POSTSCRIPT.

SATITRDAY.

The Ministerial explanations occupied both Houses last night. In the House of Lords, the Marquis of LA.NSDOWNE made a brief statement, the most important point of which was the fact that, after the failure of the recognized party leaders, the Queen sent for himself as a member of her Privy Council, and subsequently for the Duke of Wellington in the same general capacity, "fully to inform herself before she takes any further steps in the important and delicate state of affairs." The Duke was then with her Majesty.

The Earl of ABERDEEN briefly explained the part that he had taken— The fint efforts made in obedience to her Majesty's desire, in conjunction with Sir James Graham and Lord John Russell, led to the submission by Lord John Russell of a basis of agreement. "All our differences were con- fined exclusively to one measure " : Lord Aberdeen felt an invincible repugnance to adopt any measure of penal legislation towards the Roman Catholic subjects of this country, by the prohibition of the as- sumption of ecclesiastical titles. He thought no law—or at least none but some one of those barbarous laws the text of which still disgraces our statute- book—had been violated ; though sensitive to the arrogant tone assumed,. which must in some way have engaged the attention of .Parliament, he saw no sufficient ground for legislative interference. Without any previous com- munication with Sir James Graham, he found to his delight that he concurred entirely in this opinion. Lord John Russell was willing to make material alterations in his bill; but those would not have removed the main objec- tion, The hope of that combination therefore disappeared. The Queen then graciously requested Lord Aberdeen to undertake the formation of a Mi- nistry alone. Believing that a majority of the Members of both Houses of Parliament, and the mass of public sentiment, would have been in conflict with his opinion on the subject in question, he entreated her Majesty to permit him to decline the task. Be believes that at no distant period a great change will take place in the public sentiment. Lord STANLEY stated, that when at the Queen's command, he from repaired to her presence, he learned lm her Majesty the reasons which Lord John Russell had given for his resignation, and then frankly stated his own views on that event.

He now expressed his doubt whether the divisions on the motions of Mr. Disraeli and Mr. Locke King were the sole or even the principal causes of the resignation. Ile was not in the secrets of the Cabinet, but believed the mode of dealing with the Papal aggression, and the difficulties arising out of the state of Protestant feeling kindled by the letter of the Prime Minister, and which tended to drive matters to extremes, had much to do with the re- signation; while the financial crotchets of the Chancellor of the Exchequer had aggravated the difficulty; although the course taken by the Ministry was not such as to induce the notion, that under ordinary circumstances so small a majority as fourteen on a motion could be held by them a sufficient reason for resigning. He stated to the Queen circumstances confirming this view ; and, having obtained her Majesty's ;permission, he read to the House extracts from a recapitulation of his statements which at her desire he after- wards made for her Majesty's use in writing. He quoted his statement, which is written in the third person- " He adverted to the two occasions specified by your Majesty as the grounds of the resignation of your Majesty's servants, and observed, with reference to the mo- tion of 31r. Disraeli, that it had been negatived, and, although by a small majority, the minority were reinforced by a number of votes hostile to the Government on other grounds, and on whose general support Lord Stanley and his friends could not reckon ; and with reference to the majority on Mr. Locke King's motion, he observed, that of the minority of 54, 27 held office, only 10 unofficial supporters voted with the Covernment, and no less than 17 of the Protectionist party ; who would have been vnore numerous but for an impression which undoubtedly prevailed that your Ma- jesty's Ministers were not honestly exercising their influence to defeat the motion."

