adjourned, he would lay on the table a despatch from the LordLieutenant of Ireland.

The improved condition of commerce was attested by the increase in the number of cotton-mills, in the employment of hands, and in the demand for manufactures. At a future time Lord Lansdowne would lay before the House details which would show that there had -been a solid improvement in the revenue independently of the cornduties. He believed it would be found that, putting aside the cornduties altogether, there had been an increase of 200,000l. in the Customs in the course of the last year. He had been informed yesterday that there had been a considerable increase of deposits in the Westminster Provident Institution; he believed the same would be found to be the case with the savings banks; and he sincerely trusted that the commencing prosperity, of which there were such evident signs, would be of a permanent character.

The Duke of Richmond declared his strong opposition to the Ministerial policy, especially to the proposed reductions in the army and navy. He expressed his confidence that the system of protection to agriculture must be soon reestablished.

The Earl of Yarborough, although hitherto an opponent to Corn-Law Repeal, disclaimed all intention of joining in an agitation to restore protection.

The Duke of Argyll defended the free-trade measures against the imputation of failure; he thought the present prices were those of a transition state.

The Duke of Wellington briefly declared his reasons for voting against the Amendment.

In the House of Commons the Address was moved by Lord Harry Vane and seconded by Mr. E. Bunbury. Mr. Disraeli, in a speech of great length and ability, moved an Amendment similar to that proposed by Lord Stanley. In the earlier part of his address, in adverting to the Irish policy of the Government, he paid a passing tribute to the lately deceased leader of the Protection party, Lord George Bentinck.

There was a policy, he said, once proposed in that House with respect to Ireland, which by the Irish Members was defeated, but which if it had been pursued would have produced a very different effect from what we now saw in that country-a policy which was obliged to be partially pursued even by the Government who then opposed it. The proposer of that policy is no longer among us. At a time when everything that is

66

occurring vindicates his prescience and demands his energy, we have no longer his sagacity to guide or his courage to sustain us. In the midst of the Parliamentary strife his plume can soar no more for us to rally round. But he has left us the legacy of heroes-the memory of his great name, and the inspiration of his great example."

Adverting then to the commercial policy of the Government, Mr. Disraeli, at considerable length, controverted the grounds upon which the Government assumed that our commerce was improving under the new system; he contended that not only were our manufactures paralyzed by its effects, but that it was working a change in the distribution of the precious metals, which must be pernicious to this country. After an appeal to figures, showing the unfavourable influence of the new commercial system upon our revenue, Mr. Disraeli passed to that portion of the Speech which touched upon the foreign policy of the Government, observing that this was the first time he had known a Royal Speech at the opening of the Session omit to acknowledge the continuance of amity with Foreign Powers. The honourable Member then entered upon a pungent criticism of the state of our external relations. Where," he asked, "was the suspension of arms?" Was it between his Holiness the Pope and the Prince of Canino? Was the foreign policy of this country to be dictated by a French Admiral? Who is "the King of Naples" is not the King of the Two Sicilies to be noticed?-what

are the " negotiations" in Sicily? Has Her Majesty no allies left, that the usual assurance on that

head is omitted in the Speech? All that portion of the Speech was vague, unsatisfactory, and obscure. Yet great changes had taken place on the continent since Parliament was prorogued, and England had taken an active part. "Look at the state of France; look at the state of the whole centre of Europe -the fairest, the most favoured, the most civilized countries. I find in France a Republic without Republicans, and in Germany an Empire without an Emperor. And this-this is progress!' (Immense laughter and cheering.) This is the brilliant achievement of universal suffrage-the high political consummation of the sovereignty of the people! Yes, these are the constitutional models, the political exemplars, which are to fashion the future free constitution of England. The scene would be one of unmingled absurdity, were not the circumstances connected with it calculated to create terror. There wanted only one ingredient in the mess to make the incantation perfectly infernal. A Republic without Republicans, an Empire without an Emperor, only required mediation without an object on which to mediate, to make the saturnalia of diplomacy, the orgies of politics. And we have got it." (Loud cheers and laughter.)

