The Sun.
London, England, 1859-06-10 00:00:00

ADDRESS.

The debate was resumed by
Mr. Sergeant DEASY, who, after some preliminary ob-
servations, said that the Government of Lord Derby in
Ireland was open to grave objections as regarded pa-
tronage, and exclusion of Catholics from juries
in particular cases. This had created great bit-
terness of feeling in Ireland, and excited much dis-
trust in the policy and impartiality of Government. That
feeling should be removed,- or, at all events, abated, neither
of which he believedwould be effected solong as the present
Government remained in office. (Hear, and oh, oh.) He
denied that the result of the late elections in Ireland
proved the opposite of what he asserted, as was contended
by some parties. It was indispensable that there should be
larger concessions made to Catholics than was proposed by
the Government. He denied that the antecedents of the
present Government were such as entitled them to the con-
sideration of that house or the country at large—that they
showed the greatest hostility to what was liberal and in
accordance with the spirit of reformers. When they at-
tempted to introduce anything of a liberal character they
failed altogether—the Reform bill of last session was a
proof of his position. Such being the case, he contended
that the Government tenure of office must necessarily be
brought before long to a termination. The Government
might have gained some increase in their
numerical strength ; but it, was a fact that
the Liberal party was much more united than
previously, and tftere was a disposition on the part of that
party to make mutual concessions, in order to secure good
measures for the country. With regard to the foreiku
policy of the Government, he did not consider it entitled to
that praise which was claimed for it' by certain politicians ;
and the predictions of the Government last session were
falsified by the present state of hostilities. As regarded
other departments, he asserted that they would not suffer
much even if the Government changed hands, because on
that side-of the house which he occupied there was as' much
efficiency as would render the transfer of the executive to
their hands unattended with any danger. (Hear, hear.)
They had been taunted with their dissensions, but was it
not a fact that there were differences of opinion amongst the
supporters of Government on certain questions ? He denied
that the Government were justified, from the known consti-
tution of the house, in expecting to get such a constitutional
majority as would render their remaining in office prudent
or beneficial to the interests of the country. He believed
that it was highly desirable for the interests not only of his
own country, but of En ;land that power sholild pass from
the present Government into hands that were more able t•
wield it with efficiency, and which would enjoy confidence
at home and respect abroad. (Hear, hear.)
Colonel DICK SOll proceeded to make his maiden speech.
He said it was with no ordinary diffidence that he ventured
'to throw himself upon the indulgence of the house—a diffi-
dence which arose from his total inexperience of parliamen-
tary usages. But he felt that he would be guilty of a great
neglect of duty if he allowed that inexperience to interfere
with the expression of his conscientious opinions. (Cheers.)
It had been made /matter of reproach to the Conservative
members that they had, on the former evening, allowed
gentlemen on the other side to monopolise the whole of the
discussion. They had been taunted with being unable; or
unwilling, to explain their reasons for sitting on that side
of the house. Though, asa new member, he might be sup-
Posed not the best fitted to reply, he was willing to accept
the challege which had been thrown out to them. It was
adit by the noble lord who moved the amendment that
Was a decidedly party
to lay down move.
(C
*
heers ) He had no wish
any standard as to the principles which ought
to characterise the debates of the house, but he felt that a
party move ought to have some eTounds of sense and rea-
son on which to found l *tNow7he tad watched the whole
of this debate; and though* the party opposite had had the
sole occupation of the bat ttip-field he had not heard a single
argument to prove the justice of the ,r) aotion. (Cheers.) He
would not allude to what.' took place 4 n former Parliaments.
It was not for him to defend the oliA7ly and the acts of her
Majesty's ministers—it was not for Min to defend men who
were so much better able to defend, themselves but he
must say for them, that he believ ed the dissolution ' ;
lawn of
Parliament was the only constitution: 11 course which, under
the circumstances, they. could have 'tinned. He believed
they had taken the straightforward line of policy in refus-
ing to carry on the Government as it he obedient slaves of
an opposing majority. (Cheers.) He believed they had
acted constitutionally in advising er Majesty to appeal
to the country to send to her assistas .ce such a body of re-
presentatives as would enable one pro: rty or another to rule
with authority. And now that they had met it was their
b ounden duty not to impede the cot irse of legislation, but
t o give the Government -a fair char Lee of unfolding their

measiures. T here was one thing at least of which they were
helm d to take care ; if they did by their decision now declare
that the present Government were not to retain the reins of
oughte to be prepared with a strong Government
office,
es. Now, he would ask hon. gentlemen to
ffituee theyyeirp
look round on the other side and ask themselves where that
Government was to come from. It was now said that the
diversities which theyall knew to have existed on the other
side had been arranged, while her Majesty's Ministers
were taunted w..i.th having lately lost .two of their ablest
colleagues. Well, he regretted that, but when he contrasted
this honourable dough painful conduct with these arrange-
ments of differences in prospect of office on the other side,
he couldonly say :that it was not on his side, at any rate, that
men consented to stifle their principles for the sake of place.
(Cheers.) The two noblelords opposite were, it was said, ready
to act together. It would ill become him to speak with any
but feelings of the most profound respect of those two noble
lords, but he might ask, were the antecedents of one of
them such that they considered him gifted with that com-
bination of energy, discretion, and consideration for the
feelings of foreign powers which would enable him to pre-
serve neutrality ? With regard to the noble lord the member
for London, he might ask whether that noble lord would
take up as his ground of action the broad basis of the
k English constitution, or whether he would extend the hand
of friendship to men whom he knew to entertain opinions
that, however honourably and conscientiously they held
them, were opposed to the feelings of the large majority of
the house and country ? (Cheers.) He would now come
to the question of that support which it was made matter of
complaint against the majority of the Irish members that
slzecr were about to give to the Ministers. It could not be
• of him that he was attached to any hierarchy,
Sa:
but he felt unbounded pride in the thought that while
he st-ood there as a sincere Protestant, and one who,
as was. known to all who knew him, was incapable of
sa„ideinv his principles to his interests, yet he stood
in that house as the representative of a great Catholic con-
stituency. He denied that the Catholics demanded any
illegitimate preponderance whatever—he huled back with
scorn the impatetion that they were prepared to make their
religion a mattor of bargain and sale. (Cheers.) If, then,
they wished to rmow why it was that the Roman Catholics
oflreland had sent Conservatives to Parliament he would
answer, it was because they were disgusted with the
treachery of which they had been made the victims by
other parties, and the' had made up their minds to give a
fair trial and support to men who they believed would give
them that justice and due ,lonsideration to which they were
fully entitled as an importaelt element in thecountry. He
would appeal to the Irish members of Parliament—those
men who had not always receiJed due credit for their con-
duct—menwhose talents had not' always met in that house
with that consideration which tivy deserved—men who,
though they were opposed to him on many points, yet he
believed had conscientiously devoted themselves to the wel-
fare of their common country—he would ask them had they
forgotten the treatment they received from other hands,
and were they now prepared to see their country made the
tool of faction and the mere shuttlecock for place ? (Cheers.)
Let them give the present Government a fair trial ; and if
on that trial they were found wanting he would be among
the first to join with them in an attempt to remove them
from office. But until that were proved he asked his
countrymen to join with him in giving a cordial support to
men who were prepared to maintain neutrality in Europe
and to uphold the integrity of this great empire. (Cheers.).
Mr. DUFF supported the amendment.
Mr. S. FITZGERALD said the noble lord the member
for Tiverton had complained that the Government had left
all the argument to the Opposition side, and that it rented
with the unsupported speech of his (Mr. Fitzgerald's) right
hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to vindicate
their policy. But he thought he might appeal to those who
had heard the debate of the previous evening whether, al-
though the preponderance in number of assailants rested
with hon. gentlemen opposite the victory and the success
did not remain with his right hon. friend. (Cheers.) Indeed,
the noble lord the member for Tiverton seemed to be of that
opinion himself when, on the first night of a debate of that
importance, he was constrained himself to enter the lists to
restore the unequal fight, and to inspirit again the failing
courage of his forces. (Cheers.) The noble lord took the
position which had also been assumed by nearly all the
speakers on the Opposition side, that the house ought to re-
fuse their confidence to her Majesty's Government on the
ground of failure in their administration of both our domes-
tic affairs and our foreign relations. With reference to the
first point, the noble lord had said that during the whole
course of the past session'the Government found themselves
unable to carry those measures which they considered de-
sirable for the public service, and to give effect, when in
office, to the opinions they expressed in Opposition. The
noble lord had already been reminded that, the failure to
carry measures thought to be necessary to the welfare of
the country was not peculiar to her Majesty's present ad-
visers. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord has been reminded
that if the present Government were unsuccessful in their
reform measure the noble lord the member for the City of
London has been twice in the same predicament. (Cheers.)
And the noble lord (Lord Palmerston) was only not open
to a similar retort, because, although he promised a mea-
sure of reform, he was not able to redeem it. (Cheers.)
The noble lord told the Government that they were not able
to carry their India Bill, but be was himself open to a simi-
lar remark. Night after night the India Bill of the noble
lord appeared upon the votes—(“,No, no," and "hear,
hear")—but, if he remembered aright, some of the most
important provisions of that measure were stoutly and stiffly
but unsuccessfully contested by the noble lord. (Cheers.)
Under what circumstances did the Government of Lord
Derby come into office? (Cheers and counts'r cheers.) It
was in consequence, not only of the vote of that house, but
of the unanimous and indignant vote of the whole people
of England that the noble lord was expelled from office.
(Cheers.) The noble lord's argument came to this, the, be-
cause in the last Parliament Lord Derby undertook to form
a Government which did not possess the confidence of the
house, it was therefore the duty of the present House of
Commons to also refuse the noble earl its confidence. The ,
noble lord further said that the Government were not
entitled to the confidence of the House because they were
amble to carry out in power the principles which they pro-
fessed in Opposition. They were told that if the present
vote were successful a new Government would be formed
upon a wide basis. It was not stated that it would em-
brace all the sections of the Liberal party, because, although
it had been asserted that the differences in that party were
only differences of detail and not of principle, yet he saw
gentlemen upon the benches opposite who differed more
from the noble lords than the noble lords differed from many
hon. gentlemen sitting on the Ministerial side of the house.
(Cheers.) They were also told that the new Government
was to be formed on the principle of mutual concession.
But the house had a right to know by whom those conces-
sions were made, to whom they were made, and their
nature. He would ask the hon. member far Birming-
ham—who did good service to the Conservative cause in
the autumn and winter by going from town to town pppos-
ing schemes that startled the country—whether in .1-us new
coalition the hon. member was to be allowed to carry out in
power the principles he professed in Opposition. (Laud
cheers.) Of this ho was sure that the House of Commorts
would not extend its confidence to any Government unless
it distinctly understood on what grounds that Government
was to be formed, and whose principles were to guide the
future Cabinet. (Hear.) Leaving domestic affairs to those
who would follow him, he would ask permission to say a few
words in answer to the argument of the noble lord, that the
Government were not entitled to the confidence of the House
of Commons in consequence of the-policy they had pursued
upon foreign affairs. The noble lord put this accusa-
tion in two points of view, The first found fault with the
present Administration because they had not prevented
the breaking out of hostilities in Italy; and, secondly, he
maintained that the Government did not deserve the con-
fidence of the house because their declaration of neutrality
was not sincere, and because they were inspired by Austrian
sentiments. • He could understand accusations levelled
against the Government upon such grounds as these—that
they had not interfered at the right time or in the right
manner; or that they had not displayed energy enough ; or
that they had not made all the exertions that were necessary
to maintain the peace of Europe. But these were exactly
the points which, in the present state of their information,
it was not possible for the house to form a judgment upon.
(Hear.) That information had just been laid upon the table by
the Chancellor of the Exchequer,and when it was in the hands
of members it would then be in the power of the House of
Commons to say whether the Government had exerted
themselves in the right manner and at the right time. But
when the house were in ignorance of what the Government
had done, to ask them to condemn the Government, not on
account of the measures they had taken, but solely on ac-
count of the result, was a claim on the part of the noble
lord so totally irreconcilable with any principle of justice
that he was sure the House of Commons would not adopt
it. (Cheers.) The noble lord, however, seemed to be aware
that the house could not pass an opinion without knowing
what the Government had done, and he therefore
volunteered some information to the house as to
they had thei course which the Government had taken. He
s
hhaaddpautsreised
used the
Austria,
endof
tmhaetnacitewtaeo France
that
under-
stood in Europe that if hostilities broke out and England
were engaged
ofAustria.eduine them, theGfroveemrnwmhenerat wthouelndetbakleeltehrde parthud
received this
information, g
end
knew not
but he would assure him that,
from beginningehad
been
made to
not one tittle of truth in
the report that
t
At no. time had the Governmento ventured
l e
to use.
e(Cthheeers.)
lan-
guage of menace to France. They had
attempt to hold an impartial balance,never done more than
and to give
such advice to both parties as their
ad-
visers of both parties enabled them to give. situation
ras
isright hen. friend the Attorney. General for Irelandea in the
last session of Parliament called the attention of the house
to some striking circumstances which occurred in 1848. If
hon. members who were not in the house at that time
would refer to the Blue-books on the Italian affairs of 1848,
they would learn that if the Italian question—the difficulties
of which menaced the peace of Europe, and might, if we
did not preserve our neutrality, wrap the whole world in
flames—were not settled in 1848, it was wholly owing to the
noble lord. (Cheers.) In a despatch written to Lord Pon-
sonby the noble lord said :
"I have to say that a question so important in itself and
so mixed up with national feeling and with traditional
policy as the question whether Austria shall or shall not
retain a portion of her Italian. possessions, has seldom been
decided simply by negotiation and without an appeal- to
arms ; and it seems now to have become inevitable
that the
fortune of war must, to a certain degree at least, determine
the manner in which this question between Austria and the
Italians is to be settled. The part which naturally belongs
to the British Government in this matter is to remain a s pec-
tator of events, until invited by the contending parties to
interpose by good offices with a view to an amicable arrange-
ment.'
Was it for the noble lord who said that the Italian ques-
tion must be left to the arbitrament of the sword, that the
Minister of England must fold his arms and not interpose
until the parties to the war, exhausted by the contest,
should invite the interference of the British Government
—was the noble lord who thus left the matter to the chances
of war the person now to turn round upon the Government
and blame them, not for having undertaken negotiations,
but because, having undertaken them, those negotiations
were unfortunately unsuccessful ? (Cheers.)
Lord PALMERSTON—What is the date?
Mr. S. FITZGERALD—August, 1848. At any rate
continued the hon. gentleman, in respect to the conduct of
the Government in endeavouring to prevent hostilities, he
might fairly claim a comparison of the policy of 1859 with
the policy of 1848. (Hear, hear.) But the noble lord said
—and it was the gravest charge which he imputed to the
Government—that they were not sincere in their declarations
of neutrality, and they were influenced by Austrian sympa-
thies. He (Mr. Fitzgerald) could only say that no single
word had dropped, not a single line had been written, not a
single act had been done by any member of the Government

