the recommendations which he had proposed in 1817 regarding the navigation and the silk laws. Now, another of the measures which he had recommended was one that had never been described as either so chimerical or so abominable, as either of those which had been recently adopted, and might be easily and successfully, if willingly, carried into effect. It was a well-known observation of Dr. Swift, that in political arithmetic, two and two did not always make four. Now, this observation he had applied to the consumption of commodities which were heavily taxed; for instance, wines. Now, there it was quite clear, that by increasing the tax upon the article they did not find that two and two made four; but different was the result in the case of coffee, for there, by lowering the duty, they had increased the consumption; so that where they meant to add two-andtwo in the arithmetic of taxation, in the case of wine they had failed, and had not doubled the amount of duty; whereas, when they reduced the duties upon coffee one-half, they found they had doubled, or nearly doubled, the consumption, and, necessarily, maintained the full amount of the revenue. He hoped, therefore, that in the article of wines, as in that of coffee, they would profit by a departure from an unproductive estimate of calculating their amount of revenue. Why not do so speedily in the article of wines? Why not, in the path of reduction, make that the next step? Let the wine duty, then, at once be reduced; and, above all, let there be not only a reduction, but an equalization of these different wine duties for all foreign countries-he meant, in fact, a general and total revision of that arrangement which was made under the name of the Methuen treaty, in a time, and under circumstances, when a far different foreign and domestic policy prevailed from that which ought at present to regulate the affairs of such a kingdom as Great Britain. One good effect which would immediately arise from such a revision, would be the establishment of a better understanding with the French government, the lowering of the duties upon other French articles, and the increase, which he had no doubt would be consequent upon such a reduction, of the foreign consumption of British manufacture. These instances of better policy were, he hoped, on the eve of consummation; so that whatever amelioration had been already effected, he was quite sure they had not yet seen the last of those reformatory measures, which had been so long delayed, although so essentially called for by the best interests of the community. There was another branch of his majes ty's Speech which gave him sincere satisfaction: he alluded to the approach lately made by the king's government to that sound, and not more sound than expedient, and no less expedient than just and liberal policy, so often recommended from that side of the House, and so unanimously called for by the general voice of the country-he meant the recognition of some of the great empires in South America. How much of this policy, great as it undoubtedly was, belonged to the country, which had so strongly and repeatedly called for it-how much of it belonged to the executive government-how far the ministers had been driven into it-how little was the speed of their march-how small was their reluctance, or what was the measure or degree of their readiness, to do this justice to the country and to those new states, it were now, perhaps, unnecessary, if not invidious, to inquire. But, all men would know and feel how much of it belonged to his hon. and learned friend (sir J. Mackintosh) who had shown himself the uniform, powerful, learned, and consistent advocate of those early and liberal views of enlightened colonial policy which now met at length the assent of his majesty's government. How much of it was due to the inimitable speech delivered by his hon. and learned friend upon the foreign enlistment bill-a speech than which there never had been one delivered within their walls more deserving the admiration of every wise and liberal mind-how much of it was, he repeated, due to that eloquent and powerful speech, as well as to his learned friend's equally great, though more elaborate address, during the last session, upon the state of South America-it was not easy to say: but sure he was, that there was no man, either within or without that House, who could fail to ascribe a portion-a large portion-of this great triumph of right policy over wrong policy, to his learned and excellent friend [hear, hear]. He would not, however, on this occasion, quarrel with the share which the govern ment had had in promoting the recent improvement. It was a great good to the country, at all events: if done by the ministers themselves, they deserved thanks for it; if done in obedience to the voice [58 of the country, equally ought they to be well to the protection of their own colopraised for listening to the suggestion. nial whites as they did to their own unThe good was done, and by whatever pro- happy slaves; and, in carrying it into efcess it had been effected, it was gratifying fect, they ought to lose no more time than to find, that there was now a government was actually necessary for arranging the ready to yield to the wishes of the people; acknowledgment, in the same manner as so that upon this subject he would not they had lately, in the South American criticize too nicely the operation by which States, and for more than the same rea→ the improvement was effected. The re- sons which had, at length, producedcognition bad luckily taken place at last; some might say extorted-that just and it was an act of justice following the un- salutary policy. Now, he would ask, was doubted fact of the assertion of their in- this display of liberal policy to stop here? dependence by the people of the South Was this essential administration of justice American States; and, however tardy the to be confined to their foreign colonies ? acknowledgment, still it would be