The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-29 00:00:00

VVVDNESDAY EVPNING, JULY 0, 1846.

they were hitherto moving in a vicious ci cle. He agreed in
that. He felt that tee colonies and England were plaeed
within a vicious circle ; but he thought it would be desirable
if it were so, when a Mrnister of the Crown he cared not
whether he acted from erimel convict ion or recent conversion—
( Hear, hear)—or on which side he sat) when a Minister of
ithe Crown thought it desirebte to propose a law which sub-
jected many to dismay and alarm, that he should furnish some
detailed considerations why the measure should be sepperted-
-1 that he should c.rndescend to give some arguments—he (Mr.
Disraeli) would say facts—why the House should adopt the
I charge.— ( Hear, hear.) When they were so lately told
that they were moving in a vicious circle,
it would have been consolatory, and extremely interesting and
advantageous, if the Noble Lord had given some proofs of the
benefits that would flow feom the adoption of his measure—
that he should give some idea of this perfect system of com-
merce. lie should be glad to see a Minister of the Crown
who was in office, or a Minister who wa-4 not, pretend to en-
lieliten them ter this point.—( Hear, hear. ) No one could
be insensible to the secret influences that had been in
operation to bring ebout the new commercial features of the
country, or that they had :teen brought about by unknown and
irresponsible persons. He would say nothing disrespectful of
one nom, whom he knew and respected—Mr. Deacon Hume.
All he would say was, that before the report appeared of the
Import-duty Committee, or evidence given upon it, he told
him (Mr. Disraeli) that. year after year he had, in established
and respectab:e periodicals, given all the evidence which had
been then adduced. But the fact was, Ministers never
read, and they had to he converted by Parliamentary
Committees. But he would refer to another of their private
influences—a respectable gentleman, and he ( Mr. Disraeli)
only referred to him to show the influence of his opinions
on the Noble Lord (the First Lord of the Treasury.) The
Noble Lund had told them that, uncertainty was fatal to the
inter ests of the West. Indian colonies. and in support ot his case
he referred to the opinions of men of experience—to- Mr.
Al•Culloch and others. VVeuld it not have been better in the
Noble Lord, who he believed was incapade of saying
anything injurious—would it not have been better
at the same time that he cited the opinion
of Mr. M-Culech on the question of sugar, that he had
told the House that Mr. M'Culloch was an honest and undis-
guised advocate of s'avery as an institution.—( Hear, hear.)
In the very page of the work which had been referred to by the
Nob:e Lord, Mr. el‘Cullech laid it down that there was no
greater delusion than the objection entertained to negro slavery,
and that it was an institution that worked well in society—
that the soil of the tropics would never have been
cultivated without the application of slave labour. This the
Noble Lord had not referred to, yet those were the opinions of
a man whom the Government which had just given up office
had recommended as a fit object of royal consideration, and to
whom a pension had been granted. —( Hear, hear.) But what
could the pubic think of this when they knew these to be the
ten iments ot the man. The Hon. Mr mber for Bo'ton, who
was learned in all laneuages. would know a Turki.h
proverb he was about to quote ; it was .‘ Fortunate
is the man who hr. a peach that is sunned on bre,.
sides " Mr. M'Colloch was in this position, for
thrrugh he was a supporter ot slavery, his phrases were dexte-
rously used by Ministers on both side., of the house.—( Hear.
hear ) The real qua-tion, therefore, was M'Culloch against
Clark.on. for, though the Noble Lord had plentifully supplied
himself with arg,uments from that gentleman's writing-, he
had carefully kept his anti-slavery tendency in the rear; no
one was left to suppose that he was an advocate
of the institution of sl :very.-_( Cries of " Hear, hear. )
There was soother gentleman connected with the Board of
Trade who had favoured them with his opinion—( Hear, hear.
—a gentleman who. preached peace and good-will to all men,
and that was his principal argument for the achievements of
free, trade. That gentleman could listen to nothing that com-
promised principle. That was his answer to all their (the pro-
teetionists') statements—to all their reasons. There was
another individual, a pedant who put up fora philosopher, who,
at the eve of a great resolution, said, also, "Perish the
world rather than compromise a principle ;" yet, ere
twelve months passed, with all his sel-complacent
glory, he committed suicide, in despair of the fate
of the human race and his own destinies.—( Hear, hear. )
In these circumstances he ( Mr. Disraeli) was bound to say
that he could not agree with the Noble Lord, that those
,oloniee were prt 'if a vicious system. He said he did not
oppose the Ministers on account of ther being antagonistic to
any previous arrangement as to slavery, but because he felt
this was an act of hostility to a fragment, if such it might be
called, of the colonial system of England.--( Hear, hear, and
cheers.) That Yves for the moment an old fashioned notion, but
he was of the belie: thst they would yet be furbished up by the
national feeling. It was a trag.-nent of a system, though they
had been tampering with that system—though they had de-
prived it of its greatest advantages—though they had been
following an ;finis frituris, with so fatal a result,—still it was a
fragment which he believed they would have ere long to re-
build—a structure which they had destroyed —( Hear, hear.)