He then explained to the Queen his view of the condition of parties in the Howie of Commons. There is the party of her Majesty's Government, the various gradations of opinion in which: have been increased by what has taken place so much as almost to lead to the formation of another party—the Irish Roman Catholic party ; the party with which Lord Stanley is connected, an undoubted minority, containing men of talent but hardly more than one in- dividual of political experience and versed in the transactions of public busi- ness; and a third party, not extensive in numbers but most important in re- spect of the ability and official experience of a great portion of its members —the small party which adheres to the policy of Sir Robert Peel. Lord Stanley proceeded with his extracts- " After stating to your Majesty the position of the three main parties into which the House of Commons is divided, Lord Stanley observed that the policy of the pre- sent Administration had met with the general approval and support of the most dis- tinguished men of the party which adhered to the late Sir Robert Peel, and that they bad never yet met with a defeat from Lord Stanley's political friends ; that a very important member of that party, SirJames Graham, had publicly declared his opinion of the necessity of • closing their ranks' to resist the presumed policy of Lord -Stanley's friends ; and, as your Majesty had been' pleased to inform him that no communication had been made to any one previous to that with which your Majesty honoured him, he ventured to suggest, that in the first instance your Majesty should ascertain whether it were not possible to strengthen the pre- sent Government, or partially to reconstruct it, by a combination with those who, not now holding office, concurred in the opinions of those who do, and professed their opinion of the necessity of union : that failing such a combina- tion, a portion of that third party might be willing to combine with Lord Stanley, whose difficulties in such a case would be grestly diminished : that if it should ap- pear that both of these arrangements were Impracticable, and if personal considera- tions stood in the way of the formation of a Government of those whose opinions ap- peared to prevail in the House of Commons, Lord Stanley, not underrating the ex- treme difficulties which he should have to encounter, would, if honoured with your _Majesty's confidence, prefer any responsibility, and even the chance of failure and loss of reputation, to that of leaving your Majesty and the country without a Govern- meet; and he added, that he believed an Administration formed under such circum- stances would be more likely to meet with support, even from moderate opponents of their views, than one which should be hastily formed without giving time to show the impracticability of a different arrangement."

