On this page
-
Text (1)
-
March 20, 1852.] THE LEADER. 265
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Histoet Of Parliament. Ministeeial Expla...
the empire . It must be determined by them , and Yes and speedily sa . y I ( cheers ) ; let us have no hesitation , no delay , The right hon . gentleman ^ continues—« It ft evident that the present parliament cannot last Ion ? and I think you -will agree with me that the sooner it is dispensed with the better . " . But is this the feeling of the government ? ( Hear . ) . No , they have propositions for Chancery Beform ( hear ) ; they Imve a Militia Bill- ; they have in view , not only the
disfranchise ment of St . Albans , but the enfranchisement of other'p laces ; and this does not look quite like dissolving parliament " speedily . " ( Opposition cheers . ) " I believe ( the right hbn . genteman added ) this question w then be solved , and trust it will be set at rest for ever . "We cannot afford to be always in collision with our fellow subjects . " ( Hear , hear . ) . He then gives most salutary advice to the owners of the soil . Hesays-v _ ... .
« We must either have protection , or learn to live without it . " ( Loud-cheers from the opposition . ) Now , I say to the gentlemen opposite , in the words of my right hon . friend , "You cannot have protection , and you must not . " ( Hear , hear . ) Then the right hon . gentleman proceeds to show the agriculturists how they may live without protection" I know , if we try , that we shall have to turn our attention to the improvement of our estates , for where is the landowner who can say that more cannot be done ?" I say there is in these right hon . gentlemen perfect frankness and no guile—I had almost said that these were Disraeliteai indeed . ( Loudlaughter . ) : Leaving the question of Ministerial intentions , Sir James
fastened on the arrogant denial made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that there had been an appeal ad ntisericor & iam by the Government to the House ; and quoted Lord Derby ' s famous sentence— 1 know that I am in an undoubted minority , in the House of Commons , and I appeal therefore to the forbearance of the House ; " and he denied absolutel y that there had ever been in English parliamentary history such an appeal made before . The Government were bound to dissolve the moment the most necessary measures were passed .: Mr . Pitt had done so . in 1784 , Lord Grey in 1831 , and Lord John Eussell in 1841 .
On the last occasion , when there was a discussion as to whether a Minister in a minority oughtr not to dissolve or resign , a speech was made which-Sir James read to the Hpuse . The speaker characterized the admission of Lord John Russell that his party did not sufficiently possess the confidence of the House , and yet held office , as unheard of ; andinveighed in strong terms against Ministers holding office who could not carry their measures , " The speaker on that occa s ion , " said Sir James , " was the present Earl of Derby . " ( Great cheering and laughter from , the Opposition benches . ) ,
The remainder of his speech was devoted to proving that the Free-Trade policy had been successful , even as it affected the landowners ; and he brought forward the startling facts , that since 1846 5 , 200 , 000 ? . have been advanced to landowners for drainage ; the quantity of guano imported had increased from 83 , 438 tons in 1849 , to 243 , 514 in 1851 ; and 365 , 902 acres had been enclosed since 1845 . Taxes had been remitted , yet had the revenue increased . He cited the opinion of the Duke of Buccleuch , who opposed Corn-Law repeal in 1816 , that it would be moat dangerous to landowners to reimpose duties on corn . And finally , after more statistics , he wound up as follows : —•
" I remember the" last conversation which I ever had with Sir It . Peel . It was upon the eve of that great discussion upon our foreign policy in which he and I found it our painful duty to vote against a Government which upon other accounts , and more especially upon the account of their support of a Free-Trade policy , we had usually assisted . It was impossible not to look to the consequences of that vote , and I pointed out to Sir K . Peel the possibility that the Goverment would be overthrown , and asked him what would theft-ensue ? He said , * I know that in this country , without party connexions , no man can govern . I know that my party ties are dissolved , and I am not preparod to renew them , and do not desire to renew them .