And to retrace the steps which they had heedlessly pursued.—
( Heat, and cheers.) He ( Mr. Disraeli) said so for two
reasons, not merely because he believed their policy to be
wrong—though that was no sufficient reason, fur all men
were liable to err; but he had learned from the
history of this c.tuntry that its characteristic was
that it would retrace its steps ; not that it was less noto-
rious in injustice, but that the people being sooner sensible re-
traced their steps. The history of England was a history of re-
action. Why, he asked, what was it they had done on which
they had not retraced their steps? They had destroyed their
national church anti they retraced their steps—they destroyed
their monarchy and they retraced their steps—they destroyed
the House of Lords and they were now daily taking up Bills
for their sanction. They even destroyed the House of Com-
mons, yet here they were assembled to discuss a great
question. Why, not more than 100 years ago, when
they chr,se to effect one of the greatest revolutions in the
world, they were warned against the course pursued by Sir
Robert Walpole ; they were warned by the most gifted of
writers, by the most eloquent of advocates, that indirect taxa.
tion would be a bane to the people. But now, not a man rose
who did not advocate direct taxation, offering them proof
that Sir William Wyndham was right, and Lord Bolingbroke
a safe guide. Why, he contrasted whet was now going•on
with the abolition of slavery. The Minister of the Crown
came forward and put an end to one of the greatest
struggles on which the people had entered. Having abolished
slevery, 'heir effort, were directed against the slave trade at an
expenditure of 50,000,000 e He asked how, when they were
on their way to the hustings, they would propose to explain
this? Fifty millions, the people would say, and all for a fai-
lure ! England would retrace tier steps towards establishing
her industry, which, if destroyed, was destroyed rashly ; but
if it was an error, this, at leest, could be said that the peo-
ple Lad no pare icipation in it. They
did not send them to
destroy the colonial system ; to them remained all the
glory. and they could not experience the shame. Anti
here he would have stopped, and would not have troubled the
House at arty further length, but for a speech which hail been
de rye oil in the House last eieht. They had heard last night
a funeral oration delivered over the abolition cause by the
Noble Member for Liverpool. He thought that if the subject
was not choice, the oration was choice.—(Laughter.) When
he remembered another speech that was made by the Member
for Liverpool on the same subject, at a period not very remote,
he was the last person whom he would have expected
to make such a criticism on the motion of the
had not the potential parenthesis which the Noble Lord had
insertedlsl o e i Membernh,his
s speech,
hLyen•—(
. Hear, hear.) But that motion
He knew not, and he would not pre-
sume to say, which speech—that of 1841 or that of last night
—was the opinion ot the Noble Member. But it was, perhaps,
an apt conc:usion to the session, to see the Noble Member en
a hogshead of sugar in a white sheet, and holding the taper of
penitence in his hand, crying out " Peccari."—(Great
laughter ) He remembered that the Noble Lord at his elec-
tion carried a wooden bible before him—perhaps the speech of
last night was tire wooden bible speech.—(Great laughter.)
No one understood the West India question better than the
Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth. and well he
might tell them that any system of emigration would not be at-
tended with successs, unless it was accompanied with a suffi-
cient quantity of feinales.—( Hear, hear.) But great was the
mortification of himself and the friends around him to find
the Right Hon. Baronet's speech terminate with a resolution
that was fatal to all its arguments.—( Hear, hear.) But he
must say, that the reason which was given for that resolu-
tion was less ingenious and more surprising than many of the
arguments which they had heard from the Right Hon.
