Commons Sitting of 3 May 1827

NEW ADMINISTRATION—SHIPPING INTEREST.
General Gascoynewas proceeding, pursuant to notice, to bring forward his motion on the state of the Shipping Interest, when
Mr. G. Dawsonbegged that there might be a delay of a short time, as he had a question of considerable importance to ask of the right hon. gentleman now at the head of his majesty's government, whom he did not yet see in his place [cries of "Go on, go on"].
General Gascoyneobserved, that he was in possession of the House, and that his motion had been standing a long time [cries of "Go on"].
Mr. Huskissonsaid, that he had not seen his right hon. friend, the First Lord of the Treasury, during that day; but that, if that right hon. gentleman had had notice that the hon. gentleman opposite desired to put any question, he made no doubt that he would have appeared in his place, even although other business had been neglected for it.
Mr. G. Dawsonsaid, he apprehended that some notice had been given that questions would be asked, because he himself had stated that fact to the right hon. gentleman, previous to the ballot.
Mr. Huskissonreplied, that he had stated the cause of his right hon. friend's absence as well as he knew it. Certainly, on receiving the intimation of the hon. member he had not thought it necessary to send for his right hon. friend; but no doubt he would soon be in the House.
At that moment Mr. Canning entered, and took his seat.
Mr. G. Dawsonsaid, that he wished to ascertain from the right hon. gentleman who had just taken his place, whether any arrangement had been made, or was in contemplation, for filling up the offices of Master of the Mint, Judge-advocate, and Surveyor-general of Woods and Forests?
Mr. Canning.—Yes [great cheers and laughter].
Mr. G. Dawsonsaid, he did not quite understand what all the cheering meant. However, to bring the matter to a crisis, he would make a motion upon the subject. He would move, in order to afford an opportunity of making some observations which he was desirous the hon. gentlemen on the other side should hear.—"That an humble address should be presented to His Majesty, praying that copies of the commissions of the Master of the Mint and of the Judge-advocate might be laid before the House." it would have been but fitting, he thought, that, after so long a delay, the House should have been informed who were the gentlemen intended to fill those offices. As nothing was intimated directly, report, as usual, had been busy; and statements had got abroad, that the places in question were to be filled by some of the gentlemen who had lately coalesced with the right hon. gentleman at the head of affairs. If that report were true, this would be the last act of that political farce, which the right hon. gentleman had been carrying on, with wonderful success, for the last five weeks; but, in the plot of that farce there did appear to be one or two very curious circumstances of coincidence, to which he wished, very shortly, to point the attention of the House. He had heard the right hon. gentleman declare, but a night or two back, from his place on the opposite bench, that he had received the resignations of those six ministers who had retired from office, because they were opposed to the measure of the Catholic claims, "In the King's closet." This was the right hon. gentleman's statement, which it was impossible for him to doubt;
506
but, certainly, he had heard four of the six ministers in question state, in their places in the other House, that those resignations had been sent to the right hon. gentleman in ample time for him to have received them at his proper place of address—the Foreign-office. Now, it did appear extraordinary to him, that these resignations—sent some of them as early as eight o'clock in the morning, two sent the night before the right hon. gentleman received his appointment—should not have reached him until he was absolutely in the king's closet; and if the fact was, as it was difficult for a man of plain understanding not to believe, that this circumstance was the result of an arrangement, and that the letters, being received in due time at the Foreign-office, had been purposely delayed until the time of their delivery to the right hon. gentleman, the inference was inevitable, that such a device was calculated to produce the impression upon the royal mind, that the noble persons resigning had entered into a low cabal, in order to prevent their king from having the benefit of their services. Then, whether such an impression as this was made upon the royal mind he did not know; but one thing was certain; namely, that that was precisely the impression which had been produced upon the public mind, and through the medium of the public press. He would not ask the hon. Secretary for the Admiralty, nor the learned member for Winchelsea, if they understood how this had happened; but it was quite certain the thing had happened; and he should be glad to hear some explanation of such a coincidence. And the coincidence did not terminate here; but the part which followed formed the chief object of his present observations. It had been stated publicly, that the places respecting which he had taken the freedom to question the right hon. gentleman opposite, were to be filled up by those hon. members who now supported government, but who had, for so long a time, been in the habit of opposing its measures. It was currently reported, that either those gentlemen would at once be put into the situations in question, or that the places would be filled up provisionally, so that they might be ready when it suited the squeamish stomachs of the hon. gentlemen to accept of them, or the liberality of the right hon. gentleman at the head of affairs to bestow them upon them; and

507
to this no contradiction was given. It was a coincidence no less curious than that of the receipt of the six resignations by the right hon. gentleman in the royal closet, that all this accession of strength from the Opposition should accrue to him just at the moment when he had place and preferment to give away ["hear, hear," from the Opposition]. For it was pretended, that, for a long time, there had been a similarity of feeling and opinion between the right hon. gentleman and the hon. persons who had joined him. The House should see, in a few moments, by what sort of conduct that similarity of sentiment had manifested itself. The hon. and learned member near the pillar (Mr. Brougham) had spoken of his agreement with the right hon. gentleman—his agreement upon all points of foreign affairs, or internal arrangement. Now, he had no means of ascertaining, but in one way, what this agreement had or had not been. He had no means of knowing what the personal feelings of the hon. and learned gentleman had been; but he could refer to the manifestation of the opinions of the right hon. gentleman, and of the hon. and learned gentleman, as they appeared upon the divisions of the House; and upon that he would say a few words presently. If he referred to the Parliamentary Debates during the time when the right hon. gentleman was Foreign Secretary, so far from finding any approximation between his sentiments and those of the hon. gentlemen who had now joined him, he found no one subject, except that of Catholic emancipation, upon which their views had not been diametrically opposite. In consequence of the declaration of the learned member for Winchelsea, two nights since, he had looked through the proceedings of the House from the year 1820; and, upon a list of ninety-five divisions, he found the following proofs of the agreement of the right hon. gentleman and his present colleagues; in the course of ninety-five divisions he found the name of the reputed Master of the Mint, the right hon. member for Knaresborough (Mr. Tierney), opposed to that of the right hon. gentleman forty-nine times. The learned member for Winchelsea's name stood opposed to that of the right hon. gentleman fifty times; a pretty strong evidence, not only of his sentiments, but of his constant attendance in the House. He found that the hon. member for Ware
508
ham differed from the right hon. gentleman forty-seven times. The hon. and learned knight, reported to be the new Judge-advocate, was in opposition thirty times. Could any man living be aware of these facts, and believe that there had been any political community of sentiment between the right hon. gentleman and the hon. members who had lately joined him? There was not an agreement in opinion upon any one subject, except that of Catholic emancipation; and that subject was one which the right hon. gentleman directly declared he did not mean to make a cabinet question. The hon. baronet, the member for Westminster, said certainly, that he had considered the carrying of the Catholic question as a sine qua non between the ministry and himself: but the right hon. gentleman had no such scrupulousness; he avowed plainly, that he considered that question no such bond of union; therefore, this only pretence—this only question which had formed a bond of union between the right hon. gentleman and his colleagues—now they were united, was to be a bond between them no longer. He would come then—since the question upon which they had agreed was no longer in existence—to the questions upon which the right hon. gentleman and his supporters had been vitally opposed. Let the House see if they were of a light or unimportant nature. The questions upon which they had divided in opposition were—to enumerate but a few of them—Parliamentary Reform—the Pension List—the Diplomatic Expenditure—the Influence of the Crown—the Sinking Fund—the Changes in the Criminal Law—the Scotch Representation—the Administration of the Law in Ireland—the Conduct of Ministers as to the War between France and Spain—the Repeal of the Window-tax—the Estimates of every description—the Repairs of Windsor Castle—the State of the Church of Ireland—Colonial Policy—the Repeal of the Assessed Taxes, &c. The learned member for Winchelsea talked of agreement in opinion between himself and the right hon. gentleman. Surely the hon. and learned member conceived that these questions were all dead, and would never come before the country again! Whether they had passed away for ever, he would not venture to say; but, if they had not, when they came on, what was to become of the union between his new colleagues and the

