The Sun.
London, England, 1859-06-11 00:00:00

Manchester, and Halifax, of which I enclose copies, will
show the feeling of the trade on the riubject.—l have, &c.,
" Tilos. HOLROYD.
" Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer."
How the hon. member could after this say that there was
no precedent ffor such a thing as the Cunard arrangement,
seemed to him to be wonderful. (Hear, hear.) The hon.
member for De v onport charged the Government with un-
duly influencin g the elections. He pronounced to the
house a jeremia( I respecting the manner in which he had
been treated at Devon Port, and he so depicted his griefs
that he (Captain -Vernon) expected to see—
" The big Wars rolling down his innocent nose."
(Laughter.) He (Captain Vernon) could have mingled his
tears in the same bottle, for he had in times gone by can-
vassed Chatham against the Government, and it might be
readily imagined that they had been tarred with the same
brush. (Laughter.) In reference to elections, it was the
easiest thing in the world to make charges in every possible
direction. The right hon. member fer Carlise gave
to understand that a large sum of money had been paid by
a nobleman on the Conservative side of the house with the
view of that money being employed for political purposes.
He said at first £20,000, then £lO,OOO, then £5,000, and he
did not know whether he had now " shadowed" it away
altogether, but at all events the statement left behind it a
sting. The right hon. member said that there was an im-
proper interference with the elections, but did he not know
that that which was charged against one side of the house
was also charged against the other. The hon. and learned
member for Cork (Mr. Sergeant Deasy) when speaking the
other night in his excitement " bonnetted" the noble lord
the member for London, and the right hon.,member for
Carlisle was morally "bonnetted" when he charged the noble
earl with subscribing money for the elections. (Laughter.)
Similar things to those said of the noble earl had been said
of gentlemen closely connected with the noble lord the
member for London. The hon. member for Birmingham
(Mr. Bright) gave them to understand that bribery ex-
tended among all sorts and conditions of men, but he did
not say whether he left out his own particular friends. The
bewitching goddess no doubt served out to him a certain
amount of poetic justice, and inspired him to-present a peti-
tion against two of his own immediate relatives for bribery.
No doubt a more philanthropic man than the hon. member
for Birmingham did not exist, and no doubt the feeling ex-
tended to his family ; and doubtless when they contributed
their specie it was from purely philanthropic motives. The
hon. member for Birmingham must be connected with the
Humane Society, for he believed he had actually gone to the
extent of paying £2O for a cat—a tolerably large sum for a
four-legged:mousetrap. (Laughter.) They were all fresh from
the hustings; and if ever there was a time when the consti-
tuencies of kingdom compelled candidates to be explicit
and give things their right names, and call a spade a spade
it was now ; and doubtless the people of England expected
that they should carry out some straightforward measure.
lie had been sitting Tor night. «like Patience on a monu-
ment smiling at Grief "—listening, not to the great ques-
tion before the house, but to matters about Austria, Ger-
many, Sardinia, and France, interspersed with attacks and
challenges and throwing down of gauntlets, such as might
have characterised some Irish parliament when they talked
about pistols and paces on the Green. (A laugh.) What
was this amendment stripped of its disguise? Why, nothing
but a desperate determination on the part of certain gentle-
men, who had been cooling their heels in the rear of the
existing Government, in the hope of once more getting their
backs at the warm Treasury fire. (Laughter.) That was
the be-all and the end-all of this amendment, the letter and
not the spirit of which they were called upon to delude
themselves into the belief that they were taking into their
serious consideration. They might deceive themselves, but
they could not deceive the people. They had too fresh in
their recollection the unhappy motion of the member for
the city of Oxford, in which he suffered himself to be victi-
mised by his friends, and sent forward like a scapegoat
bleating in expiation of the sins of his party. (Cheers and
a laugh.) They had too fresh in their recollection the fac-
tious amendment of the member for the City of London.