Here Lord Stanley corrected the statement that he had informed her Majes- ty that he was "not then prepared" to form an Administration—incorrectly., but not intentionally, conveying the inference that he had abandoned the expectation of forming a Government. It should have been accompanied by -a qualification : though advising her Majesty that other means should be tried 'first, yet when called on by his Sovereign he did not hesitate to express -readiness in the service of her Majesty to risk even failure and loss of Lord reputation, everything but loss of honour. After the failure of Lord John Russell to form a junction with the party which he hoped it would not be thought offensive to call the Peelite party, from Tuesday morn- ing to Thursday afternoon Lord Stanley earnestly endeavoured to form a Cabinet. In the position of parties) it was of the utmost import- ance, if practicable without sacrifice of principle, to obtain the coopera- tion of some of those who, generally acting on Conservative principles, had yet been separated by the unfortunate differences of 1846 from the great Conservative party—of the Earl of Aberdeen. "The reply of my noble friend was expressed in language of the most sincere friendship—("Hear, hear ! "from the Earl of Aberdeen)--sveh as I have always entertained for him; - but he could not give me the assistance I required. I had conferences with various Mends in this and the other House of Parliament. I succeeded in obtaining the cooperation of some who, I had no doubt, would be most able to carry on the business of departments. I am not at liberty to give names, but one noble friend now present will allow me to say that I never felt anything more deeply than the terms in which he expressed his readi- ness to share the responsibility in administering a department for which the 'country would have found him peculiarly well qualified. On the following day Mr. Gladstone was expected to arrive. I thought it desirable to obtain the 'cooperation in the House of Commons of so able, honest, and upright a man. He had acted with the intermediate party to which I have referred - but, in contra- distinction to that party, he had supported emotion for the relief of agricultural distress. On communicating with Mr. Gladstone I found that he could not con- sistently with his views take part in an Administration. I was thus deprived of all extraneous assistance m the formation of a Government, and I was eompelled to rely entirely on that party with whom I was immediately and politically connected. I found some who' from various causes—one from the pressure of domestic concerns, three or four from an undue depreciation of their own ability to fill the situations in which I proposed to place them— expressed their unwillingness to join an Adminstration. Yesterday afternoon, there met at my house a portion of those noble Mends and those friends in the other House of Parliament who had consented to take part if the Go- vernment had gone on ; and the whole state of the case was anxiously and deliberately considered by them. I express the general concurrence of their views, as well as may own views, when I say, that though I was enabled to present to her Majesty a list of the names of gentlemen who were compe- tent, with an assured majority in the House of Commons, creditably and reputably to conduct the business of the country., yet! could not lay before her Majesty a Cabinet, more especially in the other House of Parliament, so strong as to act in the face of a most powerful majority—a majority ready to combine for purposes of opposition, though unable to act together for purposes of government.' There is not the slightest foundation for the statement that he wished the power of dissolution and that her Majesty refused. He not only did not ask a dissolution, but he expressed his distinct opinion that a dissolution is impossible. He knew that such a pledge could not be asked from the Sore- reign, nor given. " I am authorized on the part of her Majesty distinctly to state, that no person would be justified in saying or in holding out to be- lief, that if I had felt it my duty to recommend a dissolution of Parliament the consent sought would have been withheld." Under all the circum- stances, he asked her Majesty to relieve him from taking on him duties of office which he could not for any long period have conducted. Lord Stanley frankly stated ;that would hare been his policy in office. Ile thought it a matter involving the faith of successive Ministries that the Income-tax should not be allowed to degenerate into a permanent tax ; and should have asked Parliament by some resolution to pledge itself to the gra- dual reduction of that tax with a view to its final abolition. He had no desire to reverse the policy of Sir Robert Peel, but he should have asked the imposition of such a moderate import-duty on corn as, without raising the existing price, would have produced a revenue of 1,500,0001. or 2,000,0001. Should the next election prove that the sense of the country is in favour of unrestricted import of all provisions, he will respectfully bow to that expression of opinion. The Papal aggression was a proceeding which it is impossible, con- sistently with the dignity of the Crown and Parliament, to peas over - but he disapproves of the mode proposed by Ministers. " If the law had not been vio- lated, I think the offence would have been more aptly met by a resolution of both Houses of Parliament, declaring in the first instance the unconstitu- tional character of the aggression, not recognizing the validity of the titles which were assumed to be conferred, and declaring that in virtue of those titles the holders or assumed holders of them had neither pre- cedence nor authority of any kind within this realm. I frankly say that I am not prepared to legislate upon the subject at the present moment. I do not think the amount of information before us as to the facts of the ease justifies us in legislating ; and this is a question of all others upon which, if you do legislate, you must legislate deliberately, upon full information, and in such a manner as to make your legislation effective." The law is in a most anomalous state ; we are ignorant both on tho state of the law and of what it is expedient that we should do to amend it. "For example, what effect will the fact of the Roman Catholics Bishops being enabled to meet in synod have upon the binding character of their enactments. Do they, by acting in an organized body, obtain an authority recognized by all Roman Catholics as a legislative authority, which when they are not so acting they do not possess ? If so, the question becomes of importance, not whether there shall be a Roman Catholic Bishop of Birmingham, but whether there shall be in this country an imperium in imperio, a body of men acting in synod, and passing laws which, enforced by the most awful of all pe- nalties—the spiritual censured of the church, have a power over a vast portion of the Roman Catholic population, superior to that of the law of the land ? " We must have connived at encroachments ; it is desirable to see how tar. "On the whole of this question relative to the position of the Roman Catholic population with regard to this state and to a foreign power. I believe that Parliament and the country are equally ill-informed. This is a subject which ought to be dealt with upon a great scale, temperately, deliberately., and upon full information ; and the loss of one, or even of two years, if it were necessary, would be an evil of little magnitude compared with the evil of dealing hastily and ineffectually, passionately, and in an irritating manner, with this great and important question, the chief evils and dangers of which you leave wholly untouched by your legislation. I should have recommended that, in both Houses of Parliament, inquiries should take place as to the actual relation in whieh the Roman Catholic subjects of the Queen stand towards foreign powers and their own prelacy. I would advise that this subject should be fully investigated, the present anomalies of the law really exposed, and amendments of the law suggested for the consideration of Parliament; and, though I know the difficulties of dealing with such a subject, I believe it would not be impracticable to introduce measures which should secure this country from the interference and usurpation of a foreign power, and at the same tune should not take from, but add to, the religious freedom of our Roman Catholic fellow-subjects, and place the Roman Catholic laity in a condition far more satisfactory to themselves than that in which they are at present— under the uncontrolled domination of the bishops and clergy of their church."