Baronet. (Hear, hear.) It would seem that the
Right Honourable Baronet was induced to come to
that decision upon a consideration of the question of who
should sit on the treasury bench. He said a few minutess since,
that if they went to the hustings, the people of England upon ,
being told that fifty millions of their treasure had been
promoting a delusion, might perchance have something to say
as to the usefulness of the Parliament of England. but when
they were told it was a question not only of fifty millions, but it
might be of five hundred millions of countless trsasures—ol
principles which they had prized beyond all treasure—they
might perhaps be disposed to rebel against the conviction of
the Right Hon. Baronet. When they heard that it was
for the sake of party convenience. and settling who should be
Prime Minister of England, they .migbt be, almost
induced to say farewell to the Parliament of Eng-
land. The Right Honourable Baronet indeed told
them that he could not, under the circumstances of the
case, act otherwise than he did. He said he could not see how
another Government was to be formed, but he (Mr. Disraeli)
thought of late Honourable Members had became rather inde-
corous in always supposing that the Government of the
country was selected, not by a high authority, but by the
House itself.—(Hear, hear.) Hut this be could tell the Right
Hon. Baronet that. in his mind, his forte lay not so much in
forming a Government as in destroying one.—( Hear, hear, and
laughter.) These Were the views which had in-
fluences/ him and his friends around him in re-
sisting the resolution of the Government. He was
glad to believe that there was not a Member of the Govern-
ment, that there was not a Member of that House, who could
suppose that in the course they had taken they had been
influenced by any iilegitimate or sinister feeling.—( Hear, hear.)
He nly c as regarded the Government themselves:
tecotaieihiudg then
circumstances under which they acceded to
cdofessed,
office, to power, remembering himself as a Member of the
placed them upon the Treasury bench, that he
upon himself some of the responsibility which
Hear, hear ) But. it
oughtmajo r t yt
to
takehich
the Governer'. nt nor
attached to them, but he could not see that there was any
tthoaatdoopetizer(
We,t, India bre), dill not support them
open
thett: knowt
h m
House could suppose that they had been
factious or selfish metives in th actuated be any fee e course they
owat-oahyse ral‘cioesuanrtiseef satisfaction cOtlosi ref)
had taken. 'they had supported the West India body upon
in the hour of need and on the day of judgment.—( Hear,
hear.) They bad clung to the hope that they might still
maintain their former position, anti well they might, for they
had the memorable admission of the Right Hon. Baronet
principle, although the
the member for Tamworth, that had he remained in office
saved for another year
they might have been —( Hear, hear.)
he 4
He was not sorry that t catastropheth was consummated in
this way. He was glad that. e system of protection had
put an end to under the circumstances which at present
been
hear.) ) He was glad that existed.—( Hear, he
d to by a protective Parliament, who had passed a re-
an en
solation pledging the Commons of England to support the
colonial interest.—( Hear. hear.) But he did not see why
the opposition of the Right Hon. Baronet should have in-
duced the Noble Lord to abandon office, because the Noble Lord
might have pursued the course of the Right Hon. Baronet in
some few Seats back, under similar circumstances; indeed upon
the very subject of sugar. lie might have said he was defeated
on a question which was not atal, and therefore it was not ne-
cessary for him to resign.—( Hear, hear )
ELL saicl—si
Lora JOHN BUS:" r, in rising towards the
close of this debate, to addres
s some observations to the House,
I must in the first place most willingly declare, that my Noble
Friend, whether in the motion that he has made, or in the
speech with which he accompanied it, has not said or
proposed
anything which he was not rrfeetly justified in doing.—(l-lear,
hear.) The Noble Lord, no doubt believieg in the truth of his
principles, has declared himself in opposition to the plans
own pr
of the Government, and asked the House, in a preliminary
resolution, to declare its opinion
with respect to
the colonies; but, Sir, the resolution does not simply
confine itself to the principles of the Noble Lord. I think it
goes far beyond that, in fact proceeds to a condemnation of the
immediate! plan before the House. I could have understood
my Noble Fr lend had he said at this late period of the session
it is impossible to alter the whole system of our sugar duties
without considering other questions which are involved in
them, and we, therefore must vote against the adoption of the
plan before us, and we shall be ready at the commencement of
another session to take this plan, or any ether plan Government
may ite the mean time mature for . dcsiasiderrtiou—( Rears.
