The Sun.
London, England, 1853-06-17 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING., JUNE 17, 1853.

the Government had no intention whatever of proposing
any alteration in the advertisement duty, except to re-
duce it from is. 6d. to 6d.
Mr.'T. M. GIBSON said as the resolution now stood,
advertisements in books would be liable to the duty,
which had not been the case hitherto.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
resolution was open to amendment in that respect.

THE LATE AND PRESENT GOVERNMENT AND

MR. KEOGH.-EXPLANATIONS.

Mr. KEOGH.—Mr. Speaker, in rising to make the
statement of which I have given notice, I am sure I shall
not seek in vain the indulgent attention of both sides of
the house—(hear, hear)—whilst I endeavour to defend
myself against charges impeaching my veracity and dero-
gatory to my personal honour. (Hear, hear.) I have
that confidence, because I have observed that no matter
what may be our individual or party conflicts, this house
is always prepared fairly and candidly to listen to any
statement which any one of its members may be driven to
make in vindication of his character. Sir, lam not with-
out a conviction that discussions of this nature are irk-
some, tedious, and disagreeable to the house. (Hear,
hear.) lam not without the conviction—to me a most
unpleasant one—that altercations of a personal nature
have ton often arisen between the representatives of Ire-
land. (Hear, bear.) But this I wish to impress upon
both sides of the house, and I hope that justice will be
done me in this respect, namely, that in this case I am
not the aggressor—(hear, hear)—that I have neither sought
nor originated this cause of quarrel ; that it has been put
on me under circumstances which I do think every mem-
ber of this house, when they are fully explained to them,
will believe are neither consistent with fair play nor with
those terms which are conceded to every political oppo-
nent—which are never denied by any generous man to an
absent individual. It will be in the recollection of hon.
members that on Friday last, in another place, a discus-
sion occurred in which my name was much brought into
question. To that discussion and the object of it it is not
now my intention to allude further than may be necessary
as an introduction to the issue raised between myself and
the noble lord the member for Coleraine (Lord Naas.) For
that discussion I was perfectly unprepared. No notice
was given of it to any of my friends, and it was not until
a quarter after five o'clock on that day, that, on meeting
my hon. friend the member for Roscommon in the lobby,
I learned that my name had been introduced into a dis-
cussion in the House of Lords ; but as I perceive that dis-
cussion is to be renewed in a formal manner before a proper
tribunal, I shall not follow the example of other persons
by prejudging that inquiry, and shall confine myself to a
vindication of my own character. The discussion to which
I refer was originated by a noble marquis, to whom I
shall only allude for the purpose of entirely passing over
him. (A laugh.) He was followed in that discussion by a
noble earl lately at the head of her Majesty's Government,
and that noble earl in the course of his speechthought pro-
per to say that he considered my appointment to the office
I now hold a most unfortunate circumstance. Now, lat
once say that, however painful it may have been to my
feelings tohave heard that observation from so distinguished
a person,yot that I do not perceive anything in it which would
entitle me to challenge it, as I am about to challenge the
observations of another noble personage. Sir, the noble
earl was followed by another, a noble and, as I have always
heard, a very chivalrous earl ; and he was pleased to say,
that he considered my appointment to be the least repu-
table made by the present Government. Now, I scarcely
think the expression I have quoted is justified by any cir-
cumstance which the noble earl can mention in deteriora-
tion of my character—l scarcely think there is any rank
or station, however exalted, which would justify any
person in pronouncing such an opinion—on statements, be
it remembered, got at second hand, made twelve months
after the transaction, and conveyed by persons whose names
are not mentioned (hear, hear) —and made, likewise,
without the knowledge of the person most interested in
the inquiry. Sir, Ido not think such language is justi-
fiable in this or any. other house—(hear, hear)—without
some facility being given for the person so accused of ex-
plaining his conduct. But it so pleased the noble earl to
pronounce on my appointment. I was at the bar of the
ouse of Lords and heard the words used. I immediately
communicated with a noble duke, who in a kind and
generous manner undertook my defence. I thought the
remarks of the noble lord ought not to have proceeded
from any one ; but I confess I was surprised to hear the
observations of one who had been Viceroy in Ireland,
when I knew —when many others knew, and as I shall
prove, that the noble lord who now sits opposite to me,
and who held the office of chief secretary to that Lord
Lieutenant, had sought me with eagerness immediately on
the formation of his Government—had pursued me from
street to street, and from house to house—having hired
not one or two, but friend after friend, in his eager haste
to place himself in communication with me, in order that
co
a mmunication, which I shall presently mention,ly
be made by that noble lord. I thought it was thatlike
some of these circumstances had reached the ear of the late
Viceroy of Ireland—l thought some of them could not but
be within the knowledge of the noble earl late the First
Minister of the Crown, and I asked the noble duke (New-
castle) to state the fact to the house—the statement on
which the noble lord has joined issue—namely, that when
he was named as Chief Secretary for Ireland, on the day
when, as he himself stated, there might be some possible
doubt whether he would accept the office of Chief Secretary,
he sought an interview with me, and asked me whether I
would accept office under the Government of Lord Derby.
(Ministerial cheers.) The statement I made then is the
same that I shall make now—is the same as was made by
a noble duke in another place on my behalf—namely,
that having sought an interview the noble lord opposite
did ask me whether I would accept office under the
Government of Lord Derby. (Hear, hear.) I admit it
was rather a perilous issue for any man to 'take with an-
other; but I confided in the noble lord's honour, and I
trusted to the accuracy of his memory. But, sir, what
are the circumstances which it will be necessary to men-
tion before I read the document to which I desire to refer?
In the first place, it will be in the recollection of the
house that nine or ten days after all the appointments of
the Earl of Derby's Government were made the noble lord
opposite was named for the Chief Secretary for Ireland.
I confess that, not at the time having the remotest idea
that I could be in any way interested or concerned in the
formation of Lord Derby's Government, I took no interest
in the subject. (A' laugh.) However, the noble lord op-
posite was in communication with my honourable friend
the member for Tipperary. He was very anxious in his
inquiries about me. He asked the member for Tipperary
to take him to my private residence ; he could not find me
there. He then went to the Reform Club, of which I was
not then a member. He inquired there for me. Ido not
know whether this has escaped the noble lord's memory—
Lord NAAS.—No.
Mr. KEOGH.—At all events, I will refresh the memory
of the noble lord. The noble lord, as I have said, went
to the Reform Club, and not finding me there, he inquired
my address. He waited in that great hall, which, when
ministries aro changing, may not improperly be called a
political encampment. (A laugh.) Ido not suppose lam
making any grave charge against hon. members who sur-
round me when I say that the noble lord's presence there
caused great surprif,e, and that hon. members were seized
with a justifiable curiosity to ascertain the cause of his
business. (A laugh.) In fact, the noble lord was the ob-
served of all observers, and it became perfectly known
that his business in having recourse to that club was to
ascertain where I could be found, in order to see me on
the business with which I shall presently deal. I have
since inquired as to what I knew at the time, and this is
the account given by the hon. member for Middlesex, to
whom I applied on the subject :