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE and Lord STANLEY exchanged a few words of explanation ; and the House adjourned.

In the House of Commons, Lord Jew( RI:Ban:Ln commenced his

expla- nations with a reference to the contradiction which he received from Disraeli on Monday, "in terms very peremptory, and in a manner not very courteous"; with an implied contrast of the spirit, courage, and honour shown by Lord Stanley in Parliamentary battles, wherein Lord John has sometimes fought by his side and at other times fought against him face to face.

As to the declaration which he had ascribed to Lord Stanley, it was not Lord John's duty to go into details, and what he stated "appeared to him to be the general result" of what Lord Stanley said. To bear out this view, and also to relieve himself from the charge that he had endeavoured to force his way into to the presence of the Sovereign, he quoted, with the permission of her Majesty, from the written statement made by Lord Stan- ley, (to be found in our report of his speech") and from a note by Prince Albert to himself, which showed that he repaired to the Palace at the Queen's command.

Lord John reciprocated Sir James Graham's approaches to their old rela- tions of friendship ; and then proceeded with the explanations.

The insuperable objections felt by the Earl of Aberdeen and Sir James Graham to legislation on the assumption of ecclesiastical titles was the sole bar to union. He was willing to agree to considerable alterations of the bill, but must have persevered with it. Lord Stanley was again sent for and has resigned the commission ; and now her Majesty, having called for the advice of one whose wisdom in civil affairs is hardly less than his glory in military achievements, she pauses for a while before she again attempts the task of forming an Administration.

Lord John touched generally on the topics of the day. Referring to the motion of Mr. Locke King, he repelled the charge founded on it that he shrank from the responsibility of conducting affairs. He called to mind that he had not yielded to such motives in the trying times of the Irish panic1 when three millions:of the people were fed by public charity ; nor at the time of the money panic, when Ministers were asked to suspend payments in the Bank; nor during the revolutions of Europe, when the example of revolution tempted to the violation of public order in this country. He adheres to the necessity of legislating against the assumption of eccle- siastical titles. "But with respect to the bill which we have introduced— although great pains were taken in framing it--we have been told by persons who are competent authorities, that looking to the proceedings in courts of law in Ireland—that looking to what has been the practice both before 1829 and since 1829, this bill will in its second and third clauses interfere, per- haps with the ordination, certainly with the collation of priests, and with be- quests which have been allowed by various decisions of courts of law. I will say at once that it was not our intention so to interfere ; and that, so far as regards anything which belongs to the regular order of the Roman Catholic Church, so as to permit the Roman Catholics to have their worship and their ecclesiastical functions undia;.4rbed—so far we were anxious to ma.ntain the religious liberties which-have prevailed in this country ; and therefore, if this bill were proceeded with, I should be ready to make all such alterations in it as might prevent any interference of the kind which I have now stated. I own that when I see a man of such moderation and so justly respected as Archbishop Murray objecting to the provisions of the bill, I cannot refuse to examine and go over its provisions—(" Hear, hear!" and slight murmurs of dissent)—with the view of seeing whether the objections thus stated are really well founded." lie had last autumn prepared an outline of a bill on the suffrage ; but all his colleagues agreed that the time for bringing forward such a measure would be next a olden. He would still oppose any change in the representa- tion, which, by giving the preponderance to mere numbers, would deprive the Legislature of those conservative elements which ought to belong to it. It is a matter of entire doubt into whose hands may be committed the power of officially presenting such measures. When proposing reform to a small minority, and amidst the apathy of the country, and when urging reform of Parliament amidst the enthusiasm of the whole nation, he acted with men in whom he had the utmost confi- dence, reliance, and faith. He quoted the sentiments of Edmund Burke, to the effect that the only preservative for a man against the corruption of na- ture and example is a habit of rffe and communication with the most vir- tuous and public-spirited men of the age you live in. "Adopting these sen- timents, I have to say, that for: far more than eleven years I have thought and acted with some of the most eminent men in this country. When I first came into Parliament, I benefited by the counsels anti followed the examples of such men as Rornilly, Mackintosh, and Horner. When I first entered office. I did so under the auspices of the lofty patriotism, the calm temper, and large experience of Earl Grey ; and with the unostentatious public spirit and incorruptible disinterestedness of Lord Althorp. With such men it was my pride and fortune to act. I will not speak of the living ; but so long as it is my fate to take a part in public afthirs, it will be my endeavour to consort with such men as Burke speaks of, with whom I agree in public principle, and from whose wisdom I can learn the best path to the public welfare. So long as this country endures, that, I believe, will be found to be the best course to pursue. Some men may think that the standard of public virtue has risen higher than it was in the time of Burke, and some may think that it has sunk lower. My belief is, that from such men as I have mentioned both this country and the world will derive benefit ; and that future ages, not only in this country, but in the Western world, will thank them for the humanity they have inculcated, for the freedom they have enlarged, and forathe just principles they have taught to the world ; and as long as I take part in public affairs, whatever my station may be, I shall endeavour to follow the example of such men as my best guide to the public welfare."