509
right hon. gentleman? The fact was, that it was useless to talk. There never had been any bond of union between the parties but the Catholic question; and it would be a delusion too monstrous almost for belief, if that question was not instantly brought to issue. That was the question which he desired to see the right hon. gentleman try. Upon that question either the confidence of the king or of the Catholics must be betrayed; and the new ministers would desert their duty, as well as their principles, if they did not, within a single week, bring that question to issue. The House must see, and the people of England would not long fail to know, that, in this most extraordinary coalition, both parties had equally lost sight of every principle which ought to have been sacred to them. He hesitated not to avow that fact: it was his opinion, and he freely stated it. He looked at the conduct of the right hon. gentleman at the head of affairs as having been dictated by no other motive than the gratification of his own personal ambition; and, disagreeable as it might be to the right hon. gentleman to hear it, and disagreeable as it was to him to utter it, he told the right hon. gentleman, that he had not been over scrupulous as to the means by which his ambitious course had been pursued. Then, for the other party—if they lost sight of the Catholic question but for one moment [hear and laughter]—he meant to throw no difficulty in the way of the bringing on of that question —if they abandon that question only for one hour, they would do so for reasons which all the country would understand. They would have abandoned it, after clamouring incessantly for it, at the very first moment when valuable places were to be given away, and when—if the latter part of the report which he had already alluded to was the correct one—when other valuable places were to be kept open before them, ready to reward and gratify them for their support. After some further observations upon the extraordinary and unnatural character of the coalition in which the hon. gentleman on the other side had entered, the hon. member concluded by moving—"That copies of the commissions of the Master of the Mint and of the Judge Advocate should be laid on the table."
Mr. Brougham roseto second the motion [great laughter and cheers]. He said, that he trusted the House would believe, from his seconding the motion of the
510
hon. gentleman opposite, that he had succeeded, with his new position in the House, to some of the candour and fairness which naturally belonged to it; and, certainly, his successors on the opposite benches had approved themselves the most apt learners—he would not say of the tricks, but certainly—of the wiles and resources of faction, of any he had ever seen distinguish themselves in that very respectable school [hear, and laughter]. For never in the course of his long experience of opposition, whether as an artist or an amateur, had he witnessed as a by-stander, or practised in his own person, any thing comparable to the evolution of only the second night's tactic of the hon. gentlemen opposite, by which they had actually interjected—not into a debate, but actually into an opening speech, made upon a motion standing after two months' notice—into the very exordium of the address, as to the state of the shipping interest, of the hon. member for Liverpool—not a simple question or two to annoy government—though that would have been more than he (Mr. Brougham) had ever been able, under such circumstances, to effect—but a regular debate upon a question of their own ousting, and taking place of a debate, of right, and even actually of fact, already in possession of the House [cheers, and laughter]. Therefore, to augur from the first step of the new opposition, as to what they would do hereafter—be their continuance in their present places as long as he could wish it to be, or, as short as they themselves would desire—certainly a more violent, and unhesitating, and unscrupulous party could hardly have been gathered together, than that which had broke ground upon the opposite benches two nights before. With respect, however, to the most important part of the observations of the hon. gentleman opposite, which he wished to dispose of before he came to the questions which the hon. member had put personally to himself and one or two other members, it would be necessary for him to occupy a few moments of the time of the House. He confessed that he admired the boldness of the course of the hon. gentleman opposite. It was a frank, gallant, proceeding; and he liked it, because it at once showed the foot, which was meant to carry the hon. gentleman and his colleagues back into office, by carrying the Catholics away from their chance of emancipation [hear, hear.] The hon. gentleman proceeded

511
with vigour. He was a contemner of doubt and delay. He did not wait to urge the new ministry on to his object by out-door conversation, or newspaper discussion—a means of influence to which, as it appeared from the hon. gentleman's account, he had no access. He did not wait till the mail arrived from Dublin—he did not mean the journal called the "Mail." The hon. gentleman did not wait for these helps to force him (Mr. Brougham) and those about him into the trammels with which they wished to fetter them—into discussions, in the course of which, according to the custom in such cases from time immemorial, all their old speeches were to be flung in their faces, in comparison with those which they would have to deliver at present. Not at all; this cold delay did not suit the hon. gentleman and his colleagues. Being out of place only for a week, they did not find so pleasant as to be desirous to try it for a month. And therefore they wished to urge on the tried friends of the Catholic question, to do that very act which every rational man connected with the Catholics must see—done at present—would be wholly fatal to their cause. There were times, however, and seasons, when it was proverbially dangerous for men to listen to the counsel of their enemies. The Catholics had too often, he was afraid, taken a lesson of indiscretion from their friends; let them now take a second lesson—a wiser one—from the advice and tuition of the hon. member for Derry; for if the Catholics could doubt now for a moment, they must be mad—literally and absolutely mad—that the especial course calculated to ruin all their interests was for them to follow the advice which that hon. gentleman and his friends threw out to them [great cheering]. Let the Catholics avoid the hon. gentlemen opposite; and as they had feared their hostility, let them now, on every account, be apprehensive of their friendship. Let them trust to the effects of time, and of discussion—of better lights breaking out in various ways, and freer opinions, in England. Let them rely upon the effect of their own forbearance, of their abstinence from offensive and provoking topics. Let them suspect bad advisers; and endeavour to conciliate the hostility of those who opposed them from honest and sincere prejudices; avoid the counsels and seductions of rash and intemperate friends; but above all, let them fly from the advice of their
512
open, avowed, and determined enemies, who were now endeavouring, in order to promote their own private and party purposes, to force them on to a conduct which could have no end but in their ruin [loud cheering]. For the trick was too clear. It was the thinnest disguise he had ever seen thrown by a virulent faction over their naked depravity. Let the Catholics only employ their common senses: let them ask themselves who the party was—the hon. gentleman opposite—who was crying upon them to press their claims, without loss of time: let them recollect that the individual who talked of their abandonment, their betrayal, and the mischief coming upon them from a single moment's longer delay, was their ancient, their avowed, their honest enemy—the man who had opposed them upon every occasion, and was pledged to oppose them—the member for Derry [cheers]. One word, however, when he said "honest," not that he meant one point to qualify that well-merited word, as applied to the hon. member; but, while he fully bore testimony to the hon. member's honesty, he begged to be understood not at all to make the same admission with respect to his consistency. For that he (Mr. Brougham), who had always supported and advocated the cause of Catholic emancipation; that he, who, through his whole political life, had shown himself the firm friend of the repeal of every kind of penalties, or disabilities connected with religious belief; that he, with his habits and opinions, should feel impatient for the accomplishment of Catholic emancipation, and even perhaps not hesitate to involve the country in something like confusion to attain such an object, imprudent and indefensible as such a course would be, might be perfectly conceivable; but was it not strange, was it not miraculous almost beyond belief, to find the hon. member for Derry and his colleagues opposite—they who had been, for years and years, crying out and uplifting their voices against the carrying of the Catholic question—who had treated the granting emancipation as the death of the constitution and the ruin of the church—who had exclaimed against the carrying it as the heaviest blow which could be struck against the prosperity of the country, save and except only one, the continuing to agitate it—was it not perfectly inconceivable, when those same persons were found crying out—not to

513
forbear from bringing on again the Catholic question, and vexing and disturbing the country further with its discussion, but assuring the Catholics and the country, that their duty was to press their cause at a time the most peculiarly inconvenient for discussing it; and that those friends were only deserting and betraying them who talked of patience or delay? [hear, hear]. "Bad as it would be to grant the measure," the hon. gentlemen opposite had been used to say—when they were not "the hon. gentlemen opposite"—it is still worse constantly to moot and to debate it." He had heard them say this, in so many words, twenty times over. He had not their words, certainly—the quotations cut out of their speeches—at his fingers ends. It was true that he was out of office, as they themselves were; but he had not time for such an operation—he had been in a court of law all day; but he remembered the topic perfectly, and had the whole form of reasoning, he could assure them, by heart [hear, hear]. "Bad as the success of the measure would be, odious to the feelings of Protestants, and ruinous to the safety of the church, one thing is still worse even than the granting of the claims, the eternally debating them," &c. But, how strangely, with their powers of office, had their consistency deserted the hon. gentlemen opposite! For here were those very individuals who held agitating the Catholic question, but a fortnight back, the very worst thing in the world, only anxious now, without a moment's delay, to bring it forward! "Do not delay a single fortnight," was the cry of the hon. gentlemen; "do not delay a week." Even a week, a little week, was too long to sit upon a bench of thorns ["hear," and laughter]; to be out of the sunshine of royal favour. A week! A week was an age in a cold, chill, opposition atmosphere, with no employment but reading the fag-ends of old debates to piece out new discussions, instead of calculating the amount of vast and eternal items of official expenditure, and the still more agreeable problem of receipt. A week was an impracticable time to sit upon a bare and barren rock; surrounded by persons as ill off as themselves; and calculating nothing more pleasant and enlivening, than how many times in the last twenty years the future master of the Mint had voted against the first lord of the Treasury; how many times the hon. mem
514
bers who sat by the "pillar," and the worst of it was, were likely to sit there, or if they were driven away, it could only be by the old kind of driving, which made matters worse, the being driven from pillar to post—how often these persons had voted, and with what numbers, and in what divisions, when they sat opposite to particular other persons—the burthen of the calculation being, that they now sat with them [cheers]. Oh, no! this was too much. To bear this for a month was impossible. At least, if it were possible in any way to get out of it by forcing on the question which we had been used to say only convulsed England and agitated Ireland; to force this on—at the certainty of keeping it still unsettled—by telling ministers you are abandoning your principles, and you are giving up the Catholics, if you delay to bring it on but for a single day [loud cheers].—One word now, in answer to the questions which the hon. gentleman had said he would not ask of the hon. Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of the Admiralty and, he believed, of himself. These questions related to the phenomenon, that the public press, generally, had taken one peculiar course in discussing the events of the last few weeks—a wonder for which the parties questioned seemed called upon to account. Now, the hon. member had said, that he would not ask this question of the Secretary for the Admiralty, which indeed he might say safely, for the hon. Secretary was not in the House. Then the hon. member came to himself (Mr. Brougham) personally; but still, he said, he would not ask him the question; so, as the hon. member would not ask it, he would imitate so good an example, and not answer it. To proceed, however, in his no-answer in the same spirit in which the hon. member had put his no-question, he would just make one observation upon the course taken by the press upon this occasion. The surprise could not be at the conduct of all the newspapers; it might have been expected, that some of them would take the part which they had taken. It could not be wonderful that the newspapers which had formerly supported the party in opposition should continue to do so still; and therefore the only wonder was, that that part of the press which used to side with the hon. member for Derry and his friends, to cover all their errors, and uphold all their opinions—that these papers