" June 15, 1853.
My dear Keogh,—You wish to know whether I can
remember the circumstance of Lord Naas calling at the
Reform Club and making inquiries respecting your residence,
at that particular period of last year when Lord Derby was
forming his administration. I have a distinct recollection of
meeting Lord Naas in the Reform Club, during that period ;
the fact of his visit to the Reform Club was the more im-
pressed on my mind from the peculiar position of parties at
that moment, especially as it was shortly afterwards com-
monly reported that you had been asked if you were willing
to accept office under Lord Derby's government. This im-
pression was subsequently confirmed by your stating to me
that Lord Naas had expressly asked if you were disposed to
take office under the new admistratiou of Lord Derby.
" I am very truly yours,
OSBORNE,"
But (contined Mr. Keogh) the noble lord was not successful
in finding me there. I think, however, I may conclude
from his two visits to the club, that he was extremely
anxious to see me. Sir, it will be in the recollection of
hon. members that the noble earl lately at the head of her
Majesty's Government distinctly stated that he had heard
this rumour before ; that it had been put about by friends
of mine on my appointment under the present Administra-
tion ; and that he had directed a friend to circulate the
disclaimer which he repeated in the House of Lords. But
it is curious that after that declaration of the noble earl, a
late Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland should have risen in his
place and declared that this was the first time he had
heard the rumour, and consequently he had never heard
the contradiction. (Hear.) Whether, sir, that rumour
was so first heard or not, I left the bar of the House of
Lords and came here, and without hesitation, and without
deliberating with any other persons, I addressed to the
noble lord the letter I shall now read:—
" Reform Club, Friday Evening.
" Dear Lord Naas,—l have just returned from the bar of
the House of Lords, where I heard Lord Eglinton state that
he considered my nomination to the office I now hold the least
reputable of those made by the present Government.
" Upon hearing this, I at once communicated with the
Duke of Newcastle, and authorised him to state that imme-
diately upon the change of Government in the year 1852, and
before the ministerial arrangements of Lord Derby had been
completed, I was asked by your lordship whether I would
accept office under Lord Derby's Government, a question
which I had answered in the negative.
The Duke of Newcastle stated this to their lordships, and
thereupon Lord Derby in the most explicit manner denied that
he had ever authorised any such proceeding, and I therefore
at once address you upon the subject.
" It will be in your recollection that shortly after Lord
Derby had undertaken the formation of his Ministry you
called at my club at least twice on the one day, leaving on
each occasion your card, and subsequently a note, requesting
to see me at your house upon the following morning. I
called, but did not see you, as you afterwards informed me
by some mistake on the part of your servant, and you again
wrote, requesting that I should call upon yon. I did so ; and
after sonic conversation of no importance you stated that you
had been directed to ask whether I would accept office under
Lord Derby.
" I, jestingly, asked you if you intended to make me Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, President of the Board of Control, or
some such offer. You replied, that you had asked me a
serious question and expected a serious answer. (A laugh.)
I reminded you that you had not stated by what authority
you put the question ; and you replied, at Major Beresford's
desire, adding, that he was in communication with Lord
Derby. I then told you that it was impossible for me to join
Lord Derby's Government.
" Major Beresford having subsequently spoken to me, in
a deprecating tone, of the opposition I thought it my duty to
give to Lord Derby's Government in the House of Commons,
reminded me, when I expressed my surprise at his remon-
strance, that I had been asked to take office by you, and
that he felt my hostility the more as he was the person who
had spoken with Lord Derby in reference to my name.
" With the distinct recollection of these facts on my
mind, I need scarcely say how much Lord Derby's declara-
tion surprised me, and I have therefore to request that your
lordship, as a matter of justice to me, will, in reply, state that
the narrative I have given of my interview with you is sub-
stantially correct.
" Our friend Mr. Anthony O'Flaherty was aware of your
calling upon me at my club. I showed him your notes as I
received them, and within half an hour after the interview
communicated to him the details of our conversation. I have

last sentence I have read in the presence of the hon. mem.-
now read to him this letter, and he perfectly concurs with
me as to the accuracy of my recollection.
" I remain, dear Lord Naas, yours faithfully,
" WILLIAM KEOGH."
Whatever else this letter proves, sir, I think at least the
ber for Galway disposes of the issue put forward by a noble
earl in another place, that this rumour first transpired
after my appointment. I sent that letter to the noble
lord on the Friday evening, and I had no reason to think
the noble lord was not in town. I saw him myself very
near town on the previous day. I waited for an answer
until the Saturday, and towards evening I asked whether
he had arrived at his club. I was told that he was ex-
pected. I inquired on the Sunday, but could receive no
answer. On the Monday, being very anxious that this
matter should be decided here---

Lord NAAS—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. KEOGH—The noble lord cheers, but has he been
anxious throughout that it should be decided here ? Has
he been desirous from the commencement that the whole
matter should come before this house as the proper tribu-
nal. Was he anxious yesterday—to-day—or even half an
hour ago ? But, sir, on Monday I wrote another letter to
the noble lord in these words :

" Reform Club, Monday.