gratify- Was it to be restricted to the operations ing to find, that it was not the price of any of their foreign trade, the branches of unworthy traffic, or paltry barter for mere which were guided by men who were at commercial views. He was glad it was the elbow of the government, and supposed done at all events; for it was a measure to have a certain degree of colonial in fraught with justice, and calculated to fluence in certain quarters? Was this to produce the most beneficial results; and be the circumference of their liberal sphere right was it, therefore, that both in the of action? Were they never to do justice King's Speech, and the Address, the sub- nearer home? Were they never to listen ject should have been introduced in the to the voice of Ireland? [Hear, hear]. manner in which it had been. When Was it there alone that sound policy was touching upon this branch of the Speech, to be overlooked; and that, too, where one it could not fail to recur to him, that many half of the empire, or thereabouts, was a long year before Mexico, Colombia, concerned; where a great population was Buenos Ayres, or Peru, had even dreamt oppressed by a continuance of matchless of nobly struggling for, and establishing impolicy, and worse injustice, where a their independence, there was a struggle state of things prevailed, which put to imfor liberty, a fighting stand to conquer minent peril the responsibility of any national independence, made by another British minister, who suffered the whole people, who had embarked in a successful civil fabric of a large portion of the king's contest for personal and individual free- subjects to remain in jeopardy, because he dom-he meant the great island of St. withdrew from the adjustment of a quesDomingo, which had long and long since tion, which ere long must be definitively succeeded in establishing its entire inde- settled. He hoped that, upon the state of pendence, upon a more peaceable, and now Ireland, they were not to be met by any a more assured footing, than even Buenos crooked policy of expediency-he hoped Ayres or Colombia, the best established the time was now past when they were to of the new South American States. His be told, "O, touch not such a topic, it is belief was, that at the onset of the St. too delicate, there are too many, and too Domingo revolution, England was hos- irreconcileable, and too various opinions tile to the interests of the natives of that afloat upon it: we must leave that alone island; she became so from the cruel situ--it is too harassing and complicating to ation of her people as slave-masters. This it was which blindly led her to dislike the emancipation of the slaves of St. Domingo. But, a new state of things had since arisen, and the question of slavery, so far as St. Domingo could be connected with it, had been long since set at rest; for the natives had entirely emancipated themselves, and the island had become a thriving and powerful empire one which had a right to be included in the protecting branch of the British colonial system: it was clearly the interest of their own colonies that it should be so they owed this policy as be mooted. All other difficulties you will find us ready to meet and overcome, but, by common consent, we have arranged to steer clear of this question: the fact is, what can we do with it?-we have not two members who think alike upon this topic." Was this the way, he would ask, in which the government of this country ought to be conducted? Could they tolerate this exception from the general policy, in the case of a country so inseparably identified with their internal interests, when they had an absolute right to have upon it the undivided opinion, clearly expressed, of an what he could say in reply to that which I have advanced. This I know, that the greatest statesman this country ever saw, would cheerfully have gone to death rather than use such language; and yet, when so humble an individual as myself, temperately, and I trust, not immodestly intelligible and distinct cabinet? It was worse than idle to say that the condition of Ireland was the only question on which a cabinet might be divided. We had proof, that there were too many opinions in which they were far from concurrence. It was no later than the last session, that the House witnessed-the country wit-repeats a doctrine which has been invanessed-one honourable colleague intro- riably maintained by those statesmen, to ducing in that House, a change in the whom the constitution is so highly insilk laws; and witnessing also, the same debted, he is to be met with a cheer. My measure thrown out in the upper House hon. friend cheers because a whig ventures by another noble colleague; upheld also to say, that the king's name ought not to in that object by other members of the be mentioned in this House, for the pursame administration. We had seen also pose of overawing or influencing our demeasures since adopted by all the mem- terminations. And yet, that is a principle bers of that cabinet which once were de- which was never departed from, until the signated by some of its members as Jaco-period to which I have alluded, and the binical, when they were suggested by those who surround me, carried, I will say, by the wisdom and manliness of the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Secretary Canning); because, backed as he is by public opinion on this question -backed by the hon. friends who fill the benches around me, and on which he would have triumphed even had he been obliged to have left office on such grounds. Is he not bound, then, to follow up his principles? Is Ireland, I again ask, bound as we are to that near, that intimate connexion, on whose peace and security such momentous interests hang, on which so much danger stares us in the very front; danger, I would say, growing out of our own neglect, and on which we are probably on the verge of a great crisis, never to be approached? Sir, it can no longer be said, or insinuated, as it