The Sun.
London, England, 1840-02-01 00:00:00

who set themselves against the law of the land anti the
peace of the country. Was thit declaration similar to
what had been said by the Hon. Member for Dublin?
What had he stated in 1833 ? Why, that Hon. Gentle-
man bad thought proper to denounce the Whigs as "base,
bloody, and brutal." The Honourable Gentleman was
at that time agitating the Repeal of the Union.
He had driven Lcrd Grey to the necessity of using
strong measures to preserve the peace of the land ;
and under those circumstances it was that his Noble
Friend, whom every Government could command, whether
Whig or Tory, and even the present motley Government—
on that occasion it was that his Noble Friend had said
that the loyal and Protestant people of Ireland would re-
sist to the utmost of their efforts if any insurrectionary
movement were made. And he could say that even the
Roman Catholic body, who were a strong, loyal, and Con-
stitutional body of men, would oppose the Repeal of the
Union by the laws of the land, and preserve that country,
as settled by their ancestors ; and he could tell the lion.
Gentleman, that, if even that awful day should come—
which might God avert—if such a course were persevered
in, they would find the Protestants to a man ready to rise
—they would find the Roman Catholic community, of which,
he was going to say, the Hon. Gentleman was an unworthy
Member—they would find that body arrayed on the side of
the Constitution, and they would find a miserable defalca-
tion in the much-vaunted seven million.. He now, in
conclusion, would only ask whether the cases were at all
parallel ? He (Mr. Sergeant Jackson) utterly denied
that there was any parallel. Before he sat down
he begged to say, that if in the course of the debate he
had used any expressions personally discourteous to any
individual member of the Government, he could only ex-
press his sincere regret. He thanked the House for their
attention, and should certainly give his vote in support of
the motion of the Hon. Member for Devonshire.

Mr. C. WOOD rose, and said he was unwilling to
trespass on the time of the House ; but he was anxious
to throw himself on their indulgence for a moment, and
relieve himself from the possibility of having any unfair
imputation cast upon him as regarded the motives by which
he had been actuated in leaving the Ministry. When he
was in the Government, it was with great reluctance
that he quitted his office to accept the situation
that had been pointed out for him by other
members of the Government. Sorry as he was to quit the
office with which he had been connected, and with the
duties of which he had become familiar, stilt he expressed
his readiness to undertake the office of Secretary to the
Treasury. His Hon. Friend near him had stated the
ground upon which he thought it necessary to leave the
Government, and that he was dissatisfied with the course
that had been pursued with regard to the reconstruction of
the Government previous to the Session. The Hon.
Member for Pembroke had stated that the cause was the
exclusion of those who wished to go further on; but it
was their objection to the general arrangement. He
agreed with his Noble Friend in that view; and although
it was not for him, holding a subordinate situation in the
Government, to have attempted to dictate to the Minis-
ters, yet he felt he could not remain, consistently
with his honour and integrity. He was aware that
the conduct of his Noble Friend and himself had been
blamed by those whose censure was painful ; but deeply
as he regretted it, he was borne up by the belief
that he was actuated solely by a proper feeling.
He confessed that ho regretted the loss of office—he re-
gretted the influence, power, and occupation which office
gave. He confessed that, in the present instance, that
loss was rendered more painful to him by his separation
from those with whom he had acted, and from many friends
to whom he was bound by the warmest ties. Whatever
opinion might be formed of his conduct to his Noble
Friend (Lord Howick), he should still say that they had
been actuated by a painful conviction that they were fol-
lowing a course in which they had no alternative.—
(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") He now wished to allude,
to some assertions of the Right Hon. Bart. opposite,
the Member for Pembroke. Much as he admired—much
as he admitted himself to be his inferior—he should say
that on ono point his conduct to his former friends had
been such as he should be sorry to imitate.—(Ministerial
cheers.) The Hon. Gentleman opposite had promised.
them progressive reform, but he should say that those
promises had been sadly denied by them in practice. To
the principles of progressive reform which might maintain
the great objects of the Reform Bill, be had, since the
passing of that Bill, given his support. There were still,
he believed, the principles of Government, and on those
grounds he would give them his support.—(Hear,
hear, hear.) These principles, on the contrary,
had constantly been opposed by Gentlemen on the other
side. But though he had little confidence in that assur-
ance of progreSsive Reform held out by the Right Hon.
Baronet opposite, he was sorry to hear the definition of
progressive Reform given by the Hon. Member for Shef-
field. In that definition he could see nothing but a con-
stant series of innovations on the Reform Bill, innovations
which those who had framed that measure thought they had
put an end to for ever. He respected the opinions of the
Hon. Member for Sheffield ; but he should express his
conviction, that it was to the manner in .which those ex-
treme opinions bad been advocated that the little confidence
felt in the present Government, and the weakness of the
Liberal party were mainly to be attributbd. He 'Mould
state tha ere was' no inconsiderable alarm felt on the
subjectet ese perpetual changes' by a large portion of
the community. He did not merely allude .to persons who
held opinions entirely contrary to his own. He alluded to
opinions advocated a pamphlet recently published by a
Gentleman he believed in that House, and who styled him-
self. a Radical, Member of Parliament. Those who are
described by that Gentleman the most influential members
of the middle elasses,sound Reformers, but attached to the
institutions of the country, men who in ordinary circumstances
took little interest in political affairs; these men are decidedly
opposed to a system of perpetual change. It was
because those men took a part in the agitation of the
Reform Bill that that measure had been passed. But
when that Bill had been passed they were opposed to
new struggles, and to agitation for further measures: It
was because_their support was now withdrawn' from the
Liberal party, that its members were diminished, and that
the majority of Reformers in the House of Commons had
dwindled away. To what else were they to at-
tribute the difference which they saw in those
benches between the last Parliament of Lord Grey
and the present—between the Parliament of 1832
and 1837? In the elections of 1837 there had not been,
as in the elections of 1834, any disunion among Reformers.