" Dear Lord Naas,—l addressed a letter to you on Friday
evening to the Carlton, and on inquiry on Saturday and yes-
terday was informed that you had not been in town. I called
this day at your house, and was told that you are still absent..
May I beg the favour of a reply as soon as possible after
your arrival.

" Dear Lord. Naas, truly yours,
" WILLIAM KEOGH."
Now, I am quite sure the noble lord was out of town on
the Saturday and Sunday, but he arrived in town on the
Monday, and he had my letter before he came to this
house. Of this the house may be sure, as he significantly
enough asked a friend of mine whether this question was
likely to be brought before the House of Commons. Ele
was in the divisions which took place in this house on
that day, and he received my two letters. About two
o'clock on the second day, before the noble lord and a
gallant friend of his entered the house, they left for me at
the Reform Clnb the letter I shall now read to the house.
I do not wish to deprive the noble lord of any advantage
he may derive from this letter. I will give his letter
word for word, and will read it with all the emphasis I
can command. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) That part of
the letter which appears to give the most direct negative
to what I have asserted is the part on which I most rely—
(hear, hear, from the Ministerial benches)—because some-
thing tells me that, although the noble lord was of this
mind at two o'clock on Tuesday last, he has seen reason to
think very differently, and that he will speak very differ-
ently when he now rises to address the house. Here is
his letter :