was formerly said or insinuated, that scruples exist in a certain quarter which destroy all hope of giving to the Catholics the relief which they seek. Such language, indeed, I always held to be most unconstitutional-most unjustifiablemost factious. It was language of which even the ministers of Charles II. would have been ashamed. It was language which, in the better times that preceded the reign of Charles II., would have brought the minister who dared to utter it to the block [hear, hear! from Mr. W. Lamb]. I should like to hear my hon. friend, who by his cheer challenges the justice of that observation, refute it. Accomplished as my hon. friend is in constitutional knowledge, having examined every opinion respecting it-for I am sure no man is better informed on the subject than my hon. friend-I should like to hear propriety of a departure from which was never openly avowed in parliament until this night. In ancient times, it was invariably admitted, that of every act that was gracious and conciliatory, his majesty ought to have the credit; but, that whenever odious and unpopular measures were proposed, the ministers of the Crown should take the responsibility of them upon their own shoulders. This principle has been laid down by all our writers, and has been invariably acted upon even in the very worst periods of our monarchy. Yet I was only drawing a corollary from this principle when I was interrupted by my hon. friend's cheer. Unquestionably, it is a principle which has been departed from by many of the individuals of whom the present administration is formed. If any odious step is to be taken, any measure by which, perhaps, a political opponent is to be run down and injurednothing is more common than to hear them exclaim, "Oh! I assure you it is no fault of ours, that Mr. So and So is thus used. You may easily guess who is at the bottom of the treatment he has received. It is our wish to do what is right. We are above all petty personal jealousies: we have no inclination to injure a political adversary: but there are impressions existing in a certain high quarter which prevent us from acting as we would otherwise do." And thus, Sir, is it constantly attempted to throw the load of odium on the sovereign and his immediate friends. Even when creditable measures are proposed by these individuals, the same system is resorted to: They talk of the difficulties they have experienced; and declare that God only knows the prejudices they have had to conquer. So it used to be in the late reign with respect to Ireland The language was (I thank God that it cannot be now held), "We are free from prejudice on the subject; we acknowledge that the proposition to emancipate the Catholics is just and reasonable; but there exist in a certain illustrious quarter objections which it is impossible to obviate, although the precise nature of those objections our solemn oath as state councillors forbids us to divulge." Sir, it is a source of great satisfaction to me that that argument is at an end. No one who has marked the course of the illustrious individual who is now seated on the throne of these realms, more especially on that gratifying occasion, his visit to the sister kingdom, can doubt for a moment, that his opinion respecting the policy that ought to be pursued towards Ireland is consistent with the soundest and most enlightened principles. But this is a fact of which we cannot regularly have any knowledge of here. The private opinion of his majesty is in this country of no weight. The royal acts are the acts of the ministry. The speeches from the throne are the speeches of the ministry. But, there is a country in which such is not the case. I may advert, in support of my conviction of his majesty's opinion on the question of religious liberty, to his conduct in a country in which he acts not through his ministers, but directly as a sovereign. England has had frequent occasion to lament her connexion with Hanover. It is an ill wind, however, that blows nobody good. That connexion has proved highly serviceable to the cause of Ireland, by showing the sentiments entertained by the king, on the subject which now agitates Ireland. I allude to the royal proclamation issued last December, at Hanover, for the purpose of removing doubts respecting one of the articles of the act of the German confederation of June 1815. This, Sir, is the proclamation of George the 4th king of Hanover. It is his proclamation individually. It does not proceed from responsible advisers. Whatever blame or credit belongs to it, belongs to his majesty personally. It was, therefore, with no small delight that I read this, which I consider as a test of his majesty's real opinion. It is a proclamation deserving of the highest praise. Our government has too frequently been in the habit of imitating the governments of the continent. I wish they would do so in the present case. I hope they will take this whole leaf out of the volume of the practice of Hanover. It is a valuable hint which has been given to them-a useful admonition-a sound example of liberal policy. At least, it will for ever stop ministers from insinuating, that any one is to blame but themselves for whatever fate may await Ireland. The annunciation of the king of Hanover is one which ought to be echoed in this country. It is most wise and most enlightened. "The several professors of the Christian faith," it declares, "enjoy a perfect equality of civil and political rights in the kingdom; and in conformity with the said article, the notion of a predominant and of a merely tolerated church is entirely abolished." This, Sir, is indeed the real doctrine of toleration. The man who really means to tolerate, does not use the word. He never speaks of it as a boon. He considers it as a right, not as a favour, that every man should worship his maker in whatever mode he conscientiously prefers. He holds, that a man may be erroneous in his religious opinions, but that if he be sincere in them, it is