The Sun.
London, England, 1841-05-28 00:00:00

1111W8tX,

that country in which we ought .never to have stood.
I With respect to our relations with America and France,
I still retain my opinion, and believe if there had been
earlier interference that what had taken place would
have been avoided. I feel most deeply our alienation
from France, and deeply regret it ; and without entering
further into the different subjects' . I still entertain my
opinions upon them ; and notwithstanding the brilliant
exploits of our fleets and our armies, I think it would have
been better that we should have effected everything which
British interests required by peaceable means. Instead of
proceeding towards France as we have done, we should
have endeavoured to reconcile all parties, for by that
means we should have avoided those bitter feelings
which have caused such preparations for war in that
country, and we should have re-established those reci-
procal friendly cordial relaiions between France and this
country, whieh -I sincerely wish to be permanent, and
which I believe to be the essential foundation for the
permanent peace and tranquillity of Europe. But on
these considerations I will not further enter, because I
wish to urge the constitutional grounds only on which my
motion is founded. Sir, I dare say I will be met with
the taunt that I have brought forward on this occasion no
scheme of comprehenisiv• policy; and I shall be told this is
an aggressive motion, and that when I invite the House
to affirm a resolution which supposes a want of public
confidence, I might have been prepared to- make a de-
claration of my opinions on all public questions. My
answer to that is, to ask where is the man that has more
explicitly than I have done his opinions on all great
questions of national policy.—(Cheers.) When was it
that upon any constitutional question—upon the
question of the Ballot—upon the extension of
the suffrage, or upon the shortening of Parliaments—
when was it that I ever withheld my opinion ? The
Hon. Gentleman the Member for Finsbury, says to us—
" Make a bidding against the Government, propose
something more popular than the Government and
then you will have the support of Gentlemen of extreme
opinions like myself ? Sir, I will do no such thing.—
(Loud cheers.) I make no bidding for popular applause.
—(Renewed cheers.) I maintain my opinions upon all
great constitutional questions ; and I will not for the
purpose of filching some support from the Government
on the present occasion, indicate opinions at variance
with those . which in detailed discussion I have con-
stantly professed. But did not I when subjects like
these were formally under discussion—on the vote of
confidence of last year, for instance—did not I explicitly
state my views with respect to all the ordinary subjects
of Legislation ? Have not I, when any question was
brought under the consideration of Parliament, whether
Church Reform, or Church-rates, or any other measure ?
Have not I uniformly adopted the same line of policy ?
What is the public question of ordinary legislation in
respect of which any rational doubt can be entertained
as to my views ? I do draw a distinction between all
financial questions and questions of ordinary policy ; and
it is absurd to call upon me for the expression of an opi-
nion with respect to our financial difficulties. I stated
before that I would not express any opi/ion on this sub-
ject, and I now repeat it, giving the full advantage, inde-
pendent of saying that if I was called to power to-mor-
row I would claim the right deliberately to review the
financial difficulties of the country, and I would not be
forced into a precipitate measure for the purpose of ex-
tricating myself from the present inconvenience.—(Hear,
hear.) These are the grounds on which I submit with
confidence my resolution to the House of Commons. I
have never been the flatterer of the House—l never have
encouraged the House in any attempt to carry a measure
which I thought would have the effect of unduly increas-
ing the privileges and the powers of the House of Com-
mons at the expense of the prerogatives of the Crown
On the very last occasion on which I gave a vote, I gave
that vote in support of her Majesty's Ministers,
in the attempt to resist a motion which would have the
effect, in their opinion, of widely encroaching on the
prerogatives of the Crown.—(Hear, hear.) I did what
I could, and my example was not followed by many
members of her Majesty's Government.—(Loud cheers.)
I did what I could to resist an attempt of the House of
Commons to interfere with the rights of the Crown.
Sir, that attempt was defeated by your single vote. You
were a single obstacle to a motion which, if carried,
would amount to an interference with the prerogatives
of she Crown. You had the manliness, though the organ
of the House of Commons—(Cheers)—you had the man-
liness, which I expected from the consistency of your
character—(Loud and continued cheers)—you had the
manliness to expose your single, but exalted, but effec-
tual, authority against a measure which you deemed in
furious to the principles of the Constitution. I expected
that vote, and I expected the declaration of the principle
on which it was based ; but when I saw how great had
been the risk, I could not but feel confirmed in my opi-
nion that the prerogatives of the Crown were not safe in
the hands of a Government—(Loud cheers)—which, even
with the aid that I could give them, felt themselves com-
pelled to call in the aid of the Speaker to form
a majority.—(Loud and long-continued cheering.)
But, Sir, although I have always resisted on
the part of the House of Commons, and always will re-
sist, any unconstitutional, proceedings on the part of the
Ministers of the Crown, yet I have attempted to main-
tain for the House of Commons the possession of every
just prerogative and right. I supported the Noble Lipid .
last year in the maintenance and defence of the privi-
leges of the House of Commons. I might have been
seduced by the temptation of party advantages. I had
to encounter the painful sacrifice of differing from
perhaps a majority of my former friends, but I thought
that vital and important interests were at stake, and I
was determined that I would not conciliate the favour
and affection of my now esteemed friends—that I would
not put to hazard the legitimate privileges of this House,
and subject it to the control of a Court of Law.—(Cheers
from both sides of the House.) It might perhaps be
more wise not to refer to these things—it might
be more politic to conceal the differences I have
had with my Noble Friend, but I will not be
guilty of any such unworthy concealment.—(Hear, hear.)
