On Monday night the House of Commons became, not unnatur-
ally, somewhat fractious about the non-production of the Danish papers, and Mr. Osborne, who delights in these rows, made,—in no very serious spirit, we imagine,—a violent war speech, re- proaching the Ministry for standing by while their ally was butchered, and moving to defer the Navy Estimates till the House should know what its prospects of war might be. The speech of the evening, however, was Mr. Disraeli's. He congra- tulated Lord Palmerston on having, during the last four years, " established a name that bears terror to no country except his own." He quizzed him for the ineffectual proposal of the armistice, said that, on the rumour of its failure, ho had purposely given him an opportunity to explain, but that after "a dead silence, Mr. Layard, who seems to me to do the work of the Government, rose with becoming modesty, and announced a diplomatic failure." The House did not want to be assured of the failure, but did wish to know the motive for the attempt.. Mr. Disraeli referred to Lord Palmerston's answer about the "brutal outrage " of the Prussian invasion of Jutland as given in the vein which used to be called " the Cambyses vein, but which of late has been the property of the noble lord," and which in old days would have "alarmed Europe and animated the House of Commons, but which in the present instance was received with the depression and despondency which now usually accompany such expressions of the noble lord, because experience proves to us that they generally herald the humiliation of our country." If the Prussians had heard that reply of Lord Palmerston's before withdrawing from Jutland, Mr. Disraeli thought they would probably have stayed there. He concluded a very epigrammatic speech by suggesting that if a dissolution came, and a man in the crowd should ask any of the members, " How about Denmark ? " he would have nothing authentic to say. Members were content with an ebullition of anger, and when Mr. Osborne divided the House on his motion there appeared only 47 for it, and 220 against.