that could in the least degree justify such an insinuation;
but, as the noble lord challenged an examination into sym-
pathies, and accused the Government of Austrian tenden-
cies, it would not be improper to consider whether the noble
lord himself was entirely free from sympathies an the other
side. (Hear.) He would not inquire too curiously into the
nature the objects, or the results of Imperial hospitality—
(" oh," and cheers)—he would not speculate upon combi
nations at Compiegne, but assume that a compliment was
intended to be paid by a great monarch to an illustrious
statesman, perhaps with some desire to show a recognition
of the earnestness with which the noble lord had endea-
voured at no remote period to alter the laws of this country
in order to gratify an Imperial desire. (Cheers.) More re-
cently the noble lord had made a speech at Willis's Rooms,
where he was supported by the noble lord the member for
London and the hon. member for Birmingham—a combina-
tion so portentous and extraordinary that the man who
might have ventured a year age to predict its possibility
would have been considered qualified for confinement in a
lunatic asylum. (Laughter and cheers.) However, in such
company the noble lord made a statement of his views, which
it was said was not entirely satisfactory, even at that early
period of the alliance, to the hon. member for Birmingham ;
and in that statement he put forth as the keystone of his
foreign policy the maintenance of most intimate relations
with France. (Hear.) No one could more highly value the
alliance now happily existing between this country and
France than himself (Mr. Fitzgerald)—he believed that it
had conduced greatly to the advantage of both countries as
well as of Europe—(hear)---but he thought that the mo-
ment when we were professing a strict and impartial neu-
trality was hardly the time for the noble lord to declare that
the first object of the Government, if it should be formed,
would be the maintenance of friendly relations—not with
both Powers, but with one of the belligerents only. (Cheers.)
The noble lord had done more. In a speech delivered at
Tiverton the noble lord had expressed a hope that before the
end of the campaign the Austrians would be driven out of
Italy. (Cheers.) No doubt those who loved freedom and
liberty might desire its extension in Italy, but would it be
prudent to commit the guardianship of our "strict neu-
trality" to a noble lord who declared he had one common
object with the Emperor of the French, whose arms he de-
sired to see successful, and the keystone of whose policy
would be to maintain the most intimate relations with the
Government of France ? (Hear, hear.) Would that be
consistent with strict and impartial neutrality ? (Cheers.)
But the case did not end there. The noble lord in his
speech referred to what he called the bad origin of the pre-
sent Government. What was that origin ? Why, the
noble lord was expelled from power, not more by the vote of
that house than by the general feeling of the country, be-
cause it was felt that he was sacrificing the honour and
interests of this country to the Government of France.
(Cheers.) Might not the noble lord, who was willing to
alter the laws to gratify the Emperor of the French, be also
induced to modify his policy for the same reason ? (Hear.)
In the early portion of his remarks he (Mr. Fitzgerald) ha
observed that the formation of a Government upon a broad
basis must, even in reference to domestic policy, expose
great differences of opinion, and that some of its members at
least could not carry out in power the opinions which they
had expressed in opposition. (Hear, hear.) But in what
position would such a Government be placed in respect to
foreign affairs ? The noble lord opposite (Palmerston) would
have to forget that for his loss of power last year he was con-
siderably indebted to the noble lord the member for London.
(Hear, hear.) The noble lord the member for London, too,
must forget something. He must forget that as a member
of that house he was asked by the noble lord, then at the
head of the Government, to adopt that which he described
as a "policy of humiliation and shame." (Hear, hear.)
When the future Government upon a " wide basis" should
be formed, embracing all the talents and sections, it would
be imposible to overlook the claims of the right hon. ,gen •
tleman the member for Ashton (Mr. M. Gibson). In what
position would that right hon. gentleman be placed ? What
were the opinions he had expressed of the foreign policy of
the noble lord the member for Tiverton, who from his vast
experience and general knowledge must exercise a para-
mount influence in such matters in any Cabinet of which he
was a member. The right hon. member for Ashton, in a for-
mer debate, quoted a public writer whose words, he said,
" seemed to be aimed with wonderful accuracy, and with a
very discriminating appreciation of the real character of the
noble lord, and of the character of his foreignpolicy." Those
words thus adopted by the right hon. gentleman stated—
" There is no constituted authority in Europe with which
Lord Palmerston has not quarrelled; there is no insurrection
that he has not betrayed. The ardent partisans of Sicilian,
Italian, and Hungarian independence have certainly no es-
pecial cause for gratitude to a Minister who gave them
abundance of verbal encouragement and then abandoned
them to their fate." On the other hand '—mark this—
' when Lord Palmerston has made up his mind to court the
good will of a foreign power no sacrifice of principle or of
interest is too great for him. "
The right hon. gentleman must admit that those words were
large enough to include the abandonment even of " a strict
neutrality." The passage quoted by the right hon. gentle-
man concluded with the following emphatic words—
" From first to last his character has been the want of a
firm and lofty adherence to the known interests of England,
and it is precisely from a want of such guiding laws of con-
duct that our foreign policy has degenerated into a tissue of
caprices, machinations, petty contentions, and everlasting
disputes."
He (Mr. Fitzgerald) did not deny that he thought in many
respects, those expressions were not just to the noble lord,
but he imagined the right hon gentleman who had adopted
them as describing with ' wonderful accuracy' the character
of the noble lord would, if he joined the future Government
upon a wide basis, find some difficulty in reconciling that
step with the opinions he had expressed while in opposition.
(Hear, hear.) The words had been spoken recently, the
events to which they referred were not remote, and he did
not believe the house would, now that issue was placed di-
rectly before it, p.roclaim a want of confidence in the present
Administration in order to establish a Government the
chief and most influential member of which would be the
noble lord whose conduct had been thus described by one of
his future colleagues. (Hear.) On the contrary, he looked
with confidence to the issue of this conflict, and he believed
that, whether the division took place to-night or to-morrow,
the house would, by giving her Majesty's present Ministers
a :majority, enable them, in strict accordance with the
opinions, wishes, and feelings of their countrymen, to carry
out that policy of strict neutrality to which they were
pledged—(cheers)—and which they believed to be necessary
as well for the interests of this country as for the highest in-
terests of humanity and civilisation. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. BRIGHT and Sir G. C-LEWIS rose together, but the
right hon. baronet gave way to the hon. gentleman.

