NEWS OF THE WEEK.
THE Lords have at last fairly entered into the main business of the session, with debates on the new Corn-law; which was read a second THE Lords have at last fairly entered into the main business of the session, with debates on the new Corn-law; which was read a second
time in the Upper House on Monday, was taken in Committee on Tuesday and Thursday, and read • a third time last night. Its progress was not unopposed ; but the Whigs did not affect to have
a majority in that House even when they had glorious majorities of several units in the other. The debates differed considerably in character from those of the more popular assembly : they were upon the whole quieter, less desultory, far less protracted, pro- ceeding upon simpler grounds, and exhibiting less numerous but not less marked divisions of party. All the influences which had been brought to bear upon the bill in its tedious progress through the Lower House seem to have been left behind on its entrance to the House of Lords ; except one, the influence of Sir ROBERT PEEL. The discipline which is observable in his presence appears to ex- tend to the section of the Cabinet in the other branch of the Legis- lature—the distinct and level exposition of the Ministerial measure by Lord RIPON so closely followed the general scheme of Sir ROBERT'S, yet without any of those sallies and turns which mark originality, that the Earl's address had the air of a message from the Premier—as if the utterer were merely performing a vicarious function. The arguments with which it was supported by other speakers were in like manner of the sort current for the oc- casion. There was a remarkable exception to the rule, which illus- trated it by contrast : the Duke of WELLINGTON occupied a very cu- rious position in the debate. His observations were meagre and life- less : except on oue or two points with which be isfamiliar, such as his favourite military reason based on a dread of foreign depend- ence, he spoke wide of the mark, like one having little knowledge of the subject and little interest in it. He seemed to consider him- self a bystander ; as though, having been told that the measure was necessary, he had given a passive consent, but only interfered for form's sake, and left the business to others. The Ministe- rial party really engaged with the matter in hand were sim- ply the representatives of Sir ROBERT PEEL. The lead on behalf of the mere agriculturists was taken neither by the BUCKINGHAM nor the CLEVELAND nor the RICHMOND, but by the knight. errant of politics, Earl STANHOPE ; who opposed the second reading in a fierce and bitter denunciation of Sir ROBERT PEEL and his supporters among the Commons, for having deceived and betrayed the agricultural interest : a charge which he made more easily than proved; and he could procure but sixteen Peers to agree with him in postponing the bill for six months—that is, throwing it out. The Duke of BUCKINGHAM, in a curt, insipid - speech, made a pro forma opposition to the bill. The Duke of CLEVELAND fairly yielded, and gave in his reluctant adhesion to the measure. The country gentlemen have proved that they have lost their strength for the active warfare of politics in the House of Lords as well as in the other Chamber. Lord MELBOURNE re- asserted the Whig policy, in a resolution moved on going into Comttuttee, couched in general terms, and supported in an address marked by all the Viscount's blandness and more than his usual ingenuous unconcernedness. He performed the ceremony of re- citing a speech and heading a division, for the credit of the Whig party, and to avoid confessing that they are hors de combat : but he avowedly wished the Ministerial measure to proceed, and seemed really to care very little what happened. Lord BROUGHAM put a characteristic string of resolutions, framed with logical precision and legal comprehensiveness, categorically pronouncing a tax on corn to be unadvisable in every respect : the abstract principle served to mark the unaltered position of HENRY BROUGHAM in the question, and its purpose was thus fully answered. The House of Lords are not so far forward in the accidence of political economy : PEEL'S Corn-law is to the full as much as they have yet learned to compre- hend; and perhaps they take that rather on authority than on con- viction.
The first reading of the Income-tax Bill in the House of Com- mons, on Monday, gave rise to an interesting scene. Not that the discussion was worthily begun ; for Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in the manner of his opposition to the bill at that unusual stage, allowed his statesmansbip to degenerate into a purely personal attack on the rival leader. The debate was carried on almost entirely on the Opposition side of the House—both the attacks on the measure and the replies 1. and the Ministerialists looked on as spectators, without need to stir in their own cause—if indeed it is their own. Thus, one of the most effective speeches to quash the Whig cavilling was that of Mr. ROEBUCK; in which he balanced the policy suggested by either party, found e.ach guilty of im- perfect legislation and lavish expenditure ; but concluded, that for the business at issue the raising of funds for a specified purpose, Sir ROBERT PEEL alone offered any means. Mr. RAIKRS CumnE delivered a speech of high eloquence and great breadth of view, which exhausts the question to the bottom. He had looked to an organic improvement of the House of Commons as an instrument of legislation ; till Lord JOHN RUSSELL himself declared that he had intentionally devised a preponderancy of the landed interest : what instrument then had he left himself to work out his newly-adopted change in the laws of landed commerce ? to what recourse could he turn to overcome the power which he has built up against himself? To the Chartists ? That day has not yet come. But Sir ROBERT PEEL/ who commands a large portion of the phalanx to which the preponderancy belongs, takes the hostile force in the rear : he shows an inclination' and he is the only man able, to effect the changes recommended by the concurrent voices of all sections of the Op- position. This is the moral of the whole question : others may speculate on better changes in the Corn-laws and the Tariff—Lord Joan RUSSELL himself is outdone, theoretically, by a still less powerful party than his own, the absolute Free-traders ; but Sir ROBERT PEEL is the only man that actually can change our com- mercial code. Shall he or shall he not do it ? That is the ques- tion for the Opposition to vote upon.