Lord John concluded by moving that the second reading of the Ecclesi- astical Titles Bill should be deferred till Monday.

Mr. DISRAELI explained his interruption of Lord John on Monday.

Lord Stanley had assumed that no particular allusion would be made in the Commons to what had passed on the two previous days ; "but Lord Stanley wished me, in case by any chance it should happen—which he thought ut- terly impossible—that the noble Lord should state that he was not prepared to form a Government—not to allow such a statement to pass unnoticed." If the observations were abrupt, it was because Mr. Disraeli was labouring under a physical oppression which made it almost impossible for him to address the House; and that may have rendered his phraseology less appropriate than was necessary. Recited past testimonials from Lord John as to the fair and ho- nourable manner in which he conducted the Opposition in that House. But Lord John virtually connected his resignation with the motion which Mr. Disraeli had brought forward. "The statement of the noble Lord was as much as to say, 'Here is a politiealparty professing certain principles, and declaring that they would take office at the first opportunity ; and yet when an opportunity is presented to them they decline to act upon it,'—as if we had been trifling with the Parliament, with the country, and with the Sovereign. Now I hope the noble Lord clearly understands the reason why I made the obser- vation I did on Monday last; and that he will admit that, under the circum- stances, I was authorized to make it, although I did not do it so felicitously as if I had prepared myself."

Sir JAMES Gnarl/ix did not rise till he had been repeatedly called for. He began by alluding to his non-official position, and by very emphatic assurances that he desired to renew the cordiality of feeling, almost affec- tion, which formerly existed between himself and Lord John Russell— again to call him "his noble friend."

When Lord John invited his cooperation, three main points arose,---free trade, extension of the suffrage, and "the cause of civil and religious liberty as exhibited in the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts and the emanci- pation of the Roman Catholics." On free trade there could be no difference of opinion. On the extension of the suffrage there could be no difficulty : he agreed with Lord John that the amount of democratic influence introduced by the Reform Bill rendered great caution necessary in the next advance ; but he was not opposed to the principle of an extension. But he could not agree to the legislation proposed by the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill. Lord Aberdeen and he agreed in that opinion ; and also in the conclusion that, with the public feeling excited to the extreme on that point, an attempt to form an Administration on the principle of not legislating must be abor- tive. "I have known nothing in my experience in public affairs," observed fiir James, "so dangerous as the demand for something to be done without any reference to whether that something be safe or unsafe, practicable or impracticable." That his opinion was not an afterthought, he proved by a letter which he wrote to Mr. Henry Howard, of Greystoke, in November last year, and which he now read-

Netherby, Nov. 29, 1850.