an insult to him to say that he shall be tolerated in professing them. When, therefore, his majesty, in this proclamation, says, that the idea of a predominant and of a merely tolerated church is not to be endured, he speaks the language of a wise and liberal policy. More is added in the same sound spirit. "All Christian religious communities (ALL; the expression is not confined to Hanover; it is equally applicable to Ireland) "have a right to the unobstructed and free exercise of their religious worship." More than this cannot be desired. Further than this no man would wish to go. But I ask, why not apply to Ireland the principle which has been thus wisely applied to Hanover? Why will his majesty's ministers in this country, in spite of this noble example, persevere in their present offensive and unjust policy? Why do not at least some of them manfully, frankly, and boldly maintain the necessity of concession to the Catholics? I will for the present put aside altogether the consideration of the Catholic Association. I will for a moment suppose that the refusal to grant the claims of the Catholics has not produced this, its natural and genuine fruit [hear, hear!]. Sir, I have no doubt of the fact. I never had a doubt that, sooner or later, that refusal would be productive | the burthens of his high and important of the most injurious consequences. I station. In these qualities the noble and told the House so last year. I then said, learned lord has never been excelled"If harsh language, if extravagant propositions, if a vehement spirit, if proceedings which may be termed violent and alarming, have emanated from, and been manifested by the Catholic Association, do not blame the Association itself; but blame those who have made the Association what it is, by treating the Catholics as they have been treated; blame those who by their conduct have turned reasonable to unreasonable expectations, and converted a dutiful request into an insolent demand." I will now, however, lay aside all consideration of the Catholic Association. I will suppose that that association, and the evils arising from it have not been created by yourselves; that they are not your handy-work. I proceed, then, to ask the friends of Catholic emancipation in his majesty's government, why, having as councillors of the king, been enabled to carry measures which were opposed by the self-same persons, who refuse Catholic concession, they do not exercise the power which has been triumphant in the one case, in the other? They have not made the experiment. How, then, can they tell that it would not be successful? Of what are they afraid? What is their ground of alarm? Are they apprehensive that the result would be the resignation of any of their colleagues? Do they think that any one of their co-adjutors, some man of splendid talents, of profound learning, of unwearied industry, would give up his place? Do they think he would resign his office; that he would quit the great seal? Prince Hohenloe is nothing to the man who could effect such a miracle [hear, and a laugh]. A more chimerical apprehension never entered the brain of a distempered poet. Any thing but that. Many things may surprise me, but nothing would so much surprise me as that the noble and learned individual to whom I allude, should quit his hold of office while life remains. A more superfluous fear than such an event never crossed the wildest visionary in his dreams. Indeed, Sir, I cannot refrain from saying, that I think the right hon. gentlemen opposite greatly underrate the steadiness of mind of the noble and learned individual in question. I think they greatly underrate the firmness and courage with which he bears, and will continue to bear, has never perhaps been paralleled. Nothing can equal the forbearance which he has manifested. Nothing can equal the constancy with which he has borne the thwarts that he has lately received on the questions of trade. His patience under such painful circumstances can be rivalled only by the fortitude with which he bears the prolonged distress of the suitors in his own court; but, to apprehend that any defeat would induce him to quit office, is one of the vainest fearsone of the most fantastic apprehensions→→ that was ever entertained by man. Let him be tried. In his generous mind, expanded as it has been by his long official character, there is no propensity so strong as a love of the service of his country. He is no doubt convinced, that the higher an office, the more unjustifiable it is to abandon it. The more splendid the emoluments of a situation-the more extensive its patronage-the more he is persuaded that it is not allowed to a wise and good man to tear himself from it. I contend, therefore, that the right hon. gentlemen opposite underrate the firmness of their noble and learned colleague. Let them make the experiment; and if they succeed in wrenching power from his gripe, I shall thenceforward estimate them as nothing short of miracle-mongers. His present station the noble and learned lord holds as an estate for life. That is universally admitted. The only question is, whether he is to appoint his successor. By some it is supposed that he has actually appointed him, and I own I have observed several symptoms of such being the case. If it be so, I warn that successor, that he will be exceedingly disappointed if he expects to step into the office a single moment before the decease of its present holder [a laugh]. However, I do intreat, that the perseverance of this eminent person may be put to the test. Let the right hon. gentleman say, he will resign, if the Catholic question is not carried in the cabinet: let the noble and learned lord say, that he will resign if it is carried. I am quite sure of the result. The Catholic question would be carried; but the noble and learned lord would retain his place. He would behave with the fortitude, which has distinguished him in the other instances in which he has been defeated; and the country would |