Debates anb Vroreebings in Varliantent.

OPENING OF THE SESSION.

UNUSUAL interest being felt in the opening of this session, large crowds collected in the line of the procession from Buckingham Palace to the Houses of Parliament ; the curious being undeterred by the lowering aspect of the morning. When the procession left the Palace, however, about half-past one o'clock, there was a break in the weather. The crowd were eager to see the Queen; but the cheering was neither loud nor general. A coincidence was observed. At the corner of Bridge Street, "one of the spectators called out No monopoly!' At that moment her Majesty turned her head, and, while bowing, smiled. The gracious move- ment was instantly noticed, and a hundred voices united in the shout of ' God save the Queen!' "

The House of Lords was crammed in the usual way with a brilliant assemblage, of Peeresses and ladies in their varied dresses, of Peers in their robes, military officers and diplomatic persons in uniform. The Duke of Cambridge and Prince George were present A few minutes before two o'clock, cannon announced the approach of the Queen; and her Majesty entered the House, leaning on the arm of Prince Albert, and surrounded by the great Officers of State.

The Queen being seated on the throne, and the Commons having been summoned to the bar, her Majesty read the following Speech- " My Lords and Gentlemen—It gives me great satisfaction again to meet you in Parliament, and to have the opportunity of recurring to your assistance and advice.

"I continue to receive from my allies, and from other Foreign Powers, the strongest assurances of the desire to cultivate the most friendly relations with this country.

"I rejoice that, in concert with the Emperor of Russia, and through the success of our joint mediation, I have been enabled to adjust the differences which had long prevailed between the Ottoman Porte and the King of Persia, and had se- riously endangered the tranquillity of the East.

"For several years a desolating and sanguinary warfare has afflicted the States of the Rio de Is Plata. The commerce of all nations has been interrupted, and acts of barbarity have been committed, unknown to the practice of a civilized people. In conjunction with the King of the French, I am endeavouring to effect the pacification of those States.

"fihe convention concluded with France, in the course of last year, for the more effectual suppression of the slave-trade, is about to be carried intoimmediate execution by the active cooperation of the two Powers on the coast of Africa. It is my desire that our present anion, and the good understanding which so happily exists between us, may always be employed to promote the interests of humanity and to secure the peace of the world. "I regret that the conflicting claims of Great Britain and the United States in respect of the territory on the North-western coast of America, although they have been made the subject of repeated negotiation, still remain unsettled. You may be assured that no effort consistent with national honour shall be wanting on my part to bring this question to an early and peaceful termination. "Gentlemen of the House of Commons—The Estimates for the year will be laid before you at an early period. Although I am deeply sensible of the ha- portance of enforcing economy in all branches of the expenditure, yet I have been compelled, by a due regard to the exigencies of the public service, and to the state of our naval and military establishments, to propose some increase in the estimates which provide for their efficiency.

" My Lords and Gentlemen—I have observed with deep regret, the very frequent instances in which the crime of deliberate sarsassination has been of late com- mitted in Ireland. It will be your duty to consider whether any measures can be devised calculated to give increased protection to life, and to bring to justice the perpetrators of so dreadful a crime.

I have to lament that, in consequence of a failure of the potato crop in several parts of the United Kingdom, there will be a deficient supply of an article of food which forms the chief subsistence of great numbers of my people. The disease by which the plant has been affected has prevailed to the utmost extent in Ireland. I have adopted all such precautions as it was in my power to adopt for the pur- pose of alleviating the sufferings which may be caused by this calamity; and I shall confidently rely on your cooperation in devising such other means for effect- ing the same benevolent purpose as may require the sanction of the Legislature. " I have had great satisfaction in giving my assent to the measures which you have presented to me from time to time calculated to extend commerce, and to stimulate domestic skill and industry, by the repeal of prohibitory and the relaxa- tion of protective duties. The prosperous state of the revenue, the increased demand for labour, and the general improvement which has taken place in the internal condition Of the country, are strong testimonies in favour of the course you have pursued.

" I recommend you to take into your early consideration, whether the principles on which you have acted may not with advantage be yet more extensively applied, and whether it may not be in your power, after a careful review of the exist- ing duties upon many articles, the produce or manufacture of other countries, to make such further reductions and remissions as may tend to insure the contin- uance of the great benefits to which I have adverted, and, by enlarging our commercial intercourse, to strengthen the bonds of amity with Foreign Powers. " Any measures which you may adopt for affecting these great objects will, I am convinced, be accompanied by such precautions as shall prevent permanent loss to the revenue, or injurious results to any of the great interests of the country.

" I have full reliance on your just and dispassionate consideration of matters so deeply affecting the public welfare.

" It is my earnest prayer, that, with the blessing of Divine Providence on your councils, you may be enabled to promote friendly feelings between different classes of my subjects, provide additional security for the continuance of peace, and to maintain contentment and happiness at home, by increasing the comfort and bettering the condition of the great body of my people."

The Queen and Prince Albert retired as they came ; and both Houses adjourned for a short time.

MINISTERIAL ErrzAwariows AND PLANS.

The House of Commons reassembled at a quarter to four o'clock. The Speaker read the Speech, and some other smaller matters were disposed of; after which, Sir ROBERT PEEL made the following announcement— "Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to give notice, that I propose, on Monday next, to move for the appointment of a Committee to consider the mode in which this House shall deal with the Railway Bills proposed to be submitted to it in the present session. "I also propose, Sir, on Tuesday next, to make, in Committee of the whole House, a statement as to the intention of her Majesty's Government with respect to the commercial policy of the country and the Corn-laws."