They could not be deluded, but could see at once what must
be the plain and distinct object of the amendment. He be-
lieved the thinking part of the community—the intelli-
gence that guided the commerce and general business of
the country—were sick and tired of seeing the great inte-
rests of the country jeopardised, and, if not sacrificed, at
least postponed to the miserable question as to who or who
were not to hold office, and be the distributors of patronage
(Hear, hear.) There was a feeling growing up throughout
the land that England had a nobler destiny to fulfil than
to be the mere pasture ground of a political clique. (Hear,
hear.) The interests of England and of her people
would always be paramount when those names that had
flourished in the leading columns of newspapers, and who
fancied they were names for history, would be swept from
the face of the earth. (Hear, hear.) What was the plain
and unmistakeable object of this amendment P Why, the
removal of Lord Derby from power. (Cheers from the Op-
position.) Was it, he would ask, because Lord Derby had
neglected reform, as did the administration of the two noble
lords, until it served their purpose to reproduce it as a poli-
tical stalking-horse ? (Cheers.) Was it because he mis-
managed the foreign relations of the country, as did the
noble lord who suffered himself to be cajoled, and flattered,
and out-manoeuvred at Vienna, drifting the country into a
sanguinary and savage war, as did the administration to
which the noble lord belonged ? Was it because he plunged
them into a sanguinary war with China, as did the noble
viscount, that cost the country much money, and he (Cap-
tain Vernon)his seat ? (Laughter and applause.) Was it
because he submitted to national humiliation, as did the
noble viscount, and which, in his turn, cost him his seat ?
No, none of these circumstances and misdemeanours could
be laid to the charge of Lord Derby. Then what was his
crime ? Why, his crime was that he occupied the seat
coveted by the noble lord opposite, and which he sought to
possess by the filibustering operations of his party. (Cheers.)
And who was to be their future leader ? Who was to reign
upon the Treasury bench ?
" Under which king, Bezonian ?
Speak, or die."
(Laughter and loud cheers.) Was Tiverton to do suit and
service to London, or was London to be dragged at the chariot
wheels and through the mud of Tiverton ? (Laughter.) Who
was to be egornet apse, and who was to be rex mew Or
was the Premier of England in future to be depicted in the
imperishable pages of Punch 'as the two Kings of Brent-
ford, amicably smelling at the same nosegay. (Renewed
laughter.) Or was a third member to be introduced in the
nishiaeper
ofo fEthneghleonnd. minetmhbeegrofoodr Birmingham? ienogmhianmg ?toAhned
aweasdetheeeriPhreed-
bntyhoetbhlfieleoorvienßeeet.slriemeebt celebrated Mrs. Malapiop, like Mr. Cerberus—three
gentlemen all at once. (Loud laughter.) Poverty made
people acquainted with strange bed-fellows ; but was it an
impossible vision that would vouchsafe to them the proba-
bility of seeing the noble lord the member for the City and
the noble viscount the member for Tiverton comfortably
tucked up under the blanket of coalition, with the hon..
member for Birmingham ensconced between them.
" Could such things be,
And overcome us, like a summer dream,
Without our special wonder ?"
What was the bond of union between this chOice triumvi-
rate ? Was it place ? That was not the vocation of the noble
viscount. (A laugh.) Was it war ? That was against every
feeling of the hon member for Birmingham. But the noble
lord the member for the City of London might be said to
have a bias both way!—(laughter)—for whereas he formerly
drifted this country into one of the bloodiest wars, he sud-
denly became peaceful and deserted his party on the motion
of the member for Sheffield. (Hear, hear.) What was the
bond of union ?—was it the ballot ? Why that was a stink in
the nostrils of the noble viscount, though it was a sweet
smelling savour to the nose of the hon. member for Bir-
mingham. (Laughter and cheers.) And here again the noble
lord the member. for the City of London might be said to
'have a bias both ways—(hear, and laughter)—for whereas
formerly he eschewed the ballot, latterly, under the pres
sure of a possible contest for the City of London, he had been
induced to look at the momentous question with very modi-
fied feelings. What was the bond of union ? Was it reform?