Mr. BRIGHT—Sir, in the observations which, with the
permission of the house, I shall address to it, I shall endea-
vour to keep myself as strictly as I can, under the circum-
stances, to the grounds upon which I shall feel it my duty to
support the amendment which is now before the house.
The hon. gentleman who has just sat down, I think, has
not clone very much to clear up the question before us. Ad-
mitting all that he says to be true, it comes very nearly to
this, that he thinks the noble lord the member for Tiverton
is about as bad as his colleagues. I think that is the whole
substance of his speech. (Cries of No, no, met by cheers.)
I am not about to defend the conduct of the noble lord the
member for Tiverton—(hear, hear, from the Ministerial
benches)—nor am I about to retract a single sentence that
I have ever said with regard to him ; but I must beg tore-
mind him. gentlemen opposite that by their unanimous
opinion in private, and some of them have expressed
it in public, it is a matter of deep regret that they
have not been for years past arrayed under his banners.
(Cheers, and cries of "No, no.") I shall not attempt to
add any proof to that, because on both sides of the house
what I have stated. is well known to be true. I am very
glad, sir, that the tactics of Tuesday night have been de-
parted from, and that the silent system is not to be
imposed on hon. gentlemen opposite throughout this debate.
(Hear.) I was afraid that we were coming back to times
one remembers many 'ears ago, when hon. gentlemen were
not allowed to speak on a question now happily settled for
fear they should say something that it would be almost
impossible for their leaders to answer or to atone for in
debate. I shall not endeavour to establish the propriety of
the course lam about to take on several—l was going to
say on any—of those grounds which have been attempted to
be met by the hon. gentleman who has just spoken. I
should not think it necessary to vote against the Govern-
ment because they insisted upon a dissolution of Par-
ment, a proceeding which no doubt members always feel to
be objectionable, nor would I vote against them because
there were certain vague charges of corruption brought
against them at the recent election, for I know tht.t our sys-
tem is balanced between a considerable freedom in the large
boroughs, corruption in the small boroughs, and coer-
cion in the counties. (Cries of " No, no," and counter
cheering.) I know further that practices which 'I
should
neither like to be concerned in nor to defend have not
been confined to the present holders of power; and unless
I had proof more distinct than I have, I should not think
it would justify me in a vote of want of confidence in the
Government on account of any charges I have hoard with
respect to their proceedings in the recent contests. In
regard to the qestlon of not having kept the peace of
Europe, I should not for a moment think of supporting a
vote of want of confidence on that account. (Ministerial
cheers.) If they had permitted this country by mismanage-
meat to be engaged in war, that might, indeed, have been
a good ground for such a vote ; but I do not see how the
Government of this country can in fairness be held
responsible for the maintenance of peace between two other
great powers of Europe--(cheers from the Ministerial
benches). More than that, in this case I admit I have no
facts before me sufficient to prove that the Government have
not done all that was in their power to prevent the vast ca-
lamities which have so recently befallen Italy. (Hear.)
The grounds which have been alleged as reasons of com-
plaint may indeed be reasons, but in my mind they offer no
sufficient justification for the support which I am inclined to
give to the amendment which has been moved. I come to
one point, however, on which I feel that with my views I
have great reason to complain of the conduct of the Govern-
ment, and to charge them with mismanagement in respect
to the course they have taken in regard to the neutrality to
which they have pledged themselves, and of which they
boast. I want to know whether that neutrality be a real or
pretended neutrality. (Hear.) I have heard from members
of the Government, in whom I am free to admit I have the
greatest confidence, that they are as anxious to keep out of
war as I can be myself. (Ministerial cheers.) lam not
about for a moment to say that that is not the fact, but I
am about to show that the course which the Government
has taken in regard to that matter has been such as to lead
to doubt in the minds of the population of the country, and
to doubt generally in the minds of the population of Europe.
(Hear.) It will be admitted on both sides of the house that
as far as the public opinion has been expressed through the
press, by public meetings, and in the ordinary conversations
of every society, of, every rank of life in England, that it
would be difficult to find one single Englishman, on single
Irishman, or one single Scotchman, at this moment who is
in favour of being mixed up in any way whatever in the
hostilities which have broken out. (Hear, hear.) I think the
positive hunger for the continuance of peace on the part of
the people is evident from all that we see, and hear, and
know. That I think will be admitted by every hon. mem-
ber whom I am now addressing in this house. (Loud cheers.)
The case before us is this. If peace be broken, as far as
England is concerned it can only be broken by our own
-voluntary act as regards Fraenaccee.,
wwlt inseqveuirtea'tctuleark
us—
Austria, as long as she is at peace,

can never atteck us ; and it is ecually clear that unless we
are resolved upon war it is almot impossible that we should
attack Austria. In point of fact,war between England and
Austria alone is very much like afish in a river fighting with
a horse which is grazing on its tanks. (A laugh.) Certainly
Austria cannot assail England and there is scarcely any
considerable point in which Ragland can assail Austria,
therefore there is in reality no great danger of any war acci-
dentally occurring between England and Austria. The
question of neutrality, then, arplies almost entirely to the
Government of France. (Hear.) Now, what has been
done in regard to that ? I make this statement before the
house, because while we have tie cry of neutrality on our
lips, nothing should be done tint might tend to make that
neutrality difficult or impossible. For example, war was
declared—l am not sure whether before, but immediately
after, there was a great cry of apprehension that we should
be drawn into the war ; and I an told that there has been a
great increase in the naval pown. of England in the Medi-
terranean.. (Ministerial cheers.i It is quite clear that that
cannot be directed, and there h no suspicion that it is di-
rected, in any way against Austria. Then we had a great
stir about enlistments for the navy. (Ministerial cheers.)
There have been exhibitions it the streets of advertising
vans, with bands o'f music and banners, for the purpose of
enlisting any stray individualswho might wish to exchange
their service and their occupation. At the very time this
was being done, there were, I sin told, in ourdepoots, 3,000
or 4,000 seamen capable of manning, at any time, twelve
line-of-battle ships: (Ironical laughter.) I am not a very
great authority perhaps on these matters---(hear)—and I
should not think making the statement I • have made if
I had not received it from a person who is acquainted with
the facts, and who is perfectly competent to form a sound
judgment upon them. I do not think that all this can
have reference in any degree to the possibility of hostili-
ties with Austria. Then what has been done in regard
to any other mode of defence ? The Chancellor of the
Exchequer tells us that there are more soldiers in this
country at the present moment than there have been since
the time of the great war, and yet notwithstanding that he
invites everybody who has a little notion of military affairs,
or wanting to have it, to engage himself as a rifleman in
one of the numerous bodies or corps which are are being
formed. (Ministerial cheers.) I know there are gentle-
men who think these things useful—(renewed cheers)—but
at least they will allow there is something to be said on the
other side of the question. 1 rather agree with the ingenious
author of the Biglow papers who says that if there is any-
thing more ridiculous than military glory it is militia glory
—(cries of " oh, oh")—and I say that if there is anything
more ridiculous than militia glory it will be amateur rifle-
men glory. If there is any necessity for them I am not
finding fault with them, but I what I say is this, that if
there he any country in Europe, and that country be
France, with which under any conceivable circumstances
in the present state of things you can be brought into con-
test, is it not likely that all these ,preparations which you
are making, both by land sea, at the time when you are
telling the world your force is so great and complete—is it
not inevitable that the course you are taking must destroy
in the minds of the French Government and the French
people any belief whatever in the language you are holding
in respect to neutrality, any faith in your professions ? I
think it very likely that the rifle corps movement was a
movement of party tactics. (Oh, oh). We know very well
that the yeomanry and militia, and I dare say the rifle corps
movement, do something to add to the strength of the Con-
servative party in some of the counties of England. (Re-
newed cries of " oh, oh.") We must either be driven to the
conclusion that you suspect France has designs against us or
else that you contemplate at no distant period the possibility
of attacking France. (Vehement cries of "no, no.") One
of those two conclusions I hold you cannot escape from after
'the conduct which the Government has adopted. I want to
ask the Government whether, as rational men, apart from
those superstitious fears which sometimes haunt the minds
of almost all men, there is any fair ground why we should
add from year to year to every armament of this country,
and to our military expenditure, on the ground of appre-
hension of danger from France ? The present Emperor of
the French, at least in his conduct to this country, has
given no ground for suspicion. (Cheers.) The house will
allow me to say that I have a right to be deemed a person
who can exercise an impartial judgment on this question.
I did not approve of what I call the hasty recognition of the
accession of the Emperor of the French to the throne of
France. It did not appear to me to a question which we
ought to have been enthusiastic about. I never approved
of the intimate personal alliance which has existed between
the Ministry and court of this country and the court of' the
French Emperor; I did not join the crowds in the streets
of London when the Emperor and Empress came to Eng-
land, and when the press that now assails him asked the
people to prostrate themselves as it were before his chariot
wheels. (Hear.) I never joined in this house in the ex-
cessive and fulsome laudations which I am sorry to say I
have heard from both sides, and, therefore, having no feel-
ing of hostility to any person reigning in Europe, or any
people—and it would possibly not matter if I had—
(laughter)—coming here to discuss these questions, I have
an impartial opinion, and if the house will allow me I will
state it. (Hear.) I say, that for what was done at the time
when the Emperor of the French obtained his present posi-
tion of power he can owe no gratitude to the ,Government
or the people of England. I say that he went into the
Russian war with England, not because he wished to go
into that war, but because he thought it highly useful to
him, and he was anxious evidently to associate himself
'closely with all the foreign policy of England. I say he
entered into war with China at the request of the Govern-
ment of England, and I say he had an opportunity to carry
out those benevolent designs which. some men think he
entertains, if he have entertained them, at a time when all
the military resources of England were being sent some
10,000 miles away to quell a most gigantic and perilous
revolt. (Cheers.) More than this, at the present moment
he has on his hands a war with a great military power ;
he has on his hands enough to tax the energies of any
ruler and of any people. (Hear, hear.) Surely it is not
necessary to appeal to the common sense of hon. members,
and to argue, that whatever may have been the danger
heretofore from the side of France, that danger must be
immeasurably diminished by the circumstances in which
the Government of France is at this moment placed. Yet
if it be possible for that which has been proved to be ima-
ginary to become real now—and if it were real before it
must have become imaginary now—then I argue this way,
that there is no increasd cause to suspect France, and that,
on the contrary, if there were ever any cause to suspect
her, that cause is now diminished and reduced to the barest
minimum. But what is the conclusion to be drawn from
the proceedings of the Government ? If you agree that
there is no cause to suspect France, you are driven to the
conclusion that your Government contemplates the possibi-
lity, nay, the probability, of attacking France. (Loud cries
of " No, no," from the Ministerial benches.) Don't let hon.
gentlemen opposite think that I am charging the Govern-
ment with such an intention. I am only showing that from
the unfortunate course they have taken their proceedings
lay them open to the charge, and I shall be glad when, in
the course of this debate, we shall have upon this point a
frank declaration from the Government which shall be satis-
factory to this country and to Europe with respect to this
grave and perilous question. It is not only the impression
in England, but you know very well that the proceedings
of the British Government have created in the minds of
other people an idea that we know something which they
do riot know, aad when they see the most powerful organ of
the press in London writing in a manner to make that alarm
more alarming, it is not to be wondered at that there should
be an uncomfortable feeling. That feeling exists not alone
in England but in Germany. This opinion is generally
expressed, as any Englishman may see from the German
papers, or hear from - persons recently travelling in Ger-
many, that the proceedings of the English Government are
all directed, not against Austria, but against France, and
therefore they believe that the Government is rather
inclined to side with Austria than with France. If
you inquire what is the opinion generally expressed in
Paris you will find that there is a sense of want of confi-
dence in the English Government very much like that
which, I believe, prevails in the house at the present mo-
ment. (Hear.) There is growing up—l do not believe it
is from anything which the Government has written or
from anything the Government has thought, or from any-
thing that their agents abroad have done, but from the cir-
cumstances I have detailed—in the minds of the French
Government and of the intelligent people of France who
read what is going on in this country, a feeling that the
alliance which has so long existed is being gradually rent
asunder, if not violently, and that a coolness and danger is
growing up where there has been friendship and perfect
security. Now, sir, I am disposed to blame the Govern-
ment for this. (Hear, hear.) They may choose to say, and
I shall not be able to dispute it, that they have had no such
intentions; but I am satisfied that in England and on the
Continent of Europe their proceedings must shave been
deemed to be altogether unnecessary, if there was not a
latent belief on the part of the Government that sooner or
later they would be compelled to take sides against the
Government of France. If I recollect the speech of the
right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer—a
speech which he made not very long ago to his consti-
tuents—there was in it what I may call a bounce and
a boast about the pecuniary condition of this coun-
try, which I did not think quite becoming in a
Cabinet Minister or a Chancellor of the Exchequer. The
right hon. gentleman told the world that 20 millicn a year
for 10 or 20 years, what did it signify to a great and indus-
trious people like this?—and when he referred to that
greatest of calamities, thenationaldebt—the right hon. gen.
tleman selecting his metaphors, I suppose, from his own
personal experience—said, it was no more than a flea-bite.
I think that when a Cabinet Minister in the position of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer speaks to a large audience of
his-constituents and countrymen it would be becoming in
him to be a little more careful in regard to what is accurate
in such matters. Does not the right hon. gentleman know
that that very debt of which he spoke so slightingly has
been the cause of the embarrassments during the years in
which,it was contracted and ever since of millions of fami-
lies, and that there is not a gaol or workhouse in the land
whose walls have not resounded with the lamentations and
sorrows of those who traced their ruin to the excessive
amount of taxation which that debt brought upon them.
(Cheers.) I can't have confidence, I am sorry to say, in a
Minister who thus endeavours to mislead the public, and in
a Government whose neutrality, so far as one can see any
active exhibition of it, is to be found in continued and
gigantic preparations for war. (Hear, hear.) I am told it
would be a dreadful thing if there were to be a change of
Government, if one is, after all, to take place. I remember
an hon. gentleman behind me (Mr. Kinglake) who, in an
interesting book that he wrote upon Egypt, told us that at
Cairo, whenever the plague was very destructive, whenever
thatgreat
nprofessionaluntbr s o e
,people
howlers" died,
were w hei cmhp wloayse
de.v er(yL
afeuwg
hdtaeyr s.
Now, whenever any government is found to be in extremis,
we find these professional howlers crying out, with which-
ever House of Farliament they may be connected, and in
whatever part of the West-end they may happen to reside.
(Laughter.) Now, y: ith respect to the next Government—
(Ministerial cheers and laughter)—l have no objection to look
in the face those difficulties which to hon. gentlemen opposite
are so mysterious. I think that in all probability we shall
have the same professions of neutrality that came from that
(pointing to the Treasury) bench ; Put at the same time I
hope, and I believe, that so far as regardsthat country with
which alone there is the smallest danger of our becoming
embroiled—that with respect to that country there will be
felt, among all classes of its people, that there is some what
less of coldness, somewhat more of, sympathy, than, so far
as we know and can gather, has been shown by the present
Government. (Hear, hear.) I have no objection to tell
the noble lord the member for Tiverton that I am not one
of those who have ever approved of that strict and full alli-
ance which has existed between France and England for a
few years past. I do not think, though it has been very
popular in England—l have never thought that it was an
alliance which added to the dignity and to the power for
good of either of these Governments or either of these na-
tions, and therefore I shall be glad to find in a future Go-
vernment—if there be one soon to be formed—that the
relations between the two countries should rather be such
as we hold with the rest of the world—generous and digni-
fied, and should be conducted on the part of each country
in such a manner as to show that they both have an under-
standing with, and bear intimate relation to, the rest of the
nations of Europe. But, sir, with respect to the question
of neutrality, I should like to offer one more observation,
and I am anxious for it on this ground, that we may show
respecting our foreign policy that we have learned something,
from thepast, something from that war the treaty subse-