Lord Faewcis EGERTON moved the Address in answer to the Queen's Speech, of which it was an echo. Precisely twenty years ago, he had discharged a similar duty under the aus- pices of Mr. Canning; and he regretted to say that lapse of time had not increased his confidence in his own discretion, or invested him with superior claims to the indulgence or sympathies of the House. He hoped, however, that the importance of the juncture which had called Parliament together would induce his hearers to extend to him the same confidence and indulgence which he experienced in 1826. He briefly touched upon the topics in the earlier part of the Speech; re- joicing that the peace and happiness of Europe, and the progress of civilization and good government throughout the world, were secured by the good under- standing between France and England; viewing with regret and anxiety the dif- ferences with the United States, confident that Ministers would neither neglect the honour of the country nor lightly hazard the peace of the world. He passed to other topics which engrossed public attention more deeply, but as to which he would be insincere if he said he expected perfect unanimity. He did not think that the invitation to consider the subject of the laws which regulate the importation of various foreign commodities into this country could surprise the House, after what had taken place. If he had not concurred in the propnety and necessity of that invitation, he would not have undertaken the duty he was now endeavouring to discharge. This change had arisen from observation, and a con- sideration of the state and prospects of the country; and his conviction now was, that the present opportunity should be taken, of reconsidering the whole system : upon which the commercial system of the country. was based, with the view of ultimately departing from the principle of endeavouring, by exclusion or restricted admission of foreign commodities, to encourage home manufactures. By that term he meant also the products of the earth as prepared for the food of man; which he considered to be as much a manufacture as any other. He looked upon the earth as a machine, and the largest landowners as master-manufacturers, and nothing else. Holding these views, he considered that, whether the principle of protection were applied or withheld, it should be applied or withheld impartially with regard to all the various departments of industry. He did not know what the intentions of Government were; but he hoped they would be such as were compatible with the broad principles he had laid down, thus enabling him to give the measures his support. He acknowledged that he had opposed the fixed-duty proposal of Lord John Russell, believing that it was intended to be permanent, and was less advantageous than a sliding scale; but he had now amved at the conclusion that restriction permanently applied to foreign commodities ought no longer to be adopted. As to the consequences of relaxing the import-duties on foreign products, Parliament could form an opinion from what had occurred in the case of wool, cattle, and timber. Circumstances had placed him in a favourable position for observing the connexion between the prices of tiro- visions and the happiness and employment of the people. He lived in the nudst of a dense population, in which he had been a distributor of work and wages when commercial and manufacturing derangements took place; and under such cir• cumstances he had always found that provisions advanced in price. On the other hand, when a revival in trade took place, prices fell, and the comforts of the working classes were largely increased. In the present more prosperous days, he had again been enabled to trace the connexion between abundance and employ- ment. In the midst, however, of this general prosperity, an alarm was felt, from the deficiency of the harvest and the state of the potato crop, that the price of food might rise; and he would ask any Member connected with the manufacturing districts to say if the prospect of an advance in the price of provisions did not cause his memory involuntarily to recur to the disastrous years of 1841 and '42 ? But he might be told that the abundance to which he had previously referred, and which was accompanied with so many advantages to the country generally, and especially to the working classes, had been coexistent with those restrictive laws, the consideration of which was proposed. Others might say that the abun- dance spoken of was a consequence even of those restrictive laws. He had no right to question the sagacity or sincerity of those persons who entertained these opinions; but his observation led him to believe, that when a Government under- took to control and regulate the supply of food, it would be difficult to spread the public table, profuse as it might be, so as to satisfy those who partook of it. The abundance which some might call sufficient, but which no one could call excessive, was after all but matter of comparison. With regard to the objection that this country might be made to depend on foreign countries for a supply of food, he did not attach any weight to it. It had been supposed that some vast confederacy of foreign nations might be formed against England, which at some critical moment might reduce her to a state of dependence. He did not think the occurrence of any such confederacy was at all likely. He did not think that any such raising of bucklers against this country ought to enter seriously into the calculations of Parliament. History taught another lesson. When England stood alone against the world in arms, was she altogether independent of foreign nations for her sup- ply of food? Why, the iron frame of Napoleon's Continental system yielded to the strenuous and irresistible pressure of mutual wants. In 1810 there was scarcity or apprehension of scarcity in this country,. and in that year 1,292,000 quarters of corn were imported from foreign countries; of which not less than 581,000 quarters came from France and Flanders: the men whom Napoleon had raised to the rank of Marshals were among the parties who provided that supply. The transition from the existing condition of things to the state which must fol- low the adoption of the principles he advocated, could not fail to involve many sacrifices; but he was glad to think that there never was a period in the history of the country, and he doubted whether any such would ever occur again, in which so many opportunities would be found of absorbing the temporary and local superfluity of labour by means of the great public works now in progress. As to relations with foreign countries, there had seldom been, in his opinion, a time more favourable for largely extending our intercourse in that direction, thereby promoting peace and good-will, and preventing the bad effects of national ani- mosities. None would benefit more than that higher class of manufacturers who bore the name of the landed interest Whatever the throes might be which ac- companied the adjustment, their remuneration would be ample in the removal of a state of intestine dissension, the existence of which he could not contemplate without apprehension. He might assume for the sake of argument that there had been proceedings in this country as dangerous and unconstitutional as the wannest advocates of protection could imagine. But he would ask, what had they to ex- pect from counter-irritation, aided with all the instruments and improvements which ingenuity and experience could suggest? A war of bribery and chicanery— a war of the Hoses in the reign of Victoria; which, in his opinion, could but terminate in one way, but which when terminated would leave the country torn by intestine divisions, and so exhausted as to attract the notice of foreign nations and the enemies of their common country to the spectacle of that exhaustion. These considera- tions were well worth the attention of Parliament. His apprehensions were not confined to the fate of those who he believed would be the more immediate sufferers from the continuance of the contests he had alluded to—the landed interest; he looked further. If he could not regard the great body of manu- facturers in the country, who exhibit great industry, sagacity, and intelligence, as unfit fortaking a share in the government of the country, he could wish them no more fatal gift than the monopoly of power in the state gained by question- able means—by some revolutionary though bloodless convulsion, and by weapons likely to be used in the contest he now contemplated. " I see special danger to them, though it is not unlikely that danger would affect other classes. There is something tenacious of life and enduring in land. The storms of popular com- motion may sweep over our our ancient land-marks, and the tide of popular con- vulsion may submerge them for a season; but the waters will retire, the moun- tain waves roll back, and the old limits and land-marks will reappear, and the fertility of prosperous seasons replace the ravages of disastrous years. I doubt whether it would be so with your abodes of peaceful industry." fhe trade of agitation was a mystery of no difficult attainment; and he could imagine no better pupil in that school than some man of liberal education, of ruined means, and no principle, who, goaded by a sense of wrongs, real or imaginary, might be led to become a leader of agitation in the manufacturing districts. Such a man with opportunity might make those chimnies and storied edifices tremble to their bases. There are dark spots and weak places in various parts of our social system: let us not be blind to them, or neglect the duty of exposing them, with the view of mending and improving them. Let us not fling in one another's teeth difficulties, remediable or irremediable' for the sole purpose of party or of fac- tion. Let us not fling in the face of one class a Wiltshire labourer, or a manufae- turine. labourer in the face of another. To meet the cases of both; to give them in the first instance food ; to give them other luxuries which many of them still need—air, water, drainage; to give them all the physical and moral advantages possible,—let that be our employment and our duty; and let us endeavour to per- form that office by ridding the country of those subjects of angry discussion to which I have referred."

Mr. BEatErr DENISON seconded the Address; remarking that he occu- pied that prominent position. in consequence of being the single county

representative of the largest constituency in the kingdom, who were waiting with much anxiety from the Queen's Speech, and with still more anxiety for a statement from Ministers of the measures they intended to bring forward.

Briefly alluding to the more prominent topics of the Queen's Speech, Mr. Denison expressed a hope that measures would be devised calculated to put an end to the fearful atrocities which prevail in Ireland. The most interesting

topic, however, was that which related to the relaxation of import-duties—" We have now had four years' experience of the abilities of the present Prime Minister, and of his view of commercial relations • and I think the House will admit that he has been upon the whole, most eminently sureessfal. I believe I am correct in

stating, that in the last four years reductions in the duties payable to the Customs and Excise have been made to the extent of between 4,000,000/. and 5,000,0001.; and that those reductions have been very nearly made up by the duties paid upon the increased quantity of goods imported into this kingdom. We hear of great facts% but to my mind this is one of the most astounding facts that ever I heard. I must confess, that to my mind it holds out the greatest possible encouragement to pursue the same course of reduction of duties upon goods to be imported from foreign parts; and I am bound to say, that I think they who have had the wisdom to devise and the courage topropose such reduc- tions are eminently entitled to the thanks of the public. Her Majesty has been

pleased to advise that we should pursue that system, and follow it up still further. I am quite of opinion—experience drives me to it, perhaps—(Laughter from the Opposition benches)—gentlemen on the opposite side seem to be amused at my

using the word but I should be ashamed of myself if I did not candidly confess that experience teaches me that that course is the right one." He re-

commended the utmost caution in ' out the changes, lest any class or

interest, should be injuriously affected. " ntertaining these opinions, I ought to say in my own defence, that as to what measures are to be proposed, I know

nothing. I have asked for no information. I want none—(Loud laughter)—in order to induce me to second the address to her Majesty. (Cheers.) I have per-

feet confidence in her Majesty's Government, that they will propose such measures as will deal out justice to all parties, and, I hope, liberality to all at the same time. I think that confidence should be extended to them until they state their measures to this House." Mr. Denison, however, reserved to himself the right of opposing any proposal of which he might disapprove.

The Address having been read from the chair, Sir ROBERT PEEL rose, and made a full explanation of the late Ministerial crisis, and also of his own views and measures.

He might have felt hurt at having been the object of much accusation on mere surmise—at having been condemned without a hearing: he made no reference to any particular expression—he did not even ask for a reversal of the sentence; but he asked for the opportunity, after condemnation, of explaining the motives for his conduct.

