The Sun.
London, England, 1860-05-08 00:00:00

- -
---d advocate
ith the right hon. gentleman were otherwise than of a of his speech appeared to me to countenance an
iendly character. The letter is as follows : that mode of settlement of the question. I do not say he
cc Sir "1, Richmond-terrace, May 2. intended to do so, but when he came to' the dissolution and
,—I think it right to request that you will be in your the postponement of the bill, what the hon, gentleman said
lace to-morrow, when the debate on the Reform Bill is re- was received with ironical cheers and laughter from different
umed, as I intend in speaking to notice the suggestion you
lade on Monday, that the passing of the bill should not be Parts of the house, and the house evidently fixed that in-
Allowed by an early dissolution. And I feel the more terPretation upon it which the rumour mentioned by ray
-. ' sound to do this, as the same suggestion was coupled with hon. and gallant friend assigned. That same morning there
ay name in a leading article of the Times of that day, in appeared in the Times an article from which I will read an
-.Mich. lam personally brought in for no other purpose but extract. The writer is speaking of the Reform Bill :
as illustrative of the general meanness of the House of " There are certain gentlemen in the house whose seats
Commons. As the member selected by the Times through are secure, and whose elections cost them nothing, and
whom to offer an insult to the House of Commons more whose nature it is to make hustings speeches who would
gross than any yet offered by Mr. Bright, whom you re- just as soon it passed as not. There are also a'few Conger-
buked, I feel called upon to repudiate, as publicly as it was
votive leaders who have never ceased to regret their own folly
made, a description of the character and sentiments of the
in committing themselves to any reform, and who would
house which every member of it will repel as indignantly as
perhaps buy a release from this most disagreeable pledge
Ido myself.---I have the honour to be, Sir, your obedient
servant, " EDWD. HORSMAN." even at the expense of an interview with their constituents.
" John Walt, Esq., M.P." (Cheers, and a laugh.) But with these exceptions. the pass-
Now, in this er,
letter ing of this Reform Bill means money out of pocket, a
the house will observe that a distinct
char month of hard, disagreeable work, and possibly a fall from
ge is made against me of using language in my speech the Parliamentary firmament. Perhaps itmight have facili-
'inad the debate which, taken in conjunction with language tateendmthaedrtohgarr
as oiletermbillieft asiejoeuubilpaaennbt oeufnerweendtty a i
used in a leading article in a public journal, the right hon. 1)e
gentleman supposed to convey an imputation on the charac- dissolution. The idea, we believe, has occurred to many,
perhaps it has been thought so candid as to verge upon
ter of the House of Commons. (Hear, hear.) To this indecorum. A maiden may be very anxious for a husband,
letter I addressed the following reply : a barrister for a brief, or a politician for a seat, and each may
" 40, Upper Grosvenor street, May 3. tremble at the thought of losing the object of his solicitude
" Sir,—l have the honour to acknowledge the receipt ofrespectable hypocrisy of social life
—but it is par of the
a
your extraordinary letter, which I received last evening at that a perfect and stoica indifference
t ash 11 always be as-
a public dinner, and to which, as I shall of course be in the sumed in such matters. We believe
Hh t if such an assur-
house this evening, I need make no further reply at this ante had been volunteered even Me, orsman would have
moments—l have the honour to remain, Sir, your most indignantly repudiated any suggestion of an unwillingness
obedient servant, "J, WALTER." to test the confidence of the electors of Stroud. (A. laugh.)
But still it might have helped the bill."
In consequence of the invitation of the right hon. gentleman .