btaz.). I could well tiadentia4 tkit Coiliu 114 it been

taken by the Noble Lced. and it might have been supported by
the majority of the House, and Government might still have
thought themselves juonied in centinui g in oflice—( Hear,
hear)—for the course which my Nohe Friend has taken is
widely dfferent to this. It de( lares in the first place that the
aeVierence of this Hese e was pledged to principles of
a parsictilar commercial policy. It declares in the
nex, place that the plan before the House is calculated to give
a stitnu!us to the slave trade, and altogether condemns, upon
these two allegation, the whole plan that has been submitted
to the coesiderat ion of this House.—( Hear, hear.) Sir, I will
endeavour, in the first place, to touch upon a few of those
topics to which my Noble Friend, as well as the Honourable
and Learned Member who has just sat down, have adverted,
and I will then ask the Houss to consider what
may be the effect of the adoption of the resolution
of the NetVe Lord. Sir, n.y Noble Friend commenced
with a statement as to the production of the colonies,
and went into a calculation of the sugars to be expected
this year, but I am not going at present to follow him with
regard to any calculation as to the amount of sugar that may
be intreduced into this country from India during the present
year. I cannot, however, but say that the principle upon which
my Noble Friend proceeds is, that you should endeavour to
create a necessity in India for the production of sugar, by
establishing actually high prices for that sugar than it would
otherwise obtain if sou did not by law give them. Now, Sir, a
worse instance for the adoption of a protective policy
I could not well conceive. I can well understand with respect
to corn, or with respect to any production that has been long
favoured by law, that any Ministry may say, this system it is
difficult to tax, because there is a great portion of our popula-
tion whose interests are inclueed in the protection of this
article.—(Protectionist cheers.) My Noble Friend the Mem-
ber for Lynn has said that we must raise up a protective
interest, aid give to the sugars of India an advantage in the
market by raisirg the price by law, in the hope that at some
future time the price would be • again reduced to meet
the exigencies and the wants of the people of
England --( Cheers.) But, except this House is ready to
revoke its former votes and decide that protection is neces-
sary for the interes's of this country, and should not be inter-
fered with, I conceive it cannot give its consent to the resolu-
tions of my Noble Friend the Member for Lynn.—(Cheers.)
The Hon Gentleman the Member for Shrewsbury has gone
into some statements with respect to the revenue; I do not in-
tend to follow the Hon, Gentleman in that course. But he,
and the friends who act with him, seem to forget that the cal-
culations upon which we rely are, that with diminished
prices there will be an increased consumption, and with an in-
creased consumption you will have an additional importation,
and from an additional importation you must have an increase
of revenue.—( Cheers. ) With reference to the last portion of
the Noble Lord's resolution, that the proposed measure will
give a stimulus to the slave trade, I must say that the Hon.
Member for Shrewsbury was led into the most extraordi-
nary aonfusion of ideas. He supposed. that because we do
not think that the exclusion of slave sugar from the markets
of this country could be kept up as an efficient
system that we were ready to say that the abolition of slavery
teas a failure. Nothing could be more distinct than the two
propo,it.ons.— (Cheers.) After he plan of Mr. Wilberforce
had been adopted and carried into effect, there arose another
question, which was if you can give protection to your own
colonies against all the sugar producers of the slave colonies of
other countries. Urn that arose the question whether or not
it was defensible upon the principle of protection, or upon the
grounds of humanity, to maintain that system of protection
and exclusion.—( Cheers.) Sir, I was one of those who had
the honour of being her Majesty's advisers at the time of
the abolition of the slave tratte.—(Hear. ) I still hold that
to be a great ineasere—a wise and judicious measure—
founded upon the sound principles of justice and humanity.—
Cheers.) I consider it, Sir, as a measure which experience
has sanctioned, and which no House of Commons will. I
venture to say, ever propose to revoke. —(Loud cheers) The
question before this House is, do sou think you can put any
check to the slave-trade by the prohibition of the single article
of slave-grown sugar, while at the same time you admit slave-
grown tobacco, rice, copper, and other things? The Hon.
Member for Shrewsbury has said, that to defend the practice
upon this principle, would be to de so on the principle of a
person who might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb.
