POSTSCRIPT.
SATURDAY NIGHT. WE have been assured that there is no foundation whatever for the statement, published by us last week, as to a difference in the Cabinet concerning open questions. We have seen our statement wholly and positively contradicted, in writing, by a member of the Cabinet whose honour cannot be fora moment questioned ; and we are therefore bound not only to believe, but frankly to acknowledge, that we were misin- formed on the subject. An expression of our sincere regret at having been so misled, is unfortunately the only reparation that we can make to Mr. RICE for suspicions which, it now appears, were altogether un- founded. But we also owe some apology to our readers. Hardly any proof short of that to which we now yield entire assent, would have led us to doubt the accuracy of our first information ; which came from one who is incapable of deceit, very much attached to the Ministry, and likely to be well acquainted with their sentiments. Our informant, it is clear, had been grossly imposed upon. By whom' we have not at present any means of judging : but this is certain—that, for some time past, accounts of the most contradictory nature as to the disposition of the Cabinet, with respect both to open questions and to an early disso- lution of Parliament, have been diligently circulated by persons form- ing part of the Government. Black and white are not more opposite than some of these communications to friends of the Government by persons in office. If the object were to involre the purposes of the Government in profound mystery, the means adopted have been com- pletely successful. At this time, no one ean form a conjecture as to what is even probable, with respect to matters which affect the sta- bility of the Government and the deepest interests of the country. Hence, naturally, erroneous reports ; and, from honest journalists, the earliest correction of errors which, under the circumstances, can scarcely be avoided.
Previous page