515
should suddenly have veered round to the other side, or have become silent; that they should either say nothing directly, either one way or the other, upon the dispute, or that they should be defending the sovereign in the exercise of his prerogative—supporting the right hon. gentleman and his measures, such as they had been, taken under circumstances of very peculiar embarrassment, certainly not at all of his own seeking. To explain the phenomenon which seemed to have so confounded his conjectures, surely it did not require greater talents than those possessed by the hon. gentleman. Had he really no means to divine the meaning of it? He had not shown so slow a capacity in the office which he lately filled; for he was ready to give full and ample praises both to him and to his right hon. relative, for the manner in which the duties of the Home-office had been conducted during their administration of it. In regard to the influence supposed to have been used to bring about a union of sentiment with the newspapers—he ought to say more properly the periodical press—and the new government, they greatly deceived themselves who supposed that public opinion grew out of the public press, and that the public press was not, in its turn, the mirror of public opinion. If he saw that the public press was in unison and harmony with the character and proceedings of an administration, it was not for him to attribute that sympathy of moral feeling to the efforts made by the friends of the Secretary of State in one quarter, or the visit of an officer of the Admiralty to another party; but the reason which he would assign would be, that the public voice was loud, and the public mind was strong. In his opinion, the reason of this happy union of sentiment was, that the public saw the delicate and embarrassing situation in which the king was left, and that they greatly lamented the sovereign having been left in that embarrassing situation. He was convinced that the public feeling had inclined strongly to the late right hon. Secretary for the Home Department; and that the regret of the public at his retirement from that office was general. It could not be greater, had it been called forth by the resignation of the then Foreign Secretary, now First Lord of the Treasury; who was ready to resign, notwithstanding the charges which had been made against him of an over
516
weening ambition, The public press had shown itself faithful to that opinion. He had not seen all the publications; but of those which he had seen there was not one which did not display respect for the talents, and regret at the resignation, of the right hon. gentleman. He greatly regretted those attacks which had been made in what was called unmeasured language, on an illustrious person who sat elsewhere. If the characters of public men were public property, as truly might it he said, that the character of that great man was the property of Europe; he had almost said of the world. Therefore he highly disapproved of the attacks made upon that gallant duke. He thought for one, that that noble duke was perfectly justified in resigning as he had done, and upon the reasons which he had given. He could not say the same of all the resignations. Lord Melville need not have resigned. He could not imagine why lord Melville had resigned. He dared to say that his lordship himself, upon reflection, must be very much at a loss to know why he had done so. However, the comfort was, that he belonged to a department which was the most easily filled up. In the main, however, he saw no fault to find with any of those noble and honourable seceders. He would not give in to the ordinary cant upon such subjects. There was no unwarrantable disrespect in any man refusing to act under another, who was placed over his head, contrary to his liking. As long as men were men, such things must be of frequent occurrence. But, while he was ready to do this justice to the retiring party, he should be doing the highest injustice to others, if he did not see the embarrassment and difficulties in which they had left the government. The king found himself suddenly deprived of the services of six out of nine of his ministers. It became absolutely necessary that the offices should be filled up, and that the public service should be committed to the charge of men who were equal to this great crisis. And the result had been, to form a government, if any government ever deserved the name, effective, generally consistent, able, honest, and enlightened; and this upon his conscience he believed to be the character of the new administration. It was upon this conviction, and with almost the certainty that the country would soon, from their own experience, come to the same conclusion, that

517
he had given his support to the new arrangements. He would have disdained the attribution of interested motives to his conduct: but none had been seriously attributed to him. But he would now speak of others, his friends, who were implicated in the common censure; and he wished to speak as a witness, with the same solemnity and earnestness for the truth which he would feel on deposing in a court of justice on his oath. He knew of some of the negotiations. He was fully acquainted with the difficulties and scruples which arose, in cases where there ought to have been none. Any thing more unlike the description which had been attempted to be put on those transactions—any thing that differed more entirely from an eagerness to seize the opportunity of confusion in the former government, and of rushing through the access which suddenly opened to their view,—any thing less like a desire to seize upon place, power, and patronage, now within their reach, and which they had but to put out their hands to touch, there could not be. He had seen some former negotiations. He remembered that of 1812, and that of 1815; but he had seen nothing like it—he had not heard nor read, and he could not have conceived, any thing which resembled it. Difficulties as to the adjustment of terms, scruples where none
existed, arose continually. He himself had had to do away with difficulty after difficulty, until he was tired with what he at last deemed almost the squeamish resistance of his friends; and he had now the unspeakable satisfaction of feeling, that the negotiations were assisted in their course towards the present happy termination, by his endeavours. So much for the subject of eagerness to seize place. If men were so anxious for place as to abandon their own principles, and among those principles the Catholic question, such a resistance of that which was said to be sought with an almost unprincipled eagerness was the most extraordinary miracle of modern times.—Now, as to the divisions upon which he and his friends had differed from the right hon. gentleman: the hon. gentleman had discovered divisions upon those questions so preeminently important, as the window tax, and the assessed taxes, the repairs of the old towers of Windsor, and some other great European or cosmopolitan questions which he had cited. But he would request the hon.
518
gentleman to recollect some of the minor matters which concerned Europe and the country, almost as much as the Gothic windows of Westminster-Hall; to one of which he had the honour formerly to call the attention of the House. His exertions on that occasion were now the greatest happiness of his life; if he were only to except some professional services which he had effected on another occasion, and in which he must glory till the end of his days. He had supported in that House those principles which, upon the same occasion, had been supported by the then Secretary for Foreign Affairs, the now First Lord of the Treasury, although they differed as to the line of conduct to be taken. He reminded the House of the last military invasion of Spain by the French. He had wished on that occasion, that other language should be used than that which was used. But neither he nor any of his friends had differed, in any essential points, from the sentiments of the right hon. gentleman; and, in the end, the question was suffered to turn merely upon that consideration which was proposed by the hon. member for Westmoreland—"at all events, we are not prepared to say that we will go to war upon the question of the French occupying the Spanish peninsula." That was the only general question of policy upon which he had differed from the right hon. gentleman, and that was not upon principle, but upon the measures which ought to be pursued in supporting it. As to the division upon that occasion, he remembered very well that he had only threatened it; and at the close of the discussion he had declined the dividing of the House. The fact was, that if he had been ever so well disposed to divide, he could not have done much; for the House at that time wanted what it had now got, a really good factious opposition [loud cheers]. He was very glad of it. He congratulated the country upon possessing it. The place had been long unoccupied; and he had no doubt it would soon be ably filled; especially after the hon. gentleman should have forgotten his official suavity, and had time to attune his infant aptitudes for that rough labour. He could give the hon. gentleman some useful hints; having had considerable experience in that way. He thought himself almost perfect in his knowledge of the tactics; and the first hint which he would give him was, that the division to be good for any

519
thing ought to be small, and not, as the hon. gentleman thought, considerable and almost overwhelming. The hon. gentleman liked it served up rather warm and highly spiced; but he could assure him that there was nothing so bad in a division as a large opposition. There was so much to be done to conciliate parties—so much to be given up to one—so much to be conceded to another—and so much expected by a third—that nothing could be more harassing and perplexing; not even a factious debate introduced into the middle of the mover's speech [loud cheers]. There was a gentleman whom he did not see—he scarcely knew his person; he had heard of his name; and it was said that he held a place in the Ordnance, under the former government—as he did not see him on the benches opposite, he almost hoped that he would be found on the ministerial side of the House. He believed that that hon. gentleman sat for Bishop's Castle. He was aware of the excellence of that hon. gentleman in the Quarter-Master's department; but, with the vast respect which he felt for his great talents, he wished to see them confined to that department. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Dawson) might take a lesson from that hon. member. Let him be consulted, He would say, "Oh! you won't divide, won't you; but I'll make you divide, just to expose your weakness."—The question of parliamentary reform was one of those cited, upon which he and his hon. friends were said to be at variance with the government. Upon that question, the party to which he had the honour to belong was divided by two opinions—one portion standing in direct opposition to all reform, the other holding for moderate, or, as old major Cartwright used to call it, mock-reform. He differed from this opinion of the major; and differed from those who were opposed to reform in any degree. To call that a question upon which they were bound to remain opposed to the present system of government, or for his friends to have considered it such, when upon all other great questions of policy—passing by those very great ones concerning Gothic windows, lamp-posts, and some others of no less importance which had been cited—it was only one upon which the right hon. gentleman stood pledged—and as he feared, irreversibly pledged—to stand back and hold out upon that question from a government whose measures they approved,
520
and had for some time approved, would have been neither sense nor justice: it would have been folly and injustice to themselves, and dishonesty to the country [cheers]. The causes of their union were to be found in the alteration of the great features of administration, after the death of lord Londonderry, and the liberal, manly, and truly English feeling displayed by his successor in the foreign policy of the country—in the equally sound principles which guided him in that almost equally grand question of South America—in the liberal and moderate views of the President of the Board of Trade, as to the regulations of our shipping and commerce, and the currency, as connected with, and deeply affecting, the interests of both. These were the three ties which united them, and upon which the country and her policy had derived the highest advantages, since the demise of the marquis of Londonderry. Was his declaration of approving these measures true? He had himself propounded them. As early as 1812, he had pleaded for them, and to a certain degree defeated the opponents of them. He had, on behalf of them, renewed his opposition to the old illiberal government, when returned to that House in 1816. He fought that whole session against lord Castlereagh for them. He propounded them again in a more formidable way in 1817, and divided the House upon them. Was his distrust of the Holy Alliance first awakened by the now vacant places? Why, that alliance was but "in the gristle," when he had endeavoured to rouse the opposition of parliament to it. He had argued against it, as a system weak and inexpedient, any participation in which would be dishonourable to the country, and mischievous to her liberties. For that he had been called a fanatic—a misguided promoter of political disturbance. What objection, it was said, ought he to have to the most harmless of all princely arrangements? What could be less distrustful than this scheme of politics, which, like a grain of mustard seed, being sown in due season, was to spring up and overshadow Europe—so that no glimmering of the light of liberty should break in to disturb the repose of tyranny. He had been called a seer of sights, and a dreamer of dreams, for opposing this notion. These were the very words applied to him by lord Castlereagh. Nothing so harmless, according to the unsuspecting mind of lord

