opinion which has put down slavery and all but
abolished the duel, will also place the only efficient
check on the immorality of the bribe by branding it
as ungentlemanly and dishonourable. When this
happy day arrives there will be no more such scandals
against the characters of public men as the last month
has made lamentable contribution to, and it will be as
rare to meet with the affected prudery of a Roebuck
as with the unblushing audacity of a Coppock.

NARRATIVE OF PARLIAMENT AND
POLITICS.

In the HOUSE of LORDS, on Friday, Feb. 27, the
Earl of DERBY made a Statement explanatory of his
Reasons for taking office, and of the Policy he proposed to
adopt. After an eloquent testimony to the character of
the Marquis of Lansdowne, Lord Derby said that he would
not enter into speculation upon the question whether
the Commons' vote of yesterday week had caused the
retirement of the late cabinet, but he would only remark
that so little had he expected such a result from the
discussion that followed it, he had actually left town.
On Saturday, however, he was apprised that next day
he was to attend the Queen, in order to the formation
of a new ministry. Aware of the weighty difficulties in
his way, but also aware of the weighty responsibility of
leaving the crown and the nation without a ministry
(for he saw no prospect of any other administration than
his own being formed), he had decided that it was his
duty to accept office. The concurrence of nearly all
whom he consulted enabled him at once to submit to her
Majesty the outline of a ministry, and to fill it up in
the four or five subsequent days. He then proceeded
to an explanation of his proposed policy. Peace with
foreign nations would be his aim, and this he conceived
would be attained neither by large preparations nor by
Utopian schemes of disarming, but by calm and
conciliatory conduct, both as regarded act and word, and by
the strictest adherence to the obligations of treaties. He
was for rigidly respecting the rights of all nations, great
and small, to govern themselves in their own way, denying,
that however justly proud we might be of our own
admirable constitution, we had any right to political
sympathies or prejudices with regard to the form of
government other nations might adopt. As regarded
our defences, he thought we should keep up the
preparations wisely made by his predecessors, so as to
screen the country from possibility of invasion, and
he declared his belief that never either was our
army or our navy in a more efficient state than
now, although our armament was in no condition
to excite the just jealousy of other nations. He
was certain, that were invasion threatened, the three
kingdoms would rise as a man, but thought that their
undisciplined efforts would be unsuccessful. Alluding to
the attempt that had been made to re-organise an old
constitutional force, he deprecated the doing this in any
mood of unnecessary panic, which would tend to render
our preparations less efficient than they would otherwise
be. As regarded refugees, while declaring that England
was the natural refuge of all exiles, he said that it was
the duty of the latter not to abuse our hospitality, and if
they did, although government would not descend to
espionage, it ought to keep a guard over them and warn
their governments, but we could go no further so long as
they avoided the punishable offence of attempting to levy
war. He would come now to more difficult questions—
those of finance and commerce. In 1842 he had given
his warm support to the financial measures of Sir
Robert Peel, to his revision of the customs, and his
legislating on a principle which Lord Derby had then
understood Sir Robert to mean was that of imposing
duties on articles of import, not only with a view to the
revenue, but with reference to the basis they afforded
for the operations of the British manufacturer. He
contended that where the entire supply of an article came
from abroad the whole increase of price caused by taxation
fell upon the consumer, but that this was not the
case where the article was partly of foreign and partly
of home supply, and he would not shrink from declaring
his opinion that there was no reason why corn should be
the solitary exception to the rule. But an opposite
principle to that which he had approved appeared of
late years to have been adopted, and he contrasted our
policy with that of America, which latter he thought
the most defensible. But he repeated that this was but
his opinion, and though a revision of our financial
policy might be desirable, it was a question only to be
solved by reference to the clearly expressed and well
understood opinion of the intelligent part of the people.
So large and comprehensive a scheme required to be
dealt with by a government strong in the confidence of
the people, not by one called suddenly to office. He did
not know whether he had a majority in that house, he
knew he was in a minority in the other, but he had not
felt that the public interest would be consulted by a
dissolution at this period of the year and in this condition
of the world. An humble but not useless task devolved
upon his government, which, in the face of the conviction
that he could not command a parliamentary majority,
he would undertake. Government would have to appeal
to the forbearance of its adversaries and to the patience
of its supporters, but he had too much confidence in the
good sense of the house of commons to believe that it
would unnecessarily take up subjects of controversy
while there were legal and social reforms for which the
country was anxious. He should act he trusted, though
in a minority, neither uselessly nor dishonourably; but
if he were interrupted by faction, he should have the
consolation of knowing that it would recoil upon its
promoters. In reference to the measures introduced by
the late government he said he was most desirous to
crush corruption to the utmost of his power, but that, as
regarded the proposed reform bill, he should not follow
it up, and he warned his hearers, especially members of
the house of commons, against the danger of perpetually
unsettling everything, and settling nothing. He did not
contend that the system established in 1831 was perfect,
or did not require amendment, but he wished to be sure
that a proposed remedy would not aggravate the evils
complained of. He had heard that Lord John Russell had
in some way mixed up the question of education with that
of the franchise, with which it had nothing whatever to
do. As regarded education, the feelings of all classes
had united in the conviction that the more you educated
the safer was the country; but he was opposed to the
mere acquisition of secular knowledge, dissociated from
the culture of the soul. And although he looked on all
engaged in education as his fellow-labourers, his chief
reliance would be on the parochial clergy. To uphold
the Church as the depository of truth and the agent of
incalculable good, would be the object of his efforts; but
this he thought should be done, not by invective against
those whose errors we deplored, but by resistance to all
aggression, and by lending all aid in the cause of church
extension. There his lordship's statement terminated; but
he added that, awful as were the difficulties in a minister's
way, the destinies of the nation were in the hands of an
over-ruling Providence, in whose presence he solemnly
declared that no motive of personal ambition had
induced him to take office, and that no motive save the
incentive of duty should actuate him while holding it.
He should trust to higher guidance than his own, and be
his tenure of government long or short, he should have
attained not only the utmost height to which ambition
could aspire, but the highest end of human reason, in
being permitted to make an effort in the cause of the
happiness of the nation, and in the spreading peace on
earth and good will among men.—Earl GREY admitted
the frankness with which the Earl of Derby had
explained his financial policy, but protested against some of
the principles which he had avowed, lie argued against
the doctrine laid down by Lord Derby, that taxation on
an article produced partly at home and partly abroad
did not raise the price to the full extent of the duty
levied. He said that theory and practice were in favour
of the soundness of free trade views, and he had heard
with consternation that Lord Derby proposed to
apply an unsound system to the food of the
people.—The Earl of DERBY explained that he had
stated his own opinion, but had no intention
of making any proposal on the subject until public
opinion could be decidedly expressed upon it.—Earl