"4, Grosvenor-place, Tuesday.
" Dear Sir,—l only received your note last night on my
return to town after an absence of some days.
" I distinctly deny that, either directly or indirectly I made
an offer of office to yourself or to any of your friends, or that
I had, or that I assumed I had, authority from anyone so to
do. (Opposition cheers.)
" As to the interview which took place between us about
the period to which you refer, my recollection of it so essen-
tially differs from the version given by yourself, that I can-
not admit its accuracy or the deductions you seem to have
drawn from it. (Opposition cheers.).
" Truly, yours,
Well, I say no language can be more positive or precise
or more comprehensive than this which conveys his denial
that he made me any offer. But does the noble lord mean
by that denial merely to deny an offer of office, or does he
mean to deny that which I asserted—namely, that he asked
me "would I accept office?" If the noble lord means by
that denial not only the offer of office, but the only thing
I asserted—namely, that he asked me whether I would
accept office—he being the Chief Secretary for Ireland—
I ask him what he means by the word "indirectly ?" My
only desire is to vindicate my own honour and veracity,
which have been impeached in the most sweeping terms by
the noble earl at the head of the government to which he
then belonged. And what were the words of the noble
earl? He said, " I heard the rumour for the first time
after the appointment of Mr. Keogh had called forth a
great deal of observation in Ireland, and had been loudly
condemned." Now, sir, if Igo to those organs of public
opinion, not only in Ireland, but in this country, with
which the noble earl is supposed to have the most com-
munity of feeling, and which were known to express the
wishes of the noble lord's Government when he was in
power, I think that, so far from giving condemnation to
that appointment, they rather selected it for approbation.
(Oh, oh, and hear, hear.) The noble lord proceeded :—" I
heard that it was then put forth by the friends of Mr.
Keogh that such an offer had been made to him. I lost no
time in authorising every person who had heard it to state,
on my authority, that I did not know—that I did not ad-
dress, neither did I believe then, nor do I believe now,
that any such offer, proposition, suggestion, or hint was
at any time made to Mr. Keogh." Now the noble earl
holds the highest position in this country. The noble lord
opposite occupies a position to which one in my humble and
inferior station cannot aspire. Of course it would be impro-
per to question the veracity either of the noble earl or of
the noble lord ; but let me now ask the noble lord the
member for Coleraine, who now sits opposite to me—who
now hears my words, and who shall hear further evidence
—has he been labouring under a misapprehension or not
when he says that no " offer, proposition, suggestion, or
hint " was ever so conveyed to me ? I will now turn to the
letter of the noble lord. What, let me ask, is the mean-
ing of that portion of it where he denies that he ever made
an offer of office ? I never asserted that he did. (Oh.) I
trust, if any hon. member thinks I did, he will rise in his
place and say when and where. lam not now an absent
man. I may lack the ability, but I have good heart and
purpose to defend myself. I state distinctly, and I have
in my hand and in this house a body of evidence to that
effect which cannot be controverted, that I never said the
noble lord had offered me office. But I stated—not since
my appointment, but half an hour after my conversation
with the noble lord, and days after to the honourable and
gallant member for Middlesex, eo instanti to the hon.member
for Galway, that the noble lord asked me " Would I ac-
cept office ?" I have evidence, I say, to establish what I say ;
and I trust the honest British public will not allow those
facts to be upset by prevarication. But did the noble lord
in passing by my statement that he had sought me twice
at my club—did he mean to deny or to assent to that
statement. Did he mean to deny that he had written me
two notes on two consecutive days ; and, with regard to
the offer, does he mean to say that ho admits, or denies,
or forgets it ? When ho passed over that portion of my
letter where I alluded to Chancellorship of the Exchequer,
and he said lie wanted from me a serious answer, did he
mean to deny, to admit, or to say that he had forgotten
that offer? Finally, I wish to ask the hon. and gallant
member for North Essex (Major Beresford) whether, when
on taking me from the outside of the door there to the
window of that division lobby, he did not (and I do
not use the phrase disrespectfully to him) whiningly
complain of the attacks I was then making on Lord
Derby's Government ? When I stated to him that I had
a perfect right to take what course I thought proper,
and expressed surprise at his remonstrance, did the hon.
and gallant member say to me "Of course you had ; but
we expected better things from you, seeing that Lord Naas
had asked you to accept office ?" I want to know, also,
when the noble lord said he had the authority of the
hon. and gallant member for North Essex to put to me
that question, did he mean to admit that he had mentioned
the right hon. gentleman's name, or to deny it ? The me-
mory of the right hon. gentleman, I am sure, is accurate
enough for my purpose ; and lest I should be mistaken in
that supposition, I would remind him that there was a
member of this house, an hon. and learned friend of mine,
the member for Cork (Mr. Serjeant Murphy), who, at the
time, was very close to me and to the right hon. gentleman
when the conversation or remonstrance to which I have
referred took place. The hon. and learned serjeant was
in the house and heard me and the right hon. gentleman
in conversation. He hoard the tones of the right hon.
gentleman and thought that something very odd was going
on. (A. laugh.) The hon. and learned member asked me
at once what had been going on between us ? And here
let me say, that this occurred, not since my appointment
by the present Government ; that this was not got up for
the occasion, as Lord Derby would insinuate, but took
place when the noble lord opposite and the right hon. gen-
tleman were both in office, and before the last dissolution
of Parliament. Eo instanti, and forming part as it were
of the res gestce of the case, the hon. and learned member
asked me what the right hon. gentleman had been saying ?
I replied that he had been " rowing" me for my attacks
on the Chancellor of the Exchequer. lam sure the right
hon. gentleman did not regard them as such —(a laugh)—
and assigned as a reason the offer which had been made
to me. Now, when I called the attention of the noble
lord opposite to that conversation, did ho mean to admit,
to deny, or to forget it ? He will have an opportunity of
explaining. But the noble lord states in another part of
his letter that the conclusion to which he arrived as to the
result of the interview was quite different from mine. I
ask him when that impression first entered his mind that
he had had a conversation with me in which a phrase was
used, that under the circumstances might have induced
me to suppose that if office would be accepted it would be
offered ? Now, I want to know, is that the impression
upon the noble lord. I ask the noble lord now to inform
the house—no matter what he wrote upon Tuesday last at
two o'clock—no matter what he wrote before I came down
here, at the very earliest moment after the noble lord's
denial was reasserted in another place—no matter what he
wrote before then—is he now of opinion that at that in-
terview he did use the phrase that " under the circum-
stances he might have induced the hon. and learned gen-
tleman to give a reply, in case it had been the intention of
the Earl of Derby to ask him to take office, would he
accept of it ?" If the noble lord wants the exact words, I
can write them down for him ; but perhaps as the noble
lord is taking notes, he may have a copy of them. lam
defending myself. I only want to sustain my veracity—
ply own personal honour—for it has been most grossly
assailed— (loud cheers from the Ministerial benches)
and it has been assailed with very unequal odds.
(Hear, hear.) Yes, a man in the humble position I hold
has been assailed in all the powers, rank, and in
fiuence of the late Government in another place. I have
not been asked whether I could explain anything that has
been urged against me. I have not had the common cour-
tesy of the ordinary notice extended to me. (Renewed
cheers.) But no, the noble earl was determined to have
me down. (Cheers.) He says, " I do not believe that
any suggestion, proposition, offer, or hint, over was made
by any person on my behalf, or acting on behalf of the Go-
vernment, of office to the hon. and learned gentleman." I
ask the noble lord is that true? Well, I now come to an-
other branch of this case, which, if all I have already
stated were out of the case, would place the noble lord in
a very unenviable position. I recollect the noble lord held
a conversation with a person beside myself. lam now
about to make mention of a friend of the noble lord's, an
early friend, not known now for the first time, or since the
noble lord came into Parliament—a gentleman to whose
veracity and high character I have no hesitation in asking
the noble lord to speak. I recollect distinctly, in the sum-
mer of last year, an hon. friend of mine, a brother of a
member of this house, telling me that he had met the
noble lord, and that he was loud in his complaints at my
conduct in Parliament. That gentleman, sir, is the brother
of the hon. member for Galway (Mr. O'Flaherty), an inti-
mate frieed of the noble lord ; and the gentleman referred
but
the
° nthte
noble the
e same
lto was also a candidate at the last general election for the
overiena with
teso
h
borough of Dungarvan. That gentleman left England
doisrsdolwturan
tasiionp, and he happened not only to travel
pleased
dh
tethdeirneeotblehisloreed,nvbeursat
conversation
also
himumbbyletahne
isandmievipdaucakletastol Tarmel.anld,
haveand
observations bs e
perfectr vat:
recollection
my hon. friend mentioning andth
i
crossed
this
circumstance. I therefore applied to him the moment I
received the letter of the noble lord from lreland, to give
me as accurate an account as possible of what had occurred
because his statement was at right
of the noble lord, and I will proceedangles with the letter
to read it • and the
noble lord is not aware of the existence
from hon. friend, because, although I have
ofbeen such a letter
a very different manner, I thought, and treated
my right
friend thought, that it was right and properthathe noble
lord should have a knowledge of the existence of such a

" NAAS."

written statement. Accordingly my hon. friend wrote to
the noble lord, that " altbsugh nothing was further from
his intention than to say or do anything disagreeable to
the noble lord, he felt bound, as a matter of justice, to
give the benefit of his testimony, either here or elsewhere,
should my character be attacked." Here is Mr. O'Flaherty's
letter :

:97, jermyn-street, June 15, 1853.