What was the construction to be put on this article ? The
I attended in my place on Thursday evening, and waited, ,
construction I put upon it was that, however dangerous the
from 4 o'clock till half-past 7. The right hon. gentleman
was in his place, but did not rise to address the house. He
House of Commons might think that bill, however descruc-
tive it might be considered by the Times to the national in-
intimated to me at half-past 7 that, as he found his rising to
address the house at that time would lead to an adjourn- terests, still that what we eared about was the danger of ae
ment of the debate and cause great public inconvenience, he dissolution, and that therefore, if matters could b
mem-
some
mad
had abandoned his intention of speaking. Here, perhaps, pleasant by an tutderitanding withlhe Government,
person may ask why I did not allow the matter to tiers weretot sell their votes in return for a two years' lease
drop. Sir, I felt it impossible to allow it to drop. (Hear,
of their se If thiscould be secured then this Parliament
condemnedas. and morally defunct, in which there
hear.) After having been called on to attend in my place —legally
• and hear a charge preferred against me in reference to a are many members who would in that case have no right
remark is a speech made by me, coupled with reference to legally to sit here, and from which many persons would be
remarks made elsewhere, I felt that I could not allow the
excludedto legalright to sit here—would be willing
sell their votes, who had a
openly and unblushingly, with a selfish
right hon. gentleman. to hold in his hand a weapon that he
r might use against me at any time at his convenience. (Hear, regard to their base and sordid interests. (Hear.) That was
till; construction I put upon that article, and, putting that
hear.) I therefore wrote the following letter to the right
hon. gentleman :
construction upon it, I say that a grosser calumny and
"40, Upper Grosvenor-street, May 4, 1860,
a fouler and a more insulting aspersion could not have been
" Sir,—l cannot help thinking that your letter of Wed- cast by any public speaker or writer upon the House of
nesday, which occasioned my attendance in the house last Commons. (Hear, hear.) I then wrote the letter which
evening to no purpose, must have been written in a MO- the hon. gentleman the member for Berkshire has read to
ment of irritation, and under circumstances of misappre • the hotse. No one had seen that letter but myself, and I
hension which your better judgment may have led you to
regret. If so, I shall be happy to receive an assurance from gave no notice of my intention to bring the matter before
you to that effect; if not,
I shall feel it my duty to bring the house. Therefore, I believed, when I told the hon.
your letter and the subject to which it relates under the member I was not going to notice the matter in debate, that
notice of the house this evening at the earliest opportunity, no injury had been done to him, and •*that no
—I have the honour to be, sir, your most obedient servant, public
dilation of his character was required. I will go further,
via-
" J. WALTER." rther,
I waited at home till half-past two o'clock on Friday after-
and say that if, when I received the hon. member's letter
noun for a reply, but, not receiving any reply, I came down next morning in which he complained of my abandoning
my intention of speaking upon the matter, that letter had
to the house to consult you, sir, as to the course which I
ought to pursue. I had just arranged for the proper moment not been accompanied by the threat that if I did not make
he would bring the question before the house,
of bringing the subject under the notice of the house, when, an apology
• at half-past three o'clock, this very brief epistle was for-
I shored have been ready to make any apology for any in-
warded to me from the right hon. gentleman. Of course I convenience, and give any explanation which the right hon.
was prevented from giving to it the attention which such a gentleman desired. But when that letter was accompapied
t document deserved, and I was obliged to postpone my state-
sayby athrea of an appeal to the House of Commons, I ask
hon. gentleman whether I could have given an apo-
meat till the present moment. (Hear.) I have no wish to
refer to the contents of this letter, except to one passage logy. (Hear, hear.) I regret the hon, gentleman did net
-
only, which relates to a speech of mine at Nottingham.
It Disk for an apology without the accompaniment of that threat. After that letter I wrote a reply, which, after the
contains a great deal of very curious matter, and the right
hon, gentleman, if he thinks proper to read it to the house, challenge of Veen. gentleman, I must read. Before, how-
has my permission to do so, on the distinct understanding
ever, I read it, I may be permitted, to show my opinion on
the subject, to read the two subsequent letters referring to
that ha reads every word of it. (Cries of "Read, read.") I
this matter. I received from the hon. member for Berkshire
would rather not read it ; but the right hon. gentleman may
read it to the house, provided he reads every word of it. the followingletter :
"
(Cries of c' Read, I felt that I had good reason to complain Read, read.") I informed the right hon. gentle-
of the course which you pursued on Thursday evening, in