t do not admit that it is wrong to admit these articles into the
country. The adoption of such a principle would not, I think,
advance the cause of humanity in the world. It would leave
you to declare in your tariff, and in your custom-house books,
that you would take an exact account of the means to ascer-
tain the products, where produced, and the different tints at
which the various articles were shipped and embarked for this
country. Will any man say, that if such had been the ease—
that if on the ground of humanity, such had been the policy
of this great commercial nation, mankind would have been in
a better situation in that case than they are at the present mo-
ment? Will any man say that the commercial intercourse
of this great and civilised country with Asia and with Africa,
has not tended to mitigate those barbarous practices?—( Hear,
hear) —to mitigate slavery while it existed in India and the
other countries, and upon the whole, reviewing the state and
condition, has it not produced a policy more civilised—a policy
more happy in relation between man and man, than would
have been the case if you had continued to sanction that exclu-
sive principle, and which was conceived to be humane, but
which would have turned out to be a barbarous and
injurious policy?—(Cheers.) Such, Sir, I think, is a fair de-
duction from the principles which the Honourable and
Learned Gentleman has put forward, and is this an opinion
solely of my own—is it an opinion, with regard to what is at
present carried on with regard to sugar, which her Majesty's
Ministers entertain ? Why, my Right Hon Friend near me
quoted the opinions of an anti-slavery society in Liverpool.—
( Hear, hear.) The opinions of that anti-slavery society, as
here stated, are that freedom of labour in the pro-
duction of sugar is promoted, not by the
exclusion of slave-grown sugar, but by its free admission.
They say, that from observation, they are of opinion that free
labour, when brought into fair competition with slave labour,
will be more effective in the abolition of slavery, and they can-
not but regard the continuance of the protective duties as
virtually and practically promoting the continuance of the slave
trade; and they say that they believe that sugar can easily be
produced by free labour, and that the free labour colonist will be
able to compete with the slave holding colonists. Such is the
opinion of the Anti-Slavery Society. I hold in my hand a re-
port from a very different body, the association of the West
India planters and merchants ; and what is their opinion on the
present subject? They say that it is perfectly practicable to•
compete with the slave growing colonies by means of free
labour, and that the abolition of slavery can be better effected
by admitting sugar into this country free of duty, than all the
high-sounding denunciations which tiro be used, and which
they say will be fruitless. The simple plan of abolishing slavery
they say is to follow the course pointed out by the Government.
Wive Sir, thine opinions are almost identical in expression,
and vet they come one from the: Anti-slavery Society, and the
other from a committee of the \Vest India body, deeply inte-
rested in the preservation of these colonies. I say, therefore,
that no one has a right to say that the plan. which we propose
has any tendency to increase the slave trade and slavery. But
let me take another part of the argument, and show you in
what manner I think that the present system does prevent
the good you labo. r to effect, and that argument is no other
than the well-known argument which experience has re-
peatedly shown to be well-founded, that the effect of monopoly
and protection is always to cheek exertion and diminish enter-
prise, and prevent the full and fair fruits of the capital, skill,
and labour of those who are engaged in any branch of agricul-
ture or manufacture.—( Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) What
is the case with the West Indies? We find during
the last two or three years some evidence given
before a Committee of the Assembly of Labour by persons
who are well acquainted with the West Indies, showing that
the cost of the production of sugar is very much greater than
it need be if all the advantages of machinery, if all the specu-
lations and skill were used which moral science
and moral ingenuity would dictate. I have be-
fore me a plan proposed by the West Indian
colonists, who say that the plan which they proposed was
generally well received. The plan which they propose to sup-
port the manufacture of sugar or the cultivation is such a', in
their opinion, would enable ithe proprietors o' estates in the
colonies to produce sugar at 14a per cwt., instead of 275., the
present price.--( Hear, hear.) I do not say that this statement
of that those particular figures are just, but that there would
be a very great economy with regard to the manufacture of
sugar, and particularly so if those colonists were exposed to
competition.—. Hear, hear.) It is competition, and it is com-
petition only, which ever does bring out enterprise, and
economy, and skill. ( Hear.) I have spoken of late years with
various persons engaged in the various branches of manufacture,
I have asked them what it was, in their opinion, that caused
the very great advances which had been made in machinery of
late years, and they have all uniformly answered—•' It is the
great increase of competition ; it was necessity which led us to
improve our machinery and resort to every species of economy
that we could, to be able to:go into the markets of the world.
--( Hear, hear.) With the same stimulus—with the same
unlimited exertion of the West Indian colonists, I believe and
I think that you will see that they w ll rise and flourish
more than they have done for many years on the old systesu
(Hear, hear.) From an Hon. Gentleman who spoke to-night
I was very sorry to, hear of persons who had resolved to colti-_,
vete their estates no longer. I am sorry to hear that there are
persons so dispirited, but I do believe, that if those estates
are properly worked, there will be no better in-
vestment than the West Indian estates.—( Hear, hear.)
The lion. Gentleman has alluded to some other points, to
which I should wish to draw attention before I sit down.
Now,lSir, one point is that with regard to the opinion of Mr.