"My dear Keogh,—l have a perfect recollection of the
conversation between me and Lord Naas to which you
refer as having been communicated to you shortly after its
occurrence. It took place during a journey to Ireland last
summer, when we were both going over to our respective
elections. He spoke in terms of much disappointment and
regret at what he considered your ungrateful conduct, in
making an attack, a few evenings previous in the house, on
Mr. Disraeli, as they had deserved a kinder consideration
from you, after the feeling evinced in his having sent for you
and asked you whether you would take office .under the Go-
vernment of Lord Derby. (Loud cheers from the Ministerial
benches.) Lord Naas never mentioned to me whether or not
he made this offer by direction of any other person, but he
dwelt much on Mr. Disraeli's kind feeling towards you, and
said that the step he had taken entitled them at least to have
looked for a more generous forbearance.

" I thought he desired his remarks to be conveyed to you,
and I mentioned them when I saw you. I have written to
Lord Naas, apprising him of my having given you this letter,
but I trust, unless absolutely necessary, you will not bring
my name in question,, as, independent of other feelings, I
should be very sorry personally to take any course disagree-
able to him.

" I remain, very faithfully,
" EDMUND O'FLAHERTY."
Now, I wrote to my hon. friend, begging him to be as pre-
cise and accurate as he could be with regard to the inter-
view ; and I again say, that whatever the noble lord may
be disposed to offer by way of explanation to this house, I
do not think he will venture to throw any doubt upon the
veracity of his and my friend. Well, perhaps the noble
lord will be good enough to explain to the house how it
came to pass that he had informed this gentleman, previ-
ous to the last general election, that he had expected a
kinder consideration from me, in consequence of his having
sent for me to ask me to accept office ; and how does he re-
concile that statement with this contained in his letter—" I