521
Castlereagh, as this union of the Russian, Austrian, and Prussian powers, with our own for the achievement of this beneficent purpose. He had persisted in the opposite opinion. The right hon. gentleman (Mr. Canning), he believed, was not in the House at the time: he was abroad upon foreign business. The demise of lord Londonderry made way for him. He entered office, and proceeded immediately to act upon those principles which he (Mr. Brougham) had moved the House upon in 1817, and which he had defended in 1822. The right hon. gentleman had successfully established a system of liberal and manly foreign policy. Upon these grounds and principles he had given him his best assistance. Guided by these principles, and founding his measures on such grounds, in the course of his administration the right hon. gentleman should have from him that which he had a right, in point of consistency, to demand—a cordial, zealous, and disinterested, support.
Mr. Canningsaid, he rose for the purpose, and not without the hope of being able to persuade the House to replace his hon. friend in that priority, to which, by the invariable practice of the House, he was entitled. He would take leave to suggest to the hon. gentleman who moved this amendment, that proceedings so irregular brought with them generally their own cure, from the disgust which they never failed to excite [loud cheers]. The trick was too bare; and if he thought himself justified in adopting such means, he must not be surprised, nor would he have any right to complain, if upon a division, he found the House declaring its sense of such proceedings, in an unceremonious and expressive manner. Not only was priority due, by long and undeviating practice, to his hon. friend; but, although the interpolated topics were perhaps more interesting, he must remind the House, that there were large interests at stake upon the decision of the subject fixed for discussion this evening, which ought not to be lightly risked, and which would not fairly admit of postponement. He could assure the hon. gentleman, however, that he felt towards him no personal malice. He was too old a stager not to be able to bear this attack without resentment. He had, indeed, had to endure the assaults of those benches when filled by other persons, of a quality which he
522
was not likely soon again to experience [laughter]. He could assure the hon. gentleman that none of these little tricks would be able to drive him from his resolution of meeting them when properly brought foward, and disdaining them when brought forward improperly. In one thing the hon. gentleman had accused him of being mistaken: namely, the assertion which he had made in the House on a former evening of six resignations. He had not his papers with him at the time, but with leave from the House he would refer to them now. It was on the night of the 11th of April that he received the resignation of lord Westmorland: of the resignation of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Peel) he was aware some days before. He received the resignation of the duke of Wellington on the 12th, at half-past ten a. m. Lord Bexley sent in his shortly after. With these, and the verbal resignation of Mr. Peel, he went to St. James's. Those of lord Eldon and lord Bathurst arrived during his absence, and did not reach him till he was in the king's closet, having been sent after him, according to his directions in case of their arrival. He would state further, that, so far were they from anticipating the resignation of lord Eldon, that the king and himself were each under the delusion that there were the best reasons to expect the support of his services in the new arrangements. This was the exact state of the affair; and, upon his honour, he assured the House, that when he spoke of the coincidence in the manner in which he had mentioned it, he intended no sneer. It was bare justice to lord Eldon to say, that his conduct was that of a man of the highest feelings of honour, and that throughout it had been above all exception. He had received no hint of the purpose of the hon. gentleman; and even now he could not imagine how the production of the patent for appointing the judge-advocate, and laying it on the table, could have the effect of satisfying his anxiety, unless it were, upon the old Cambridge principle, by taking the masts and guns of the ship and dividing by the men, you can get at the name of the captain [a laugh].
Captain Dundascomplained of the harsh treatment of his noble relative by the hon. and learned gentleman. He assured that hon. and learned gentleman, that his noble relative cared neither for his friendship nor his enmity.
Mr. Broughamappealed to the House, whether he had spoken of lord Melville otherwise than in the most good-humoured way. He assured the gallant member, that he was mistaken if he attributed to him any ill feeling towards that nobleman. As to the sentiments of lord Melville towards him, he could only say, that he should be very glad of his lordship's friendship, and that he believed he had not his enmity, and that he did not expect to enjoy either. He was so far from feeling enmity to lord Melville, that he heartily wished to see him back in the government.
Mr. Peelsaid:—I admit that it would be more regular to pass to the question to which I expected this evening would be devoted; but I must say that I am very far from being satisfied with the explanation of the hon. and learned gentleman, as to the principles upon which the present coalition has taken place; and yet a proper explanation of those principles involves questions of the greatest importance, and upon the explanation given would depend the degree of confidence which could be properly placed in the present administration. In commenting on the conduct of the gentlemen who now sit on the opposition bench, the hon. and learned member has adopted the same tone of sarcastic remark, which characterised his speeches when he himself sat on that side of the House. He has congratulated the opposition on the new tone of asperity which it has acquired; but I must also congratulate the hon. and learned gentleman on the promptitude and facility which he has displayed in employing that tone of sarcasm in favour of the ministry, which he so lately employed against them—at least against the head of the present ministry. I cannot help congratulating the hon, and learned gentleman on the facility with which he has fallen into the cant by which, as he himself used to say, the supporters of the old administration were so much tainted. But it is a very grave question, whether these gentlemen had not abandoned their principles in the short space of a week, and the subject ought to be treated with another temper. I need not say that I feel no personal animosity against the hon. and learned gentleman. I never did entertain any such feeling towards him, nor do I now. But I am sorry to say that our political differences are as wide as ever, if not wider; for he certainly has not
524
as yet been able to give me a full, satisfactory, and clear explanation of the principles upon which he has contributed to form, and has joined this coalition; and yet a full, clear, and satisfactory account of these matters is, as every one must see, absolutely necessary, before any one can venture to repose confidence in the administration, as at present constituted. What, for example, is to be done with the question of parliamentary reform? Is it to be brought forward in any specific form, and supported by the new friends of the government; or is it to be postponed until all those shades of opinion can be blended of which I have this evening heard for the first time? That question certainly was with those hon. gentlemen a common bond of connection: I do not say uniting every man in its support, but undoubtedly including so many of them, that from it a great parliamentary party took their colour, and derived their name. I should have thought that no government that hoped for the support of parliament, would have countenanced so essential a change in the constitution of this House as the party to which I allude calls for. If these opinions be not countenanced by the new government, on what principles then, I ask again, is the question of parliamentary reform to be discussed? Is it to be left as the Catholic question is? I do not say this reproachfully, for I know I concurred myself in the arrangement, with respect to that question; but I ask, will it be suffered to remain still? These questions must produce the elements of discord in the new administration, unless, indeed, I am to gather, from what the hon. and learned gentleman has said, that parliamentary reform is also to be made an open question; though truly he was not very explicit in his statement. These, however, are points of the utmost importance. I have listened attentively to the speech of the hon. and learned gentleman, but the satisfaction I derived from the explanations he gave, was so far from being complete, that it has, I confess, only increased my anxiety to hear something more of the conditions on which be has agreed to support the new government. When I hear it stated, as one of the grounds of this union, that his majesty was abandoned by his former servants, and that his very prerogative was so put in jeopardy by their secession, that my right hon. friend had no alternative but to apply to his political

525
opponents for their support; if, for the sake of argument, I admit it to be strictly true, that on that ground the coalition was formed—that its chief, nay, its sole object, was merging every subordinate point, to maintain the prerogative of the Crown, why, then, I ask, if that be the ground, is it not declared so at once? Why do they not avow that to be the real reason? Why do they not say that they will forget the Catholic question and parliamentary reform—that they find the prerogative of the Crown in danger, and have rushed forward to defend it? Why do they allow the first places in the state to continue unfilled, like empty boxes waiting for those who have engaged them? Why, I ask, again and again, do they not come down to this House, and tell us frankly, what are the principles on which they have entered into this coalition? Their conduct, Sir, I repeat, is not satisfactory. It is not suited to the fair dealing and manliness in which this country delights. It does not accord with the principles of the constitution for one party to unite with another, on condition that there should be a period of probation; in order that they may determine whether their principles of action will agree or not. If it be a union of parties, why is it not so publicly proclaimed? Why is not the emergency declared that has rendered this step requisite? If difficulties have arisen, which strong and firm minds are wonted to encounter, why are the public offices filled with merely fugacious ministers? In two months—the probable period when the intended arrangements will be completed—the dangers of the time will have passed away, and with them the necessity for this junction will have ceased, if it be founded on the maintenance of the prerogative of the Crown. I am anxious to see the character of party men, and of the great parties in this country, upheld. I should not be glad, certainly, to see the great Whig party in office. They ought, I think, to be excluded from power; but I should be sorry to see their character, as a party, lowered and disgraced. But it will be tarnished, if the principles are not made known, on which the union has been effected; and unless a satisfactory explanation of the reasons why that union has been delayed be given, I apprehend that the character of this party will not, for the future, stand very high with the public. I ask again why is this delay? Is it that there are on the Notice-book some incon
526
venient entries, which the members of that party know not how well to evade or erase? What, for example, will they do with the notice of the member for Bandon (lord J. Russell), for the repeal of the Test and Corporation acts? This is another important question, which I suspect will display the material difference that exists between the opinions of those right hon. gentlemen, whom I had lately the honour to have for colleagues, and their new allies. If, after the noble lord has consulted with the leaders of the Protestant dissenters, he should be prepared to move for any further concessions in their favour, I give him notice that I intend to oppose him, and that I will always do so, whether in or out of power. That, indeed, is a circumstance of little weight or consideration to me. The most cursory view of my past career will spew, that I have been actuated by no ardent desire of office. When I have accepted it, it has always been a personal sacrifice to me. So far as I am personally concerned, I can say truly that I care not whether I return or not. I feel grateful for the confidence of the Crown; but I am, thank God, independent of it. My principles are not changeable with my position. I will adhere to them, through good report and through evil report. It is with these sentiments, that I now say, that the points to which I have referred—parliamentary reform, and the motion entered on the Notice-book, for the repeal of the Test and Corporation acts—and, still more, the Catholic question, have not been explained satisfactorily. I will not deny that I observed myself that, latterly, there was between my late colleagues and the hon. gentlemen who have now joined them, on many subjects, a close and cordial alliance. But I do protest, that if I had been told, only the day before the recess, that the hon. baronet, the member for Westminster, would have offered himself to the notice of this House the first night after the adjournment, in order to give his active support to a government, still divided on the Catholic question—if, after what I have heard the members for Calne and for Knaresborough say in this House, imputing all the evils of Ireland to the existence of divided councils in the government of the country, which, they contended, prevented any firm or consistent course of policy from being pursued;—if I had been told, that now, or a few months hence even, they would be prepared to give thier

