking that counsel. (Hear, hear.) Be it remembered
that he had taken upon himself on her accession, during
the youth of the Queen, to give her advice upon every sub-
ject. At the time that Sir Robertaeel assumed the reins
of Government her Majesty been already mar-
ried. It was in the beginning of September, 1841; and on
the 30th of August in that year Lord Melbourne wrote in
those terms to her Majesty— " Lord Melbourne cannot
satisfy himself without again stating to your Majesty in
writing, what he bad the honour of saying to your Majesty
respecting his Royal Highness the Prince. Lord Melbourne
has formed the highest opinion of his Royal Highness's
judgment, temper, and discretion, and he cannot but feel
a great consolation and security in the reflection, that he
leaves your Majesty in a situation in which y our Majesty
has the inestimable advantage of such advice and assist-
ance. Lord Melbourne feels certain that your Majesty
cannot do better than to have recourse to it when it is
needed, and to rely upon it with confidence." That was
the opinion which Lord Melbourne had fofmed of his
Royal Highness's ability, and I may say that no one who
had any intercourse with his Royal Highness could form
any other opinion—(hear, hear)—but must appreciate the
judgment and the ability of this amiable prince. I should
be sorry, without necessity, to refer to the affairs of

" Great Stanhope-street, Jan. 20.
" Lord Hardinge presents his compliments to Sir George
Brown, and requests his attention to an article in the
Morning Advertiser of the 18th of January, which des-
cribes Sir George Brown as having onion° occasion replied
with great emphasis to Lord Hardinge that he was aware
that he had. sworn allegiance to her Majesty, but that he
could not recognise the authority of the Prince in any
matter connected with his office at the Horse Guards.
Lord Harding° desires to be informed whether, in the
transaction of the official business of the Adjutant-Gene-
ral's department, any such conversation as that described
ever took place between them ?"
The reply to this letter was as follows :
" 61, Eaton-square, Jan. 20.
" Sir George Brown presents his compliments to Lord
Hardinge, and in reply to his note this moment received,
begs to assure his lordship thathe has no recollection what-
ever of ever having received orders from him as emanating,
from Prince Albert, and that consequently he never could
have expressed himself in the terms he is represented to
have done in the article extracted from the Morning Ad-
vertiser, transmitted with his lordship's note."
With regard to the other statements respecting the Horse
Guards, the same contradiction could be given if it were
worth while. I believe I have described accurately the state
of the case, and of the relations which do exist between
Prince Albert and the commander-in-chief. When the
Duke of Wellington was commander-in-chief, these com-
munications were frequent. They have been less frequent
of late, but they all relate to the general efficiency of the
army. There is another subject, with respect to which a
specific assertion was likewise made. It was said that upon
questions of foreign policy, and more especially upon that
Eastern question which at present absorbs to so great a de-
gree the attention of the country, Prince Albert had taken
a course to thwart the advice of her Majesty's responsible
Ministers, and that in the attempt so to thwart their ad-
vice he was in the habit of writing to foreign ministers on
these subjects. Now, on that point I will read the
following letter from the Earl of Westmoreland
" TO THE EDITOR OF THE MORNING ADVERTISER.
" Sir—my attention has been called this day to a para-
graph in the Morning Advertiser of the 14th inst., which
states That if these noblemen (Lord Stratford de Red-
cliffe and Lord Westmoreland) were called on to state what
has passed in writing between an illustrious personage
and themselves, relative to the Eastern question, and to
produce the correspondence, we have no'doubt that disclo-
sures would be made which would startle the people of
England from their propriety::
" I lose no time in informing you that there is not the
slightest foundation for the supposition therein contained.
I have not had any communication, directly or indirectly,
with the illustrious personage' alluded to since I first
came to Vienna. I never received a letter from the Prince
containing one word upon politics, public men, or public
affairs. The only letters with whiCh his Royal Highness
has honoured me have related to matters of art and bene-
volence.
"I feel satisfied that you will take an early opportunity
of giving publicity to this contradiction of the report cir-
culated in your paper. " Your obedient servu.nt,
"Vienna, Jan. 22, 1854." • " WESTMORELAND."
Thus, whenever these allegations took a specific shape, it is
obvious they could be at once contradicted, and that in a
manner the most decided. His Royal Highness has never
been in the habit of corresponding with foreign ministers.
There was one instance, and I believe one only, in which it
happened that a minister at a foreign Court wrote to him,
undesired and unrequested by him, and his Royal High-
ness immediately sent the letter to the Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs, and desired to know what answer he
advised him to return. With respect to the Court of St.
Petersburg, I believe that the only communications that
have passed have been on matters of ordinary courtesy
and civility, and that is some time since that took place.
On another occasion, when a near relation of her Majesty,
'being the representative of Austria at the Court of St.
Petersburg, was afflicted by a dangerous illness, Sir
Hamilton Seymour, our Minister at that Court,
wrote
repeated accounts from day to day of the healthous al of thata-
relation. I have thus gone through th ileg
gations quite .as far as it is proper and becominouse g that
t
I should do so. I need hardly appeal h
consider, but I hope that the country
will consider,
what must be the position of the Prince as relates
to her Majesty. We have had two female sovereigns be-
fore, both of whose reigns were great and glorious in En-
glish history. Queen Elizabeth, no doubt, feeling that she
would not like to divide her power, and that her mind and
her fortitude 'and her ambition were fully equal to the
conduct of all the affairs of this realm, never married
as the house knows. Queen Anne was married to a prince
of no very distinguished intelligence, and we all know that
while the policy of Marlborough prevailed great victories
were gained; but that, owing to a change of influence at