distinctly deny that, either directly or indirectly, I made
an offer of office to the hon. and learned gentleman."
(Cheers.) Now, I well recollect, although the noble lord
addresses me in such very curt terms, although he does not
think it proper to go into any explanations with ma upon
the contents of my letter—and I am sure my letter was
framed in no hostile spirit towards him—l believe I
merely asked him to do me a matter of justice, which I
fully expected (cheers from the Ministerial benches)—l
perfectly recollect, I say, the circumstances under which
my acquaintance with the noble lord grew. He and I
entered this house together, and for six years we sat upon
the benches opposite together. The noble lord entered
the house under the auspices—to use no stronger word—
of that great statesman, to whose party, however, he after-
wards acted in opposition ; but, in conjunction with the
noble lord, at the time, I gave my support to the com-
mercial policy of that eminent man. For a time—indeed
to the end—l continued to give that support to the same
party, although not in company with the noble lord.
Bat I was frequently in this house thrown into personal
communication with the noble lord, and I distinctly recol-
lect that there were other subjects of conversation between
us, which perhaps I may bring back to the noble lord's
mind. At the time when the noble lord sought the inter-
view with me' and asked whether I would accept office or
not under Lord Derby's Government, the noble lord was
then in a difficulty. The noble lord was offered—and an
hon. and learned friend of mine who sits upon the other
side of the house has had the candour to tell me that he
would rise in his place in the house to affirm my statement
as regards this matter—but the noble lord upon the very
day on which he sought the interview with me, or rather
on the very day on which he obtained that interview, had
been offered the Chief Secretaryship of Ireland, though
ho had not as yet accepted it. Now I will ask my honour-
able and learned friend the member for Youghal (Mr.
Butt), does ho not recollect my coming out of the house of
the noble lord ? I remember meeting him. And I remem-
ber at the same time I told my hon. and learned friend
that he was a political supporter of the noble lord ; and
that, great as might be the disclosure to be made, I did not
wish in any way to take advantage of it to his detriment.
Greatly to the credit of my hon. and learned friend—(loud
cries of hear, hear)—he at once said—he frankly, and with-
out a moment's hesitation, said—" no matter whether it is
disagreeable to me or not—no matter what may be the
consequences to me—you have a right to my testimony
here or elsewhere—(renewed cries of hear, hear)- and un-
questionably (he continued) you shall have that testimony,
and moreover, you shall have this from me, that I was
kept waiting in the noble lord's ante-room during the in-
terview which you were holding with him." But the noble
lord did discuss other questions ; for let not the noble lord
think I shrink for a single moment from placing before the
house everything of which even I have the most remote
recollection in the transactions between himself and me.
Well, he inquired of me whether I or any of my parlia-
mentary friends were disposed to offer him any opposition?
I at once shall say what I repeated to the noble lord—and
the noble lord sits there opposite to me, having declined to
do me justice, although ho knows that from that time up
to the period of the general election I have remained under
a weight of slander and obloquy aimed at me in a manner
such as only can be done by the Irish press. (Cheers.) They
charged me with having sold the county of Kildare—the
liberties of Kildare—they charged me with having made a
compact—a corrupt compact—with the noble lord—with
regard to the representation of that county. The noble
lord perilled my 'political position—inconsequential as it
is—he perilled my seat in Parliament at a time it was of
importance to me, when with a line, with a breath, he
could have dissipated all that slander, all those calumnies,
by proving their unsubstantiality. (Ministerial cheers.)
And it was open to the noble lord to have relieved me of
that obloquy—it was open to him to have done me that
measure of justice which he knew he could have done by a
single line. But I repeat these words—which I hope the
noble lord has taken down if they are not fixed in his mind
and memory—that "ho did use a phrase which might have
induced the hon. and learned gentleman to suppose that
there was an intention upon the part of Lord Derby to
offer him office." Well, the noble lord asked me as to
his prospects for the county of Kildare on that or a sub-
sequent occasion. He asked me whether any of my po-
litical friends would oppose him ? I told him that, "as
far as I was personally concerned," that I would not op-
pose him, nor would any of my political friends do so."
I freely confess I sympathised with the noble lord. and I
did not wish to see the noble lord's ambition baffled for
want of a seat. (Hear.) But the conversation happened
at a time in conjunction with other matters, the recollec-
tion of which may serve to bring other matters contained
in my letter more clearly to his mind. I ask this house
to fix their attention upon this solemn, unequivocal, un-
reserved denial of the noble lord, that "either directly
or indirectly he made no offer of office to me." I ask the
noble lord, calling these specific words to his recollection,
reminding him that I never asserted, that I do not now
assert, nor never shall assert, that the noble lord asked
me to accept office. But without that being the case, we
all know what his words mean. Is there any politican
in this house so jejune as for a moment to doubt what
was the meaning of the inquiries of the Chief Secretary
for Ireland, " Will you accept office under Lord Derby's
Government if you are offered it ?" (Ministerial cheers.)
And recollect that was before the formation of Lord
Derby's Government was concluded ; for, according to the
hon. and learned member for Youghal, it was upon the
day on which the noble lord opposite was offered, but had
not yet accepted office. Recollect this ; and I ask any hon.
member what is the meaning of such words ? Why, was
it not put as if a gentleman were to go and say, suppose
I were to ask you to take office, what would be your
answer ? Or if, perhaps, shifting the expression in the
ingenious manner the noble lord had said, suppose you
had been asked by Lord Derby to take office, would you
have accepted of it?" Really the position which the noble
lord would assume reminds me of that of a gentleman say-
ing to a lady, " suppose I were to ask you to marry me,
what would be your answer ?" and that he were then to
turn round and say, he never meant to propose to her at
all. (Roars of laughter.) I feel, should be insulting
the understanding of the house if were to ask it to put any
other interpretation upon the inquiry of the noble lord.
No matter how the noble lord may vary the words, if he
admits, as I cannot but believe he must admit—l use the
words inoffensively—l have a perfect conviction he did
use a phrase which, under the circumstances, was cal-
culated to lead me to believe that I would be ten-
dered office if I would accept it. And let me say
that I am taught by my experience as a professional
man, that when persons have committed themselves by
making admissions, that they scarcely ever are able to
screw up courage enough to withdraw those admissions.
Then, if that is the case, what becomes of the denial of the
noble lord, and which was repeated on Tuesday night last a
denial that " neither directly nor indirectly" the noble lord
had made me an offer of office. I came down to the house
as early as I could, and I gave notice of my intention to
bring the question under review. I was apprised by the
hon. member for Roscommon (Mr. F. French) that the
noble earl (Lord Eglinton) intended to bring the question
under the notice of the other house. I sent my friend to
the noble lord, saying that it was not fair to bring the
matter forward untirl had made a reply. I thought it
but fair that a little time should be allowed me for my
defence, but the answer given by that noble earl was, that
he was pledged to the noble lord here to repeat his solemn
and unequivocal denial, and accordingly it was again re-
peated. The some is now shifted, and the noble lord and
I are now in presence of each other. (Loud cheers from
the Ministerial side.) The house has heard my statement
—it has heard the letters read, which I have placed with-
out reserve before it. (Renewed cheers.) I ask, then, the
house and the country to consider whether the probabilities
of this case are with me or with the noble lord, and whe-
ther, even if the testimony of those disinterested witnesses
whom I have called on were placed wholly out of view—
I ask, may I not presume with reason that tho verdict will
remain with me, despite of anything which may fall from
the noble lord? (Great cheering.)
Viscount NAAS —I rise, under circumstances of a very
extraordinary nature, to claim the attention of the house,
not for an hour and ten minutes, as the hon. and learned
gentleman has done, but for a very much shorter time, for
the purpose of making a statement which shall be unorna-
mented by the flowers of rhetoric, or by the eloquent words
which we have heard from the hon. gentleman, but will
bo a simple statement of the truth. (Loud cheers from
the Opposition benches.) Sir, I have listened for the last
hour and five minutes to the betrayal of private confidence
—(cries of " Oh, oh," from the Ministerial benches, and
cheers from the Opposition)—l have listened to the be-
trayal of private confidence—I have heard the betrayal of
private conversation, and a distortion of the words used in
those conversations. (Opposition cheers.) Under those
circumstances, I do not think it is incumbent on me, nor
is it necessary for me, to follow the hon. and learned gen-
tleman through all the web of deductions which he has
drawn from the facts ho has laid before the house. I
have a simple statement to make, and a simple statement I
will make, undeterred by the eloquence and undismayed
by the threats of the hon. and learned gentleman—(cheers)
and my statement will be materially different in almost all
its facts from the statement which we have heard from the
hon. and learned gentleman. (Cheers.) I think I shall be
able, when I conclude that statement, to appeal to the
house and ask them to consider which of the statements
they will believe. (Hear.) Unpractised I own I am in
debate, and unable I may be to follow the hon. and learned
gentleman through the variety of topics he has introduced,
but I do say I feel convinced that every word I utter is
nothing but the truth, and fortunately my memory is ac-
curate on the facts lam going to state. (Hear, hear.) I
will first refer to the terms on which I have been with the
hon. and learned gentleman during the earlier part of the
last Parliament. We certainly came into Parliament to-
gether—we sat on the Opposition side of the house—the