quent to which efforts an tf being made to undo. That war
loaded us with that debt, s vith that taxation, with that pau-
perism, and with that widespread misery, which has neve
since entirely ceased, an c t which arose from our blindly
plunging into that war. Your war with Russia, to which
the house knows I was om the very first entirely opposed,
is now generally felt throt ughout all classes of the people to
have been fruitless in a 11 but the loss of English blood
and of English treasure. Let the house remember that
those who sit on both sides of it have the same inte-
rests. We on this side alo not pretend to a morality and
humanity that you have : not ; but I think I may appeal to
both sides of the house in asking if it would not be a wise
thing for us now to come tc • the conclusion that so far as-re-
gards continental wars, i n which there is no probability of
European nations attackiix, this country, it is our interest,
however others may invol vie themselves in conflict, to leave
the contest to them, and 16 tep aloof from the struggle ? I be-
lieve that if we do so, with. the happy geographical position
of these islands, with the a dvantage of a free press, withthe
intercourse between this c ountry and the other nations of
Europe, we shall set an exa rnple which will exercise great in-
fluence when these nations c lo by any unhappy circumstances
become involved in war, wh en wecan show that it is a solemn
principle of the English nat 'ion to abstain from shedding its
blood in European conflicts, we shall then be regarded by the
continental nations as an impartial tribunal, and those na-
tions might appeal to us with a belief that, when they were
asking our counsel and good offices these would be given in
the spirit of generosity and c of ifidencEt with which they were
asked. (Hear, hear.) Now, sir, I must pass for a moment to
another great question, on v 7hich I feel as strongly, er
nearly so, as that on which 1 have referred—l mean the
question of Parliamentary Rei'orm. The Chancellor of the
Exchequer made everything t i tat could be made for his side
of the question in his speech tiro other night, a speech which,
probably, considering the case :he hadin hand, was as much
to the purpose as it would be possible for human ingenuity
to make. I thought he was to king the course of a most able
counsel, who in a desperate came advises the prisoner not for
his life to open his mouth, for that if he does there will be
no possibility of avoiding a conviction. (Laughter.) The
right hon. gentleman made soraething like a general defence
of the course his Government had taken upon the question
of reform, and he, no doubt -from past experience, having
great confidence in the generosity and simplicity of many
hon. members on this side of the house, asked them to have
faith in him for the future. (Renewed laughter.) The
right hon. gentleman, however, postpones the redeeming
of any pledge for the introduction of a Reform Bill till
another year, as if anybody could tell what another year
would bring forth. The debt has been long due to the
people, yet the right hon. gentleman has asked for another
year to pay it in ; there has been time to pay instalments,
and the right hon. gentleman has produced the bill which has
met with such an unfortunate though deserved fate—he
comes forward to give the people an instalment, and pays
them in " Bank of Elegance" notes, and in coin that has
never passed through her Majesty's Mint. (Laughter.) In
point of fact his " Reform Bill" was not only no reform
bill, but the whole country protested against it as anti-re •
form, and his bill did not fail because he had not a majority
at his back, but because he could not have carried it among
his own supporters. How many letters and remonstrances
did Lord Derby receive on the subject of that bill ? Nearly
as many as, if you counted them, there were gentlemen in
that Parliament as I now see opposite to me. But we are to
take a promise for next year I Last year we had promises
that the Reform Bill would be proposed, and how we have
obtained the fulfilment of them we all know. (Opposition
cheers.) What reliance, therefore, is to be placed on the
promises of the right hon. gentleman for next year? Then,
has the past policy of the Government upon this question
of reform been such as to encourage us to a faith, hoping
and believing all things. What confidence can we have in
a measure of the right hon. gentleman, supported by a
party who have been opposed all their lives to everything
like parliamentary reform, who introduced a bill which
would have gone far to defeat whatever there is of freedom
in the present system, and who repudiated the idea of lower
ing the borough franchise and whose colleague, moreover,
the Secretary for the Colonies (Sir Bulwer Lytton) sup-
ported the bill as maintaining the ascendancy of the middle
classes, while the working classes were to be shut out ?
(Opposition cheers.) The right hon. gentleman stands to
the last hardened and impenitent on this question, and
seeks to win the innocent and childlike faith of some indi-
viduals in this house. (Cheers and laughter.) I have never
heard of one of the 28,000,000 of people outside this house
who would, in such a circumstance, pledge -their faith,
though I am told there are some here who are so prepared.
I do- not blame them, but I will only say that they
have arrived at a state of mind of which I can form no ade-
quate idea. (Loud laughter.) Yet there arc some persons
who, after all this, are ready to place faith in the right hon.
gentleman, and believe that he is not only a reformer, but
that he is actually panting for the coming of the next ses-
sion of Parliament, when he hopes to take the wind altoge-
ther out of the sails of the noble lord who sits before me
(Lord J. Russell)—when he hopes to convert me into an
attached admirer of the reform he is to propose. (Much
laughter.) I ask the house if it is a befitting thing that
this question of reform 'should be thrown over to another
year ? I should not blame the right hon. gentleman if he
were not able to pass his bill between this time and that
when hon. gentlemen will think it their duty to kill grouse
—(laughter)--but I say that, if he had been actuated with
the zeal for reform by which some hon. gentlemen in their
innocence suppose him to be actuated, he might at an early
time have laid his bill upon the table of the house, or might
even have carried it to a second reading ; and if hon. mem-
bers had found the weather too hot for the consideration of
such a warm subject—(laughter)—they might have post-
poned the further consideration of it to a later period, per-
haps in November. Whether Governments were formed
from one side of the house or the other, the great difficuty
was to get a Government with a majority; and, at the risk
of having a Government supported by a minority of that
house, her Majesty must have advisers. Let the house
inquire whether that did not arise from the present state
of the representative system. (Hear, hear.) No doubt
hon. gentlemen opp6site believe in the freedom of the
county constituencies, but the greatest corruption exists
in the buying and selling of the small sections of small
constituencies—(hear, hear)—by which these small con-
, stituencies pass lightly' from one party to the other,
according to the zeal and liberality of the Government in
power. I say this is the reason why such a majority is
not returned as would facilitate the formation of a Govern-
ment which could hold a firm attitude before this country
and assume a string position in the eyes of foreign Govern-
ments. (Hear, hear.) With respect to the formation of
any new Government, I am sure the right hon. gentleman
the Attorney-General for Ireland (Mr. Whiteside) will feel
great interest in that question. (Laughter.) I presume it
would be the duty of that Government to bring in a mea-
sure amending the representation at an early period, which
at least must be very different from any the.right hon. gen-
tleman has brought forward—a measure which would en-
large the rights of the people, and obtain the general appro-
bation of Parliament and of the country. lam assuming
that the noble lord near me would adhere to the very mode-
rate programme which he indicated before the dissolution
—I presume it would offer a £lO rental qualification in
counties, and at least a £5 or £6 rental in boroughs—even
that in large boroughs would give a great amount of satis-
faction, and in small boroughs it would enlarge the con-
stituency, but not to a proportionate extent. That even
would, at any rate, give a substantial increase to the con-
stituent body, and a wide difference would be discernible
between it and the measure offered to us by the Chancellor
of the Exchequer. (Hear, hear.) There is one other rea-
son why, besides this question of neutrality and this ques-
tion of Reform, I think it will be admitted that hon. gen-
tlemen on this side of the house will assent to the course
which has been taken on this occasion. I think the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer and his colleagues will admit, that
if they had been sitting:on this side of the house, they would
have recommended and adopted the line of action now pro-
posed. But the Chancellor of the Exchequer tells us that
the Government is a good Governtnent, that we have not
shown that they have done anything very bad, and that
there is no ground on which we can justify the seeking to
expel them from that side of the house. But there were
parties at the elections. (Cheers.) The Address was
moved by an hon. gentleman in a speech that was very un-
affected and sincere. That hon. gentleman was returned
for the large constituency of South Lancashire. But why
did he come as the representitive of a constituency which
last session sent up an hon. friend of mine I presume
because there was a difference of principle between the hon.
gentleman and my friend who was formerly returned for
the constituency. (Hear, hear.) Why was there a contest
in the west riding of Yorkshire, where the numbers polled
for the successful candidates were 15,000 and upwards, and
where the right hon. gentleman (Mr. S. Wortley) who has
sat everywhere in this house--(laughter)—boasted of
having polled 13,000 plumpers. Was that contest entered
upon merely for amusing exercise ? (Laughter.) Why
was a political wanderer sent down to Birmingham merely
to give my friends there great trouble? (Great laughter.)
I suppose there must be an essential difference of opinion at
the root of all this. The hon. members for North Warwick-
shire have seen their side of the house drifting towards the
views of this, and a great change has occurred since I first
had the pleasure of sitting opposite to them in this house.
What was it that you assume the constituencies sent a ma-
jority to this house for ?, Was it to support a Government
in a minority, and thinking differently from themselves ? I
cannot think that anything so unreasonable can be imagined.
Having taken our oaths and made our affirmations with a
view to proceeding to the business of the session, are we to
abstain from dealing with a Government holding opinions
of a different character ? Everybody knows it is painful to
execute those great changes which generally occur in such
eases. (Laughter.) I am' not quite sure it will occur.
(Laughter from the Ministerial benches.) That is a matter
which rests at present in the bosom of each individual
member, and to-morrow night we shall probably be in full
possession of the information. There is another point in
the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to which I
must make some allusion. He said that the Tories or Con-
servatives, or Conservative Liberal party—for it has so
many aliases that one hardly knows how to call it—he says
his party has never been so exclusive as this (the opposition)
bench, and that when a man of capacity was found any-
where he was invited to that bench, and invited to a high
position in his party. That party allowed Sir R. Peel to
lead them, but when he did that which all the world now
admitted to be most beneficial to the country they cast him
off. (Cheers.) They dealt in the same manner with the
right hon. gentleman the member for the University of
Oxford. They had shown generally a rancour scarcely
comprehensible. But though the Conservative party did
so I tell you that thereby you have done yourselves great
harm, though as the result it has enabled the Chancellor of
the Exchequer to become your leader. (Ministerial cheers.)
You have enabled him to occupy the eminent an 4 proud
position ,in which he sits at this moment. (Renewed
cheers.) But you have almost proscribed the Peelites, and
I could almost imagine that you had derived the idea from
reading the Old Testament of classing them with the Hi-
vites and the Jebusites of whom we read in that book. It
seems almost as if you had doomed them to perpetual ex-
tinction. On this side of thehouse'it is said that the Whig
paily are exclusive in their formation of Governments ; but
we may, perhaps, now look for a more comprehensive plan
in the formation of a new Government. (Hear, hear, and
laughter.) I believe such a Government would preserve
the neutrality of England, and pursue a policy on reform
very different from that of the present Government, who
have tampered with it, and may betray it in the session to
come. It is most important, too, that a friendly feeling
should exist with France. These are objects which it be-
comes the people to seek to further. The right hon. gen-
tleman was ingenious when he referred to what he desig-
nated the " reconciled sections" of the Liberal party. For
sixteen years I have had a seat in this house, and I have
never during that period given a vate merely for the pur-
pose of displacing a Conservative or embarrassing weakfoar
Government ; but my votes have always been given
rnthe
purpose of forwarding those principles which you all know
I hold, and that policy which I have always frankly avowed
and maintained. (Cheers.) Now, I suppose the stoutest
ship with the strongest tackle will sometimes find itself '
where it did not expect to be ; but if there be a change of '
Government I expect to sit opposite or close alongside the 1
right hon. gentleman the member for the University—if
he dos not change his place—(a laugh)—and I shalrp—uil,
sue the same course that I have always
_ regard topursued in
times past—namely, a course of vigilance with
the Government. (Hear, hear.) I never quarrelled with a l
Government which intended to be liberal because it did not
do all that I wanted it to do or go quite so far as -I desired.