man of my intention to bring the subject before the house abandoning the impeachment which you had expressly
this evening, wheri he would have an opportunity of making summoned me to undergo,l did not consider myself justified,
a reply. Now, with respect to the passage in my speech to at the risk of another adjournment of the debate on the
which the right hon, gentleman refers,
making any objection to that proceeding. I felt, however, I have nothing to Reform Bill,and the further delay of public business, in
explain or to vindicate. It referred in express terms to the that I eould not remain silent under the imputations con-
speech which the right hon. bart. the member for Hert- veyed in your letter ; and, accordingly, on my return
fordshire had delivered a few nights before, in which he home, after the debate, I wrote the few lines which you
spoke of a dissolution as a great evil to the country, the received e,l
homeatafne early hour yesterdayi
reply_ half-pastmern flgo.'cloActeli wait-
only difference being that, while the hon. baronet depre- ing
gwn to the hLyseeurand td just arranged with the Speaker
cated the passing of the Reform Bill, because it would lead for my proposed explanation when, at half-past 3 o'clock,
to a dissolution, I, agreeing with him as to the mischief of I received your copious and elaborate communication. It
a dissolution, thought that it did not follow as a necessary was too late for me at that hour to study its contents before
consequence of a Reform Bill, and therefore should not be il addressing
ed t
aetaht e hnoeusme andy
exp fa
explanation
a t therefore
li reluctantly
onca Monday
evening,com-
considered an obstacle to the passing of a Reform Bill plying
you wir have an opportunity, if you think fit, of re-
during the present year. (Hear, hear.) Even had the plying to it
language which I used conveyed the meaning which the I replied to that letter immediately by the following :
right hon. member attributes to it, Ido not think there are o Sirs—l must leave you to take whatever course you
many members in this house whose sensibilities would have may think proper on Monday, on the distinct understand
been wounded by the suggestion that the prospect of a ing that there will be a motion before the house on which
general election, with all its concomitant expense, confusion I shall be at liberty to ape ik, and that you read to . the
and dissipation, was one which they would not wish to pre- house my letter on which you found your complaint, I
cipitate. (Hear, hear.) The fact is
have not as yet shown that letter or any portion
' , however, that I respondence to any one out of my family, except confiden-
neither expressed nor intended to convey any such mean- tially to one friend, nor did I intend, unless compelled, to
ing. (Hear, hear.) But what I do complain of is, that show it. I shall only regret its production in the House
ioleCatoimaamersu ltohercousuerateheofnrame eprieciaf
wtwhoiati.if rotuoirdfrieonud
the right hon. member seeks to connect my speech with an
y friends are
article in the Times, with which I had no more to do than 4 privately offered.' I presume you will have apprised them
he had himself, and of which I can only say that Ido not at of your intention to bring the correspondence before the
this moment know who wrote it. But as this statement house, and to take on yourself the responsibility of giving
may surprise the hon. member, and as he founds his infer- to their names a publicitythat I would willingly them, but from which I have not the slightest have
disposition
spared
,enee as to my connexion with the press, and pleaded it as an
to shrink. ghtest die p
excuse for not having taken a more active part in the debates
in this house, I will explain to the house the reasons which The house will see from this that I did not compel the
r led me to make that statement. There is, in my opinion, aeading of the letter. As far as I was concerned, I depre-
necessary antagonism (I know not by what other name to
cated the course which the hon. gentleman has now obliged
call it) between Parliament and the press, which aught to me to pursue, and warned him that it would be painful toothers. I hope, therefore, the house will boar with me
keep the functions of each entirely apart, and which requires
while I read this letter, and be kind enough tee feel that it
a good deal of delicacy to be observed in the relations
between them. Now, I have observed a growing dispo-
is not a voluntary act on my part, but one which has been
sition of late years on the part of a certain section
tbrced upon me by the challenge which the hon. gentleman
has 'given me to-day. I should mention first that the let-
of this house to import into the debates in this
house very frequent references to the opinions of the
ter of the hon. gentleman was delivered at my house early
in the morning, before I was up. As soon as I received it,
press, to an extent which appears to me to be
with a number of other letters, I hurriedly wrote a reply in
hardly consistent with the dignity of Parliament. And in
order that the hon, gentleman might receive it early that
the year in which my speech to which the right hon. gen-
day. He had, however, left home before my letter arrived
tleman refers was made I was particularly struck by the