The immediate cause which led to the dissolution of the late Government in the early part of December, was that great and mysterious calamity the failure of the potato crop. It would, however, be uncandid to attribute undue importance to that one cause. " That particular cause appeared to me to preclude further delay, and to require immediate decision—decision not only upon the measures which it was necessary at the time to adopt, but as to the course to be ultimately taken with regard to the laws which govern the importation of grain. I will not assign to that cause too much weight. I will not withhold the homage which is due to the progress of reason and to truth, by denying that my opinions on the subject of protection have undergone a change. (Cheers from the Opposition.) Whether holding a private station or in a public one, I will assert the privilege of yielding to the force of argument and conviction, and acting upon the results of enlarged experience. It may be supposed that there is something humiliating in making such admissions: Sir, I feel no such humiliation. I should feel humiliation, if, having modified or changed my opinions, I declined to acknowledge the change for fear of incurring the imputation of inconsistency. The question is whether the facts are sufficient to account for the change, and the motives for it are pureand disinte- rested." Those who argue for removing impediments on an article of great consump- tion, such as corn, start with immense advantage: the natural presumption is in favour of free and unrestricted importation. All admit that high protection or prohibition for the benefit of any particular class is untenable. The argument in favour of protection must either be, that protection of native industry in all branches is in itself good; or that in &country burdened with an enormous debt and great taxation, domestic industry must be protected against foreign competition; or that the interests of the great body of the people are not committed to the question—wages rising and falling in a direct ratio with prices; or that the land is entitled to protection on account of peculiar burdens. The last is a question of justice rather than policy; but the evident answer to that argument is to re- move the burden. " Now, I want to deprive those who, arguing a priori, with- out the benefit of experience, have come to the conclusion that protection is objectionable in principle—I want to deprive them of none of the credit which is fairly their due. Reason, unaided by experience, brought conviction to their minds My opinions have been modified by the result of the experience of the last three years. I have had the opportunity of comparing the results which have followed during the last three years from that principle upon which yon have been acting for some years past—namely, the gradual removal of protection on domestic industry. I have had the opportunity of comparing the periods of abundance and comparatively low prices with periods of scarcity and high prices; and I am led to the conclusion that the main grounds of public policy on which protection has been defended are not tenable; at least I cannot maintain them. I do not believe, after the experience of the last three years, that the rate of wages varies with the price of food. I do not believe' that with high prices wages will necessarily rise in the same ratio. I do not be- lieve that a low price of food necessarily implies a low rate of wages. Neither can I maintain that protection to domestic industry is a necessary good. I said last year that I thought these protective duties were evils in themselves. I thought they ought not to be lightly abolished; that the system of protected in- dustry had grown up, and must be tenderly and cautiously dealt with : but it is utterly impossible for any men who have made the changes we have made in the tariff during the last four years, to contend that protection to industry is in itself and abstractedly a public good. Then, as to the other argument, which makes great impression on its first statement—that because we have a heavy debt and a high rate of taxation, we must be protected from competition with foreign industry—that argument also has been submitted to the test of the last three years; and, so far as the exaerience of that period can supply an argument, it is this—that a large debt and heavy taxation are best encountered by abundance and cheapness of provisions; that they rather alleviate than add to the weight of taxation. Let us take the result of the experience of the last three years; the result of OM- SIHRII7 diminished protection—on wages, on trade, and on revenue. "Fast, as to wages. Who can deny the fact, that during the three years that preceded the month. of October last prices were comparatively low? there was comparative cheapness and plenty, and yet at no period were the wages of labour higher than during that period. If you take the three preceding years, you will End high prices, and coexistent with high prices you will find low wages. Well, then, I have six years—I have during the first three years high prices and low wages, I have during the last three years low prices and high wages; and I cannot resist the conclusion that wages do not vary with the price of provisions. They do vary with the increase of capital, with the prosperity of the country, with the increased power to employ labour; but there is no immediate relation between wages and provisions—or if there be a relation it is in an inverse ratio. "Now as to trade. As I said, during the last four or five years we have been acting on the admitted principle of removing prohibitions—reducing duties—that

is, destroying protection to native industry. That has been the principle, whether right or wrong, on which we have acted—the removal of protection to native in- dustry. Now, what has been the result? I will give you the total amount of exports since the year 1839. The total value of British produce and manufactures

exported from the United Kingdom was, in 1839, i 53,000,0001.; in 1840, 51,000,0001.; in 1841, 51,000,0001.; in 1842, 47,000,0001.; in 1843, 52,000,0001.; in 1844, 58,000,000/ ; that is, the rise from the year when the great invasion

upon the• of domestic industry was made by Parliament was from 47,381,000 in 1842 to 58,500,0001. in 1844. But it may be said the China trade made all the difference. Now let us deduct the whole of that trade. In 1842 our exports to all the countries except China amounted to 46,411,00014 and in 1844 they increased by 10,000,0001., amounting to 56,000,0001. For the last year we can only have the account for eleven months preceding December.

In 1843 the exports of our principal articles of manufacture to all parts of the world, including China, amounted to 41,011,0001.; in 1844, to 47,312,0001.; and, during the first eleven months of 1845, to 47,764,0001. Such is the state of our foreign exports under this system of continued removal of protection.

"Now let me take the revenue; the results of the revenue as bearing on this question—ought there to be high protection in a country encumbered with an