C''.-
.~r'

_.,. s

,
,

the palace, to one lady supplanting another, these victories
gave place to the convention of Utrecht. Her present
Majesty is in a different position to either of these sove-
reigns. Her Majesty is married to a prince of singular
attainments, and their domestic life is as good an example
to all the Queen's subjects as her constitutional conduct is
a model for all sovereigns. (Cheers.) Would any man
believe me if I were to say that, while thus united, the
Queen never consulted with the Prince Consort—whose
eminent qualifications I have described—with respect to
affairs that nearly interest her Majesty, that interest her
fortunes, and the fortunes of her crown, the welfare of
her people, the happiness of her interior life, and her rela-
tions with many of those who are dear to her? No one
would believe me if I made such an assertion. I say, then,
that I hope in future there will be no delusion upon the sub-
ject. There is no harm in telling the wholetruth withregard
to this matter ; in saying that her Majesty spathe Prince are
inseparably united, and that with regard to public counsels
as with regard to private affairs, they have no greater com-
fort than to communicate with one another. (Hear, hear.)
And when the people of this, country, always just in the
end, have reflected upon these matters, I think that the
result of these calumnies, base a they are, and of these
delusions, blind as they have been, will be to attach the
people of this country still more strongly to the Queen of
these realms, and to give a firmer and a stronger founda-
tion to the throne. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. WALPOLE—Sir, I am sure that the house and the
country aro indebted to the noble lord for the manly,
honourable, and able manner id which ho has vindicated
the Prince Consort from charges as calumnious and, in my
opinion, as extravagant as ever were urged against any man,
It would be presumption in me to add much to the state-
ment of the noble lord ; for, with regard to the specific
charges brought against that illstrious personage, they are
disposed of completely; and, with regard to the constitu-
tional position occupied by his Royal Highness, I have no
hesitation in saying publicly what I have often before ex-
pressed in private with reference to these calumnies—that I
conceive there is, according to the constitution, not only no
reason why every public and private matter should not be
communicated to the Prince Consort by the Queen, but
that it would be contrary to all good feeling to suppose
that such communications should not take place. The
only point which I wish to add to the statement of the
noble lord is this I—the noble lord has assured the house
that her Majesty the Queen has, according to the constitu-
tion, invariably reposed the utmost confidence in the
ministers of her choice, beginning with Lord Melbourne,
going on with Sir R. Peel, and ending with himself. I
hope I may be allowed to supply the only omission in the
noble lord's statement. On my honour, I positively assert,
on behalf of Lord Derby and his colleagues, that the same
confidence was as frankly and as fully confided to them by
her Majesty. I will add no more on this point, because
the noble lord has so completely disposed of the whole of
this case. I will not be supposed to flatter the Prince ;
but still less' will L from fear of stating what I believe -
to be the truth, detract one iota from the high and just
praise which the noble lora has given to the consort of
the Queen, whose intelligence, capacity, and conduct since
he has been in this country, entitle him to every possible
respect and esteem from all her Majesty's subjects. (Hear.)
Having disposed of that part of the speech of the noble lord,
perhaps the house will allow me to recall its attention to the
commencing passages of his speech. The part of his speech
to which I refer related to our foreign policy.' In these
passages the noble lord has to my mind supplied a great
omission, which would otherwise have been remarked upon
in the country, with respect to certain matters connected
with Russia and Turkey. In the first place he has assured
the house, and k think it will be satisfactory to the coun-
try to hear the assurance, that the last efforts at negotia-
tion which have been going on between this country and
foreign powers have now brought the matter to an unani-
mous expression of opinion on the part of the four great
powers, and as I understood the noble lord, with the assent
of Turkey. (Hear.) I conclude he refers to what is called
the collective note, which, to my mind, whatever may be
my opinion of the former parts of the transaction, has put
the matter on a proper basis—the vindication of the inde-
pendence and integrity of Turkey. Another satisfactory