527
sanction to the support of an administration still divided on the Catholic question, I could not have believed it possible. On the necessity of putting an end to that system of a divided government, the resolution of the hon. baronet for the relief of the Catholics was founded. Let the House now look at the sincerity with which these principles had been acted upon. In the new administration, it is true, there is no difference between the Home and Foreign Secretaries of State: but we have a prime minister and a lord chancellor opposed to each other, and very recently, in almost personal conflict on this very question. Hitherto, we have had the two law officers of this country united in opinion. The present administration has been the first to disturb this agreement, and, by transferring the chief office to an advocate of the Catholic claims, to create a disunion where before it never existed. Should his majesty's Attorney and Solicitor-general be now called on to advise the Crown on any measure touching the Catholic Association, suppose it should continue, in what a situation will they be placed? It is a fact—one of the curious events of the day—that these two learned gentlemen have both presented themselves as candidates to represent the University of Cambridge, professing to differ essentially from each other on this question, and founding their claims to support respectively on that very difference. These circumstances are so strange —so extraordinary—that it is not by the sarcasms of the hon. and learned gentleman that the public can be reconciled to them. But, above all, when I recollect the motion brought forward a few weeks ago by the hon. member for Armagh (Mr. Brownlow), from the very place where I am now standing—which motion, deeply affecting the official character of lord Manners, was supported by the hon. member for Limerick (Mr. S. Rice), who took the opportunity of repeating his conviction, that "all the evils of Ireland were attendant upon that absurd state of things in which a Protestant lord chancellor was conjoined with a Catholic lord lieutenant in the government of that country," how shall I now express my surprise, when I hear, that the first act of the new administration has been, to prevail on the lord chancellor of Ireland to revoke his known intention of retiring from office. With these facts before me, I say that the union
528
of the Whigs with the new administration is an extraordinary coincidence. This is not an occasion on which I can be expected to give expression more fully to my opinions; but as my votes on many questions that will come before me must depend on the degree of confidence I possess in the administration, I feel entitled to call upon them to state, what are the conditions on which it has been formed, particularly with regard to parliamentary reform and the Established church. I see that the hon. member for Montrose yesterday postponed his motion respecting the church of Ireland, avowing as his reason for so doing, that he had full confidence in the intentions of the new ministry, though I believe, from the bottom of my heart, that he will find he is mistaken in his expectation of support from my right hon. friend (Mr. Canning), who, I believe, will manfully defend the church against all his attacks. But when I hear the hon. member for Montrose publicly state such a reason for postponing his motion, I must pause before I give any vote of mere confidence to the present administration, until I know what are the principles on which it is founded, as to parliamentary reform and the other great questions of importance; whether they are to be open, like the Catholic question, to free discussion by every member of administration, or whether those who are called by the name of Whigs are prepared to oppose them when they may be brought forward? [loud cheers.]
Sir F. Burdettinstantly rose to address the House, but gave way to
Mr. Brougham,who wished to explain a passage in his speech, which had been misunderstood by the right hon. gentleman; who had supposed him to impute the quality of factiousness to the mere common act of asking questions calculated to annoy the government. Now, in fact, he had said nothing that warranted that construction. He did not represent that practice as indicative of faction; but he had said, that it did look something like faction, that when one hon. gentleman had opened a motion, another should interpose with another motion and debate.
Sir F. Burdettthen proceeded.—Though, Sir, the right hon. gentleman has not attempted to answer any one of my hon. and learned friend's arguments, he has thought fit to bring forward a variety of insinuations and personal allusions, and

529
groundless charges of inconsistency and want of principle, neither to be maintained by reason or justice, nor in any degree warranted or called for by the occasion. I must confess, that the evident soreness of the right hon. gentleman shows—notwithstanding the apparently fair and general professions which he has in this place made, and in which he has denied that he participates in the bitter feelings of some of those who are opposed to the government—that he is nevertheless inoculated with the virulence of the same spirit; or he would not so suddenly have forgotten the manly line of conduct within which he has, up to this time, confined himself. I did not think that the right hon. gentleman was called on for any justification at all. If, on one consideration, he felt bound to resign his situation, I know of no constitutional principle that could be injured by his so doing. He has, therefore, only succeeded in proving what nobody disputed, and in defending himself from accusations which nobody had made against him. But, while he now loses that view of his position, and converts into an attack on the conduct of others what was, in the first instance, only a justification of himself, he must be made to feel how that attack recoils upon its author. In reply, I will tell him, that every word he uttered, the other evening, in his own defence was a complete justification of all those who have acted with me on the present occasion; for, either he had no reason to withdraw from the administration, or we had ample reason to give our support to it [hear, hear!]. I will allow him the full benefit of his principles; and on precisely the same ground, though with an opposite view, I have stood, in maintaining, defending, and promoting my own. The right hon. gentleman has talked a great deal about Whigs and Tories. I am neither one nor the other. In fact, the terms have now no meaning. They are no longer applicable to the circumstances of the country. Though they might be sometimes convenient to indicate the distinction of opposite parties, it would be well if, for the sake of clearness and precision, the use of them were discontinued. The right hon. gentleman, I believe, does not reckon himself a Whig; he aspires to the higher honour of being accounted a Tory. For my part, I class myself simply as an English subject, ready at all times to maintain the principles of
530
the constitution, and happy in an opportunity to shew that the professions which I made, under other circumstances, I am now prepared to fulfil. I feel it my duty to support the Crown in the just exercise of its prerogative, against any factious band who may, by any concerted design, think to put it in a dilemma, and compel it again to accept their services. The prerogative of the Crown has been exercised in the present case, according to my opinion, in a most fortunate manner for the country. It was not my intention to have introduced any hostility of feeling into this debate, or to invite any expression of anger, still less of animosity. I did hope, that with the candour which he has always professed, and with that discretion which has usually attended him, but from which he has egregiously departed on this occasion, the right hon. gentleman would not have dealt out insinuations respecting the conduct of others, which he must have foreseen would be repelled with equal warmth. I tell him again, that as far as they are intended to apply to me, they have not the slightest foundation in reason or justice. What object of private interest can I have in view? Who, give me leave to ask, can impute any sinister design to me? The right hon. gentleman, notwithstanding all his professed cheerfulness in retiring from office, would, however, appear, from what he has said on the former and present occasions, and considering what his hon. friend, the late under Secretary opposite, has done this evening, to have withdrawn as reluctantly from office as if he were leaving the "Warm precincts of the cheerful day." If the course pursued by the right hon. gentleman was not absolutely irregular, it was undoubtedly not fair; and particularly unfair, when he set out by a promise to adhere to the question before the House, and not to enter upon the discussion of the topics on which subsequently he had exclusively expatiated [hear, hear!]. This conduct certainly seems to be something like casting "a longing, lingering, look behind" [cheers]. The right hon. gentleman best knows his own motives; and he has stated positively, that he and his late colleagues retired together, without any previous concert. The fact, no doubt, therefore, was so; but if there was no actual concert, there unquestionably was a kind of sympathetic concert [laughter, and cries of "No, no"]. The right hon. gentleman has founded several of his in