immense public debt and heavy taxation ? In 1842,1 proposed a reduction in the Customs to the amount of 1,438,0001.; in 1844, I proposed a further reduction in the Customs-duties to the amount of 273,0001.; in 1845, to that of 2,418,0001. I estimated the total loss from these reductions at 4,129,0001. How have these expectations been realized ? Have 4,000,0001. been lost? The total amount of the loss has been 4500,0001. In the Excise last year there was a reduction of a million in duties-' thethewhole of the glass-duties, the whole of the auction-duty, were taken off. The loss on that occasion was estimated at 1,000,0001. Ob- serve, that was no mere reduction of duties; there was no expectation, therefore, of recovering the revenue by increased consumption. I felt confident, that al- though the glass and auction-duties were abolished, still, by vivifying other branches of industry, I should derive some compensation. What will be the fact on the 5th of April? Notwithstanding the total reduction, the absolute loss of a million, my firm belief is that the Excise will this year be more prosperous than ever. Notwithstanding these reductions, there has been a salient spring of prosperity which has supplied the void you caused by the remission of taxation. Well, then, with that evidence before me, could I contend that on account of high taxation or great debt you must necessarily continue high protective duties? I have shown you that my estimates as to loss in the Customs have been already falsified; that the Customs this year amount to nearly 20,000,0001.; that, com- paring the Customs revenue of 1845 with the Customs revenue of 1842, after that diminution of taxation to the extent of 4,000,0001, the Customs of this year, excluding from both years the revenue from foreign corn, are better by 100,0001. than in the former year. " But I will take more important considerations than those either of trade or re- venue-I take the state of crime in the country. My right honourable friend at the head of the Home Department stated that reductions had taken place in the number of commitments in the year 1842; in 1843 there was also a decrease; and the decrease in the commitments remarkable, in 1843 and 1844, continued in 1845. The total number of commitments in 1845 was 24,350, that is 2,237 less than in the lowest preceding year, 1842-a decrease of 5i per cent on the crimes of the preceding year. In 1843 there was a decrease of 5 per cent; in 1844, a decrease of 10 3-10 per cent; in 1845, a decrease of si per cent; and all this in an increasing population. This decrease of crime in the last year has taken place in all the chief manufacturing districts; and not only in all the chief manufacturing districts, but, with the exception of five, there has been a corresponding and almost equal decrease in all the chief agricultural dis- triCts. What is the state of Wales? In Wales the decrease of commitments is more remarkable than in almost any other part of the kingdom. So much for actual crime. With respect to crimes connected with sedition, discontent, and disaffection to the Government-why, in the last two years the office of the At- torney-General has been a sinecure. There has been no prosecution for seditious libel during the whole of the last year. Government has no right to take credit for lenity; it is because the crime of sedition did not exist. In 1840-'1-'2-'3,- listen to this, and seriously consider it, there were 1,257 persons committed on charges of seditious and riotous offences. In 1843-'4-'5 only 124 persons were committed so charged, instead of 1,257; while in the last year I believe there was not one. In 1845 there were 422 persons sentenced to transportation less than in 1842. In the last three years there were 1,701 persons sentenced to transporta- tion less than in the three preceding years. This has been during a period of comparative abundance and low prices. Is it possible to resist the inference, that employment, low prices, comparative abundance, contribute to the diminution of crime? Now, these are great social advantages: I will not say they have been promoted by, I say only they have been concurrent with, the diminution of pro- tection to domestic industry-concurrent with comparative abundance." Have they been purchased by any serious detriment to the agricultural inte- rest? " Let us take the four great articles in respect of which there has been a diminution of protection. Foreign flax has for many years been admitted at a very low duty into this country. What duty remained we remitted last year. There is now, therefore, a perfectly unrestricted import of foreign flax. In 1824, the duty on flax was 101. 14s. 6d. per ton: it is now absolutely nothing. The reduction having taken place, what was the effect on the price of flax? The price of fine flax in Belfast market in 1843 was 65s. to 70s.; in 1844 it was 63s. to 68s.; in 1845 from 65s. to 68s.; and in January 1846 from 70s. to 80s. There was no reduction then made that caused so much alarm and which it was pro- phesied would do so much injury, as the removal of the absolute prohibition on the importation of foreign cattle: prohibition has been succeeded by a very low rate of duty on importation: has serious injury been sustained through that re- duction? On the contrary-concurrently with increase of importation there has been increase in the price of the domestic articles. In 1844 there were imported 2,800 oxen and cows; and in eleven months of the year 1845 there were not fewer than 15,000 imported. Have prices in this country been affected either in a cor- responding degree or in any by this large importation? In 1844 the contract price for the victualling stores in the Navy for salt beef was 3/. 18s. 2d.; the con- tract price entered into for the Navy in December 1845 was, I regret to say, 61. as. 8d. The salt pork that was contracted for in 1844 was 31. 15s. 10d. a tierce; in 1845 it was 61.12s. The contract price for fresh beef for the Navy in 1844 was 11. 14s. 9d.; the contract price in 1845 was 21. 2s. 2d. Now, all this increase in price was attended with increased importation. One prophecy, if I recollect rightly, was, that there would be an importation into this country of 3,500,000 pigs, and that the price of salt pork would be immensely reduced. There was no article last year that caused so much alarm as lard. In 1840 97 hundredweight of foreign lard was imported into this country. In 1842 the duty was reduced from 8s. to 2s. a hundrweight, and there was then imported 48,312 hundredweight; in 1844, 76,000 hundredweight; in 1845, above 80,000 hundredweight. And what has been the price of domestic lard at Belfast during that period? In 1844 it was 48s. a hundredweight; in 1845 it was 67s.; and in January of the present year, notwithstanding the increase caused by this importation, the price has risen from 48s. in 1841 to 62s. On wool the duty has been totally abolished. In 1842, 45,880,000 pounds of foreign wool was imported; in 1844, 65,079,000 pounds; and in ten months of the last year it amounted to 65,216,000 pounds-all in consequence of the reduction of the duty. Now, what has been the price of wool? In 1842, the price of South Down was llid. per pound; long wool was 10d. per pound. In 1843, South Down wool was 11d; in 1844, it was Is. 2d.; long wool was also Is. 2d.; and in December 1845, eighteen months after the reduction, the price of South Down wool rose to ls. 4l d. per pound, and the price of common wool was ls. 2d per pound. Such has been the effect of those reductions that were made in 1842 and 1844, and which were regarded as a protection to domestic industry. So far as we have experience of the last three years, then, I have shown that, under the removal of protection to domestic industry, the great social interests of the country have been promoted, crime has been less, morality has been improved, and I could also bring conclusive proof that the public health has been promoted. Our na- tional trade has increased, and our exports have been greater than before: and these we have succeeded in effecting, not only without doing serious injury to those interests from which protection has been withdrawn, but I have shown that the change has been concurrent with an increase in the price of the articles. "Now, it is right I should state that, notwithstanding the conviction which this experience has brought home to my mind, yet my decided impression was, that on other grounds the charge of considering a change in the present Corn- law ought not to have devolved upon me. This I was firmly resolved upon-that I could not this session, on the motion of the honourable gentleman for the con- sideration of the Corn-laws-I could not, with these conviction; which, say as you will, I cannot withhold, have met that motion with a direct negative, I claim no aredit whatever for these arguments. My conviction has been brought about by the results of observation and experience. Those who have the merit of having formed their deductions from argument and reason are entitled to all credit on that account; but I claim no title to having made an impression by arguments drawn from any other source than that of experience and o6ervation. ICI could not have undertaken the defence of the Corn-laws either upon the public ground of this country being highly taxed, and protection therefore necessary, or on the ground that it was for the interest of the labouring classes that high prices should continue as the guarantee for high wages, so I could not have undertaken it upon the ground that interference with domestic industry must necessarily be to para- lyze our commerce. I wish most ardently to have the opportunity of stating to those friends who have honoured me on so many occasions with their confidence, that I can continue this conflict no longer-(Load cheers from Me Opposition benches)-that I must devolve it upon other persons more convinced of the strength of their arguments." He also should have wished that another Parliament should have had the opportunity of considering the question: but in the course of last autumn occurred that visitation of Providence, the consequences of which it is still difficult to foresee-the failure of the potato crop in Ireland and in many parts of England; and it became a question whether it was not desirable to take immediate steps for meeting the threatened evil. Government had instituted inquiries, and had received a great deal of correspondence on the subject; specimens of which Sir Robert Peel incorporated in his narrative. He cited letters written in the course of September, October, November, and December, stating the apprehensions of scarcity in Sweden, Russia, Poland, Germany, Belgium, Turkey, and Egypt. From Sweden to Egypt, from Riga to Constantinople, scarcity was dreaded. The letters reported also the efforts taken by the several Governments to provide for the emergency, by forbidding exportation, &c. In England the earliest account he received of the disease was from the Isle of Wight; next, a great salesman of London reported its existence in Kent; then its existence was reported in York- shire-in Damfriesshire. In Ireland the evil was peculiarly formidable; for a report by Mr. Lucas, Sir R. Routh, and Professor Kane, shows that practically 4,000,000 of the Irish people live exclusively on potatoes. The Lord-Lieutenant had sent over letters almost day by day. It was unnecessary to read the details -they were all concurrent. The passages read by Sir Robert Peel, beginning on the 17th of October, uniformly represented that the fresh discoveries of the diease in the plant were perpetually made; that the disease itself appeared to be spreading, even among the potatoes stored; that the greatest fears were enter- tained for the keeping of the stock till the next crop, and even for preserving sufficient forseed, for which one-eighth of a crop is needed. On the 27th October, Lord Heytesbury reports that " the people begin to show symptoms of discon- tent"; on the 11th November, that "a very bad spirit prevails in the provinces." If these reports were distrusted as being purely official, they were fully corrobo- rated by accounts, which Sir Robert Peel read, from the Royal Agricultural Improvement Society of Ireland, Lord Monteagle, a public meeting in Dublin over which the Duke of Leinster presided, and from Lord Clare. Dr. Lyon Playfair and Professor Lindley, two scientific gentlemen unconnected with Ireland, whom Government sent over to investigate, reported that one-half of the potatocrop had actually been destroyed, or had been rendered unfit to be the food of man. Sir Robert Peel now came to the explanation of what had occurred in the Cabinet. " There were two periods [in which the dissolution of his Cabinet and its recon- struction were mooted; one reaching from the 1st to the 6th of November, the other from the 25th ot November to the 6th of December: and, in justice to those who dissented from my opinions, I most say, that on any advice I gave, no inform ation derived from letters received since the 6th of December has or could have any bearing. Now, many Cabinets were held between the 31st of October and the 6th of December. On the 1st of November, there was no agitation, no peti- tions had been presented : but it appeared to me that these reports from the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland-the example of foreign countries-the example of Belgium, whose merchants had cleared the market at Liverpool of rice, almost in a day- justified the Government in taking measures before it was too late, either by opening the ports by an order in Council, or by calling Parliament together in a fortnight, to obviate the impending evil. That was the advice I gave on the 1st of November. There would have been an advantage in the plan of taking the responsibility of issuing an order in Council and trusting to obtain an indemnity from Parliament afterwards; and I was prepared to take that responsibility: I did not insist on that course, but stated that I was prepared to call Parliament together immediately, and advise Parliament that for a limited period the re strictions on importation should be suspended. I did not anticipate that this would compel a reconsideration of the tariff; but I considered that the effect of calling Parliament together during the period of the suspension of the duties would compel the reconsideration of this question. My advice at that period was not taken. Only three of my colleagues concurred with me; and we separated on the 6th of November, I reserving to myself the power of calling the Cabinet to- gether, with the hope of convincing them, that if my alarm was confirmed by subsequent events, my advice ought to be taken at a later period. So far as I was concerned, that was the time for me to have tendered my resignation. I can truly say, that if I did not do so it was upon public considerations that I acted. I felt that it was my duty to adhere to my post when there was a possibility of my advice being acceded to. I felt it was a positive duty not to evade the difficulty. I might have said, that overruled by the great majority of my col- leagues, I cannot take the responsibility of continuing in office: but I determined not to abandon my post. I determined to remain, that if there was a probability of an adjustment of this question I might bear my part: I determined, therefore, to remain. The Cabinet reassembled on the 25th ot November. The evidence I received in the interval did not in the slightest degree diminish my apprehensions. We had during the interval, with the unanimous consent of the Cabinet, taken ex- traordinary measures for acquiring certain information. We had issued a Com- mission for that purpose, and had taken precautions to prevent the spread of fever. On the 25th of November it became necessary to consider what instruc- tion should be issued to that Commission. Those instructions were determined on. I stated at that time, that it appeared to me that the issuing of these instructions was inconsistent with a determination to maintain the present Corn-laws; and that I could not consent to the issuing of those instructions to the Commission, without reserving on my own part the power to propose to Parliament some mea- sure of immediate relief; The instructions were issued; and again I brought under the consideration of the Cabinet what I had pressed on them on the 1st of November-namely, the suspension of the restrictions upon importation, either by means of orders in Council or by calling Parliament together. But at that period my own position, I admit, was entirely changed. The lapse of time, the increase of agitation, and other circumstances, had occurred, materially affecting my own position. I had been overruled in the Cabinet. The noble Lord opposite had in the interval written his letter; and, giving him credit for the best intentions, I must say it was a letter which, after what had occurred in the Cabinet, did most materially affect my position. After that letter I should have appeared to be adopting the proposition of the noble Lord. On the 22d of November his letter appeared, and that act of mine on the 26th of November would have appeared to be a servile acquiescence in his views. I would not have abandoned the post of danger if I had been supported by an unanimous Government; but that was not the result of our deliberations. One of my colleagues-one for whom I feel the sincerest regard, for whose public qualities I felt, and now feel, the highest re- spect-he took from the first the most entirely opposite views. His views were most sincere, I am sure, and adopted after great deliberation; and he was con- vinced that the danger had been greatly magnified, and that no sufficient reasons had been brought forward for having recourse to orders in Council. I thought that the adoption of extraordinary measures would compel the reconsideration of this question. That was my opinion. In these circum- stances, my noble friend would have felt it his duty, and he was not the only member of the Government who would have felt it his duty, to resign; and, be- lieving, as I did, that their resignation would be followed by that of others, and thinking too that it was highly probable that, in the attempt to settle this question, I should fail, and that, after vehement contests and the new combina- tions that would be formed, probably worse terms would be made than if some other person were to undertake the settlement of the question, I felt it my duty humbly to tender my resignation. That resignation was accepted by her Majesty; and her Majesty, of her own choice, immediately sent for the noble Lord the Member for London. The noble Lord undertook the task of forming an Adminis- tration. I believed that I was then in the situation of a private Member of Par- liament—that I was reduced once more to the ranks—that I was at liberty to act as I thought right: and I don't hesitate to say that in that capacity I would have done all that I could to promote the settlement of this question." There appear- ed every probability that the adjustment of the question would devolve upon Lord John llusss11; and as a private Member of Parliament, Sir Robert repeated, he would have done everything to facilitate its adjustment. At the Queen's invita- tion, Sir Robert went to Windsor, on the 20th of December, to take a final farewell. Before doing so, he learned that Lord John had failed to form a Govern- ment. On meeting Sir Robert, the Queen informed him, that so far from taking leave, she was obliged to require him to continue his services; and she asked whether he intended to persist in tendering his resignation? The colleagues who differed from him not having advised the formation of a Cabinet on the principles of Protection, and Lord John having failed, Sir Robert did not hesitate to with- draw his resignation. Accordingly, he resolved to meet Parliament prepared to submit those measures which he thought necessary to meet the emergency. "Having reason to expect that the noble Lord to whom I formerly referred would be precluded from lending his assistance to the Government as reconstructed, I felt it my painful duty to accept his resignation. My other colleagues felt it their duty to assist me in the arduous task I had undertaken."