The united strength of the Liberal party had then been
put together, and the elections had taken place at a
favourable time, and under favourable circumstances. It
could therefore, be believed, be owing to no other came
except the falling away of the classes to whom he alluded,
that he could attribute the decrease which he saw on the
benches near him.—( Hear, hear, from the Opposition
benches.) He should again return to the definition of
Reform given by the Hon. Member for Sheffield.
If that were the true principle of progressive
Reform, and if no other interpretation could be
given to it—to such progressive Reform he was
as much opposed as to that which would be held out to
them by Hon. Gentlemen on the other side. He wished
at present to allude to some statements of the Right Hon.
Baronet opposite, the Member for Pembroke, whoine.he
was glad to see then in his place. That Right Hon. Gen-
tleman had gone on with a tissue of facts from 1834 to jus-
tify his vote in favour of the motion then before the House.
The Right Hon. Baronet had complained, among other
things, that a Gallant Captain who had stood for the bo-
rough of Falmouth had been appointed to the command of
the Astrea. He (Mr. Wood) alluded to Captain Plume-
ridge. It arpeared, however, that the Gallant Captain
had been appointed to his command in the month of April,
and that the election did not take place till August. The
appointment, therefore, did not take place, as stated by the
Right Hon. Baronet, before the election, but three cr four
months after. He (Mr. Wood) would now offer some
observations with regard to Captain Plomeridge's stand-
ing for the representation of Falmouth, and he should
say that he thought his doing so had been imprudent.
That was the opinion of the Secretary for the Admiralty
at the time, who wrote to him to say, that retaining his
plaoe was incompitible with a seat in Parliament.
(Cheers from the Ministerial Benches.) Not only that,
but on a subsequent occasion, when some information had
reached his Noble Friend that the Gallant Captain had
attempted to create some interest in the borough of Fat-
month, his Noble Friend had written to that Gallant
Officer to state that any interference on his part in the
political interests of Falmouth was totally at variance
with his situation. The Right Hon. Baronet had stated
in addition that Sir James Gordon had been removed from
Chatham, in order to place Captain Plomeridge in Fal-
mouth.—( Hear. ) He believed, however, that the Right
Hon. Baronet himself must have been in possess'on of
information which would hare been negatived. Sir J. Gor-
don was removed on the principle usually acted upon, and
he could not have retained his situation, unless a special
rule had h.en made for the purpose cf maintaining him
in it. The situation, besides, had been offered to two
other gentlemen, before it had been accepted by Captain
Plomeridge. The impress:on, therefore, which the state-
ment of the Right Hon. Baronet conveyed, was directly
opposed to the truth. It had also been said, that Lord
Clarence Paget had received an appointment through
unfair influence. That appointment, however, had been
made in conformity with the usual customs It had been
made by Admiral Sir Robert Otway. The Right Hon.
Baronet then went on to say, that Admiral Sir John
Ommanney had received an appointment because he had
been a defeated candidate at an election. It was
true that he was a defeated candidate, but it was not fair,
on that sing'c instance, to judge of the mode in which the
patronage of the Admiralty was administered. He would
now simply state the names of officers appointed to more
fortunate commands. He would first ask whether Sir
Robert Stopford had been appointed because he was a po-
litical supporter of the Government.—( Ministerial cheers.)
Was Sir Frederick Maitland appointed for the same reason,
or Admiral Elliot, who for six or seven years was a Mem-
ber of the Board of Admiralty? Was Admiral Ross ap-
pointed because he had been a political supporter of the
present Government? He should state to the House, the
three out of the five officers appointed were decidedly opposed
in politics to the Govern ment.—( Ministerial cheers.)
Was it, then, to be said that because Sir John Oromanney
had been a candidate in Renfrewshire, that the patronage
of the Admiralty had been unfairly distributed ? Was it
to be said that he owed his appointment to political per.
tialities, and not to the services he had rendered his coun-
try, and the honour with which he had ever conducted
himself? Again, could they say that Captain Napier
bad received his appointment for his attachment to the
Government? Was Captain Napier, then, so little known
—(Cheers)—or were his services not only at home,
but to a foreign state, so obscure?—(Cheers. )
Was he, the hero of the last naval victory,
such a man that the Right Hon. Baronet could ob-
ject to his appointint at?—( Renewed cheers.) These
were the facts on which the Right Hon. Gentleman had
grounded his charge against the Ministry, of an abuse of
patronage I He (Mr. Wood) begged of the Right Hon.
Baronet, on occasions of the kind, to raise his mind above
such petty insinuations.—(Loud Ministerial cheering.)
Could he believe that men whom he once called his friends
would be capable, in tire administration of their duties, of
being actuated by no higher motives than party zeal 7 He
had troubled the House perhaps at greater length on
these points than t e ought w have done ors a discussion,