531
sinuations on what he calls "extraordinary coincidences." Now, I cannot help remarking, notwithstanding the declarations of the right hon. gentleman, that there was an extraordinary concurrence of resignations, in an extraordinary manner. Whether it was intended to intimidate the king, to put him in a dilemma, as I said before, which would compel him again to call back the retiring ministers, I cannot positively declare; but that certainly would be my opinion, if it were not for the direct declaration of the right hon. gentleman to the contrary. When I look at all the circumstances of these resignations, I cannot avoid suspecting that they originated in an attempt unjustly to fetter the exercise of the prerogatives of the Crown. If, I repeat, the right hon. gentleman had not asserted the reverse, and I was guided only by the apparent facts of the case, that would be the natural and inevitable conclusion at which I should arrive [hear, hear!]. One principal ground on which I give my support to the present administration is, because it does practically, and in effect, uphold the king in the just exercise of his prerogative. That is my justification on that point. But I will tell the right hon. gentleman further, that, putting aside all the great questions which he is so singularly anxious to bring under discussion, including among the rest that of parliamentary reform, I see sufficient reason to support this administration [cheers]. The right hon. gentleman seems never to have known that there was a schism on the subject of Reform. It is news to him that there were ever shades of opinion upon it. He was not aware, it appears, that there were as many different views of the general measure, as there have always been of comprehensive political questions. Some are for confining it within narrow limits; others for extending it to the widest. I am ready to vote for any measure of reform. By supporting the present government, I do not abandon or sacrifice one iota of my principles as a friend of parliamentary reform, or any other question on which I may deem it fitting and prudent to deliver my sentiments. As a man of common sense, I must wish to achieve some practical good in my time. If I cannot do all I would, I am bound, without waiting till more extensive views may be adopted, to promote all the good which the opportunity of the passing moment offers me [hear, hear!]. If
532
I can, by my feeble efforts, gain the slightest chance of advancing, in the least degree, the public welfare, I receive all the satisfaction that can be afforded. The right hon. gentleman will taunt me in vain with a dereliction of principle, while he finds me thus engaged. If I can seize and secure any good for the country, I will grasp it. I have dedicated my life to this pursuit, and I shall be too happy if I live to be successful [cheers]. The right hon. gentleman has, unfortunately for himself, also attacked my hon. and learned friend. In this respect, he only followed the example of his friend, the late Under Secretary. Indeed, they go in couples; they hunt together. The difference between them is only in the degree of expression, not in the principle of moderation or wisdom, but simply in words and temper. My hon. and learned friend well said, that the late Under Secretary's language was an honest exposure of his sentiments. It was the honesty of anger, of passion, of uncontrolled feeling, unmitigated, unmodified either by reason or sound discretion [cheers and laughter]. I feel grateful to the right hon. gentleman for having assumed the same tone. I can now speak of them together. He has done a great service to the new ministry as well as to me. My hon. and learned friend, who stands in the most extraordinary and honourable predicament, has been attacked. But, never was there a public man who occupied so conspicuous a station, which he renders still more conspicuous by the perpetual exertion of his unrivalled abilities for the public good. He, in order to raise no obstacle to what he thinks an advantageous arrangement for the country, loses all consideration of himself in the public benefit. Though qualified to command as a general, sacrificing all pride and prejudice, he serves as a soldier in the ranks. The saying of a great conspirator in a bad cause he has exemplified in the best. He is an instance how a statesman may be suspected and calumniated, though acting from motives of the purest patriotism [cheers]. The commonest considerations, if not of candour, at least of justice, should have induced the right hon. gentleman to have avoided the course on which he has this evening entered. Like my hon. and learned friend, I have—I can have—nothing to hope, to fear, or to expect, from this government. I can have no view of personal advantage. There is

533
hardly any sacrifice I would not make to remove the obstructions that impede the progress of my principles. It is no small good to have removed from the king's councils that narrow-minded, bigoted part of the late administration, who, perhaps, two hundred years back would have been highly esteemed, but who are in nowise adapted to the century in which we live. Their resignation leaves us nothing to regret, but a great deal to rejoice at. For a long time they have weighed heavily on the best interests of the people; while they clogged the superior intellect of their colleagues, and prevented their advance, in conformity with the advance of public opinion. Thank God, the incubus is removed—the administration is now purged of that dross. His present situation may raise important reflections in the mind of the king himself. When he sees how he is supported by the people against the faction that sought to enthral him, he will perceive how much safer and more Secure, as well as more honourable and glorious, it is for a king of England to have his power founded in the hearts of his people, rather than have its basis composed of factious ambition [loud cheers, and cries of "Order"]. I cannot refrain from noticing some phrases which are reported to have come out of the mouths of those who have lately done the public the very great favour to resign their offices [a laugh]. These phrases are so singular and extraordinary, that it is impossible to pass them by wholly without comment. The parties to whom I allude have found out, that that portion of the press, which is influenced by the administration of the day, is a foul and calumnious press [hear, hear!]. It is now heaping abuse on them whom it long basely flattered. But while it only operated against their opponents, not a word of complaint was ever heard to pass their lips. As to the right hon. gentleman who has, on this occasion, thought it necessary to secede from the administration, I am bound to say that his language has been, on all occasions, distinguished by a candour and a sincerity which leaves him free from all reproach upon this subject—a candour and a manliness, which those who call themselves of the same party have, happily, I would say, for the country, not had the discretion—I might almost add the decency—to imitate. But what, I might ask, can satisfy the malice of disappointed ambition?
534
What language can express the feelings, the fury, of narrow-minded bigotry, or of the virulence of faction? For I would say, without fear of contradiction from any member upon either side, that, during the whole of the time I have had the honour of a seat in this House, there never has existed a more factious Opposition than that which we now see arrayed against the government [Mr. Peel was here observed to laugh] The right hon. gentleman laughs, and thinks, I dare say, that I am stating a most monstrous proposition, and thinks, perhaps, that he could state some things which would prove those who formerly occupied that station to be entitled to an appellation of quite as much discredit. I challenge him, however, to show a single act of that Opposition which was not, as far as related to the late government, in this House, perfectly disinterested. I defy him to show that any party in this House ever acted upon principles more purely disinterested towards any government, than those who lately occupied that situation. That Opposition supported the government in its attempt to introduce those liberal principles of policy throughout, for which it has received so much credit in the country. It upheld it with that House and with the country, when it was in danger of being dragged back in its course, by that weight from which it is now happily freed, and prevented it from standing ill with the country, from its being connected with those who were hostile to the progress of all national improvement, and whose separation from that government, I may say, without fear of contradiction, has, in the eyes of the people of this country, and of Ireland, freed it from a weight which retarded its advance, which pressed down its energies, and frustrated its best endeavours for the advantage of mankind [cheers]. My right hon. friend (Mr. Canning) has been accused, among other things, of an overweening ambition. That accusation, even if true, is not of any account at all; but he has been accused also of having abused the rights and the privileges which his high situation afforded him, of injuring the reputation of his colleagues, and of furtively and basely pouring a "leprous distilment" into the ears of the king. No man, however, of common candour or common honesty, who had listened to the plain and manly statement of the right hon. gentleman, could give credit to such an accusation. If to

535
fulfil the slightest wishes of his sovereign with respect to the construction of his government, to give immediate obedience to his commands, and to offer his honest advice with regard to the course which prudence required him to adopt, be to betray the interest of his colleagues, then the accusation may be true; but I can hardly think there are many men in this House who consider the application of such an expression to the right hon. gentleman's conduct on this occasion to be in the slightest degree justifiable. [Mr. Peel here observed, that he had used no such language, nor made any such observation.] I am not now alluding to the right hon. gentleman. I did not say that he had done so; but the right hon. gentleman always seems to think that he only is spoken of—that he only is the person against whom the observations upon these transactions can be addressed. The right hon. gentleman, with all the modesty of his character, did not, when he had occasion to address his statement to the House, forget to mention his services. But the right hon. gentleman ought to recollect, that there may be something else worth noticing; and he ought to feel, that when I speak of such things as these, I cannot allude to the right hon. gentleman, but to the squad [cheers]. If some individuals make charges utterly unfair, and grossly false and unfounded, I may be permitted to allude to them, without being supposed to reflect upon him; while I say, at the same time, that those charges, and the violence and acerbity of feeling they display, afford the highest gratification to me, as displaying a strong confirmation of the propriety of their exclusion, and of the justice of those measures which have been adopted. The right hon. gentleman has asked, however, upon what principles the government now means to proceed upon certain questions of policy? Among others, he has mentioned the state of the Roman Catholics of Ireland? Does the right hon. gentleman, then, not know that principle? Is there no principle resolved upon with which the right hon. gentleman is acquainted? And if, then, there is no principle, why did he quit office? If there was no principle to be adopted upon Catholic emancipation, why did he, upon the ground of that question, desert the king? The right hon. gentleman, in that case, is embarked in the same boat with me. He is equally with me engaged to support the govern
536
ment; or if not, his question is a two-edged sword which wounds only himself, or, at least, the sharp edge is applied to him—the blunt can only be turned upon me. He has not been justified in abandoning his colleagues in office, and withdrawing his support from the government, if I am not justified, under the circumstances, of affording that government all the support which it is in my power to bestow [hear, hear!].—There is another point connected with the question of Catholic emancipation, to which I wish to advert. It is not by the exertion of party spirit, however powerful, that such great measures are to be rendered successful. The emancipation of the Roman Catholics must depend upon the progress of knowledge. It must advance with the advance of mind, and the diffusion of better and more liberal feelings. These are the only means by which I ever thought the question could be supported in this country; and I may say now, that it was never said by me, or by any other gentleman who advocated their cause, that we were prepared to raise the standard of rebellion in this country, unless we obtained our object [hear, hear!]. We have worked, as we must still continue to labour, by argument, and endeavour to still the fears of the timid, and obviate the objections of the conscientiously hostile. We have endeavoured to proceed in our course with the same caution which I trust still to see displayed; and I cannot doubt, by a union of wisdom, of prudence, and of temperance, with that caution which ought never to be abandoned, we shall ultimately triumph. Let us not, however, allow our efforts to be counteracted by the suggestions of our adversaries; nor suffer ourselves to be taunted into a course of folly by those who know that precipitation would be destruction. I think great good has resulted to the country from the secession of those who were opposed to us—always excepting the right hon. gentleman, to whose merit I would do every justice. It has been said, that a providence had befallen this House: I think that a providence has befallen the country also, in the loss of part of the administration. But whatever part of it have been knocked out, the brains of it, at least, are safe [a laugh]; and having preserved the intellectual part, I hope it will work good to the country, and promote those great measures on which the welfare and happiness