Mr. Disraeli glanced sarcastically at the Schleswig-Holstein question, still unsettled; at that German Romance-the Assembly in Frankfort; at Austria, which was to have been blotted from the map, but has re-erected her empire and her sovereignty in Hungary; at the Sicilian dispute; all which would have been settled, if Denmark, Austria, and Naples, had been left alone. He should like to

see the instructions that had been

given to the six successive envoys to La Plata. "I was going to say, these envoys remind me of the dynasties in Macbeth, Another, and another still succeeds;' but that, unfortunately, is the very thing which they don't do." (Great laughter.) Turning from foreign politics Mr. Disraeli made a dexterous transition to the economical promises of the Speech.

"Sir, immense changes have occurred since I last had the honour of addressing you. Empires have fallen; the Pope no longer reigns in Rome; Her Majesty meets Parliament, and tacitly admits that she has no allies. But, amidst all these portentous changes, there is nothing so marvellous as the fact on which I congratulate Her Majesty's Ministers, and that is, their conversion to the principles of financial reform. The age of miracles is not past." (Laughter.) He invited Ministers to explain this part of the Address, so briefly and pithily put before the gentlemen of that House:

"I have directed the Estimates for the service of the year to be laid before you: they will be framed with the most anxious attention to a wise economy. The present aspect of affairs has enabled me to make large reductions upon the Estimates of last year.'

"Well, but the Estimates of last year were also made with every possible attention to a wise economy.' (Laughter and cheers.) But it is rather strange to me to be told that the present aspect of affairs has enabled the Government to make large reductions. question naturally arises -What aspect of affairs? what has compelled them to this course? Is it what I read here- the spirit of disaffection exists in Ireland still '

The

is that the aspect of affairs? Is it what I read here-that a rebellion of a formidable character exists in the Punjaub'-is that the aspect of affairs? (Loud cheers.) Is it the fact, that at this moment two millions of armed and disciplined men are moving over the face of Europe in hostile array-is that the aspect of affairs which enables Her Majesty's Government to make large reductions in the Estimates of last year? When we met last year, Her Majesty had allies, not of a doubtful character, but some of whom had been honoured guests in her own palace. Affairs on the Continent were so tranquil, that it was with some difficulty the Foreign Secretary was able to furnish his quota to the Royal Speech. There was indeed a treaty respecting the slave-trade with a South American Republic, of which not six gentlemen in the House had ever before heard. That was the tranquil state of last year. The revenue of last year was not more eminently prosperous than it has been this prolific season. Trade was scarcely so brisk then as it is at present: but, over and above all other circumstances, India was settled, and as we were then informed, settled for ever; and yet Ministers then came forward, not with a reduction, but with a proposition to increase the expenditure-with a scheme not for the relief of our burdens, but with a proposal for increased taxation. How are we to reconcile this? Then there was an increase in our forces, and the Militia were to be called out. What has happened since to place us upon safer ground? I do not know that anything has occurred in Europe in which we can find that present aspect of affairs' which

has impelled Her Majesty's Ministers into the path of financial reform; and one of my objects in rising is, if possible, to extract that instructive information from Her Majesty's Government. That there should be a necessity for retrenchment, is not in the least surprising to gentlemen on our side of the House. You have been tampering with the resources of the country for many years. (Cheers.) It is not a year ago since one whose loss we all deplore told you, that, with the changes that you have made, a reduction of 25 per cent. on all salaries would hardly be considered as satisfactory to the country. And independently of that, retrenchment is sure to be supported by the Tory party, because no necessary retrenchments have ever been proposed which have not received their support-faithful in that to their old traditionary policy, for they were the first opposers of extravagance. But no gentleman on this side of the House will agree to a retrenchment which is not a real and a just retrenchment, adopted under a view of all the exigencies of the case, and not impelled by some mysterious influence not patent to the world. Least of all should I approve of gentlemen laying party hands upon that which is the palladium of our country-the fleet of England, which influences foreign cabinets more than any minister; or of the British regiments, which have now become as famous as the Roman legions. (Loud cheers.) Yet large reductions are announced in both, and that in consequence of the present aspect of affairs.' It surely cannot be that Her Majesty's Ministers have become converts to the perpetual peace theory." (Laughter.)