I have never quarelled with any Government yet except
when it has deserted the principles of its ancient party—
(hear, hear)—and has asked us who sat on the same side of
the house to support that which, with any show of consis-
tency, it was impossible for us to support. Well, if there
come a new Government, and my seat be where I have indi-
cated, I shall watch that Government with the vigilance that
I have exercised in time past, and with as much forbearance
as I can show consistently with what I believe to be my duty
to those great political objects to which my life has been
devoted. If they pursue a moderate, but an honest and
straightforward course I shall bear in mind the difficulties
by which they are surrounded ; and I shall be anxious to
continue them in office as long as I find them disposed to
move on fairly and reasonably in that direction which may
be said to be indicated by the average opinions of those who
sit on the same side of the house. (Hear, hear.) But if,
unfortunately, they should do some of those things which
they have done in times past—(laughter)—my sorrow will
be great, and my opposition, if I am here, will be inevitable.
(Hear, and laughter.) lam afraid, some night or other,
we shall find them, as in past times, handed over to the
Philistines who will sit opposite them. (Cheers and
laughter.) Yet I hope, sir, whoever may form this Govern-
ment, whoever may be members of the Cabinet, will look
back and take warning from their previous failures. Since
the fall of the Government of Sir R. Peel there has been no
good handling of the Liberal party in this house. Their
Cabinets have been exclusive—their policy has sometimes
been wholly wrong, and generally it has been feeble and
faltering. (Ministerial cheers.) Let us find that in the
new Government there are men adequately representing
the reconciled sections, acting with boldness and power,
grappling with the abuses admitted to exist, and relying
on the moral sense, the honest feeling of the house, and
the general sympathy of the people of England for
improvement in our legislation, Mad then I shall begin
to hope that they will have that which her Majesty
evidently wishes—a longer tenure of office than any
Ministry that has existed for many years past. (Cheers.)
Lord ASHLEY said he should vote in favour of the
amendment, because he desired to see the present Govern-
ment turned out, and his own side of the house occupying

their places, for he believed that the country would thenhave a sagacious Administration, possessing wisdom to ori-
ginate, and a will to execute, measures marked by a sound
and sensible policy.
Mr. PALK considered that in the present struggle for
place between rival statesmen and rival parties, only one
interest had been forgotten, and that was the interest of
the nation at large. The country was getting sick and
tired of these constant struggles. The so-called Liberal
party,had rejected a better measure than was ever obtained
from any other party. The consequence was a dissolution
of Parliament, and at that critical period England had not
the influence she ought to exercise m maintaining the peace
of the world. He believed the well-being of the country
was perilled by the rivalry of noble lords in their attempts
to obtain office. Unless the house of Commons vindicated
itself, they must not be surprised if such a change were
demanded in the Constitution of this country as would
sweep away from the aristocracy all their powers, and place
them in the hands of the multitude, and of men without re -
gard for our ancient institutions, but quite determined to
take on themselves the Government of England.
Mr. BAXTER wished, in a few sentences, to state the
reasons that influenced him in the vote he intended