537
of the people depend. With respect to Ireland, I have been told this very day, from an authority upon which I can depend, that that country begins already to feel the influence of the beneficial change in the government, and to enjoy the blessings of tranquillity. I hear that the Catholic Association, so long considered formidable to the government, and destructive of the peace of the empire, no sooner saw hopes held out to them of a fair consideration of their claims, and a reasonable prospect of justice being done to their representations, than they seized the opportunity to give a proof of their confidence in the government. They felt that the reign of narrow-minded bigotry—of that intolerant opposition which would, from the most indefensible feeling, shut out the dawn of hope—was at an end. They felt that the light of hope was breaking in upon the darkness of their political degradation, and that they must participate in common with their fellow-subjects in measures of general improvement. The right hon. gentleman has taken his stand upon a spot from which he cannot recede. But the mind of England is not chained to any party-prejudice; it is not, as the right hon. gentleman and his coadjutors have declared they must be, stationary. It is open to argument; it is free to conviction; and it knows how to appreciate the effects of those enlightened principles of policy which I have always advocated, and am now here to support and to defend. And, however satisfactory the reasons of the right hon. gentleman may be to himself, and to those who participate in his prejudices, they will not be equally satisfactory to the country. Convinced that the time must come when the force of argument must be felt, and satisfied that we cannot go back, although I would not now shrink from advocating the cause to which I have pledged myself, and declaring my continued conviction of the propriety of concession, to the fullest extent I have ever maintained it; yet, convinced, I repeat, that there is no standing still—that the intellect of the English people must go onward—that it cannot go back—I feel satisfied to trust to its effect, for the ultimate accomplishment of that object which I have ever most earnestly desired [cheers].
Sir Edward Knatchbullcomplained of the language which had been used to the right hon. gentleman and his friends, as wholly unjustifiable, either from their con
538
duct or expressions. Nothing was, in his opinion, more natural, nothing more reasonable, than that his right hon. friend, the late Secretary for the Home Department, should feel anxious to know upon what principles the government was in future to be conducted, and who were the men to whom the realizing of those principles was to be intrusted. He did not deny that the right hon. gentleman opposite possessed great talent, and great eloquence; but he recollected very well, that a right hon. member (Mr. Tierney), now sitting on a different side of the House, declared but a very few weeks ago, when seeking to know the steps taken in the formation of this very administration, that, although he had heard a great deal about measures, and not men, he had always considered the expression as not very alien from nonsense. Now, that was precisely what his right hon. friend desired to know. He wished the right hon. gentleman to say, who were the men who were to propose and carry into effect the measures. That was what he wished to know himself; not from any object of ociose curiosity, but from a sense of duty to his constituents and the country. After some high compliments to the manliness of character, and distinctness of expression of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Peel), and an expression of his deep regret that he did not form a part of the government, the hon. baronet observed, that no man was fit to preside over a divided cabinet, but a man of the high character, profound judgment, and exalted rank of lord Liverpool. It had been his fate to differ from the right hon. gentleman, now at the head of the government upon a very vital question. If that question had been carried in that House, he, for one, protesting against its principles, and deploring the consequences likely to result to the country, would have felt it to be his duty to bow with submission to the decrees of parliament; but, as the opinion of the House had been most decidedly expressed against the entertaining such a proposition, he felt it more imperative upon him to require from the right hon. gentleman some intimation of the nature of the principles upon which the government was in future to proceed. Then came the question of what confidence was to be reposed in a minister? Every thing, it was known, in this country, turned upon confidence; and it was therefore a matter of the last importance,

539
that the person placed at the head of the government should openly avow the principles upon which he intended to proceed.—The hon. baronet then animadverted with some severity upon the topics advanced by the hon. baronet, the member for Westminster, and declared that it was altogether impossible for him, or any other person who had been in the habit of supporting his majesty's government, to continue his confidence to an administration formed of such a strange mixture of elements. Could any thing be so irreconcilable with all the notions entertained of an efficient government, as the fact, that when the right hon. gentleman was asked to explain the principles of his government, that explanation came, not from the minister at the head of the government, but from the hon. and learned gentleman, the member for Winchelsea. It had been said, that the hon. and learned gentleman would be able to give a more active, liberal, and efficient support to the government by not taking office. That his support was efficient, every one who knew his great abilities must allow, and that it was liberal as yet, he was prepared to admit; but he preferred knowing the exact condition in which that hon. and learned gentleman and his friends were placed; for, so long as the right hon. gentleman abstained from entering into an explanation of the principles upon which he was to conduct his administration—so long as he avoided naming clearly the persons of whom it was composed—so long must the confidence of the House and of the country be withheld. [The hon. baronet was vehemently cheered by Mr. Peel and others, during the whole of these observations.]
Mr. Canningsaid:—I hope the House will permit me to say a few words in reply to the very didactic speech of the hon. baronet who has just favoured the House with his opinions, and in explanation of my observation upon a former occasion. The speech of the hon. baronet refers principally to the reception which I have given to a question addressed to me in the commencement of this debate. I do not object to that question itself, upon any considerations connected with its object; but I must take leave to say, that I have never known, in the whole of my parliamentary experience, those rules which courtesy permits, and which convenience has sanctioned, to have been
540
violated to so great a degree by any member of this House [cheers]. Upon the understanding that the answer is to be a mere matter of courtesy, it sometimes does happen, that a member, without any previous notice, asks leave to put a brief question to the minister, upon a subject of pressing importance. Such I have, speaking from my own recollection and experience, always understood to be the course; but I never, I repeat, recollect any instance of a question without notice being accompanied by a speech such as we have this night heard from the hon. member opposite. This was my impression, and I have since consulted others, who declare it to be correct. That any hon. member, under the pretence of asking a question, should seize the opportunity of introducing a motion, and that motion too thrust forward in the middle of another motion of great and almost paramount importance, the business of the evening, and the discussion upon which the House was most anxiously awaiting, is, I repeat, a circumstance altogether unprecedented in the annals of parliament To that question thus put to me, and under these circumstances, I applied my observation, when. I said, that the attempt was only calculated to excite disgust. There is a consequence, too, resulting from it, which the hon. gentleman does not foresee; and that is, that no minister, if such a course is pursued, will feel himself bound to answer such questions at all. The hon. member made it a matter of complaint against me, and as a reason for his conduct, that I was not in my place at the time he expected, and when he wished his question to be answered. But, did not the hon. gentleman recollect it was usual, in such cases, to have the courtesy to give some notice of a member's intention? If he had given me the slightest intimation that he intended to put any question to me, it certainly should have brought me down instantly to give a reply; but, even then I might have felt not a little surprised at the course pursued by the hon. member—a course so absurd and so inconvenient, that any one must see it could not for a moment be tolerated. I rejoice, Sir, however, that the standard of opposition is at length raised in this House, Such an act is to me worth a thousand professions of qualified neutrality. In whatever mind the feeling of hostility lurks, let it come boldly forth, and boldly

541
will I meet it [cheers]. As there have been one or two questions asked me, I trust the House will extend its indulgence to me, while I briefly answer them. I am asked, what I mean to do on the subject of parliamentary reform? Why, I say to oppose it—to oppose it to the end of my life in this House, under whatever shape it may appear [cheers]. I am asked, what I intend to do on the subject of the Test act, I say, to oppose it [cheers]. It has so happened, that the Test act is one of the subjects upon which it has never yet been my lot to pronounce an opinion in this House. But yet I have an opinion upon it, and I do not hesitate to declare it. I think that the exertions of the legislature ought to be directed to the redress of practical and not theoretical grievances; and that inasmuch as any meddling with the Test act might go to prejudice that great question, the success of which I have most truly at heart, therefore I will oppose it [cheers]. I hope I have spoken out. I hope I have made myself clearly understood. As to the charge brought against us by the hon. baronet who spoke last, that the government, when called upon to give an answer upon the subject of its composition and its policy, left the answer to those who had no apparent interest in or connection with the question. I deny the charge. I say, without hesitation, that the accusation is untrue. The whole of the speech was addressed, not to the government, but to those members who supported the government, and they have assigned their reasons through the mouths of the hon. members for Win-chelsea and Westminster. I never will shrink from explanation or defence, either to the hostility of the open and manly foe, or to the not less dangerous insinuations of the disavowed opponent [loud cheers].
Sir E. Knatchbull,in explanation, said, he thought the right hon. gentleman, before he asserted the accusation to be untrue, might as well have examined whether any such accusation had been made. What he had said was, that government, when called upon to explain, did not give any explanation. But he never said, that the right hon. gentleman had referred his explanation to the hon. and learned member for Winchelsea, or to any other hon. member; for he did not believe that that right hon. gentleman would condescend to leave to any one to do that for him which he was so capable of doing himself.
Mr. Canning.—The hon. baronet's explanation makes the case worse than it was. He mistakes, or seems to mistake me, when he supposes that I was denying that I had not answered the question when called upon. My defence begins earlier. I say not, that I did not answer, but that I was not called upon; and I appeal to my right hon. friend (Mr. Peel), whether his observations were not addressed to those members who supported government, and not to the government itself. The proposition is, therefore, ad invidiam in the highest degree [cries of "No, no"]. I say it is. The charge is this, and the hon. baronet has repeated it; he says, government were called upon for explanation. First, he says I declined to make any answer; and by his second indictment, he charges, not that I refused to answer, but let others take it out of my mouth. But I deny the charge altogether. I again appeal to my right hon. friend, whether the whole of his speech was not directed against those who supported government, and to that speech he had received an answer from those gentlemen. Another and a conclusive reason which I have for thinking it was so, is this; that from the knowledge which I have of my right hon. friend's conduct, I am sure he (whatever others may do) has too much courtesy and justice to make a charge which he knows I am, by the rules of the House, precluded from answering, as I had spoken before. I have no hesitation in saying, that there has been nothing like wilful misrepresentation on the part of the hon. baronet. Whatever mistake he may have been betrayed into is referable, solely, no doubt, to the heat of debate; and, as to any personal feeling, which he may have attributed to me, I can assure him, that I bear anger on these occasions, "as the flint bears fire."
Mr. Peelbore testimony to the correctness with which his right hon. friend had stated the effect of his allusions. While, however, he acknowledged that the right hon. gentleman had set his hon. friend right in this respect, he must contend, that he had a fair right to ask those who had accepted office, under the new government, why they had so taken office? He thought, however, that, throughout his speech, he had most particularly implied, that he was satisfied his right hon. friend intended to adhere to his principles; and, acting upon his own views of the interests