Of the measures in question he had given notice for Tuesday next; and he would not anticipate the discussion. He wished to separate them from mere per- &Mal and party considerations. He deprecated a prejudgment. Those who thought that he had magnified the danger, he exhorted not to be too confident. "I advise them to recollect that we have yet seven months to pass before there will be any new supply of food. Better accounts may be coming in from some quarters; bat I ask them not to form too precipitate an opinion. Some persons had suggested the introduction of Indian corn as a remedy : that was impossible. At the present moment the duty on Indian corn is regulated by the duty on Bri- tish barley. This might seem very odd, but such was the law. Suppose that on the meeting of Parliament a proposition had been made to admit Indian corn duty- free, what would have been the consequence, supposing such a state of things to arise in Ireland which I anticipate as possible? What would be the effect upon

the great agricultural interest, supposing we had agreed to touch the present Corn-laws on some slight point like Indian corn, and refuse to admit the slightest relaxation hi regard to a nobler species of grain, namely, oats? For my own part, I would rather keep the present system intact, and refuse to tench Indian corn, than come down to the House with a proposal to relieve the pressure of scarcity by introducing Indian corn, ard fight the battle of protection with respect to other grain."

Sir Robert complained of some unjust treatment. "When, after the severe labour of last session, almost every hour of my time since has been devoted to watching chances and reading evidence night and day, so as to be able to guard against a heavy national calamity, I confess it does seem hard to find myself the Object of accusations of being unfaithful to the interests of the community in general, or to any special or peculiar interests." It bad been said that those who had placed him m power could remove him, and he was threatened with being displaced. There was a material mistake as to his position—both as to the extent of his obligation and the severity of the threatened penalty. Without un- dervaluing the distinction of his position, he might say that he owed no personal obligation to any man, or to any body of men, for being compelled to submit to the toil and to make the sacrifices which official duty exacts. He had served four Sovereigns: under George the Third his situation was so subordinate that it was immersible for him to attract the notice of his Sovereign; but under his three successors he had held some of the highest offices in the state. "I have served

them in critical times, and under difficult circumstances. They have each taken far too favomsble a view of any services I have rendered; but to each of those Sovereigns I have said, with tvery feeling of dutiful and grateful acknowledg- ment, that there was but one favour, one distinction, one reward they bad it in their power to confer—the simple assurance that I had been a loyal and faithful servant. If power have any value, it is because it gives increased opportunities for rendering public service. It is this which constitutes the real value of official power; and I think I can say with troth, that in intention, at least, I have not abused it. I and those with whom I act have tried to use it for the promotion of the public interest and the advancement of the common good. We cannot charge ourselves with having acted at variance with true principles of Conservative policy. We cannot think that it was at variance with Conservative 'cy that we attempted to repair the disasters of Cabal, and to restore in the In, army a spirit which had been checked by the misfortunes of Affghanistan. We cannot think it incon- sistent with Conservative policy that we laboured to assuage the animosities which have so long prevailed between this country and our _powerful neighbour. It surely is not inconsistent with Conservative policy that we have laboured to in- crease the foreign trade of the country by removing prohibitory duties—that we have reduced taxation and yet have increased revenue. Is it inconsistent with a true Conservative policy that we have discouraged agitation and extinguished sedition? not by coercive laws, but by creating an impression on the part of the great body of the people, that we, the rich and powerful, are ready to take our full share of the public burdens, and relieve them of oppressive taxation. The con- duct of Government is an arduous and a difficult undertaking. I may without irreverence be permitted to say., that, like our physical frame, our ancient con- stitution is ' fearfully and wonderfully made '—that it is no easy task to insure the harmonious and united action of Monarchy, Aristocracy, and a Reformed House of Commons. These are the objects which we have attempted to accom- plish, and I cannot think they are inconsistent with a pure and enlarged Con- servatism. Power for such objects is really valuable; but for my own part, I can say with perfect truth, that, even for these objects, I do not covet it. It is a burden far above my physical, infinitely beyond my intellectual strength. The relief from it with honour would be a favour, and not a punishment. B. ut while honour and a sense of public duty require it, I do not shrink from office. I am ready to incur its responsibilities, to bear its sacrifices, to confront its honourable perils; bat I will not retain it with mutilated power and shackled authority. I will not stand at the helm during the tempestuous night, if that helm is not allowed freely to traverse; I will not undertake to direct the course of the vessel by observations taken in the year 1842. I will reserve to myself the unfettered power of judging what will be for the publics interest. I do not desire to be the hlinister of England; but while I am Minister of England I will hold office by no servile tenure; I will hold office unshackled by any other obligation than the of consulting the public interests and providing for the public safety." [Sir RoLert was frequently cheered throughout his spercli, especially by the Opposition: when he sat down the cheering was loud and long.] Lord Joutst RUSSELL thought it necessary to rise at an early period of the debate, to explain what his own conduct had been during the recent negotiations. He had applied, through Sir Robert Peel, for her Majesty's permission ; and had not only received it, but an assurance also from Sir Robert that it would perfectly accord with his convenience that the ex- planation should be made at the commencement of the session.

Lord. John proceeded to explain the circumstances under which the letter, re- ferred to by Sir Robert Peel as having caused him embarrassment, had been written. "It happened to me, in consequence of private affairs, to go to Edin- burgh at the latter end of October last. Early in November, the Lord Provost and Corporation of Edinburgh did me the honour to confer on me the freedom of that city, and invited me to a public meeting to receive it. I addressed those Who conferred on me that honour; and at the same time I took especial care not

to refer in my speech to any measures that might at the time be under consider- ation. The Lord Provost expressed to me immediately afterwards his regret that I had not expressed my opinions on the subject of the Corn-laws; and he added, that it was the wish of a number of the citizens of Edinburgh to give a public dinner, to which I should be invited to attend. I told him I was unwilling to receive that honour; and that, among other reasons, having formed a very strong opinion as to the course which ought to be pursued as to the Corn-laws, I could neither be silent in justice to my own opinion, nor could I declare fully and freely that opinion without some risk of embarrassing the public councils of my Sove- Me. But I found, i