' hon. and learned gentleman was a member of the Carlton-
elub, to which I also belonged—and though we differed in
many essential points during the earlier period of our par-
liamentary career, a very friendly feeling existed between
us. (Hear, hear.) I recollect that at very many periods
during the year I had constant communications on many
points of a most friendly nature with the hon. and learned
gentleman, both in this house and out of it. (Hear, hear.)
When we came to the time to which he has alluded, it is
not to be wondered that I should have felt myself justified
in communicating unreservedly with the hon. and learned
gentleman ; but little did I think that, in eighteen months
afterwards, such a statement should be made by him, be-
cause an attack was made upon him in another place, and
statements there made which I do not believe the hon. and
learned gentleman will be able to confute, though he has
already denied them. (Hear.) I do not believe that he will
be able to deny those statements any more than he will be
able to confirm the statement which he has made this after-
noon in this house. (Hear.) A little before the formation
of the late Government I was in constant communication
with the hon. and learned gentleman on the subject of a mo-
tion which then fell to my lot to bring before the house. My
eommunications.with that hon. and learned gentleman were
frequent upon that occasion ; he called often at my house
and I saw him often at other places. Tho motion to which
I allude was a motion which I felt it my duty to make with
regard to the conduct of the then Lord Lieutenant of Ire-
land. That hon. and learned gentleman was fully conver-
sant with the facts of the case. He told me on that occa-
sion that he intended to take part in the debate, and that
he intended to speak in favour of my resolution ; but when
the debate took place he did not take part in it, because,
having been engaged professionally in the case, I believe
he did not think it right to do so. The very day after that
motion was made and defeated, the then Government was
overthrown. My motion was made on Thursday—the divi-
sion on the motion of the noble lord opposite (Lord Palmer-
ston) took place on Friday—and on Saturday Lord Derby
accepted from her Majesty the task of forming a Ministry.
Shortly after—l cannot recollect which day, but I think it
was Tuesday—an intimation was made to me that it was
very probable I should be offered office—dependent, •f
course, on the probability of my re-election. (Hear.) I
thought it was no breach of confidence—l thought I might
safely refer to a member of an opposite party, and a poli-
tical opponent, and ask him whether it was likely or not
that I should be opposed at my election. Between the
Monday and Thursday I think I had three or four commu-
nications with him on the subject, and I think the house
will admit that in those communications there was nothing
that any man had a right to reproach himself with. Ido
not understand what the allusion means that was made by
the hon. and learned gentleman with regard to his character
and the attacks that were made upon him by the Dublin
press. I own I was surprised that the part he took on that
occasion had exposed him to such malignant attacks ; but I
admit that I was met with a most friendly feeling by the
hon. and learned gentlemen, and that in a friendly way he
did exert himself, without compromising his own opinions,
to save me from a contest at that time. On the day to
which the hon. gentleman alludes, I had the interview with
him to which he refers. It is perfectly true that I did seek
tho hon. and learned gentleman in the way he described,
but really I desired to speak to the hon. gentleman on mat-
ters of some importance, the most important of which was
my own election. (Ironical cries of Hear, hear, from the
Ministerial benches.) Honourable gentlemen may smile,
but do they mean to say they do not believe what I am
stating? If any hon. gentleman does mean to say so, let
him stand up in this house, and I shall be prepared to meet
him. (Cheers from the Opposition.) On the day in ques-
tion that that interview took place, the honourable and
learned gentleman came into my room. Ido not in the least
degree deny that I was not able to find him at the Reform
Club, and I wrote a note to his residence requesting to see
him, but I did not fix the day exactly. When the hon.
gentleman came into my room, we discussed for some time
different topics connected with various interests. Amongst
them was the subject of the election, and I recollect dis-
tinctly what I said to the hon. and learned gentleman.
(Hear.) This is the question on which, with the answer
to it, this whole charge is founded—(hear, hear); and I
think when the house hears them it will admit that a more
serious charge was never made on such trumpery grounds.
(Hear, hear.) When the house hears the question and the
answer, I will allude to the circumstances under which
that question was put and the answer was given, and I
will tell the house the reason why I put that question.
(Hear, hear.) I asked the hon. and learned gentleman in
perfect confidence, never thinking that the question would
ever be made an engine of to endeavour to damage my
character. (Cries of oh, oh.) I asked him this que:•
tion—" If office had been offered to you under the new
Government, would you or your friends have accepted it ?"
(Oh, oh, hear, hear, and cheers from the Ministerial
benches.) I fully admit that I asked that question ; it
may have been an imprudent question, but I can safely
say it was not put with the intention which the hon. and
learned gentleman has assumed. (Hear, hear.) He made
an answer, which I recollect as distinctly as the question.
(Hear, hear.) His answer was this—" I think that, after
all that has occurred—after the part that I and my friends
have taken in the overthrow of the late Government—
some such offer might have been made." (Loud cries of
hear, from the Opposition.) After that we proceeded
to discuss the various topics connected with the prospects
of party at that time, and the hon. and learned gentleman
in the course of that conversation asked me a question
which I thought was rather peculiar. (Hear.) He asked
me whether any person in authority authorised me to ask
that question. (Hear.) I said—" As you ask me the
question, I can tell you that Mr. Beresford knew of my
asking this question." (Oh, and hear.) The hon. gentlemen
opposite seem to think they have made a most notable dis-
covery, by their cheers ; but when I tell them of the inter-
view I had with my right hon. friend (Mr. Beresford) a few
hours before they will not be prepared to sneer in the way
they do. (Hear.) I gave that answer because I was bound in
honour to tell the truth, and I did tell the truth to the hon.
and learned gentleman on that occasion. The question
was put with a different object from that which the hon.
and learned gentleman has given the house to understand.
The reason I put the question was, that I had a communi-
cation a few hours before with my right hon. friend (Mr.
Beresford). I was walking in St. James's-square, and met
my right hon friend. I stopped him, and asked tho news,
and commenced a conversation. I said to him most dis-

