The Sun.
London, England, 1859-04-30 00:00:00

feel that I should be doing injustice to you, gentle-
men, if -I-were to dilate further on those eminent
qualties, of whom none are so well qualified to
Judge as those who for so many years have seen,
them in daily and hourly operation: (Cheers.l.
Gentlemen, allow me now to express the cordial
gratitude I feel at being again permitted to enjoy
the high distinction of being one of your repre-
sentatives in Parliament—a distinction the appre-

ciation of which is enhanced by the reflection that
now, during six successive Parliaments, I- have en-
joyed that honour. It is a maxim well deserving,
of approval as regards public life, that men's en-
mities ought to be temporary, and their friendships
everlasting ; and I must say, gentlemen, that the
continued kindness and confidence which I have
experienced at your hands grow to me more and
more valuable every year that they continue, and I
sincerely trust that no conduct of mine may at any
time deprive me of the good opinion of which I
have so long enjoyed the fruits. (Cheers.) Well,
gentlemen, what brings me here on this occasion to
solicit a renewal of your confidence ? It is because
Parliament has been dissolved—and why ? It
is difficult, indeed, to assign an adequate reason
for that dissolution. (Hear, hear.) It is difficult
to conjecture why, at a moment of considerable
anxiety at hom e and great danger abroad, the Govern.
ment should have thought fit to deprive itself of
that counsel, that advice, and that support, which
the Government of the empire must always derive
from the presence in session of its Parliament.
(Hear, hear.) But we are told, gentlemen, that we
are sent to our constituents in order that the nation
may express its opinion on the state of public affairs.
Now that expression may be delivered in two dif-
ferent ways ; first, in the language which may be
held on the hustings, and next in the selection.of
members to represent the different constituencies
of the country. I say, gentlemen, that there was
no adequate reason why the Government should
resort to the extreme measure of a dissolution of
Parliament. They
.state that two successive ad-
ministrations have in the course of one twelvemonth
failed to retain the confidence of the House of Com-
mons, but on one of those occasions they, the party
now in power, were themselves the cause of the late
administration not retaining the confidence of the
House of Commons, and they are therefore sending
to the right about the representatives of the people,
in order to punish them for an act of which they
themselves were the prime movers. (Hear, hear.)
With regard to the second instance, namely, the
late vote on the resolution which was proposed
against their Reform Bill, I deny that that was a
vote implying want of confidence in the Govern-
ment. It was a vote condemning a measure which
the Government had proposed, and, moreover, a
measure which none even amongst their own sup-
porters out of office ventured to approve altogether.
But, gentlemen, when they say that they failed to
retain the confidence of the House of Commons,
that assertion assumes that they never possessed
the confidence of the House of Commons. (Cheers.)
Theycould not retain that which they had never pos-
sessed, and when I say that they did not possess the
confidence of the House of Commons, I mean to use
the word in its Parliamentary acceptation, namely,
the confidence shown by possession of a majority
of the House of Commons. They had not, there-
fore, the confidence of the house in the plain
and ordinary acceptation of the word, and they
are therefore not justified in saying they could not
retain that which, in point of tact, had never been
in their possession. (Hear.) Well, gentlemen, 1 am
not disposed to do injustice to that Government.
They combine within their ranks many men of emi-
nent and distinguished talents and great politic-al
experience, with some other men who are not so
distinguished by talent, but who are highly re-
spectable. They are supported out of doors by a
large party in the country, and by a great number of
men of rank and station, wealth and social conside-
ration. They are, therefore, a party fairly entitled
to aspire to the government of the country, pro-
vided also that they could obtain a working par-
liamentary majority. But when they took office
there were two points upon which they were want-
ing. First of all, their opinions on many points of
great national interest were not in accordance with
the prevailing opinions of the day ; and, in the next
place, as I have already said, they had not a majo-
rity in the House of Commons. Well, but their
friends and supporters out of doors said, " Don't be
uneasy with regard to the first point. It is quite
true that many opinions which they have long en-
tertained and avowed are not in accordance with
the general sentiments of the country, but remem-
ber what they did on the great questions of free
trade and protection, remember that, not many
years ago, when they came into office, having upto
that time battled for protection and against free
trade, they yet, when they came' into office and be-.
came clothed with the responsibility of power, sud-
denly changed or relinquished all their previously
declared opinions, and gave a frank and free adop-
tion to the principles of free trade." (Hear, hear.)