"It would give me cordial satisfaction to coZiperate with you on any public occa- sion in this county. But, although I am a sincere Protestant, and resent the haughty tone assumed by the Pope in his bull, and by Cardinal Wiseman in his pas- toral letter, vet I am unwilling to join in the No-Popery cry, or to ask for the re- vival of penal laws, or for any new enactment which might fetter the Roman Ca- tholics in the full and proper exercise of their religious discipline within the realm. When I supported Emancipation, I knew that the Roman Catholics acknowledged Papal supremacy, and would be guided in all spiritual matters by hulls from Rome. I knew, oho, that their religion is episcopal ; and when I fought on their side for perfect equality of civil rights, I was aware that the Pope might nominate in Eng- land, as in Ireland, archbishops and bishops. I did not attach much importance to the safeguard proposed by the Duke of Wellington, who did not himself place much reliance on it, that the Popish hierarchy so nominated should not assume the title of Engli,h or Irish sees occupied by Protestant prelates. I myself was a party to the recognition by statute of the dignity of Roman Catholic Archbishops and Bishops in Ireland : while I adhered, however, to the settlement of 1829, that the enactment prohibiting the assumption of local episcopal titks identical with Pro- testant sees should be withheld, I proposed in the House of Commons, on behalf of Sir Robert Peel's Government, the remission of the penalties which attached to re- ceiving bulls or other similar instruments from Rome; and out of office I supported Lord John Russell's measure, which authorises the renewal of diplomatic inter- course with the Roman Pontiff. I took these steps deliberately, and 1 do not regret them. I believe them to have been necessary for the good government of Ireland, and I cannot believe that it will be possible to have one law for England and another for-Ireland with.respect to Roman Catholic discipline and worship." "lam offended, ituleed, by the arrogance and folly of the language which the Pope and his Cardinal have thought fit to employ in announcing an ecclesiastical arrange- ment which I believe to be lawful, and which I do not consider dangerous. But my displeasure will not induce me to treat with disrespect the religion of seven million, of my countrymen, or to contemplate for one moment the revision or the reversal of a policy which, in defiance of the No-Popery cry, I have supported throughout my public life, which I still believe to be sound, and which is indispenseble, unless by a melancholy necessity the vast majority of the Irish people are still to be treated and considered as our national enemies. I have thus written to you without reserve my genuine sentiments. I am aware that they are not popular. I do not wish to obtrude them on mblic attention. The subject will in some shape probably be brought under the i atice of the House of Commons; and then, in my place in Par- liament, it may be my duty to declare the feelings and the opinions which I enter- tain. In the mean time, I am desirous to avoid any premature or hasty pledge in a matter of such paramount importance. I am more undone to extinguish than to add fuel to the flame of religious strife and animosity." Further, he approved, and still approves, both of the Maynooth grant and of the Charitable Bequests Act. He put these sentiments on record on the 23d of November ; but he abstained from giving them undue publicity, "because I was honestly of opinion that it would add to the difficulty of a moment full of difficulty without any such addition." The step taken by the Pope, and especially Cardinal Wiseman's pastoral letter, were so offen- sive—because done with premeditation and design—that it was extremely difficult for the Administration to pass it over; but Sir James objected to legislation. "I am afraid, if you commence this, step by step you will be- dragged into the penal legislation which broke down under you in 1829."

A short conversational discussion followed. In the course of it, Mr. HUME criticized the Budget ; and Sir ROBERT Ixous lent his damaging defence to the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill. Mr. OSBORNE declared himself rejoiced at the speech of Sir Tames Graham, "because it let the country know that if he were called to the head of affairs he would conduct them with honour to himself and with satisfaction to the great body of the country." Lord Jonx RussELL renewed the declaration that there is in. fact "no Administration now existing."

The motion to postpone the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill was agreed to and the House adjourned till Monday.

The Duke of Wellington arrived at Apsley House from Strathfiehl- saye, at half-past one o'clock this day. Shortly after his arrival the- noble Duke proceeded to Buckingham Palace, and had an audience of her Majesty.—Globe of today.