543
of the established church, he still considered, that he was justified in demanding of those who had taken office, on what principles they had joined his right hon. friend? In conclusion, he could not help saying, that he looked upon the animadversions of the hon. baronet, the member for Westminster, as totally uncalled for.
Lord John Russellsaid, he had felt considerable surprise at the irregularity which the late right hon. Home Secretary had committed, in at first saying, that he was about to speak on the propriety of the House proceeding with the motion of the gallant general, and then going into certain charges, at great length, against those who had accepted office under the new government, and giving his own reasons for refusing to do so. Now, as he did not mean to accept office himself under it, he might, perhaps, the more readily be allowed to make a few observations on the speech of the right hon. gentleman, who had said, among other things, that he supposed, if there was any principle of union which bound together the parties comprising the present administration, it was the wish that there should he some change effected in the constitution of parliament. He was astonished at this remark; for the right hon. gentleman might have remembered to have heard the right hon. member for Knaresborough, (Mr. Tierney) but a very few sessions ago, declare his conviction, and from the opposition side of the House, that parliamentary reform never could be a party question in this country. It might be allowed him also to state a fact, which he had, perhaps, better reason to be informed of than the right hon. gentleman, and that corroborated this view of the case. He himself, some few years since, had expressed his wish, that the whole of the party with which he usually voted should unite to promote the cause of parliamentary reform; but it then appeared, not only that most of the leaders of that party were desirous that it should not be made a party question, but that the Whig party, if they should come in as a party, would be opposed to it, or to any other measure having parliamentary reform for its object. This fact he mentioned, to shew that it could not be justly imputed as a crime to any person, with whom he had been in the habit of voting, to have taken office on the present occasion, without having stipulated that parliamentary reform should be made a party question. But, perhaps, the right
544
hon. gentleman expected that he (Lord J. Russell) should introduce that question again to the House. It happened unfortunately, however, that the very last time he had mentioned the question, in the course of the last session, he had declared that that would be the last occasion of his doing so. And why had he made that declaration? Because he had found a great lukewarmness on the subject throughout the country. And that growing lukewarmness he believed to be attributable to the improvement which had taken place in the manner of conducting the government. Whether the people of this kingdom were right or wrong in allowing themselves to become indifferent upon such a cause, it was not now for him to examine; but he did believe, that as long as they saw the general affairs of the country well conducted, and actuated by a spirit of improvement, they would not look too narrowly into the constitution of that House of parliament. At all events, such lukewarmness did at present prevail; and he had, therefore, found it necessary to give up the course he had pursued formerly, of annually bringing this topic under the consideration of Parliament. The right hon. gentleman would give him leave to say, on the other hand, that if any one thing more than another could be calculated to produce parliamentary reform, in a few years, it would be the placing the hon. gentleman who commenced this debate in one of the highest situations of the government; for, in that case, and under such political principles, Ireland would be so afflicted with contending factions, and all their trains of insurrections and political misery, that her dreadful state would furnish an irresistible argument for the necessity of parliamentary reform. He too sincerely loved his country to desire to see parliamentary reform effected at such a price. Then, again, as to the right hon. gentleman near him (Mr. Canning), after seeing him for so many years backed by those who had now deserted him, and his progress fettered and his powers clogged, on too many occasions, by the views of some among those with whom he had co-operated, he was, also, too happy to find that right hon. gentleman no longer so restrained, but at the head of his majesty's government, to wish to moot against him the necessity of parliamentary reform, under circumstances like the present.
Mr. G. Dawson,in reply, began by declaring that he should not divide the

545
House upon his motion. But he must observe, that a question having been by him addressed to the right hon. gentleman opposite, that right hon. gentleman had got up, and in a manner very uncourteous—and, as he thought, very unparliamentary—had answered him. Of the conciseness of that answer, he had nothing to complain; but undoubtedly it would have been much more satisfactory to the country at large, had the right hon. gentleman condescended to reply more fully. Upon the points to which his question referred, he had thought he was justified, as a member of Parliament, and in the discharge of his duty, in seeking for information. Having obtained that information substantially he should not divide the House on his motion [cries of "divide"]. No, he would not divide, but other hon. gentlemen, who desired to do so, might. Before he sat down, he must take the liberty of observing, that the House had little reason to congratulate itself upon the mode in which one of its members, who had so risen in his place for the purpose of propounding a question had been treated. The right hon. gentleman ought to recollect, that for five years he had served with him, and voted with him on the other side of the House; that, for five years, that right hon. gentleman had never met with an uncourteous expression from him; that he had never refused to that right hon. gentleman the tribute of admiration so justly due to his extraordinary talents. All this the right hon. gentleman should have recollected before he adopted the sort of manner he had that evening assumed in answering his question. In introducing the present motion, he had carefully abstained from all allusions, except to state his opinion of the manner in which the right hon. gentleman had attained to his present distinguished station. He must, however, take leave to say, that had he thought proper to go into all the details which had been elsewhere alluded to, he might have recollected some passages in the past life of the right hon. gentleman which would justify, in his own mind, some suspicions of that right hon. gentleman, as a political character—some suspicions touching the manner in which he had got his present office. But he had done no such thing; he had carefully abstained from every such allusion After what had passed, however, he must observe, that if that right hon. gentleman looked back upon his experiences in past days, his
546
reflections on what had taken place in those days could be of no gratifying description. The right hon. gentleman had thought proper to say, that his motion had been received with disgust by the House. Now, the proposition had not been received with disgust by the House. That such a feeling had been excited in the House, he unequivocally denied; although the right hon. gentleman had certainly endeavoured to treat it with disdain, as far as he was personally concerned. Whatever imputations the right hon. gentleman might, however, have thought proper to indulge in, he trusted that his character, both as a member of Parliament and as a former member of his majesty's government, was sufficient to repel them; and he did so now in the same terms, and with the same disdain, that the right hon. gentleman had himself evinced.
Sir G. Warrenderexpressed his surprise at such a discussion having arisen out of a question, and a reply, which the hon. gentleman who spoke last, seemed, however, to think of so stinging a character. At first, he had expected that there, would be a degree of neutrality, as between the contending parties, in respect of the Roman Catholic question: and he was the more sorry that that neutrality had not been observed, because he could feelingly declare, that the absence of it had very nearly lost him his election. On the present occasion, he must say, that as fair and honest a factious course had been pursued by the gentlemen opposed to the government, as it had ever been his fortune to witness. The right hon. gentleman, late the Home Secretary—for whom he had the highest respect—in the first place, had deprecated the going into a discussion, which would prevent the House from fully entering into the motion of the hon. and gallant general, and then went on, to his great surprise, into almost every irrelevant topic which could be suggested. Seriously, he must thank the gentlemen who had taken so active a part in fomenting this discussion: because it enabled him to perceive what was the course of opposition which they were attempting to pursue in regard to the right hon. gentleman. To that right hon. gentleman, he, for one, should tender—a most inefficient it might be, but certainly a most cordial and zealous, support. He was afraid he had been but an idle member of parliament; but he had had experience enough, as a member, to

547
appreciate the very unfair sort of attempt which was making, to surround the position of that right hon. gentleman with all sorts of difficulties, by agitating the Catholic question. To that right hon. gentleman and the government connected with him, he should give his most zealous aid.
The motion was negatived without a division.

SHIPPING INTEREST.
General Gascoynethen observed, that if he were now to bring forward his motion, the House might divide upon it; and he therefore thought it would be adviseable not to carry it further at present. He appealed to his right hon. colleague to say whether or no the question should not be postponed.
Mr. Huskissonsaid, he was not prepared to give a decided answer to his gallant friend, as to whether his motion should be pressed at present, or deferred to a future opportunity. The judgment of his gallant friend must decide the question. This much, however, he would offer his gallant friend by way of advice: If he considered the present occasion a fit opportunity for pressing the question to a division, there was no reason why he should not do so.
Mr. Heathcotehoped that further time would be allowed before the discussion of this important question would again be argued. One thing was certain; namely, that while the question relative to the formation of his majesty's government was open to the observations of hon. members, neither this question, nor any other unconnected with the one at issue, would have the least chance of being fairly and dispassionately handled. Suppose the question were fixed for to-morrow, might not the member for Derry again come down, and in the midst of the discussion bring forward some motion similar to that with which he had favoured the House to-night? There never was a time when the spirit of party was so high as at present; and he might truly add, there never was a question brought before the House which required more temperance and less of party feeling than that which the hon. and gallant general proposed to bring forward. The hon. gentleman concluded, by moving, that this question be now adjourned.
The motion was postponed till Monday.