giving. He was one of those members who opposed the
introduction of the Conspiracy Bill, and who supported
the amendment which caused its defeat, knowing well
that such a course of procdeding would assist in placing
hon. gentlemen opposite in the places they now held.
That 'being the case, he could not support any want of
confidence motion based on light or trivial grounds. In
the present serious crisis of the nation's history they were
asked, was the foreign and domestic policy of the Govern-
ment such as to command the respect of the country and
the confidence of the House of Commons ; was the peace
of England safe in their keeping ? Much as he admired
the tact, courtesy, and ability of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, and the admirable management of the navy
and many departments by Sir J. Pakington and Gen. Peel,
he could not bring his mind to answer the question in the
affirmative, and therefore he felt himself compelled to sup-
port the amendment of the noble lord. The legislative fail
ures of her Majesty's Government had been a series of
blunders. (Hear.) He wished some explanation from her
Majesty's Government about their connection with Cardi-
nalWiseman, and how it was that that prelate was received
with open arms by the Conservative pdrty in Ireland ; but if
her Majesty's Government would not explain them he hoped
the hon. gentleman the member for North Warwickshire
(Mr. Spooner) would. He, however, believed that that hon.
member was too honest to be a party to any such compact.
He hoped to see her Majesty's Ministers removed from office,
and to see those men called to the councils of her Majesty
who possessed the confidence of the country, and whose mea-
sures when brought in deserved the support of all parties.
Mr. LIDDELL had detected in,the speech of the hon.
member for Birmingham some things,which he was unwill-
ing should pass without observation. If he understood
rightly, the hon. member rested the support which he gave
to the vote of want of confidence on three material grounds,
and the most important complaint against them was founded
upon their foreign policy. In the able summary of his opi-
nions which the hon. member for Birmingham gave at the
conclusion of his speech, he said he hoped to see, upon a
change of government, something more of sympathy with
France. He had a right to ask what the meaning of that
was. He had a right to ask whether he meant that we
should sympathise with a nation that had broken the peace
of Europe in a most outrageous manner ? He was as
alive as anybody could be to the importance of the French
alliance ; and he believed that their influence combined
for good purposes might rule the world. They heard that
France was fighting for the independence of Italy, but
he offered his humble protest against a despotic power en-
gaging in such a cause. The next great charge made by
the hon. member for Birmingham against the Government
was that he suspected that its professions of neutrality were
insincere, and he rested that charge upon the fact that Eng-
land had been increasing her armaments. He (Mr. Liddell)
however, believed that if there was one act of the present
Government which had received the unanimous approval of
the house, and endeared them to the people of England, it
was the efforts made to maintain our naval supremacy.
(Hear; hear.) When the hon. member for Birmingham— a
man of the people—took on himself to say that the neu-
trality of the country was in danger in consequence of the
formation of rifle corps, he would ask whether it was the
Government that established rifle corps, or the people of
England who came forward as one man to do so. (Hear.)
There was one other point which the hon. member for Bir-
mingham adverted to—his own peculiar hobby, reform. He
could not help noticing the remarkable change in the
opinions of the hon. member between last autumn and now,
for now he had very much modified his views. In his speech
that night he had foreshadowed what the policy of a Liberal
government should be, in his opinion, upon the question of
reform, and it needed no prophet to predict that the hon.
member would form one of any government formed by those
who sat on his side of the house. The bill he now shadowed
forth was not the one he had previously produced, but a
moderate reform bill similar to that which had been advo-
cated by the two right hon. gentlemen who left the Minis-
try a short time ago. He congratulated the hon. member on
his present moderation. As to the want of confidence vote, if
he could look at the matter simply as a social question, he
should regard with indifference any change of government
that might take place, for this simple reason, that at the
present day anygovernment must necessarily bring forward
the same measures. He believed that a Reform Bill, from
whichever party it came, would, when it left the committee,
be much the same. It was on considering the foreign aspect
of the matter that he could not make up his mind to vote for a
new government. There was,great prestige attaching to cer-
tain great names, such as Napoleon, Nicholas, Metternich ;
butif there was one name in modern history more unpopular
in Europe than another, it was that of the noble lord opposite
(Lord Palmerston). He admired the character of the noble
lord; and if we were to have a change of Government, would
prefer to see him at the head of it, for he believed his mea-
sures would be always tinged with principles which influ-
enced members on the Conservative side of the house ; but
his foreign policy was always alarming and often intrusive.
If ho was in the Government it was to be feared that his
name would carry influence destructive of the peace of
Europe. This opinion was entertained by persons who
were not Conservatives, for he heard those who were Whigs
say so ; and a similar feeling influenced many Roman
Catholics, which might account for the support which the
present Government had received from that body.
Mr. J. GURNEY said he had been absent from the
house last year when the Conspiracy Bill was under con-
sideration, and he then paired in favour of it, feeling that
France was justified at the time in asking for such a mea-
sure. Ho must frankly confess that he did not think a
case had been made out against the present Government.
(Ministerial cheers.) As regarded the Reform Bill brought
in by the present Government, he thought, had it gone
before a committee, it might have been made a good bill,
and he thought the Goverement might be able to bring in
a Reform Bill which would be acceptable in the next
session. (Ministerial cheers.) As to foreign affairs, he
thought the Government had carried out the sense of the
country by acting on the principle of neutrality, and that
they had adopted the fitting means for placing the country
in a proper state of defence. (Renewed Ministerial cheers.)
Though these necessary defences might cause considerable
expense, he did not think it was an expense which the
country would grudge, and that such preparation could
not give offence to any foreign Power. He therefore in-
tended, in his sense of his public duty, to vote against the
amendment. (Ministerial cheers.)
Mr. CROSSLEY said, when the change of Ministers
was made, and the present Government came into office,
and they were required to state their sentiments upon
the question of Reform, the answer of the Government was,
that during the recess they would consider the matter, and
would be prepared to bring in such a bill as would meet the
wishes of the country. He found, however, when they did
introduce their Reform Bill, that it altogether failed to
meet the necessities of the country. (Opposition cheers.)
Now, he did not approve of a bill being read a second time
unless it was of a kind which would meet the requirements
of the house ; and when a bill went into committee which
was not of a satisfactory character, there were frequently
difficulties in getting clauses which were objectionable so
altered as to make them of a satisfactory character. It was
perfectly useless in this house waiting for nine months
longer in the hope of any measure of Reform being bronght
in by the present Government, as had been intimated,
especially as that Government was composed of men who
reagard
combination
had always been opposed to Reform, andendeavouringg
the
o t,
there
last general election, were everywhere endeavourin to'dis-
ta neow f
pGloavceeruremfoorumt, e rhse.
th h (Huegar 11a r. hear.)
uld be With
every shade of liberal opinions in the new Government,' and
he was satisfied, if such a Government should be formed of
men of talent, they would be able to bring in a Reform Bill
which would give satisfaction, and that they would be able
to prevent this country d 'ft'
cheers.) drifting into war. (Opposition
Mr. SPOONER said he rose merely to answer the hon.
member for Montrose. There wasdistinct a
com
from the Chancellor ofpe the Exchequer declaration
at there was no
after act with the Po or with Cardinaliseman, and
that statement, he Nvowl ered that any hon. member
should repeat that electioneering
fabrication. Hon. gentle-
men opposite looked at the expense laid
out upon ourde-
fences as an
indication of an intention of going to war, but
for his part he looked upon it as the best preservative
against a war.

-Mr. HORSMAN looked upon the issued of this debate as
a very serious one. An appeal had been made to the
country for the purpose of ascertaining which party had
the confidence of the country. That question would be de-
cided by the pending division, and the majority, on what-
ever side it was, would decide the fate of the Government.
It was against constitutional principles that a minority
should govern the country. With regard to the war, he
believed that the policy of the Government, whether com-
posed of one party or the other, would be to abstain from
war. The diplomatic transactions of the last few months
would form a most important chapter in history. It would
be one of their first duties to ascertain how the Government
had conducted these negotiations in the interests of peace.
It was said the Government had been grossly deceived, and
they should inquire whether, if that were true, it wanwing
to the weakness and credulity of the Minister, or whether
they had been deceived, like other Governme
nts, by a con-
spiracy to disturb the peace of Eu.rope. Ile. thought that
upon the decision of that question the Ministry should

stand or fall. The Ministry most competent to the admi-
nistration of international affairs should be in office. The
state of affairs was most critical. The most matured expe-
rience should have the management of the present perilous
crisis in our history. But he had ilbjected to this amend-
ment because he thought their fate should be decided upon
their conduct of the foreign policy of the country. But
they could not 'arrive at a fair decision upon that till the
papers were upon the table of the house. He had made-no
secret of his opinion. They should have in their hands the
evidence upon which to found their judgment before con-
demning the Ministry. (Hear.) If they had appealed to
the house for forbearance on that ground, he should hays
supported them. But they had not done so. The Oppo-
sition had adopted a most manly course, and they had
rested their claim to office upon the confidence of the
house. That challenge had been accepted by the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer. There was a common agree-
ment that the opinion of the constituencies should de-
cide the question. All who were returned for Lord
Derby would vote for him, and those returned for the
Liberals would go into the opposite lobby, and as he was
returned with an unfavourable answer to Lord Derby'a

appeal by his constituents he had no alternative but to vote

For the amendment.

Mr. K. SEY ME R in opposiug the amendment of the noble
Lord, felt constrained to repeat what had already been said,
that there could be no ground of complaint against the noble

lord for bringing forward that amendment. (Hear.) The
Government appealed to the country, and by the result of
that appeal they were content to abide. He did not see how