± > ufc , come what may , thoro is no effort that I will not make to maintain that Free-Trade policy , which I believe to bo indispensable for the maintenance of peace and happmosa in this country . ' ( Loud cheers . ) Sir , I do not possess the abilities of my right hon . friend , but I poesoss his determination , and , luce him , there is no effort I will not b o prepared to make , and no sacrifice I will not be prepared to undergo , to uphold that policy ; which , in my heart and conscience , I believe to bo necessary for the peace , tho hap pinosB , and the well-being of my fellowcountrymen . " ( The right hon . baronet resumed his seat upon the front Opposition bench amid loud and prolonged encoring . )
This was a night of great spoakors ; but whan Mr . Wali > ole rose to reply to Sir James . Graham , there was literall y nothing loft for him to say , except what had been said bofore . Ho reiterated , however , Lord Derby ' s declaration in tho House of Lords , that it was nbt a " reversal , " but a modification of the policy of Sir Itobort Pool , which was sought ; and ho declared that an appeal had boon made , not to tho " forboarrtneo , " but to tho "justice" of tlio Houso . Ho could « eo no applicability in the precedents cited by Sir JamoH Grahum , and ho concluded that circumstances justified tho Government in their present proceedings , As a sting to his speech , a warning to Lord John Russell against joining in tho « now and extraordinary amalgamation of parties , " said to have taken place : alluding to tho Whig coalition of 1784 , ho said :
" The right hon . member for Eipon has entirely forgotten to notice the extraordinary similarity . between the position of Mr-Ktt and his Whig opponents and that of the present Government and their opponents . If I recollect aright , an extraordinary coalition took place at that time , when the Whig payty went out of power . Nothing damaged the Whig party so much as that unnatural alliance ( loud cheers ) i and' I warn the noble lord , who is a constitutional Minister , to beware , as he loves the constitution ( as I know he does ) before he joins with those who not only vote with him in carrying any salutary reform , but who have objects behind—democratic tendencies to
which the noble lord-would not give way . ( Cheers . ) . But the noble lord may be betrayed in an unlucky moment into a false position , much , I should think , to his own disadvantage , and I am sure to the great disadvantage of the country . ^ ' ( Cheers . ) Mr . Gladstone called the position of the Government " necessarily anomalous" and " provisional . " The question of Protection had shattered a mighty party in 1846 , deranged ever since the " whole mechanical system of our parliamentary government , " and called for every effort that men could make for the purpose of bringing * for once and for ever , the question to a final decision .
His speech then turned upon two points , the duty of the Opposition in regard to the Government , and in regard to the question of protection . With respect to the former , he went over the precedents cited by Sir James Graham and disclaimed by iNfr . Walpole , and he argued that they were not advanced simply as precedents , but as illustrations of a living practical principle , that if you want a strong government you must have one commanding a majority in the House of Commons . No one had blamed the present ministry for accepting office ; as a choice of evils , { alluding to obstructed legislation ) he was _ glad they had taken office . But it was the duty of the House- —a duty from which they must not shrink—to compel the Government to appeal to the country on the vital question at
stake ( protection ) at the earliest possible moment . He ran over Mr . Disraeli ' s category of " necessary measures " and decidedly exeepted to that as a necessary measure , which spoke of disposing of the four seats which will be vacant when the St . Albans Bill is carried ; Also he did not think Chancery Reform a subject which should prolong parliament . And fmall y ^ he concluded that an explicit assurance ought to be obtained that Parliament should be dissolved speedily . As to their duty to protection , that was clear—he was opposed either to the reversal or modification of the policy of free-trade . What they had to do now was not to discuss whether free-trade or protection was the better policy , but to bring that great question to a speedy and final issue .
Mr * BaxMiIE Cochrane here rushed into the debate , but he was disregarded , a great hum of conversation filling the House . Not so when Lord Paimer-STON rose . His appearance stilled the murmurs . He made a frank and explicit statement of bis views . They amounted to this : that Ministers were in a perfectly anomalous , unconstitutional , and accidental position . They had taken office in a minority , and therefore must either resign or dissolve parliament . The former course would be inconsistent with the circumstances under which they accepted office , and before the latter could take place , the necessary business must be performed . But this must be the necessary business ; and when transacted , a dissolution ought at once to follow . That , accompanied by a running condemnation of the Protection policy , was the gist of a short but telling
speech . After this the debate was taken up by Mr . Milnkk Gibson , Sir John Tyrbei ,, Mr . OavfAhv , Mr . Newdegate , Sir A . Cookburn , and Mr . Booker ^ and these gentlemen having spoken , the House went into Committee of Supply , and voted 39 , 000 men for the navy . The absorbing interest of Monday ' s debate throws all tho parliamentary proceedings of tho remainder of the week quite into tho shade . In the House of Lords , on Tuesday night , a debate on tho system of National Schools in Ireland was introduced by tho Marquis of Clanricardo ' s inquiry , pursuant to notice , whether Ministers intended to propose any alteration in tho present application of the public funds for educational
purposes in Ireland . Tho Earl of Derby , in his reply , referred to the fact of bis having , as Irish Secretary , twenty years ago , framed tho regulations and introduced the system of National Schools . Ho thought that , under existing circumstances , tho subject waa a proper one for a committee of inquiry . Aflor expressing his rogrot that a groat number of tho Presbyterian clergy bad kept ; aloof from tho National system with almost as much persovoranco ns tho dorgy of the Established Church , ho suggCHtod that it might bo woll to consider Whether in some cases Government assistance might not bo granted to schools exclusively Protestant , and alno to schools exclusively Roman Catholic . Thoso wore subjects which a committee might investigate Ho was most anxious that ltoman Catholics as well ns
Protestants should have , undor Government superintendence , tho advantage of a sound moral , liternry , and religious education . The Marquis ov Lansdownk deprecated any hasty interference with a system which had . " worked so woll , and expressed his conviction that if once tho plan wore introduced of giving separate
grants to the various religious bodies , mixed education would become the exception , and exclusive education the rule . The Earl of Desart denied that the present system was one of general education ; he wished to see classes still more united . The Earl op Boden made a speech on the " Protestant Ascendancy" side of the question ,, and declared that the National Schools prevented the conversion of the Roman Catholics . Lord Monteagle defended the system ; Lord Donoughmore attacked it . The Marquis of Clanricarde replied briefly ; and after some conversation between the noble Marquis , Lord de Ros , and the Earl of Donoughrnore , the subject dropped .