He believed
member
mpntftbhopgb
eetraehormdt
Birmingham
f,gnmeoorftorlo;uyt
Birminghamrtt
taoeth
Newhvedhee rnwrceewholei, uponrpetydalegwnoafief!
finality
tohinshwtnteyoearthdiwould
wohastshh the
hewet inducerdheeehoeujottl
upndhhrs.eetie finedxeo induce
noblehettl
mem-
beroeoeeL
lvfsooairrsydeowtunthhhat he had a bias(
wasß
ebno
(Renewed
e ways—(loud laughter)—
panairdonpymipeict,e nhoiwm.hepleaseddlautgohtedarn.)ce
Heon would
the hon. member for Birmingham was pleased to point
houist,
call on gentlemen opposite, who were Liberals at heart, and
not merely of mouth—who were received throughout the
length and breadth of the land as the champions of honest
Liberalism, to destroy the proposed amendment, which
might be the means of bringing into power men whom they
"Have learned to know, and knowing to distrust."
He called on those gentlemen who at the last election ob-
tained their seats through the mag,ic potency of the noble
viscount's name, and who, deserting him in his utmost
need, fled from him like quicksilver—he called on them to
recollect why they. did so—and if they forgot he would not
forget—and to resist the proposed amendment that might
bring his strong indignation back into power. He called
on them to band themselves together, and thrust out from
them the noble lord the member for the City of London;
for if they forgot it, he would not, and he would resist this
amendment, that would bring back his strong indignation
upon them. He called upon them to recollect the terms in
Which the hon. member for Birmingham gibbeted these re-
markable proceedings—" Where did these conspirators
meet—was it in a coal-hole or in a sewer ? Truly a fit re-
ceptacle for so dirty a transaction." He called on them to
recover from the feelings with which they heard these
words, and resist the amendment,ithat should bring back his
scorn and indignation to power. He called on those on his
side of the house, marshalled under the Conservative ranks,
to recollect that the amendment was not made against the
Conservative Ministry alone, but against the Conservative
party altogether, and not to listen to the flattering words
of the member for South Wilts, who said he did not find
fault with the party, but with those that led the party.
When, however, the leaders were attacked, the party was
attacked. (Loud cheers.) When they were to be defended
they were to defend them from the assault, net of policy,
but of party—not by fact, but by a faction. (Cheers.) Let
them, then, stand well together, without any hair-splitting
—no "letting I dare not wait upon I would"—but let them
band themselves together like one man, under the banner
of union, consistency, and Conservatism, and stand or fall
under its colours. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. W. LEATHAM expressed his intention of voting
for the amendment. Ho thought the Government ought to
have fair play, but he considered they had failed more par-
ticularly in framing a proper measure of reform.
Sir C. LEWIS wished to state to the house his reasons
for giving support to the amendment. He admitted that
the amendment, involving an expression of want of confi-
dence in the Executive Government of the country, was of an
unusual and extraordinary character, and that persons who
were habitually in opposition to her Majesty's Government
would hesitate on common occasions in supporting a vote of
that description. But it seemed to him that any person who
had been in the habit of opposing the existing Government
ought not to hesitate on the present occasion in supporting
the amendment. That amendment was not proposed spon-
taneously. It had been forced upon the Opposition by the
conduct of her Majesty's Government. When his noble
friend the member for the city of London made his motion
upon the Reform Bill in the last Parliament it did not, in
his opinion, involve a censure on her Majesty's Govern-
ment. It affirmed certain principles with respect to the con-
struction of the Reform Bill, in which the Opposition side
of the house were unanimously agreed, in which a large
number of gentlemen on the opposite side of the house con-
curred, and to which it would have been competent for her
Majesty's Government to have submitted, modifying their
measure accordingly. But they did not take that course.
They treated it, quite unnecessarily, as a vote of censure ;
and they went to the vote on the understanding that the
amendment imported a vote of censure on the Government.
That vote was supported by a large majority of the late
Parliament. Her Majesty's advisers did not acquiesce in
that decision. They appealed to the country ; but they did
not appeal on the measure of the bill of reform. They ap-
pealed to the country for a vote of confidence in themselves
as an Administration, and the elections did not turn on the
merits of the Leforro Bill. They were not decided by the