part of the noble lord's speech appeared to me that in
which he supplied an omission in the Speech from the
Throne. I mean the passage in which he referred to the
disposition of the other powers. I understand from his
statement, that we may now expect, if not as certain, at
least as possible, that the Emperor of Austria and the King of
Prussia are concurring or likely to concur, with France and
England in the views they take on this question. That
also was a communication which I was glad to hear from
the noble lord. The noble lord made a third observation
equally important, though I cannot agree with him on the
conclusions which he drew from it. He told us that he
thought it was not only not detrimental, but that it was
advantageous to this country and to Europe to protract
negotiations as long as possible, if by these protracted ne-
gotiations peace could be secured, and the interests of the
parties were not in the meantime impaired. I hope the
noble lord will forgive me for reminding him, in connection
with this part of his speech, that it was while former nego-
tiations were going on that the Pruth was crossed, in order
to obtain " a material guarantee for peace"—a new term, I
believe, in European diplomacy. And we should not shut
our eyes to the fact, that it was while these negotiations
were proceeding that the principalities have been occupied,
that contributions have been levied, and that martial law
bas been proclaimed there. Now I agree with the noble lord
that negotiations should be continued so long as there is a
chance of peace being preserved, consistently with the
security due to Turkey. And I hope that negotiations will
not be continued if no better protection can be secured to
Turkey than she has met with in the occupation of the
principalities and the disaster of Sinape. (Hear, hear.)
And now, sir, I cannot refrain from making a passing ob-
servation with reference to the remarks which fell from
the noble lord on the subject of the Reform Bill. My right
hon. friend (Mr. Disraeli) pointed out to the noble lord the
extreme inconvenience of discussing a measure of this kind I
which may give rise to great difference of opinion while
we should be endeavouring to unite every person in this
country, hand and heart, to stand by an ally unjustly at-
tacked, and to prevent any further injustice being wrought
against Turkey. I think the observation of my hon. friend
was a just one ; but at any rate I hope that the noble lora,
on proposing his Reform Bill, will take the advice given
him by my hon. friend in a previous observation—that he
will not confound electoral purification with Parliamen-
tary reform or the reconstruction of the Commons House
of Parliament ; and that in the bill to be introduced care
will be taken not to give to any class in this country an
undue share of the representation. In my opinion, the
noble lord has hazarded a great deal in introducing this
Reform Bill ; and I should have thought it would have
been safer, notwithstanding the pledges which the Minis-
ters of the Crown have given to propose some reform,
not to have proposed it in the present state of
affairs. And I must say that I have considerable
doubts, and always have entertained considerable doubts,
as to whether any further reform in the representation
of the people is either desired, or is likely to be bene-
ficial. Nay, more, I will go on and say that if you pro-
pose a reform bill, you must prove two propositions before
you can expect the Parliament of this country to adopt it.
One is, that you do not make any unnecessary changes,
and that you do not make any unless you are convinced
that there are grievances and abuses which cannot be re
dressed without a material alteration in the constitution of
the State. The second proposition is, that when you make
that representative alteration, you do not by the change
introduce greater evils than those that you propose to re-
form. But as I have already said, Ido not wish to anti-
cipate the discussion of this question. lam sure that
when it is laid on the table of the house, it will have the
consideration which it deserves ; but I frankly own that
I neither think the time convenient for the proposition of
such a measure, nor do I think that the measure its_lf is
at all required. I most say that I doubt very much whe-
ther the constitution of the Commons House of Parliament
will be improved by further tampering with the distribu-
tion of the franchise. (Hear, hear.)
The Address was then agreed to.
The SPEAKER informed the house that he had received
from the Parliamentary agent a communication, stating
that the petition against the return of the present members
fqathe borough of Liverpool would not be further pro-
cesßed with.
The house then adjourned at ten minutes before eleven
I o'clock.
Lg

<<
~,
~..