People said, therefore, when they came in this last
time, " De not be uneasy about the two great ques-
tions of the day, namely, the transfer of the govern-
ment of India from the company to the crown, and
the measure for improving the representation of
the people ; don't be uneasy about these two points,
because you may be perfectly sure that, whatever
opinion or prejudice they may have hitherto enter-
tained on these two points, those opinions will be
modified, and those prejudices will melt away, from
the very first moment that they find themselves
seated on the treasury benches.' (Laughter.) Then
they said with regard to the second point—" True,
they have not a majority in the Commons House of
Parliament, but they will so shape their measures
as not to adapt them to their own opinions, but to
the opinions of the majority. They will, therefore,
have a majority, not for their own measures, but
for the measures of their opponents which they will
adopt and put forward as their own." Well, gentle-
men, so it was, but they were unfortunate, andhave
all through been unfortunate in their attempts at
legislation. They brought in an India Bill, which
they had speedily to withdraw amid the laughter
of all mankind. (Hear, hear.) They withdrew
it properly and handsomely, they brought in
another framed on the moment, which we had
previously proposed to Parliament, and although,
like gipsies who steal other people's chil-
dren, and disfigure them to make them pass for
their own—(laughter)—they, acting on that prin-
ciple, very much disfigured our bill, yet substan-
tially and in all the leading features, their bill was
our bill, and accordingly it received the assent of
the legislature. (Hear, hear.) Then came the
Reform question, and they produced a bill to carry
into effect an alteration of the representation of the
people in Parliament. But they were not much
more lucky with that than they had previously
been with their India Bill, for they brought in a
bill which every one condemned, and which, from
the moment it was laid on the table and printed, it
was quite clear could never pass into a law. (Hear,
hear.) A resolution was moved by Lord J. Russell
condemning the. two worst features of the bill, and
that resolution was carried by a considerable ma-
jority, a majority so considerable, the whole house
being present all but 28 members, as to amount to
39 against the Government, and if all the 28 who
were absent, and who by the bye would, if pre-
sent, have voted against them, had been present
and voted with them, and that thus the whole
House of Commons had been polled, there would
have still been a large majority in favour of Lord
John Russell's resolution. Well, gentlemen, the
natural course for the Government to have pursued
under the circumstances of their defeat was that
which they had followed the year before in the case
of their India Bill. Feeling that their measure
Nom not in accordance with public opinion, or in
accordance with the opinion of the House of Com-
mons, they should have withdrawn their measure,
modified according to the sentiments of the public
and of Parliament. But they gave a strange
reason for not doing so. They said. "No, we have
done that once before on the India Bill, and it
would be impossible for men in our position to re-
peat twice the same proceeding." Why, they did
twice repeat the same course of proceeding ; but
the course they repeated twice was the commission
of a blunder, while the course they would not re-
peat was 'the correction of that blunder. I, there-
fore, think the reason was not a satisfactory one to
be given to the people of England. (Hear,- hear.)
Well, then, that being the case, they determined
to consider the_carrying of that resolution as a
vote of censure on the Government, and not merely
as a vote of censure on their measure. What are
we come to ? or do we live in a tithe when every
GoVernment which proposes a measure which-may
not
thesemeet
considermeasures,
e‘ wither
ythe
a,st
e approbationleaving
givent h c m ofn
against
any ParPar
alternative,s i
ianmg el
en tis
on t o
e saveo to
that of resignation or dissolution. (Hear.) Why that
doctrine must have been drawn from the time before
the Reform Bill. it cannot be acted upon now when
we have a reformed Parliament, and when the
opinions of the constituencies of England act di-
rectly on the actions of the House of Commons.,
(Hear.) I say, therefore, that they were wrong,
and they were unjustified, that they were not borne
out in declaring that the carrying of the resolution
was a vote of censure on the_Government, and not
one of disapproval of their measure. I contend
then, that with regard to themselves, they were
not borne out in stating in the speech from the
throne—for it was their speech, and, therefore, I
deal with it freely—in stating that Parliament had
in their case withdrawn any confidence which it
had ever bestowed on them. With regard to the
former occasion, in respect to which the Govern-
ment of which I was a member was greatly inte-
rested, I contend that the vote of censure, for such
it was, which was passed on us, was carried by a
parliamentary manoeuvre on the part of the present