Al•Culloch. That gentleman has been In the habit of sending
me copies of his works, and he did send to me a copy of his
last work on taxation, but with a note saying that he hoped
that I would approve of the greater part of the work, but that
he was aware that there was one question of it regarding
slavery with which he felt sure I would not coincide, and
such was the fact. I look upon Mr. M'Culloch as a most
able and well informed writer, though I do differ with him
upon that point. The Honourable Gentleman with
some of the fancy, of which he possesses much,
sap that I stated that the colonies were:on a vicious system.
Now, on the contrary, I said that the colonies were a great
part of the empire, and I hoped that they might flourish ; but
I did say that the ancient system, by which you refused to the
colonies permission to send its produce to other countries, was
a vicious system. Now, this is a point of considerable im-
portance, for it is said, that if you are not in favour of the
ancient system, you wish to destroy the colonies; but on the
contrary, I believe the colonies, under a better system, would
be of far more benefit to the country. The Hon. Gentleman
made another charge, which I confess I was quite unprepared to
hear. That the country had ever gone back after they had
adopted a more improved: system was not the fact, nor was it
the character cf the country, I do not refer to those times of
violence, when the throne and Parliament was scattered by the
assumption of an usurped authority, but since the accession of
the house of Stuart, there was notning more clear than t hat
the character of the couutry was to adhere with firm determi-
nation to the conquests of reason which had been made. In
those days personal liberty was at the will of the sovereign.
The habeas Corpus Act was passed. Had they shown a
wish to repeal that Act? The Bill of Rights was also obtained
—had any attempt been made to repeal that Bill ?—( Hear,
hear.) The Act of Toleration was passed, but who had ever
moved that it should be suspended—( Hear.) I do not believe
that there is any party in this House that would wish to restore
the disabilities that were formerly imposed upon the Catholics.
--(Cheers.) When a question had been ripened by discussion
and decided. the triumph of reason has ever remained permanent
and without even a wish being expressed to repeal er go back.
Sir, my Noble Friend who began the debate, and the Hon.
Gentleman after whom I am now speaking, contemplated the
passing of this resolution, and in terms of great courtesy to
her Majesty's Ministers, contemplated that after the passing of
the amendment, we might continue with benefit to administer
the affairs of this country. I beg to thank any Noble Friend
for the manner in which he addressed us, and I have nothing to
find fault with in the terms of hisspeech, but the resolution itself
is,ono completely subversive of the pelicy which we have thought
right to recommend to this House. I had hoped that in
assuming with my colleagues the Government of this country,
I had hoped that after a period of angry contest, after a period
during which a measure was carried which bad been attended
with mote violent opposition than any measure ever met with
in that House, I had hoped that we should have had at least
the acquiescence of ail parties till at length affairs
had assumed a settled course, that they would
have waited to see whether the measure we
brought forward would meet with the approbation of the coun-
try. With that expectation I did feel (what an Hon. Member
calls) .the. presumption—be it so—l did feel that I should
undertake the administration of the affairs of this country • but
I do think that no Minister could conduct the domestic ;ffairs
of this country, or maintain its character in.tbe face of
ore!ga powers, ialless he hid the respect of this Howe

and the country ; and I candidly confess that
• it I consented to go on with the administration of the affairs
of this country, after the resolution was carried, and my
I olicy set aside, I should be exposing my Administration to
cootemr, I should be injuring the dignity of the Crown, whose
servant lam ; I should be injuring the reputation of the Go-
vernment, at whose Lead I am placed ; I should be causing a
diminution of the glory of this great nation, to which we all belong.
I can also state that, if the resolution correctly represent the
opinions of the majority of the House, and if it be a reflex
of the opinion of the country, I think her Majesty would do
well to place the administration of aff-irs in the hands of those
who advise that policy. That would be a constitutional pro-
ceeding, and though I could not support my Noble Friend
in his views, I must admit that he would be intitled to carry
tut that policy, by assuming the position which would enable
him the more effectually to do so; but of one thing I am sure,
that to remain in power after being degraded by the passing of
the resolution of my Noble Friend, would bring a permanent
injury to the constitution of this country, and I would not be
doing justice to my Sovereign to continue to hold office one
moment longer.—(The Noble Lord sat down amid loud cries
of "Divide.")
Strangers were then ordered to withdrawn, and the House
divided, when there appeared—
For Lord G. Bentinek's amendment 135
Against it

_ .
Majority in favour of Ministers 130
The announcement was received with considerable cheering
from the Ministerial side of the House.
The resolution was then agreed to.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned at half-past One o'clock.