they could have taken the course recommended by the right
hon. gentleman who had just spoken, for when a vote of
general want of confidence was moved how could they select
one single point—that of their foreign policy—and ask the
house to wait till they had read the papers ? He would ask
the right hon. gentleman, who seemed to have been looking
out for an opportunity to support the Government, but had
not been able to find it, what other course the Government
could have taken ? He thought gentlemen opposite might
well hesitate before they formally expressed want of confi-
dence in the Government, unless they could see their way
to the formation of a strong and lasting Government
(Hear.) Before going into the question of the difficulties
that stood in the way of forming a Liberal Government,
he would notice some observations of the noble lord
the member for Tiverton as to the circumstances con-
nected with the formation of the present Government. The
noble lord (Palmerston) twitted the Conservative party
with having in the first instance supported the Conspiracy
to Murder Bill, and afterwards going against it. But what
were the circumstances? He (Mr. Seymer) recollected the
right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, not
liking to take the unusual course of opposing a bill brought
in by the Government of the day in its very first stage, said
he would vote for its introduction, but expressly guarded
himself, at the same time, against being understood by that
act to give the measure a future support. (Hear.) On the)
contrary, the right hon. gentleman stated that the measure
was one which did not meet with his unqualified approba-
tion, and that the noble lord at the head of the Government
should have sent a spirited reply to the demand of Count
Walewski, such as Mr. Canning would have written. (Hear,
hear.) And then the right hon. gentleman the member for
Ashton took advantage of that speech of the right hon. gen-
tleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and framed a
motion which the Conservative party, with the opinions
they entertained on the subject, had no alternative but to
support. (Hear.) That was the true history of the transac-
tion, which had not been quite fairly represented by the,
noble lord the member for Tiverton. , They all knew the re-
sult of that motion. A Government was formed by Lord
Derby, but not certainly after any eagerness on his part to
seize the reins of power ; and the first act of that Govern-
ment was to establish friendly relations with our nearest
ally and powerful neighbour, the Emperor of the French.
Their next step was to procure the release from prison of
the English subjects who had been so cruelly treated by the.
Neapolitan Governrr mt, and whose case had been rather
prejudiced than aided by the preceding Government. (Heart
hear.) They then brought forward their India Bill, which
was not very fairly received by the house and the county/.
Hon. gentlemen opposite had better not say much about the
country. He did not think the country would easily forget the
assault made upon the Government by what was called the
Cardwell resolution—(a laugh)—for of all the attacks made
on a Government within his recollection, he never knew one
which ended in so ignominious a failure. (Hear.) When
the noble lord the member for Tiverton talked about the
forbearance shown on his side of the house towards the
Government, he (Mr. Seymer) denied that there had been
mGaonivefrnestmedenint
wthasataoqtuawrrin.
office
eemirst On
aathetntye
attempt
contrary,forbearance
we arasant chee
made by the Opposition to eject them from
power, which, however, so completely miscarried that it
could not be repeated in the same session. Was that for-
bearance ? (Hear.) The Government then sought to deal
with the question of church rates ; and the bill of his right
hon. friend the member for Cambridge University received
a generous support from the Conservative side of the house,
and might have ended in a fair settlement of the question,
but it was opposed by those members who, while willinF
to relieve the Dissenters, were not willing to abolish churca
rates in those places where they were collected without dif-
ficulty under the existing law. No doubt a Government
in a minority were open to have a measure relating to church
rates rejected in that way; but the fault lay with hon. gen-
tlemen opposite, who ought to have settled the question
long ago, and who, not having settled it, should have as-
sisted the Government in doing so. (Cheers.) The same
course was pursued in the case of the Reform Bill. The
Government not having a majority were met in an un
nsuai
way by the motion of the noble lord the member for the City
of London, who, taking one or two provisions of the measure
which happened to be unpopular, insisted on taking the
sense of the house upon them before it had been read a
second time. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord the member
for Tiverton seemed disposed to support the bill, or, at all
events, to allow it to be read a second time. He thought
the noble lord said as much, but it was defeated by the
ingenious device of the noble lord the member for the
City. The recent history of the Liberal party was ex-
ceedingly instructive. It was a singular fact that all
the recent instances of the breaking up of Liberal Go-
, vernments had proceeded from the Liberal !side of the
house. (A laugh.) He would refer to an instance just be-
fore the first formation of Lord Derby's Government. The
carrying of a verbal amendment moved by the noble lord
the member for Tiverton in the Militia Bill, in a very thin
house, was so resented by the noble lord the member for the
city of London that he immediately gave up the charge of
the measure. The next case in which a Liberal Government
was broken up by one of their own party occurred during
the war with Russia, at the instance of the hon. and learned
member for Sheffield, when he moved for a committee of
inquiry into the origin of the calamities and sufferings of
the army in thb Crimea. In another instance an attack on a
Liberal Government emanating from the Liberal party as-
sumed the form of a " round-robin" addressed to the noble
lord the member for the city of London, suggesting that he
ought to resign, and resign he did. (A laugh.) Then there
was the attack made upon the Government of the day on
the question of the China war, and proceeding from another
member of the Liberal party. He (Mr. Seymer) voted with
ce
yb e
soughtr for Tiverton,
todu in
theh i his a
rlao
majority,
address rawjtaeor
yssrTsis
thtaytoieud, believenbltlouhibstal
tetehot
inhe:setrhtb the
yeanpt
mthijiaC:wa
nob
eac
na
majority on that occasion, and he never gave a vote with
greater satisfaction in his life.. He complained that, in the
appeal to the country which followed, the noble lord the
mtsueeramyllative party were the abettors of the atrocities perpetrated
rstocsnhhal during
ooaf
party
rs
short
thdhheNueavrta
scCa
obtainedothiinno nsonpwa,
frwo
united.a for hie
Conspiracy
a.
eB aw(i
Bill.
lag.sHoues(tmedrfr.
someymoffierc)etoonokthleeaqvueetso-
doubt it. He did not believe it, because there were questions
on which the country called fora decision, and with respect
to which there were most decide differences f opinion among
them.
. membersThe
questionopposite.
o f reform e would
was
nr eofter onet oo
could act nnewahrichtwtoheayf
in common. There was the ballot, a vital question.
That was not a matter of detail, and it was a questionwhich
he did not see the possibility of the united Liberal party
settling satisfactorily. The noble lord the member for the
city of London might be squeezable on this point. (A,
laugh.) The right hon. gentleman the member for Carlisle
was, he suspected, half squeezed already. But the noble
lord the member for Tiverton was staunch. He had made
many excellent and manly speeches against the ballot. It
ocosiultedwithreo mamaiinntanainoepdenthqautesataionexw:etush
ihoonno.
fgenthe;
would not do to say that the ballot was to be an open ques-
ttiloenm.
e nll oa pwp
franchise without the ballot would be worse than nothing
and only place the unfortunate labourer in a more
depen-
dent position than the present constituency ? (Loud cheers.)'
The speech of the noble lord on the hustings Tiv
erton
must t
must be unsatisfactory to the advanced Liberals on the,
question of Reform, as they must have expected a good R.
form programm,e from the noble lord. Heheld
in hand
by
hi
report of the noble lord's speech, revised was
published "price 4d.," and, to tell the trm' which
rather
dear at the money. (A laugh.) He uth, it was
never read a more
meagre programme. The noble lord
ought to be a lowering of the said he thought there
County franchise, and the
borough franchise, some transfer of seats there was some
the
transfer of seats he believed in
Government Bill
(" No," and hear)—and such an extension of the suffrage
as would not swamp
the present constituencies, who had
exercised the franchise •in a manner that had conferred
honour upon themselves, and been attended with advantage
to the country. (Cheers.) There was nothing in that to
which hon. members sitting on his side of the house could
not subscribe. (Hear, hear.) But there was a great deal
in it inconsistent with tl •
re views of the hon member for
Birmingham. He held in his hands a revised *edition of the
speech of the hon. gentleman, which was published at is..
and which was betterworth ls., he thought, than the speech.
of the noble lord was worth 4d. (A laugh.) The hon.
member for Birmingham put forth a schedule of disfran-
chisement and the redistribution of seats. Would such a
scheme be adopted by the united Liberal party ? He sus-
pected that a very small schedule of disfranchisement
would be satisfactory to the noble lord the member for
Tiverton. (Hear.) The hon. member for Birmingham said
in one of his speeches that hereditary legislation could not
be a permanent institution in a free country. (Cheers, and
cries of " Read on.") The hon. gentleman went on to say
that, at all events, it would require extensive modification,
and that last session the Queen proposed a system of life
peerages. (Cheers.) But that was a legal arrangement,
intended to increase the number of law lords in the upper
House, and could not justify the hon. gentleman in saying
that a House of Peers could not be a permanent institution
in a free country. (Hear, hear.) They might be told that
this was a harmless theory. But the hon. member for Bir-
mingham was not the man to hold opinions as mere theories.
His opinions were not held for the closet. There was u°
doubt he meant what he said, and that he would endeavour
to give effect to his opinions as soon as he could.
Mr. BRIGHT begged to say that if the hon. gentleman
would read the speech he delivered
at Glasgow he would
find that the statement he had just made was entirely in-

correct. (Cheers.)
Mr. K. SEYMER did not know what the noble lord—
(loud laughter)—lie begged pardon, the hou. gentleman--
meant. He had read to the house an authorised report of
what the hon. gentleman said at Manchester. The hon.
gentleman appeared to have qualified his statement, as he
had qualified many others. (Cheers.) He wanted to know,
and the house would want to know, how the united Liberal
party intended to act with regard to principles which the
hon. gentleman clearly did not intend to lie dormant, but
which he would endeavour to act upon. He did not see
how the united Liberal party wero to deal with the ques-
tion of church-rates. The noble lord (J. Russell) objected
to the bill of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Walpole), be-
cause it gave up the principle of an Established Church;
while some hon. gentlemen opposite wanted to liberate the
State from any connexion with the Church. These were
questions that pressed for a solution, yet upon which
hon. gentlemen opposite entertained irreconcilable diffe-
rences, (Hear, hear.) It was clear that a Government
formed of such elements must rely upon the support of the
Consernative side of the house against those who sat below
important
question gangway on its own side. Another most
question was the arming of the country. The hon. mem- ;
ler (Mr. Bright) laughed at the militia and the riflemen,
and his especial charge against the Government was that

they were arming the country. That was just the point
upon which the policy of the Government was most popu-
lar—(hear, hear, and cheers)—and any. Government that
expected to have the support of the people of England must
maintain the coast defences, arm the people, and especially
must maintain an efficient navy. (Cheers.) The noble
lord the member for Tiverton once gave a description of
the views of the hon. member for Northampton on war.
He said that if the French came here the hon. member for

Northampton eTiti;;el;flhat we ought not to oppose them,
but invite them to tea—(a laugh)—and then tell them over
the urn that they had done wrong to coming here, and that