there, and therefore he received it at the House of Cora-
circumstance that a right hon. gentleman, now a member of
mons. My letter was as follows :
the Cabinet, had in the debate on theConspiracyßill quoted
" Sir,—l did not write to you under feelings of misappre-
very largely from leading articles in the Times, with a view hension, and still less of irritation, and havenot the smallest
to strengthen the case against the noble lord now at the regret to express on that account. If my requesting your
head of the Government, whom he succeeded in ousting. attendance in the house put you to inconvenience, I erred
(Hear, hear.) That circumstance, coupled with the growing through a rule of courtesy, which requires notice tollbeziiven
fashion to which I have referred; has always made me feel L.t,zu1,„:„.5e0,17,1., steehuonsTmeilclenseart
sepetoailcoe pointedly
without riskaofucausitnegi
that the position of any hon, gentleman in this house who an adjournment, I thought it courteous to inform you
was supposed to be in any way connected with the press has that-I meant tot,
abandon that intention. It Was quite open
become somewhat embarrassing. (Hear.) Accordingly, in tee you- to •have objected then or later in 'the evening, fur I
the speech delivered on the occasion referred to at a public presume, from the early hour at whicht yonrnotoelosweads
Idoest-
livered,
a that
til i
et al written
va before .the .debate
de-
dinner at Nottingham, in reply to a toast in which inynarne
ad to adopt the course
was connected both with the House of Commons and with the iwn;'idls it now appears would have been more satisfactory
press, I made some remarks on that circumstance, and mem- to you, if you had returnedlo the house and apprized me tioned that any hon. gentleman supposed to be connected of what your note now conveys. I will now state to
with the press laboured under some;, disadvantages in this you what I intended to do, and my reasons for it. I
house. (Hear, hear.) But if I have felt unduly sensitive was mach surprised when you suggested
ofthe bill, n your
that asspeech,
on that point it was because I never before had the oppor- th an accompaniment to the passing e dissolution should be adjourned ; and it appeared
tunny which the right hon. gentleman has now afforded to me that no one could misunderstand what it conveyed
me, which I could not have made for myself, and without as to the motives by which the house was to be influenced.
which I could not volunteer the statement I now make— it was only on Wednesday morning that, alluding again
that toy connection with the Times newspaper, although inicnivte.rsiaitmioni,
made
oyour suggestion, I was informed that
I previously fiihe Times, and on referring
of a nature which melees 1713 feel the deepest interest in tto the' I for ihe—flrse 'time noticed the article of
its concerns, is not of an editorial character—(hear, hear) aforala,' the' day on 'Which you spoke.. I intended, in
—and does not involve any responsibility on My Part for uotie-ing the'various argninents and motives urged for the
any opinion or statement which it contains, (Cheers:) ee passing of. thte bill, to have alluded particularl?, to youriosreuga-
c. dissolution,tt:s
st
the right hon, gentleman wants any more information, all
conveying,ate'tnhenymoelaers'of
I can say is that I have not got it to give lam ; nor can gveeisytsapaeraugin
the House of Commons; and I should have added that,
Ibe responsible for any conjectures which public gossip or although your sentiment was clothed in the language of a
the imagination of any private individual may lead him to gentleman addressing gentlemen, and though you were
form on the subject. (Cheers.) I have thought it' due
characterincapable of
andlanage position, t
w inconsistentaa eextremely
r ewmt your
t b
be
highe.
alike to the house and to myself to offer this explanation,
Personal
that a member or our own body should seeym to imply
and, having done so, I will only say in conclusion that in the such motives in a speech that must'tend to give weight and
event of any similar attack being directed against me I authority to the same sentiment expressed elsewhere in
shall take no notice of it whatever. (Loud cheers.) coarser terms and a more offensive spirit. I should then
Mr. HORSMAN—If the hon. member for Berkshire
netting
read
you with
ip
it, passage in the Times—not in any way con-
th or making you responsible for it, any
felt great reluctance in bringing this matter before the house, moreinttayne I should have made Lord Palmerston or Lord
I can assure him and the house of my unfeigned regret that John Russell responsible for an article to which I charged
he has felt it his duty to take the course he has now them with giving weight and authority by adopting its sub-
adopted. Ido so not on my own account. I freely confess etance. I will
we veeari
would have
asvoeULieceann dai dee: deny
connection
tea that
that I would willingly and anxiously have avoided this din- tlemnyyoouwrns mind
peech and that article, and that it might and
cussion, for I feel that the statement which the hon, member would probably have been suggested to the minds of others,
now compels-me to make must give some pain to a gentle- and not unnaturally, for I remember that in a speech to
man for whom personally I entertain feelings of respect and your constituents at Nottingham you avowed your connec-
