The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-17 00:00:00

Lord J. RUSSELL—When the Hon. Member asked
me the other day whether I was prepared to lay a declara-
tion before the House of the principles upon which the
Ministry of which I was the head would be conducted,
I declined to undertake the task. I took no offence,
es the Hon. Gentleman seems to suppose, to that ques-
tion, but it did not seem to be necessary that a person
who had taken a part—perhaps an unwise part —perhaps
an injurious part to the country--in the discussions of
this House, but who had always taken, at least, an
open part in these discussions —(Cheers)—when he was
called upon by her Majesty to form a Government, and
had succeeded in inducing persons who, in his opinion,
were competent to conduct the affairs of the different de-
partments—to share with him in his responsibility—l
say, when that was the case, I did not think it necessary
to make a general parade of the opinions and principles
—a parade is very easy to make—(Hear, hear)—of 'de-
clarations which may convey the sentiments of a large
majority in this House, and yet when that parade is
made may leave Members as ignorant as they
were before as to the precise measures which
the Government means to introduce. I did
not, therefore, think it necessary to make any such de-
clarations, and although the Hon. Gentleman (Mr.
Duncombe) has alluded to various persons who have
before filled the station which I have the honour to hold,
and who have made these statements, I am at a loss to
call to mind when such declarations were made, or who
were the persons who made these general declarations
upon entering office.
Mr. DUNCONIBE—Lord Grey.
Lord J. RUSSELL—I do not know that Lord Grey
made, in the House of Lords, a general statement of
the principles on which he intended to conduct his Ad-
ministration. Ido not recollect that Lord Melbourne
did so. Ido not recollect that Sir Robert reel made
any such declaration. Both my Hon. Friend the Mem-
ber for Maldon (Mr. E. Denison), and the
Honourable Gentleman the Member for Fins-
bury (Mr. Duncombe), have made various comments and
criticisms upon the composition of the Ministry, and
have asked—at least my Hon. Friend the Member for
Finsbury did so—various questions, to some of which I-
shall proceed to give an answer. I own I think, consi;
dering the past history of the commerce and manufac-
tures in the country, and how vast a portion of the
wealth of the country depends upon commerce and ma
nufae;tures, I think it rather unjust, as a criticism made
by tee Hon. Member for Finsbury, that there are too
many in the Cabinet connected by family with land, and
too few persons connected with commerce and manufac-
tures. On the one side, it has been said that the pre-
ference has been given to the landed interest; and, on the
other, that the manufacturers of Lancashire and York-
shire are henceforth to govern the country. I deny
holding any such sentiment. I hold rnyielf that not for
land, not for commerce, not for ' Manufactures,
the affairs of the country should be managed,
but that the Government shoal& be con-
ducted for the benefit of the whole. I do think
that by the manner and the measures whereby they fulfil
their high trusts the Members of the Government ought
to be judged, and not from their connexion with land by
birth, or with law by profession. The Member for
Finsbury (Mr. Duncombe) asks, whether in constructing
the Government I did ask the aid of those gentlemen
who were colleagues in the late Government ; and the
Hon. Gentleman puts it in that spirit of levity with
which he entertains the House.—(Hear, and laughter.)
" Did I ask the Right Hon. Baronet to lend me three of
his colleagues?" I hope. the House will not understand the
answer in the same tone. I did ask the Earl of Dalhousie,
'he Earl of Lincoln, and-the Right Hon. Sydney Herbert
to do me the honour to be colleagues in the Govern-
ment which I was then about to form.—(Hear, hear.)

It was my opinion that I ought not to ask the aid of par-
sons from whom I differed widely in political sentiments;
but these persons have entertained opinions, and advo-
cated them lately, quite consistent with my own. But I
did think that it was of great consequence to the
honour of my Sovereign, and the peace and well-being of
Ihe country that such a Government should be formed ;
that the country should place confidence in it—some
placing their confidence in some of the Members, others
in others, while all the Members of that Government
agreed in the same general policy. I do not say that
up to 1841, not up to 1842 and 1843; but I have found
myself agreeing with these persons in the opi-
nions which were advanced by them of late.—(Hear.)
I supported them when they brought forward measures
for the advancement of what is called free trade, taking
away restrictions, and abolishing monopolies. I agreed
with them when they introduced measures—just in prin
ciple, though not wise as to the moment of their intro-
duction—to conciliate Ireland; and I could not see that
there would be any dishonour attached to those gentle-
men in consequence of their joining with me in the Go-
vernment. They expressed themselves in terms very
courteous to me, and they stated that they thought they
could not take office in the present Administration.
It was, of course, for them to form their own judgment
upon the matter, and I certainly cannot reproach my-
self with doing anything else than my duty to the Sove-
reign in making that proposition. The Hon. Gentleman
next alluded to certain reports which had appeared in
various newspapers. I do not think that it is neces-
sary for me to enter into the subject of reports in news-
papers. lam not, of course, responsible for them. The
[lon. Member alluded to a certain question upon which
he wished to know the opinion of the Government. I
will not deny that although I should not have thought it
necessary to make any general or vague declaration, yet
that, being called upon to state my opinions upon a cer-
tain question, I think I am bound, so far as I can, to
give my opinions as to the mode in which the Govern-
ment should be conducted with reference to any. par-
ticular question. I think, in the first klace, that it is not
absolutely necessary that any Government should
be formed, either at present or in the future,
the members of which should all hold precisely the same
opinions. I admit that every member of such Govern-
ment should agree upon the main principles, but it is
not necessary that they should all agree upon every
question that may come under the consideration of Par-
liament. Such was the view taken in old times, and
such was the mode in which, in old days, statesmen of
great name had conducted the affairs of this country
with great success. Upon those principles they had
formed their Ministry. In the year 1784 Pitt had mem-
bers in his Government who were entirely disagreed
with him on the question of Parliamentary reform—a
very great question in those days, and a very great
question at all times, until the Act of 1832 was passed.
He had colleagues in his Government who disagreed also
with him upon the important question of the slave trade.
Mr. Fox succeeded to the Government of Mr. Pitt, and
he formed a Government in which were Members dif-