6leyWlpet to g;3: back again. (Alaugh.) The hon. mem-
ber for Northampton was one of the Liberal united party,
and how could that hon. gentleman consistently support a
Government that was arming the country ?
Mr. GILPIN said he was sure the hon. gentleman: would
not willingly misrepresent him. Immediately after the
statement made by the noble viscount, he published a let-
ter in the Times, stating that he was not the author of the
pamphlet from which the noble lord quoted, and that he
had no more to do with the principles of that pamphlet than
the noble lord himself. Since that the author had published
his name. He was a merchant in the city. Ho had nothing
whatever to do with the principles set forth ix that pam-
phlet. (Cheers.)
Mr. B. SEYMER said that if he had misrepresented
the hon. gentleman it was quite unintentional. (Hear.)
He begged, however, to ask the hon. member for Birming-
ham whether he still retained the opinion he had expressed
that the large military establishments of the country were
merely a system of out-door relief for the aristocracy? Did
the hon. gentleman think that the military establishments
which the Government believed and which the country
believed to be necessary were only kept up for the purpose of
benefiting the aristocracy? (Hear.) If he did think so, he
could, cf course, act upon that opinion, and then how could
he be expected to arm the country for defence ? (Hear,
hear.) The noble lord the member for Tiverton had said
that the Government were mistaken in supposing that ag-
gression had come from either France or Sardinia, and that,
in fact, it was Austria that had commenced the war. He
(Mr. Seymer) thought the less said upon that point the
better, for in .1848 the noble lord had gone up to the last
moment lecturing Austria upon the impropriety of attack-
ing Sardinia, until at last Sardinia chose to attack Austria.
The Government were not mistaken in the present instance
as, although Austria had apparently taken the initiative, no
one who knew anything of the state of Northern Italy
could have the least doubt that Piedmont intended to make
War upon Austria. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord also said
the Government could not prevent hostilities because they
had not a Parliamentary majority to give them weight in
European councils; but would the course suggested by the
noble lord have improved the case? He told the Govern-
ment not to resign, but to accept his bills, to do his bidding,
and by discrediting themselves they might succeed in their
foreign policy. (Hear, hear.) The Government, however,
thought otherwise, they thought it better to try and im-
prove their Parliamentary position, and they had done so.
(Hear.) The noble lord accused those who sat opposite to
him of being favourable to Austria. As an independent
Member, he (Mr. Seymer) declared he had no sympathy
with Austria. He did sympathise with the Italians, but not
with the French and Sardinians attacking Austria. (Hear.)
He distrusted the interference of a despotic power in favour
of liberty—(hear, hear)—the first consequence of which had
been the suspension of liberty in Sardinia. He admitted
that he did not understand the question of nationalities,
although he did understand the question of constitutional
liberity. If the question of nationalities were raised, there
was no knowing how soon our own turn might come. The
lonian Islands were not easy under our protectorate,
and Russia, which had more pretensions to interfere for
Greeks than France had to interfere for Italians, might
claim a right to attack us. He did distrust France as a pro-
tector of Italian liberty. Who had put down the Roman
Republic—who kept down liberty now in Rome ? Was it
not France ? (Hear, hear.) In saying that he had no sym-
pathy with Austria he must observe that this country had no
cause of apprehension from that Pcwer. If she had overrun
Piedmont and (which God forbid) even if she had annexed
that country, England would not have added a frigate to her
navy, or a battalion to her army. But it was not the saxes in
the case of other Powers, and the instinctive feeling of this
country was evinced by the feeling which now generally
prevailed that we should take every precaution to render
ourselves unassailable. When it was said that we ought not
to increase our Mediterranean fleet, ha would observe that
we had to protect Malta, Gibraltar, and the lonian Islands,
which were a part of our empire. (Hear, hear.) He must
say he thought the Government had taken a wise,course in
arming the country and in maintaining a strict neutrality,
and, believing that the Liberal party were not united enough
to carry out their own principles, while the Conservative
party was united and the strongest in Parliament, he should
give his decided opposition to the amendment. (Hear.)
Sir J. GRAHAM then rose, and was received with cheers
and counter cheers. He said—l don't rise to enhance the
value of the reported speech of the noble viscount the mem-
ber for Tiverton, much less to depreciate the value of the re-
ported speeches of the hon. member for Birmingham. I shall
hot now follow the hon. gentleman who has just sat down
into a historical sketch of the decline and fall, as he thinks,
of the great Liberal party, neither shall I speculate upon
the prophecies in which he has indulged as to its future po-
licy. I find the question before us to be this—Shall the
Government which the hon. member for Dorset supports
continue in the possession of power with the consent of a
majority of this house ? (Hear, hear.) That is the issue to
be decided, and to that issue I will endeavour to address
the few observations which I have to offer to the
House. Now, Lam placed in a somewhat painful position.
(Ironical cheers.) I have been driven from the seat which
by the forbearance, or, indeed, grace of hon. gentlemen oppo •
site I have some time occupied in this house, and having
been received upon these benches—(ironical cheers and
counter-cheers)—hon. gentlemen opposite cheer because
Pain has been inflicted upon an humble individual—
(laughter) but I do not believe that sound of
triumph augurs an ultimate victory—(hear, hear)—
having been received upon these benches, I am not
Permitted to give a silent vote. I would gladly have
given a silent vote, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
the leader of the party opposite, has thought fit to indulge
in observations which rendersilence on my part impossible.
(Hear, hear.) Now, that right hon. gentleman occupies the
Proud position of leader of this house, and, being so, is at
the head of the largest and most respected body of gentle-
flen in this country. I may be mistaken, but I have al-
ways believed that among gentlemen there was an esta-
blished rule—(laughter and counter-cheers)—what, sir I
has it come to this ? After such an attack has been made
upon me by the rightjion. gentleman opposite, am I not to
be allowed to offer any explanation to the house ? (Cheers.)
I cannot believe that is a course which will be sanctioned,
even by a new House of Commons. (Renewed cheers.)
I was saying, sir, that where an error has been committed
and an explanation has been asked for, and when there has
been an admission of error, an apology for error, the expres-
sion of regret, and when that expression of regret has been
allowed to be published, I thought there was an established
rule among gentlemen that the subject should not again be
revived. (Loud Opposition cheers.) But it seems that I
was in error, for the leader of the house has thought fit to
revive this subject. (Cheers.) I should be sorry, indeed,
if this debate upon a question involving the policy and the
interests of a great nation were allowed to grovel in the
ground, and to be degraded into a mere question of person-
ality, instead of being elevated to those higher regions
where such important subjects ought to be discussed ; but,
Since that topic, upon which I gave an explanation in an-
ewer to the right hon. gentleman the Secretary of State for
War, has been revived, I may be permitted to say that I
adhere to the statement which my answer contained, that,
although I was decidedly wrong in saying that the altera.
tion in the amount of billet money was made by an act of
Prerogative, Parliament not sitting, yet I adhere to the
statement that it was proclaimed on the eve of a general
election—(shouts of " Oh, oh !" from the Ministerial side,
met by Opposition cheers), and that the alteration was used
for election purposes—(cheers)—and, however painful it
may be, since the matter 'has been forced upon the house
by the leader of the house, I will produce my evidence of
the facts. (Renewed cheers.) The son of the right hon.
Secretary of State for War was a candidate for Devonport.
naturally proud of the name which he bears, and of his
connection with the right honourable gentleman, he
avowed himself, in his first address at Devonport, to be
the son of the Secretary of State for War, and almost
immediately after his first appearance in Devonport as a
candidate there was issued a placard, which I will now read
to the house. (Cries of "Oh I" from the Ministerial
benches, and cheers from the Opposition.)
"A Fact for the Licensed Victuallers and Beershop-
keepers. (Laughter.) The present Government have taken
care that, from the 25th of April inst., every person upon
whom a soldier is liable to be billeted shall be paid four-
pence per day, instead of three half-pence. (Ministerial
cheers.) At a moment like the present, when recruiting is
going on to a much larger extent than usual, this boon is
One of great consequence— (Ministerial cheers)--and evi-
dences the desire which a good Conservative G overnment—
(loud cheers from the Opposition)—has to remove oppres-
sion and wrong wherever it may be discovered. (Cheers
from the Ministerial benches.) Licensed victuallers and
beershop-keepers—(laughter)—will appreciate this boon—
(renewed laughter)—and understand well the difference
between a Conservative fourpence and a Whig three half-
Pence."
- - -

(Loud laughter and cheering from the Opposition benches.)
The placard concludes with the motto "Vivat Regina." (A
laugh.) Well, Sir, the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor
of the Exchequer next referred, I think, to the subject of
the reparation and re-occupation of the barracks at Berwick.
understand that an election petition from Berwick has
been presented to this house. (Hear.) I have reason, there-
fore, to believe that that matter will be the subject of judi-
cial inquiry, and until the opportunity for such inquiry is
given I shall abstain from further reference to it. (Cheers.)
S 0 also with regard to the packet contracts at Dover and the
Lever contracts at Galway. The hon. member for Falmouth
(Mr. T. G. Baring) has to-night moved for returns with
respect to the Dover contracts. The noble member for
Ti-
"ten in his speech on Tuesday night expressed his opi-
nion? in which I most decidedlyconcur, that these questions
Zlust be submitted to a severe scrutiny, and that scrutiny
I Will not anticipate. (Cheers.) The next point, I think, to
Which the Chancellor of the Exchequer referred was the
Catholic alliance. Upon that question I may say that
throughout my political life I have, to the utmost of my
Power, defended the claims of my Roman Catholio fellow-
Subjects to perfect equality of civil and religious rights.
(Cheers.) I have stood by them in circumstances where
74,y of their former friends failed to support them. (Cheers.)
dld my utmost to prevent the passing of the Ecclesiastical
Titles Bill, and 1 have uniformly supported every just de-
!nand whtch they could make for the full and free exerciseof
their religion. (Hear, hear.) I certainly did observe with re-
gret that, during the late general election, ecclesiastical
P°Wer was used, or said to have been used— (Ministerial
cheers) —to influence Roman Catholic voters against the Li-
beral Party, and I think that infinitely more has thus been
done than could have been done by their opponents to injure
their cause. I will say no more about that. I think that
their
hlall Catholic voters, and even the heads of the Roman
Catholic Church, have a perfect right to exercise an inde-
Pendent judgment upon these subjects, but I must say I was

astonished when I saw that my hon. and learned friend the
member for Dundalk (Mr. Bowyer) was reported to have
declared upon the hustings that the Roman Catholics had
reason to expect that her Majesty's present advisers would
grant a charter of incorporation to a Roman Catholic univer-
sity in Dublin. Now, Sir, faith will remove mountains—(a
laugh)—but the credulity that could lead men to suppose
that a charter of incorporation, revised by the right hen.
Attorney-General for Ireland (Mr. Whiteside), the member
for the Protestant University of Dublin—(laughter and
cheers)—and with the great seal ofi Ireland appended to it
by the hands of Lord Chancellor Napier—(renewed laughter
and cheers)—would be granted to a Roman Catholic univer-
sity in Dublin, implies a belief in miracles exceeding any-
thin' that could be conceived of infantine simplicity. (Cheers
and laughter). But, Sir, the latest charge of the Chancellor
of the Exchequer appears to me the most serious. It refers to
a statement I made that it was reported that a large sum of
money had been collected for election purposes among the
noblemen and gentlemen of the Conservative party, and that
it was boasted that Lord Derby had headed the subscription
with the large amount of £20,000. Now, this matter has

been dealt with by Lord Derby himself. fie has denied the
subscription of £20,000; he has denied the subscription of

£10,000; he has denied the subscription of £5,000; but I do
not see that Lord Derby has denied that he subscribed even
£2OO. (Cries of " Oh," from the Ministerial side, laughter,
and Opposition cheers). Not only has he not denied his
subscription, but he distinctly admits the existence of a
fund of the description to which I adverted, and a subscrip-
tion to a large amount. -Nay, more. With great playful-
ness he said that subscriptions of this natnre take place at
every general election, and that the assertion that these
large funds existed had no doubt produced upon some of the
elections an effect very different from what I had antici-
pated. The noble lord was satisfied with giving to these
reports, erroneous in a measure, a contradiction in terms so
courteous that I rejoice in havinc, this public opportunity
of thanking him for the courtesy of his denial. (Loud
Ministerial cheers.) But, sir, the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer declared that upon this matter he was the repre-
sentative of Lord Derby, and again reterting to his position
—the highest in this house—l must say, that he indulged,
in his denial, in the use of an expression which during my
long experience in Parliament I have never heard equalled.
(Cheers.) I will say that his denial was couched in terms
so offensive that I am almost ashamed to mention them.
(Renewed cheers.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I rise to
order. (Cheers.) The right hon. gentleman (Sir J. Graham)
quoted a statement made in an anonymous paragraph. In
his speech he referred to the statement as one he had re-
ceived in that manner, and which he did not make upon
his own authority—(cheers)--and that anonymous para-
graph I characterised as an impudent fabrication. (Renewed
cheers.) That paragraph was in my possession, was pub-
lished and circulated in the newspapers beforo the speech
of the right hon. gentleman. I might have regretted that
the right hon. gentleman should have assumed, even provi-
sionally, the truth of that paragraph, but I certainly never
meant to attribute to his statement the terms which he has
quoted. (Cheers.)
Sir J. GRAHAM continued—l really, sir, am rather
perplexed as to the course I should adopt with respect to the
explanation now given by the right hon. gentleman. He
said that the statement was "an impudent fabrication."
(Ministerial cheers.) Well, sir, in all my intercourse with
that right hon. gentleman, I am not aware that I have
ever said or done anything which could have given him
reason to offer me personal offence. I could hardly believe
that you, sir, would have permitted the use of such an ex-
pression if it had been clearly applied to a member of this
house. I did not think the rules of this house would have
justified it ; and certainly it was not for me to call the right
hon. gentleman to order.
The SPEAKER—I think that, perhaps, if I state to the
house the impression which the use of that phrase made
upon my own mind it may terminate this rather painful
discussion. (Hear, hear.) The impression made upon my
mind at the time (and I distinctly remember the terms em-
ployed)---certainly was that, as the right hon. gentleman
the Chancellor of the Exchequer has explained, the fabri-
cation in question had been made use of, but that it had
not originated with the right hon. gentleman the member
for Carlisle. (Cheers.)
Sir J. GRAHAM—Certainly, sir, what the right hon.
gentleman has said, confirmed by your high and unim-
peachable authority, is some satisfaction to my wounded
feelings. (A laugh and cheers.) But the right hon. gen-
tleman went on to remark upon the mild influences of age,
presenting in his own persona contradiction to tho Hora-
tian maxim—