In the House of Commons , on the same day , Lord Robert Grosvenor , in putting a question to Lord John Manners , the Chief Commissioner of Work ? , on the subject of the ventilation of the House , drew a doleful picture of the sufferings members were compelled to undergo while attending their legislative duties . If something were not speedily done , he anticipated fatal consequences . Lord John Manners hoped that an efficient remedy would soon be applied ; he expected great improvements from the efforts of Dr . Reid and Mr .
Goldsworthy Gurney . In answer to a question from Mr . Duncombe , he announced that the government had decided not to interfere with the arrangements by which the Crystal Palace would be removed by the 1 st of May . The recommendation of the commissioners , who had received an immense quantity of evidence , was to that effect , and their reasons appeared to the government to be satisfactory . Mr . Napier , the Irish attorney-general , moved for a select committee to inquire into the state of the disturbed districts of Armagh , Monaghan , and Louth , the object being to ascertain the cause of the crimes of violence that bad disgraced
those localities , and the sufficiency or insufficiency of the laws to meet the evil . These outrages usually arose out of the occupation of land , and were the overt acts of a great secret confederation , which , if not put down by the law , would put the law down . No doubt , if it could be properly administered , the law would be sufficient , but from the intimidation of jurors and witnesses some open-day murders had been committed with perfect impunity . He recommended an alteration in the jury laws , in order that juries to try cases that affected life and property should be composed of persons who would not be likely to be intimidated . He thought
also that it might be wise , under certain restrictions , to re-enact the law making it penal to be in possession of signs and passwords . Mr . Hatchell took on himself the entire responsibility in regard to the late special commission , and explained the difficulties that sometimes lay in the way of securing the conviction of offenders . He admitted some alteration was necessary in the jury laws , but deprecated any interference with the liberty of the subject . Mr . McCttllagh ascribed much of the outrage in Ireland to tho want of confidence existing between the owners and occupiers of land , the neglect of the duties of property , and the wholesale evictions that were from time to time carried
on . He denied that there was any necessity for changing the law because in a particular district there had been a difficulty in obtaining convictions . After a few words from Mr . Grogan the motion was agreed to . Tho annual Indemnity Bill was brought in , and tho house adjourned . In tho House of Commons on Wednesday a long discussion took place on tho Manchester and Salford Education Bill , tho second reading of which , moved by Mr . Brotherton , was met by Mr , Milnor Gibson with an amendment to refer it to a select committee to inquire into tho state of education in tho boroughs in
question . Ho based this proposal on tho ground that the bill , though technically a private was in reality a public measure , seeing that it wont to establish the novol principle of supporting free schools , mot only for secular education but for roligious teaching in tbo forms of Catholicism and of all sects of protestantism , by means of the public rateH . Mr . Roebuck seconded tbo amendment , not that ho objected to tbo precise pvinciplo embodied in tbo measure , but that tho bill ought to bo treated as a public bill . Mr . Walpole , after giving great credit to tho promoters for their good intontionH , objected to osjtabliHh by a private bill
groat principles winch must affect tbo public generally , such as tho principle of compulsory rating , froo oducation , and tho restriction of roligious education to the roadingof tho Bible . Ho was prepared to agree to tho motion for n committee , with some alterations in tho wording . Lord John Russiaiift also thought tbo monsuro ought to bo doalt with ns a public one , and was favourable to tbo inquiry . Ho felt strongly that tho education to bo given should bo of a religious , and not wholly of a secular character , but acknowledged tho difficulty of deciding upon a roligious system of instruction in winch nU should agree . Sir Robjoet
March 20, 1852.] The Leader. 265
March 20 , 1852 . ] THE LEADER . 265
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), March 20, 1852, page 5, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_20031852/page/5/
-