fering with him on Parliamentary reform, and on the
Roman Catholic question. When a Government was
afterwards called by Lord Liverpool, Lord Liverpool
comprised in that Cabinet members differing entirely on
the Catholic question, which I think one of the most im-
portant questions of the day. Sir, with respect to this.
latter case, I think that this combination of men differ-
ing on the Catholic question was carried on too long—
vet I think it was the question of carrying on a war with
France. When it was a question of endeavouring to
carry on resistance against a mighty military chief who
threatened the existence and independence of this
country, we ought to have had an Administration fully
competent to carry out the various departments of the
Government—men who could act together on most ques-
tions of the Administration, although they differed on
some questions of policy. Now, Sir, the Right Hon.
Gentleman the Member for Tamworth, when he formed
his Government, seems to have made it with much
greater uniformity of opinion, and a greater affinity of
conduct on the part of the members of his Administra-
tion and party generally than either Pitt, Fox, or Lord
Liverpool ; but although the Right Honourable
Baronet has great talents and great powers of
conducting a Ministry, and from various cir-
cumstances at the time succeeded in his attempt,
I do not think if now attempted, it would be very suc-
cessful again, or advantageous to the public. Now, Sir,
I say this because there are several points on which I
will readily admit that the members of the Administra-
tion, of which I have the honour to be the head, are not
completely agreed in opinion. With respect to the opi-
nions of Lord Grey on the Irish Churches, I do not con-
cur in many of the statements made in this and the other
House of Parliament. Some Members of the Adminis-

tration, again, think that I have gone too far with re-
spect to the statements I have made with regard to the
Irish Churches. I will state at once what is my intention,
and the intention of my colleagues, with regard to the
affairs of Ireland. I consider the social grievances of
Ireland are those which are most prominent—(Hear,
hear)—and to which it is most likely to be in our power
to afford a complete and immediate remedy ; but by
some remedy, and some kind of improvement, I have a
hope that some ten or twelve years hence the country,
by the measures we shall undertake, will be in k far
better state as regards the dreadful destitution and misery
now prevalent in it. We have that particular object in
view, and shall endeavour to undertake it. I believe we
are all of the same mind on the subject, and we will not
be led away by our differences on subjects on which we
cannot effect any immediate good.—(Hear, hear.) Now,
Sir, secondly, with regard to the franchiseinlreland—my
opinion is, that it is a great mistake to suppose,
as some persons seem now to suppose, that there
i 3 no immediate connexion between political franchise
and social condition. My opinion is, that in proportion
as a man is raised by the enjoyment of this franchise,
which belongs to a free state, his energies and industry
are promoted, and he aspires to a better and higher con-
dition ; and in so saying I agree with those who have
been the greatest lights and ornaments of that House,
which if I go more into detail I could presently show.
It will be, therefore, my endeavour to procure, to obtain,
far the people of Ireland the enjoyment of equal political
franchise hisewith England. My Hon. Friend tells me that
answer, necessary
that I should make some declaration of
principle, When
asked on this subject, I gave him this
" tit was necessary I should make that decla-
ration in
year 1836, I contended in this House,
though not successfully,nni that with regard to Municipal
Franchise the D
lower political level than of Ireland ought not to be on a
shall contend in the than the people of England." I
r 1846, in conformity to that
which I coatended in 1836,
and I do look to be able to
complete those measures
from
man
they of those who are op
have admitted thchal have in contemplation,
-
becausepose d
to Ime havein
opinion, heard frt
franchise in Ireland ought to be raised to a level ofatthhaet
in England. That is, from those who
opposed it f °r-
merly, and it is honourable in those who change their
opinions on the subject, and who think that the
equality ought to be established, to avow that such is
their opinion, and to aid in such endeavour. With re-
spect to the churches in Ireland, and the endowment
the Catholic church, I voted with my Hon. Friend, the
Member for Sheffield, in favour of providing for the es-
tablishment of Maynooth out of the funds of the Pro-
testant Church. We were defeated by a very great ma-
jority, and the opinion of the House was adverse to that
grant. I afterwards voted to that end, and gave my
zealous support to the Bill for the establishment of May-
nooth out of the Consolidated fund. I made no difficulty
with-respect to the Bill, because it WAS the 122011°n of