Mr. Grattan, who followed, moved another amendment on the paragraph relating to Ireland, proposing to substitute the words following:

"The disturbances in Ireland have not been renewed; but a feeling of discontent, augmented by the distresses of the people, still exists, which it will be our duty to watch, and as speedily as possible to remedy."

In supporting this amendment he declared that the mock insurrection was a got-up affair to put down Repeal; that there was no disaffection in Ireland; that in many districts Government relief was altogether inefficient; and that the Poor Law was destroying the virtues of the male and female population.

Mr. John O'Connell imputed the want of industry in Ireland to a sense of insecurity in the fruits of labour. He should oppose to the utmost the prolongation of the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act.

Mr. Fagan defended the Poor Law, but advocated fair and impartial inquiry. He complained that, though agitation had ceased, coercion had not been succeeded by measures of amelioration.

Lord John Russell began by expressing his sympathy with Mr. Disraeli's regret for the loss of Lord George Bentinck, and he himself paid a tribute to the memory of his deceased friend Mr. C. Buller.

With respect to Ireland, he begged the House to suspend its opinion until that subject should, as it would shortly, come on for specific discussion. The powers he proposed to ask were not against Ireland, but for the protection of the well disposed; and with respect to the Irish Poor Law, his

intention was to propose that its operation should be inquired into by a Committee. The noble Lord replied very briefly to some of the observations of Mr. Disraeli respecting the state of our commerce, and of our foreign relations, upon which he said the House was not in a condition to form an opinion.

With regard to financial subjects, and the promised reductions in the national defences, Lord John Russell defended his Government against the attacks of Mr. Disraeli, and at the same time combated the views lately propounded by Mr. Cobden in his letter to the Liverpool Financial Association, advocating an immediate retrenchment of ten millions in the national expenditure. At the same time, although he thought that gentleman's propositions untenable and unsound, he (Lord J. Russell) fully admitted, that when they came to consider the question of their establishments, there were circumstances at present which justified a different view of the requirements of the country in that respect, as compared with the preceding year. Last year there was a sudden and formidable convulsion in various parts of Europe, and no man could say what might be the issue of that convulsion. "We did not think we should be justified, in those circumstances, in proposing to diminish our expenditure.

We

asked for the same number of men for the navy and the army we had asked at the commencement of the Session, although we had not the ways and means sufficient for that purpose. This House supported us in that course. They declared, by large majorities, that it was not expedient to reduce our military establishments. But when we had

again to consider the question of estimates exceeding the amount of our revenue, it was our duty, I think, to come to one of two conclusions -either to reduce those estimates to bring them within the amount of revenue, or, on the other hand, to attempt to raise the revenue to the amount of our expenditure. It was not fitting to go on another year increasing the public debt of the country, without the prospect of equalizing the expenditure. Now, the first course was evidently the best, supposing it was justifiable and practicable. We had to consider, first, whether there were not many reforms that might be made, many retrenchments that might be effected, without impairing the number or efficiency of our military establishments. The report of the Committee which sat last year upon our naval and military expenditure-which was no proposition of mine-the House is indebted for its appointment to the honourable Member for Montrose -the Report of that Committee stated that with regard to the navy, at least, there might be many useful reforms without impairing its efficiency. This was one source of economy; but that would not enable us to bring the revenue within the limits I have stated. We had, therefore, to consider whether our effective force could be reduced. Now, in considering that subject we had to remember that since we had been in office we had added 3000 men to the number voted for the navy, and 5000 to the number voted for the artillery. In considering these subjects, then, we came to the conclusion, that in the present state of Europe, and having made these additions to our naval and military force, we might now safely make some reductions--re