I acted from a sincere belief that it was absolutely neces-
sary for the vindication of the privileges of the House
of Commons, and that the privilege of free publication
was essential to our interests. Why should I shrink
from a reference to those opinions—is it not rather a
subject of pride to me that I can be permitted to take my
own course—(Much cheering)—to maintain the vital
privileges of the House of Commons, and yet that due
justice should be done to my motives, and that I should
again rally and bind, in common connection and com-
mon esteem, those who, in their honest views, differed
from me ?—(Hear, hear.) Acting in conformity with
these great principles, which teach me to resist encroach-
ments from whatever quarter they come, I think the
House of Commons has a right to expect that the Minis-
ter of the Crown should possess its confidence. This
House has been conducted and modelled upon the views
of the Noble Lord the Member for Stroud. The Noble
Lord was the author of the Bill by which the
House of Commons was constituted. It was the Noble
Lord who thought it expedient to abolish the system of
nomination. It was the Noble Lord who thought it
to introduce more of a popular spirit into the
constitution of this House, that he might make it more
in accordance with the progress of popular intelligence
and freedom. The Noble Lord it was who thought we
ought to make the House more an image of the public
mind—more sympathising with the people--7more origi-
nating with the people, and more expressive of the pub-
lic feeling.—(Hear, hear.) This House of Commons was
• constituted according to the views of the Noble Lord,
This House of Commons was elected under his auspices.
Whateverbenefit there may be in having had its election
at the time when her gracious Majesty came to the
Throne of these countries, that benefit the Noble Lord
also was possessed of. Sir, I trust I have executed the
duty which I have imposed upon myself, in conformity
with the spirit in which I intended to execute it—with
nothing of that asperity of party—(Hear, hear, hear)
—into which I may be betrayed at times when
rising at . the end of a debate—when I speak
under that excitement and agitation which belongs to
such an occasion. It is not consonant to my own feelings
to do so, and I should be the more inexcusable in giving
way to such asperity when I could not plead the excite-
ment of debate. It is not my intention to treat with dis-
respect those who hold the executive office, but it has
been my intention to say to you it is your duty to show
to the House of Commons—if it has this additional claim
to public confidence—it is peculiarly your dnty not to de-
prive it of any of the legitimate influence which it pos-
sessed under other circumstances. If the House of Cons-
mons confirmed your suggestion you would have been the
first to acknowledge this decision, and when that House
of Commons took a different course, it was your bounden
duty not to reject these decisions with scorn because they
are unfavourable to your views and opinions.
Lord WORSLEY (who was yery indistinctly heard)
':41(.1 that he trusted he should be pardoned by the House,
for st;:ting the manner in which he proposed to vote,
sßonas..o;which that vote was founded. The
t had founded his motion upon two
and theßight
h eHrn
points. First,
e1;1: :the coOtitutional point; and he had stated
irliroujlglah.rt
easr it
yo,us s
pr
reeasseonnts.
Ministers.why h had in)
(c)or
cnifi
Idvennrcsei
eiyn)
that many of the reasons on which the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet had grounded his want pf confidence were under
discussion in 1839, and since that tinie he believed a vote
of confidence had passed in that now in favour of her
liedtiro'rdheNt)Vro.)rslely-)1,%tollS,
there-
fore, Majesty'snnn dtihsceuress-
that House, Another point, to which the Right Hon.
e eGe
sosvaerr ry nf(enn t .h—i n
points that had been already discussed and dacitifiti in
Baronet had adverted was their financial policy, as ex-
emplified in the reduction of the postage; and he stated
without," But .ep-n
measure by the " pressure from
had received a vote Pf con-
fidencesince in that House,
and upwards of 100 Members.
the R ight
?Hon. Barg
net,.vot
ut
d
e
who generally supported
exception, supported the policy or the present Govern-
meat ; and he did not think this vote of gOnfidence should
be narrowed to the three questions the ottia, Fkight pro-
posed to the House, because he thought it was tiltaike In
the House of Commons to pass a resolution . respecting
any particular exhibition of the policy of the Govern-
ment.—(Hear, hear.) He (Lord Worsley) thought that
such a resolution ought to be von their general policy-
The Noble Lord then quoted a p.s44ge in a speech .`;'t.
' Sir R. Peel when in office, containing tta
meat, but in so low it tone, that we could only taaig its
purport. He quite agreed in the sentiments thus ex-
pressed by the Right Hon. Baronet. No one could re-
gret more than he (Lord Worsley) the course which he
was compelled to take on a remit occasion ; but Hon.
Members opposite would remember diiif pu that occa-
sion he said that it was on account of the agawep in
which their resolutions had been brought forward that
he felt compelled to vote against them ?--(Hear.) But
because he di&red in one point from the policy of the
Government, was he, therefore, to abandon all the prin-
ciples which he held in common with them?—(Cheers.)
He would do no such thing.—(Cheers.) Let him ask,
moreover, how he could withdraw his confidence from
the present Government, unless he was
prepared to
place confidence in some other Government 2—(Loudcheers.) The Right Hon. Gentleman had told them
Cul he was against a fixed duty on corn ; that he