esteem, and no word shall fall from me to add to the un- tion with the Times, and stated, with great taste and delicacy,
pleasant feeling which a controversy of this description tothat you felt that connection embarrassed you in your desire
must under any circumstances produce. As all that has
take
a proper share in the debates in Parliament, I should
have made no furtherallusion to you—beyond that one regret
passed between the hon. member and myself has taken that the speech ofeone of our own body should appear, to
place by correspondence, I will leave that correspondence however small an extent, to give weight to aspersions and
to tell its own tale. Tho hon. gentleman has read only a imputationst on theeaht Tifistmdseuelltsewwehreereto, 7,ed 0 shouldlfrtohatTlee
portion of that correspondence, and he has left it to me to none'
onhouse, did not regret regret that I should be brought in as an ex-
read the rest. Tho hon. member read the first of those let- ample to prove the rule as to the. depth of baseness to_ which
tern, but if he' had read on the house would see that in a members of Parliament would descend to retain their seats,
subsequent letter I qualified some of the expressions I used
rid observations gave me
to the house on the relations of the pub-
tlie opportunity of submitting some gene-
in the first ; and, so far as I could, I think I rendered it un-
necessary to bring the question before the house. I warned he press to the institutions of the country, and especiallyto the Rouse of Commons, that we are now re-
the hon. gentleman, however, that if the question were forming ; and as I believe you to be the proprietor of
brought before the house it must give pain which I would the Times, the leader in its councils, and more than any
not willingly be the instrument of inflicting ; and that, as other man responsible for its acts, I think I miii do the pub-
far as I was concerned I would rather the matter should be lie good service if I can now induce you to weigh well the
,
settled by personal explanation without these walls between remarks now privately offered, but which, had I spoken last
him I should have given to the world. You combine in
him and myself, which I courted: =These efforts of mine your own person the two most powerful attributes that an
failed. I regret extremely that they failed, but Ido not re- Englishman can possess, as a tar
otfedthriesenihertolfiatthe logic-
gret that I made them, because the responsibility of the thilltei vweobrpily aistaditohtsouprreaem
ha tee rilseyao u have res
s immense
course lam compelled to take in my own vindication rests bi lilies, and you are doubly bound to sustain the reputation
upon the friends and advisers of the hon. gentleman, and not of each of the bodies to which you belong. You do not
upon me. While lam as ready as the hon. member to assert require me to tell you that the character and honour of the
the independence of the press, and as anxious to maintain
House
thereforeef Commons
dicult are
ee
the exaggerate nation's
era te th the best
speriseefstrantsisalaideniet
it, I utterly repudiate as false and mischievous that doe- !.
I) tne.tone of low morality attributed to public men, and
trine of responsibility which the hon, gentleman has set exhibited in itself by the most powerful organ in the coun-
up ; and before I sit down I shall have, lam afraid, to‘show try. There is nothing in which the press of England is so
that the hon, b e-entlemanispersonally anddirectly responsible valuable as for the fearless advocacy by each journal of its
for every letter and every word of that article to which I own line of opinions when it is done with an honesty and
have taken exception. (Hear, hear.) The facts are these : , consistency that command respect, and, at the same time,
capability of feeling respect for all that is great and
—On taking my place on Monday I was told by ray hon. and show a
estimable in public life, with a full appreciation of the cares
gallant friend the member for Roscommon (Capt. French) and anxieties and sacrifices of those acting under onerous
that there was a rumour of a compromise ()teethe Reform responsibility, and who, while closely watched, should be
The 1. England,
Bill, that there was to be a il6 franchise for counties, au jauostlanderoudsln 'eecl
jcrl geeldev. atTngejtrerntoaniesmofQpfc mo
'.E3 fur boroughs, and an 'engagement that there was to be honourablyrality and stacinninug the character of public men, is of in-
no dissolution of the house for two years. (Laughter.) I ' estimable value, in strengthening the national institutions;
ought to repeat that my hon, and gallant friend the mem- but if is nothing short of a national calamity when public
a which, less mindful
her for Roscommon merely mentioned this as a rumour, opiou is uen
of the responsibilitiesintibtyhagnrettejon!Zelesees of the press, show
but the postponement of the dissolution for two years was
themselves true to no principle,pn constant to no policy, and
openly discussed as a sop to the House of Commons, (A disdainful of all rules of public justice and morality. Now,
laugh.) The hon. gentleman the member for Berkshire you mast excuse my taking the liberty of reminding you that
afterwards rose and addressed the house, and in the Wane there is not a leadingman on eitherfront bench that the Times,