LAST _NIG:HT.

_,-DON

DOWNING-STREET, JAN. 30.
The Queen has been pleased to appoint Anthony Nue-
grave, Esq., to be Colonial Secretary and Clerk of the
Crown for the Island of Antigua.
Her Majesty has also been pleased to make the following
appointments for the Island of Malta, viz. :--Doctor
Paolo Dingli, to be President of the Court of .A.ppe ;
Doctor Antonio Micallef, to be one of her Majesty's
Judges; and Doctor Adrian() Dingli, to be Crown Advo-
cate.

THE MURDER AT ACTON.

VERDICT OF THE JURY.

Yesterday Mr. Wakely resumed, at the Goldsmiths'
Arms, East Acton, the thrice adjourned inquiry touching
the death of Richard Medhurst, aged 14, who was
found murdered in a ditch in Friar's-lane. The facts
of this barbarous case are so fresh upon tha public mind
that they need no recapitulation. The inquiry was
adjourned on the last occasion, in order that the coroner
might apply to the Secretary of State for the production
before the jury of a person named Wildbore, who
had been arrested, charged with the murder ; but in
consequence of the subsequent acquittal of that person by
the police court, the coroner did not consider it necessary
to apply to Lord Palmerston. It being expected that Mr.
Wildbore would appear before the coroner yesterday,
much excitement prevailed in the neighbourhood, and a
number of persons collected outside the Goldsmiths' Arms,
in the expectation of catching a glimpse of him. On the
re-assembling of the jury, the summoning officer having,
in answer to the coroner, said there was no fresh
evidence forthcoming, the coroner, after making
same cursory remarks as to the extraordinary nature
of the case, proceeded to charge the jury. He said
he felt that it would be useless to adjourn again, as,
although he considered the guilty parties would be
eventually discovered, yet that would not be in all probabi-
lity for some time to come. He hoped, in conclusion,
that the police would use their utmost endeavours to dis-
cover the guilty parties, for it was a fearful and frightful
thing for the public to feel that their children could not
go abroad without being kidnapped and used for some
abominable purposes.
Sergeant Earthy said the police were using their utmost
endeavours to discover the guilty persons.
The Coroner remarked that he was sure the perpetrators
of the diabolical deed would not long escape the punish-
ment which their crime demanded.
The jury then retired, and after a brief consultation,
,
returned a verdict of " Murder against some person
or persons unknown."
After the verdict had been recorded, Mr. Fairman, soli-
citor, of Bishop himself on behalf of
and said thathis client was so down
Mr. Wildbore,
by the groundless charge brought against him
confined to a bed of illness, and was therefore wholly un-
able to attend the inquiry, al though he wast most anxious
to have done so. But if the coroner would adjourn the
investigation, Mr. Wildbore would be enabled to attend
on a future day.
The Coroner said that not a tittle of evidence implicating
Mr.Wildbore had been adduced bet ore him. He thought
that the police ought not to be too hasty in making an -ar-
rest, where the evidence was so slight against the accu,ecl.
The jury fully acquiesced in the coroner's observations ;
after which the witnesses were bound over in the usual
recognizances to appear if rewired to prosecute in the
matter, and the inquiry terminated.

SUMMAR, FOR DESTITUTE AND CRIMINAL CHILDREN.—
A. memorial has been presented to Viscount Palmerston
by a number of inhabitants of Hull, urging the necessity
for immediate legislation to provide at the public ex-
pense, in all populous districts, industrial and reforma-
tory establishments, where all destitute and neglected
children shall be educated and trained in useful habits,
and where in a separate ward or establishment, and un-
der classification, those convicted of crime may he like-
wise trained until of an ago to earn their own subsist-
ence, the parents of all such children in the meantime
being liable for the expenses incurred.
The Duke and Duchess of Roxburgh have arrived at
the Clarendon Hotel, Bond-street, from Brighton. Lord
and Lady Falmouth have also arrived at the Clarendon,
from Mereworth Castle, Maidstone.