diffuse more extensively the opinions which I
conscientiously entertain, and which are favourable to the
system of government that you are desirous of carrying
out." Why, sir, (said Lord Palmerston) if my noble
friend had shrunk from giving the editor that support,
he would have been more liable to blame than he is
for having afforded to him the means of rendering
the public a service. It may be that the editor was in
some respect unworthy the confidence which my noble
friend reposed in him. Sir, it is the misfortune of
generous minds frequently to fall into the error of
trusting too implicitly those who afterwards prove
themselves unworthy of the confidence placed in them. But,
sir, I must say, that for my part, I should not think
that I was doing myself credit or honour by taking
advantage of information given me by a man who had
proved himself so undeserving of confidence; and it
must be recollected that those who endeavour to throw
dirt upon others may sometimes soil their own hands.
Lord Palmerston concluded by saying he was sure, from
the tone of the house, that this attempt to censure
Lord Clarendon would utterly fail, and that he would
retain the high position he had always held.—After a
reply from Lord Naas the house divided, when the
motion was negatived by 229 against 137.

On Friday the 20th, on the bringing up of the report
on the ministerial Local Militia Acts Bill, Lord John
RUSSELL again briefly set forth the main features of his
measure, and his explanations seemed to anticipate some
of the gravest objections about to be urged with success
against him. He proposed to allow substitutes, but to
require that they should be taken out of the same lists—
the lists of the same county and year: thus he got rid
of the onerousness of strict personal service, and still
avoided the evils of the system of general evasion by
hiring substitutes, which is always practised when the
regular militia is embodied in time of peace. He
proposed that the queen have power to call out the force,
not only in presence of actual invasion, but in case of
"apprehended invasion;" and he would retain the force
embodied for six months after the enemy has left our
shores, instead of six weeks, as the local militia law
enacts, with a further liability to be kept on foot for
twelve months.—Lord PALMERSTON rose ostensibly to
move amendments in the instructions of the chairman,
that would make the title of the bill to be brought in
accord with the explanation of the provisions which
Lord John Russell had given. The title of the bill was
for a local militia, but the bill described was very
nearly founded on the regular militia. The local system
was thrown aside by Lord John Russell, but the
local name was preserved. Going over the objections
to the local militia as regulated by the old law—its
immobility in case of sudden danger, its impermanency
when the danger shall have only momentarily passed,
the restriction of its service to Great Britain—Lord
Palmerston summed up the objections to it by describing
what is really wanted. "We have now (he said) to
provide, not for a danger which may happen at the end
of six months or twelve months, but for a danger which
may happen at the end of a fortnight from the time
when it was first apprehended. Now, how is that to be
provided for? Why, the only rational mode is, that
you should have at your disposal in time of peace a
considerable force, adequately officered, drilled, disciplined,
clothed, and armed, and that this force should be kept
ready at the shortest notice to act under arms at the
breaking out of war, or when war appears imminent.
You want a force which shall be already drawn, which
is sufficient for ordinary purposes, and which you can
lay your hand upon at the shortest possible notice."
He met the objections to a regular militia in this way.
"It is said that the regular militia is a bad thing,
because it admits of substitutes; that you cannot rely
upon your substitute; that he does not appear at the
time of training; that he will not come whenever the
regiment is embodied; that in Scotland people do not
like to serve, and that in Ireland you cannot trust the
men who may be enrolled. To listen to these objections,
one might suppose that Englishmen are cheats, that
Scotchmen are cowards, and that Irishmen are traitors.
All the objections I ever heard are founded upon a
practical distrust of the people of these countries. Sir, I,
on the contrary, am disposed rather to confide in them.
But if you cannot trust your population to defend
themselves, you must give them up. If you cannot trust
Englishmen to come to the defence of their country—if
Scotchmen will not take up arms and fight against an
invading army—if Irishmen will not be true to their
queen and country—why, let us send for a Russian
force at once; let us have an Austrian garrison in London;
let us hide our heads in shame and confusion, and
confess that England is no longer England, and that her
people have no longer spirit to defend themselves, their
homes, their families, and their country. Sir, that is
not my opinion. I am of opinion that Englishmen are
proud of their country; that they are sensible of the
value of what they have to defend; that they are fully
determined to maintain their liberties; that they will
not give way to an unreasonable panic, or imagine
dangers that do not exist, but that they will be prepared
deliberately to guard themselves against dangers that
are sufficiently probable. And my belief is, that if the
government make the appeal to the people—if they
show them the dangers that may possibly arise—if they
point out to them the value of the stake they have to
defend—I, for one, believe you will not find the English
substitutes running away from their colours, that
Scotchmen will maintain their character for courage,
and that Irishmen will not be found unworthy of the
country to which they belong." Lord Palmerston's
amendment, that the words "and consolidate" be
inserted in the title of the bill, after the word
"amend," was agreed to. He then moved to
leave out the word "local" from the title.—Mr.
Milner GIBSON complained that national funds should
be applied for any other purpose than the reduction
of taxation, and spoke warmly against our having
any political interests beyond the shores of the United
Kingdom. He then asserted that it might be imprudent
to arm the Irish, for the Catholics of Ireland with
arms in their hands would certainly not fight for the
Protestant establishment there. We ought to rely upon
our navy for the defence of the country, which he
would not believe was defenceless, tor he would not
believe that all those who had been entrusted with the
armaments of the country had acted so basely as to
squander the enormous sums confided to them. The
present panic had been got up for political purposes.—
Lord John RUSSELL opposed the amendment. Defending
his own proposal, he said, that to tell the country
that men, whatever their rank or position, should be
bound to serve for five years, substitutes not being
accepted, would be to make the bill generally
unpopular. After bringing forward other objections to the
regular militia system, he again urged that the government
had well considered the subject, and should, at
all events, be permitted to produce its plan. All he
could say was, that if Lord Palmerston's amendment
were carried, he should leave his lordship and Mr.
Bernal to bring in their measure, and should reserve to
himself the right to oppose it.—Mr. DISRAELI remarked
upon the extraordinary course taken by Lord J. Russell,
who seemed to think it unconstitutional in a
parliamentary majority to refuse to a government leave to
bring in a bill, the structure of which the house might
consider vicious. He conceived that it was of great
importance to come to a decision on the principle of the
measure for establishing a domestic garrison, upon
which, after four years' consideration, the government
had ventured. Rebuking Lord John Russell for his
concluding declaration, he charged him with being
much too ready to carry his points by menaces to the
house. The threat of to-night would not, however,
prevent the house from deciding upon the principle
of the new government measure.—Sir George GREY
pointed out that Lord Palmerston did much more
than put a direct negative, such as he had a right
to put, on the course proposed by the minister for
the adoption of the house: he insisted on putting
his own bill into the hands of ministers, and on making
them ask leave to bring that in. As to the measure
thus to be forced upon them, Sir George believed a
regular militia would cost more than an equal number
of men for the regular army.—Mr. HUME declared
against Lord Palmerston on the point of form: his