tinctly, " I wonder what position in the new Parliament
the Irish party are likely to take with regard to the Go-
vernment ? He said he did not know. I said—" lam on
friendly and intimate terms with an hon. member of that
party "—alluding to the hon. and learned gentleman op-
posite, who makes this attack. (Oh, oh,) "I can have no
hesitation in asking the question—and I will ask him the
question—for I had intended to ask him the question as a
matter of information for myself, whether he would have
accepted office, or was disappointed in not getting it."
(Hear, hoar.) The right hon. gentleman then made this
statement to me :—" You may say at the same time, from
me, that the Government have no unfriendly feeling what-
ever towards them." (Hear, hear, and laughter.") This is
the reason why, when the hon. gentleman asked me that
question, I was bound in honour to say that Mr. Beresford
knew of my asking him the question. I put it to him.
(Hear, hear.) But Ido say this—that the right hon. gen-
tleman never authorised me to make an offer of office to
the hon. and learned gentleman. He never authorised me
to ask the question, because I told him myself that I was
about to ask the question ; but he did authorise me to
make the statement with regard to the friendly feeling of
the Government towards the hon. and learned gentleman
and his party. (Hear, hear.) I had so great an objection
to making what are called " authorised communications"
of any kind, that I did not give the message of my right
hon. friend to the hon. and learned gentleman ; and, in
further proof of my statement. I may say that I never did,
until the day before yesterday, mention the result of that
interview to any one single living man. (Hear, hear.)
When the hon. and learned gentleman left the room, after
our interview, the impression left on my mind was this—
that in the answer he gave to me, and in the subsequent
conversation we had, we discussed it in that spirit, and I
thought he left the room with the impression that no offer
of office was likely to bo made to him or to his party. I
will do him the justice to say that my impression was that
if the offer had been made to him it would have been re-
fused. (Hear.) Let me now call the attention of the
house to the day on which the alleged offer of office was
made. (Hear, hear.) It was stated to have been made on
Thursday, and every office under the Government was
filled up then. (Hear, hear.) The authorised list of the
new appointments had appeared that morning in the news-
papers, and it is quite impossible that the hon. and learned
gentleman, looking to that fact, can pretend to say, by any
construction he could put upon the words, that any offer
of office was then intended. (Hear, hear). I fully grant
that, taking the words by themselves, unaccompanied by
the statement I have made, which I declare on my honour
to be perfectly true, there is great probability in the in-
ference which the hon. and learned gentleman drew from
him. (Hear, hear.) But I can safely say that I put the
question merely as a matter of conversation, and not with
any view of drawing any admission from the honourable
and learned gentleman. I merely asked him for my own
information what were his feelings as to the non-offering
of office to him and his party, and not with any other
view. That is the statement I have to make to the house
concerning the interview I had with the hon. and learned
gentleman ; and when I assure the house again and again
that I never did mention the subject of that interview to
any man connected with the Government, or to any other
person whatever, I can lay my hand on my heart and ask
the house to believe that every word I say is the truth.
(Cheers.) A letter has been produced, which I own filled
me with considerable astonishment, setting forth that I
had stated, whilst travelling in a railway carriage, that I
had made an offer of office to the hon. and learned gentle-
man. It is perfectly impossible I could have made that
statement; and I cannot doubt that the hon. gentleman who
makes that assertion of what is untrue must have been
under some strange mistake. Would the house believe
that I mentioned such a subject to the hon. gentleman,
who was a political oronent, which I never mentioned to
any other person ? Hear, hear.) I have now told my
story as to those private communications, and perhaps,
viewed through the light of parliamentary practice, there
may be some gentlemen that may not be disposed to attach
credence to all that I have said ; but, be that as it may, in
this matter I feel there is nothing whatever with which to
reproach myself. (Hear.) I communicated freely and
frankly with the honourable and learned gentleman under
the circumstances which I have related ; and when I
was asked the question upon which he has laid so
much stress, and which I answered with truth, but
the answer to which has been fixed upon as a mode
of implicating not only me, but distinguished indivi-
duals, I think the circumstances show the low idea
that certain persons in this country have of the honour
which ought to characterige the intercourse of gentlemen
(Hear, hear.) But I feel that the ingenuity which the
honourable and learned gentleman has shown will not avail
him ; I believe the proofs which I have adduced, accom-
panied by the pledge of my own honour and word for the
truth of all that I have stated, will be sufficient to induce
the house and the country to believe that I have apoken
according to the exact facts of the case. I must say I freely
admit that I may have committed an error in the course I
took, but it was an error, not of principle, but of judgment ;
and I committed that error of judgment, because I believed
I could confidently, freely, and frankly communicate with
e
a man who, although a political opponent, I at that time
believed to be a friend. (Cheere.) I regret that in these
days Parliamentary warfare seems to be degenerating into
mere recriminatory strife, and that private confidence may
be violated if the object be to damage a political opponent
in the public estimation. Such, sir, will never be my
course—(cheers)—and such has never been my course. In
spite of the plausible statement that has been made, I
deny that I ever took that course ; and I hope and believe
that I have not yet done anything which is in the least
degree derogatory to that chara ter which the humblest of
us may always endeavour to maintain—the character of an
English gentleman. (Loud cheers.)
Major BERESFORD said he had listened with serious
attention to the charge and the explanation that had been
given. He had come there, not to make a long oration,
but to state distinctly what he knew, and to stand on what
he had done. There were two wholly distinct parts in Mr.
Keogh's speech • first, as to any offer, or hinted offer, of
office made to him by Lord Naas, and authorised by him
(Major Beresford) ; and secondly, a private conversation
which Mr. Keogh maintained to have been held between