by the public !prints and by the London Gazette, that her Majesty's servants had met; that they had been in esnsultation fel- many days; that no result appeared; that it was confidently reported that no proposition had been adopted, or even made; and there was also the regular announcement in the Gazette of the further prorogation of Parliament. Under these circumstances, I did think that the Ministers were not performing their duty to their Sovereign and to their country." His opinion was that Parliament ought to be called together to consider the Corn-laws; the case of Ireland as regarded the supply of food being particularly pressing. Sir Robert Peel, according to the statement made that evening, had entertained the Caine opinion, and in conjunction with three of his col- leagues had expressed that opinion in the Cabinet. From the inaction of the Govern- ment he supposed that no decision had been come to, and he considered it necessary to publish his letter. It had been supposed by some persons of low minds that his letter was intended as an advertisement for office; but nothing was farther from his thoughts. Shortly after its publication, Ministers resigned • and he received her Majesty's commands to proceed to Osborne House in the Isle of Wight. He felt that, in ordinary circumstances, the only thing lie could do was to decline the commission; the party to which he belonged being in a minority of from 90 to 100 in the House of Commons. " Sir, I was no sooner admitted to an audience of her Majesty, than she informed me she had sent for me to undertake the formation, of a new Administration. I at once stated to her what I now state, that those I acted with were in a minority. Her Majesty replied by putting into my hand paper, which she said the right honourable gentleman had given to her just be- tore—the day before, I believe; stating generally the reasons why he had resigned, and stating also that he would be ready, in his private capacity, to give every assistance and support to whatever new Ministry her Majesty might choose for the settlement of the question of the Corn-laws. Sir, I immediately stated to her Majesty, that the perusal of that paper altered the state of the question • and that if her Majesty would permit me 1 would consult those I was in the habit of acting with, and ascertain from them what their sentiments were as to our duty to her Majesty. I immediately came back to London; where I consulted a few persons who were in reach, and who were of opinion that it was very desirable, if possible, to know exactly the nature of the measure which the right honourable gentleman had in contemplation. The right honourable gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Department was good enough to call on me, and to inform me generally of the state of this country and of Ireland, and to give me all the information it was desirable for me to know. I stated to him the wish of my col- leagues. He next day stated to me that the right honourable Baronet, now at the head of the Government did not think it would be convenient for the public ser- vice that he should state the details of the measures he proposed on the subject of the Corn-laws. I then again called together those with whom I am in the

habit of acting, and stated that I would endeavour to frame an outline of a measure on the Corn-laws, and communicate it to the right honourable

gentleman, in order to ascertain whether it was a measure which would meet with his support. Now, I may be asked, and therefore I will state it at once, what prospect I could have of carrying any measure of the kind." Although fully aware of the difficulties which beset any attempt on his part to carry on the Government, he considered that the settlement of the Corn-laws would be of so much advantage to the country that he should be justified in en- countering great risks to attain it. But there was another point to be considered. Supposing he was to propose the settlement of the Corn-laws, should he do so with- out endeavouring to get such a majority as would influence the House of Lords; or should he resort to a dissolution of Parliament? It appeared to him, that if it were possible to obtain the wished for settlement without having recourse to a general election, it would be much better to do so. "But it was impossible that I could obtain such concurrence in this House, unless I had not only the support of those who agree with me, and of those who support the cause of absolute free trade, but also that of the right honourable gentleman and a considerable number of those who usually support his measures. Sir Robert Peel had declined, for cogent reasons, to state the details of the measures he intended to bring forward under the responsibility of his own Government; and therefore Lord John had to consider what kind of measure it would be the duty of his Government to propose, should he succeed in forming one. "The ground on which, in the letter to which the right honourable Baronet has referred, I stated my opinion that the Cora.. laws ought to be settled, were, first, that the proposal of any duty at present, without a provision for its extinction in a short period, would only prolong a contest, already sufficiently fruitful of animosity and discontent. I stated also, that neither the Government nor the Legislature could ever regulate the corn- markets with the benefit that would result from entire free trade; but also said, let the Ministers propose such a revision of taxation as would in their opinion render the public burdens more just and equal, and let them add any other regu- lation which a cautious and scrupulous forbearance might suggest. Those were the general principles on which I proposed the consideration of the question as to the Corn-laws." Perhaps his views would be best explained by reading a letter which he addressed to her Majesty- " Chesbarn Place, 16th Dec. 1845. " Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your ble;caty, and has the honour to submit to your Majesty the following considerations. " Sir Robert Peel's letter to your Majesty, communicated to Lord John Russell at Osborne House, offers the support of Sir Robert Peel to his successors, provided their measures should be founded on certain principles which are mere explained, and framed in a spirit of caution and forbearance towards the interests to be attected. " The measures which Sir Robert Peel had In contemplation appear to have been the present suspension of the duties on corn ; a repeal of the Corn-laws at no remote

period, precededby a diminution of duties ; relief to the occupiers of land from burdens by which they are peculiarly affected, as far as it may be practicable.

" Upon lull consideration of these proposals, Lord John Russell is prepared to assent to the opening of the ports, and to the fiscal relief which it was intended to afford.

" But upon maturely weighing the second prop al, that by which duties would, after a suspension or temporary repeal, namely, be reimposed and again diminished, there appears to him to be grave objections to such a measure.

The advantage given thereby to the land appears to him more apparent than real ; the uncertainty of prices in future years will be aggravated, and the prospect of a com- plete free trade would be still kept in the distance ; the prospect alarming the fanner, and the distance irritating the merchants and manufacturers.

"In this view he finds that many persons deeply engaged to the maintenance and support of the agricultural class entirely participate.

" So great an object as the settlement of Oils question might indeed have been held sufficient to justify the support of Sir Robert Peel's Administration, had they proposed such a measure. But, as Lord John Russell is placed at present, he could not himself propose a measure against which the weight of argument, as well as public opinion, appears to him to preponderate. " Had the harvest been plentiful and corn cheap, it might have been very advisable to have diminished the duties gradually ; but the restoration of a duty after suspension has all the appearance of the reenactment of a protective law. " Lord John Russell humbly submits to your Majesty, that should the proposal of an Immediate repeal, instead of immediate suspension and ultimate repeal of the Corn- law, preclude Sir Robert Peel from affording that support to the new Government which he so spontaneously and handsomely offered in his letter of the tear of December, Lord John Russell must humbly decline the task so graciously confided to him by your Majesty.

" Lord John Russell concurs with the reasoning of Sir Robert Peel, which shows the inexpediency of pledging him to the outline of a series of measures. " The measures for fiscal purposes, therefore, would have to be considered in detail by those alone who may be in your Majesty's service.

" Loni John Russell trusts that your Majesty will attribute the reluctance which he feels to undertake the Government, without a previous knowledge of the opinion of Sir Robert Peel, to his very deep sense of the injury the country may sustain from the refection of a measure of such vital importance ; and not to a desire to obtain a security for those who may be hi power." "Her Majesty," continued Lord John, "was graciously pleased to answer my letter the same evening, informing me that she had sent to Sir Robert Peel, and that she understood the motives by which I was guided in endeavouring to pro- cure support fur the great measure which I had undertaken to propose. All I shall say in this place is, that those rumours which were circulated, that I was unable to bring those I consulted to an agreement on the subject of the Corn- laws, were utterly unfounded. Those I consulted—all, with the exception of my brother the Duke of Bedford, persons who bad belonged to her Majesty's Privy Council, and had been in the Cabinet daring either the present or the firmer reign—entirely concurred with me in the sentiments expressed in my letter. Her Majesty next day desired I would attend her at Windsor Castle; and when I then explained the difficulty which Ifelt, she put into my hands a letter from the right honourable Baronet, which, if he has no objection,' will read."

Sir ROBERT PEE!,—" I have no objection."

Lord JOILN RUSSELL then read the following letter from Sir Robert Peel to the Queen-

" Whitehall, Dec. 17, 1845. "Sir Robert Peel presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and takes the earliest opportunity of acknowledging the receipt of your Majesty's letter of yesterday, which reached him at a late hour last night.

" Sir Robert Peel feels assured that your Majesty will permit him humbly to refer to the communications he has addressed to your Majesty since his tender of resignation, as an evidence of his earnest desire to cooperate in a private capacity in the adjustment of the question of the Corn-laws.

" In the letter of Lord John Russell to your Majesty, he expressos his concurrence in the reasoning of Sir Robert Peel, which shows the inexpediency of pledging Sir Robert Peel to the outline of a series of measures connected with the settlement of that question.

" Lord John Russell requires, at the same time, that Sir Robert Peel should give asearances, which amount substantially to a pledge, that he will support one of those measures, namely, the immediate and total repeal of the Corn-laws.

" Sir Robert Peel humbly expresses to your Majesty his regret that he does not feel it to be consistent with his duty to enter upon the consideration of this important question in Parliament fettered by a previous engagement of the nature of that required from him."

Lord John thought that Sir Robert Peel had misapprehended his meaning. He did not want an absolute pledge from him. "What 1 wished from the right ho- nourable gentleman was, that he should not feel himself precluded from taking the measure into consideration when brought into Parliament. The letter I have just read, though it proceeds on a misunderstanding of my letter, seems to amount substantially to this—that the right honourable gentleman was quite ready to consider, and did not regard himself as precluded from supporting such a measure, if brought before Parliament by her Majesty's Ministers. On considering that letter, those with whom I consulted, as well as myself, were of opinion, that though the tusk w:15 one subject to great risk, though it was full of danger and hazard, yet, placed as we were, we should run that peril, and assure her Majesty that we would undertake the task." He was fully aware of the heavy responsi- bility which attached to him in his attempt to form a Government; but he wished to see the Corn-law question settled without a violent struggle between opposing interests. He knew that many men of Liberal politics, as well as men who cared nothing about politics, were disposed to support Sir Robert Peel if he brought forward a measure for the repeal of the Corn-laws. On the other hand, he knew that there were many men who would follow Sir Robert Peel so as to retain him in power, but who would not vote for any measure founded on the same prin- Ciple brought forward by another. He also knew that he might rely upon the support of such men as the mover of the Address, if they thought that the pro- posed measure was suited to the circumstances of the country. Still, the difficulties to be encountered were great; and he felt it necessary that those who were to joie hini in the Government should be prepared to encounter the Opposition which to a certainty awaited them. This assurance he received. "I therefore wrote to her Ma- jesty, on the 18th December, that I was ready to undertake the formation of an Ad- ministration; but on the following morning, after I had endeavoured to make my arrangements, I found that one of those with whom I had consulted had objections which it was impossible to overcome, and that I should lose his assistance in the Administration which I proposed to fonn. I do not think it necessary to enter on the grounds of those objections: it is quite enough to say that they had power to deprive me of the assistance of his services. His name has been frequently men- tioned, and I see not why I should not state that I refer to Lord Grey. With the highest respect for Lord Grey, for his great talents, for his courage and his honesty, I should nevertheless not have thought, on an ordinary occasion, that the loss of a person even of his importance should have prevented me from under- taking the formation of a Government. But when I take in view the risk which was to be encountered, and the necessity which existed that we should all go to- gether on this great question,—when I considered that my noble friend was among the first of those acting with me in Parliament who declared that he re- garded no other measure but complete free trade in corn adequate to meet the exigencies of the country,—when 1 put all these things together, I did think that the task of forming a Government, leaving out my noble friend, was a task which I was not justified in attempting. I could not but consider, that if my noble friend was absent from that Ministry, all kinds of interpretations would be put upon his absence, and the Ministry be weakened at its very commencement. Con- sidering, therefore, the absolute necessity, as I thought there was, for complete agreements—considering the importance of the person who could not take a part in the Administration —I came to the conclusion that it was necessary for me to give up the task which her Majesty had graciously confided to me." He accord- kgly waited upon the Queen, on the morning of the 20th December, and made

following communication- "Chesham Place, 20th Dec. 1845. " Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has the honour to state that he has found it impossible to form an Administration. " Lord John Russell was aware from the first moment when your Majesty was pleased to propose to him tbiscommissiou, that there were very great difficulties in the way, which it required the most cordial cooperation on the part of his friends, and the Sim support of a huge portion of those who followed Sir Robert Peel, to surmount.

" Lord John has had solely In view the settlement of the question of the Corn-laws, by which the country is so much agitated.

" Those who have served your Majesty and your Royal predecessor in Cabinet offices, during the Administrations of Lord Grey and Lord Melbourne, who were now In politi- cal connexion with Lord John Russell, were consulted by him. They agreed on the principles by which they would be guided in framing a measure for the repeal of the Corn-laws. Thus one great difficulty was surmounted. But, as the party which acts with Lord John Russell is in a minority in both Houses of Parliament, it was necessary to ascertain how far they were likely to obtain the support of Sir Robert Peel.

" Tour Majesty is acquainted with all that has passed on this subject. Lord John Russell is quite ready to admit, that Sir Robert Peel has been willing from the com- mencement to the end to diminish the difficulties in the course of a new Government prepared to attempt the settlement of the Corn-laws. Bat Sir Robert Peel could not, of course, rely on the support of his political friends, should the proposed measure be in their eyes dangerous and unwise. " In this uncertainty of °Wattling a majority in the House of Commons, it was abso- lutely necessary that all those who were prominent in the political party to which Lord Jobe Russell is attached ahead give their zealous aid, and act In concert in the new Administration.

" Lord John Russell has, in one instance, been unable to obtain this concert; and he must now consider that task as hopeless, which has been from the beginning hazardous. " Lord John Russell is deeply sensible of the embarrassment caused by the present state of public affairs. He will be ready, therefore, to do all in his power, as a Member of Parliament, to promote the settlement of that question which, in present circum- stances, is the source of so much danger, especially to the welfare and peace of Ireland. " Lord John Russell would have formed his Ministry on the basis of a complete free trade in corn, to be established at once without gradation or delay. He would have

accompanied that proposal with measures of relief .to a considerable extent of the occu-

piers of land from the burdens to which they are subjected. But he will be little dis- posed to insist, as a Member of Parliament, on what may seem to your Majesty's ad-

visers an impracticable coarse. The country requires, above all things, an early and peaceable settlement of a question which, if not soon settled, may in an adverse state of affairs cause a fearful convulsion."

" I owe," proceeded Lord John, " a debt of the deepest gratitude to her Ma- jesty for the gracious manner in which she intrusted me wills the task of forming an Administration, and for the facilities which she was always ready to afford with the view of lessening the difficulties of the task I had undertaken. Her Majesty has imposed upon me a burden of obligation which I cannot sufficiently acknowledge. I would say, in reference to the right honourable gentleman's offer

of assistance, that it was entirely spontaneous • and as to his subsequent commu- nications, there was nothing that tended to spontaneous; my task more difficult." He was exceedingly sorry at not having been able to overcome the objections of Lord Grey: it was due to him to state, that his objections were not of a personal na- ture, but originated in his sense of public duty. As to the Corn-laws, Lord John Russell expressed his surprise at seeing it alleged at Protection meetings, that the danger of scarcity had been exaggerated,

and that therefore the protecting laws should remain untouched. Did those who used such language never carry their thoughts forward? Was there any one who had watched events that would say the law of 1842 was sufficient of itself to provide for the food of the people in 1846? The House had just heard what the author of that law had stated as the result of his observation and experience. As regarded Ireland, Lord John remarked that he entertained the hope, had he succeeded in removing the restrictive duties on corn and various manufactures, of being able to propose a comprehensive scheme which would have laid the foundation of future peace in that country. Allusion had been made in the Queen's Speech to the necessity of measures to meet the murderous outrages

which prevailed; and he should be ready to support measures calculated to sup- press such crimes. He was sorry to say, however, that he did not think that anything had been done by the present Government to establish that peace, or procure for England that affection which were so much to be desired.

LordJohn concluded by stating, that whether in office or out of office, he should be ready to give his hearty assent to measures calculated to benefit the country, without reference to the proposer.

Mr. DISRAELI stood forth to protest against Sir Robert Peel's course, in the name of Protection.

He taunted the Premier with the apologetical speech he had just delivered. What could be thought of a statesman who, having served under four Sovereigns,

came forward and declared, that after an observatioh of three years he had found

it necessary to change his convictions on a subject which must have presented itself for more than twenty years to his notice? He found it difficult to find a parallel case; but he would mention one incident as being somewhat in point. ' I remember when that great struggle was taking place when the existence of the Turkish empire was at stake, the Sultan of that day—a man of great energy and fertile resources—determined to make a last effort to maintain his empire,

fitted out an immense armament. It consisted of many of the finest ships that were ever built; the crews were picked; the officers were chosen and selected with

the greatest care, and were rewarded before they fought. Such an armament

had never left the Dardanelles, as the gallant Admiral opposite (Sir Charles Napier) well knows, since the days of Solyman the Great. The Sultan embraced the Admiral; all the Muftis prayed for the success Of the expedition, as the Muftis in England prayed for success at the last general election. Away went the arma- ment to battle; and what was the consternation of the Sultan when the Lord High Admiral steered at once into the enemy's port. The Lord High Admiral in that instance was much misrepresented: he too was called a traitor. But he vindi-

cated his conduct, saying, The only reason for my acceptance of the headship was that I might terminate the contest by betraying my master.' And these

reasons, offered by a man of great plausibility, and of great powers of discussion, bad their effect. This man, I believe, is at this moment First Lord of the Ad- miralty at Constantinople, under the new reign." [All this, and many other passages in Mr. Disraeli's speech, provoked frequent laughter.]

Sir Robert Peel did not come up to Mr. Disraeli's notion of a great statesman! a great statesman was a man representing a great idea, who developed it and impressed it upon the mind and conscience of a nation. Mr. Disraeli did not care what might be the position of a man who never originated an idea—who watched the atmosphere—who took observations, and when he found the wind in a certain quarter trimmed that way. Sir Robert Peel had told the House that ancient monarchies and proud aristocracies were sometimes inconvenient lumber: but he did not always say so—" I remember, that at that time when it was necessary to adopt some means of managing the Reformed constituencies, the great mmd which was to guide a distracted people delivered itself of an oracle

which ought really to rank with the sayings. of the seven wise men of Greece-

' Register, register, register!' We all registered. We registered to save the Constitution; men registered to save the Corn-laws; they registered to save the Church. We went on registering, and the right honourable gentleman went on making practical speeches—a great orator before a green table, thumping a red box." Who was it that opposed Catholic Emancipation, against arguments at

least as cogent as any member of the League can adduce? The right honourable gentleman, Sir Robert Peel, was always ready with his arguments and amend- ments, with his fallacies ten thousand times exploded, and with his Virgilian quotations in order to elicit a cheer. But when Mr. O'Connell took his seat for Clare, Sir Robert " reconsidered" the subject.

The position of the Cabinet was unparalleled in British history ; and what was to be the result? " On Tuesday we are to know. 'Coming events cast their shadows

before.' I suppose no gentleman in sane mind can possibly doubt what the result will be. We, who resisted the moderate proposal of the Whigs—we, who were confident in the experience of an individnal who had served four Sovereigns,

George the Third, George, the Fourth, William the Fourth, and Victoria—we, v tio believed that such a man could not make such gross and palpable blunders- - e are to attend the catastrophe of Protection. The Whigs will be chief mourners: they weep over an infant which was an abortion, but which still excited. all the sweetest feelings of maternity. We follow, mourning over an offspring that has been assassinated; and the nurse that we engaged has done it all We saw her fondling it, and exclaiming What a darling! did you ever see any thing of its age at all equal to it?' But the nurse, in a fit of patriotic phrensy, dashes its brains out, and comes down to give the master and mistress an account of this terrible murder."

Mr. Disraeli continued to deal out his sarcasms in great abundance; concluding with an appeal to Members to adhere to their principles, and by this means main- tain the integrity of public men.

Lord NonTn.LAND protested, in the name of Ireland, against the repeal of the Corn-laws.

Mr. MILES approved of allowing the Address to pass without an amend- ment, but not of the Ministerial plans—

He had listened with surprise and regret to the speech of Sir Robert Peel; and he would ask, whether those who were returned in 11341 to support the Premier in

a particular line of policy ought now to abandon that policy, and place themselves on the lowest seat of ignominy? Was everything to be sacrificed at the foot of this idol? The Corn-law of 1842 had exceeded the expectation of its framer, and the agriculturists had a right to suppose that he would have adhered to it. The Agricultural party were not indifferent to the sufferings of their fellow countrymen, and would willingly assent to the temporary opening of the ports if the case required it. He begged to say that the strongest constitutional op- position should be givento the proposed measures.

Colonel Sierucutr was neither surprised nor deceived by the conduct of Sir Robert Peel; for he had been so often deceived by him on questions of religion as well as agriculture, that he was determined to be deceived no more. He would distinctly assert, that if there was one man more likely than another to destroy the country, it was the present Prime Minister.

The Address was agreed to, and ordered to be committed. The House adjourned at half-past ten.

Proceedings were resumed in the House of Lords at five o'clock. The Address in reply to the Queen's Speech was moved by the Earl of Hosts. He recapitulated the leading topics, but avoided entering into detail on the commercial recommendations, lest it should bring on a premature discus- sion and raise party-spirit.

Lord DE Roe seconded the Address.

The question was then put, and declared by the Loam CHANCELLOR to be carried.

The Duke of RICHMOND rose hastily, and remarked that he was not at all surprised at the effort that had been made to stop discussion. The Loan CHANCELLOR begged that the Duke would not state that he wanted to stop the discussion. He put the question deliberately and slowly. The Duke of RICHMOND proceeded angrily with his objections.

He had heard enough in the Speech to know that the Minister intended to Withdraw protection from the industry of the country. He thought that this was in violation of a solemn compact entered into with the agriculturists in 1842. For himself, he could see no difference between the Government and the Anti-Corn-law League; and he saw no reason why Mr. Cobden should not be created a Peer. He hoped the House of Lords would stand true to the country, and not allow themselves to be intimidated by the League. Sir Robert Peel de- clared in 1889, that if the Corn-laws were abolished, the farmers would require the same thing to be done with all other protecting duties: and if such should be the case, what was to become of the public creditor? He entered his solemn pro- test against the clause which obviously referred to the Corn-laws, but would not move an amendment. He thought the House was entitled to know why the Government had resigned.

The Duke of WELLINGTON reminded their Lordships, that there was no proposition before them except that which asked them to take into consi- deration such measures as may be submitted for their consideration. With regard to the Duke of Richmond's question as to the reasons which had led to the resignation of Ministers, .he had to state that no explanation of the kind could be given without the previous consent of the Sovereign. The Duke of Richmond should have given notice of his intention to ask the question. The Duke of RICHMOND wondered that the Duke of Wellington had not anticipated the question, and asked permission from the Queen to answer it. As it was, he could only give notice of his intention to repeat the question; but he would ask Lord Stanley whether he had not got the Queen's .consent to state the reasons why he had left the Government?

Lord STANLEY replied in the affirmative—

He had received her Majesty's permission to make such explanations as he might consider necessary: but it was impossible for him to make the statement wished for by the Dake of Richmond without divulging the measures contem- plated by the other members of the Cabinet He might state, however, that there was only one question upon which he differed from his colleagues, and it had re- ference to the degree and amount of protection to be afforded to agriculture. Upon that question a measure was proposed, which he considered to be neither justified by the circumstances of the country nor called for by any change which had taken place since 1842; and he would not undertake to be a party in sub- mitting it to their Lordships. He had no alternative but to act as he had done, or to sacrifice his own consistency and honour. In making this statement, he begged to be understood as not casting the slightest imputation on his colleagues.

The Earl of HARDWICKE declared his disapproval of the Ministerial progress towards free trade.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE had, like Lord Stanley, received the Queen's permission to make an explanation as to the part which he had taken in the recent changes; but till a statement had been made by a member of the present Government, he felt that he could not go into any details regarding himself. Lord Lansdowne expressed his hearty concur- rence in that part of the Speech which referred to the measures adopted by the Government to preserve peace with the United States.

Lord BROUGHAM made a long and discursive speech; of which we can barely indicate the heads.

He agreed with Lord Lansdowne as to the course adopted by the Government in reference to the Oregon dispute. As to free trade, he scarcely required to re- mind their Lordships of the opinion he entertained. He did not advocate the abolition of the Corn-laws for the purpose of lowering the price of grain and food —which he never expected to be the result—but as the means of remodelling our whole commercial system. This opinion he had often advocated; and he trusted the time was now near at hand when it would be adopted and acted upon by Par- liament He disapproved of the manner in which the friends of free trade were =rang the question. He could never agree in the opinion expressed by some of them that the Corn-laws were the cause of famine, disease, and crime and death. As to the League, if any one should ask him, " Are their means your means ? " he would unhesitatingly answer, "God forbid 1" From the members of that body he differed even more than from those who stood forward in support of pro- tection. The proceedings of the League in the way of creating votes were not illegal—no statute was violated; but their conduct was unconstitutional. They had appropriated money to buy 2,000 votes intone county. To violate the sanctity of the Representative branch of the Legislature by the force of gold, was as gross a breach of constitutional law as it would be to overwhelm the hereditary branch by an exercise of the Royal prerogative. The question of consistency bad been brought under notice by Lord Stanley; but he had no respect for those who pro- fessed to bold in utter abhorrence a person who as he grew older became wiser. He concurred heartily in that part of the Address which referred to Ireland; and he hoped that all party feelings would be cast to the winds, and that Parlia- ment would strengthen the hand of the Irish Executive Government. The Earl of MA.LEIESBURY denied that the majority of the people were in favour of free trade.

The Earl of RADNOR contended that the League were acting quite in accordance with constitutional law.

He had subscribed to the fund himself; and considered that he was acting con- fitutionally when he did so. The League did not buy votes; they only persuaded

people to avail themselves of the franchise. Lord Brougham bad denounced agitation, but had he never heard of Anti-Slavery agitation? The Marquis of SALISBURY and the Duke of BEAUFORT disapproved of the apprehended Free-trade policy. The Duke of RICHMOND withdrew his notice to question the Duke of Wellington on the subject of the Ministerial resignation. Earl DELAWARE having communicated to the House that the Queen would receive the Address at two o'clock on Saturday, their Lordships adjourned, at nine o'clock, till one o'clock, today.

NEW WRITS have been ordered to issue for the following places, the tatives of which have resigned—Selkirk, in the room of Mr. AlexanderRe?rriengelicl■-; Cork City, Sergeant Murphy; Cashel, Sergeant Stock; East Sussex, Mr. George Darby; Midhurst, Sir Horace Seymour. Also, for Newark, Mr. Gladstone having accepted office; for Bate, Mr. James Stuart Wortley having been appointed Judge-Advocate-General; and for the West Riding, in the room of Mr. John Stuart Wortley, who succeeded to the Peerage.

CONDITION OF THE POOR. Lord ASHLEY has given notice, that on the 29th instant, he will move for leave to bring in a bill to reduce the hours of working of young persons in factories to ten in the day. Also, at some future period, to bring under consideration the state of the juvenile population in many parts of London, Westminster, and Southwark.