GREY professed himself greatly relieved, and (after some
further interchange of observations between himself and
Lord Derby) implored him not to let any long time go
by before explaining the views of government on the
question, as there was no transaction between landlord
and tenant, in trade, commerce, or manufactures, that
was not affected by their being in ignorance on so
important a subject, and one on which it was the duty
of an administration to have an opinion, and submit
it to parliament.—Earl FITZWILLIAM thought that the
new government ought to be allowed time to mature its
measures, and that no factious opposition should be
offered to it.—The Marquis of CLANRICARDE was
dissatisfied with some of Lord Derby's remarks in reference
to the intercourse of this country with foreign nations,
and thought his language as to the corn laws was likely
to involve in embarrassment every transaction affected
by them. He complained also that Lord Derby had not
been sufficiently explicit as to his intentions in regard to
the "protestant securities" of the country.—The Earl
of ABERDEEN coincided with Earl Grey, and declared
his own firm adherence to the policy of the late Sir
Robert Peel. He was equally prepared to oppose a duty
on corn for revenue or for protection. At the same time
he entirely acquiesced in the policy which the noble
earl's government intended to pursue towards foreign
powers.—In reply to some remarks of Lord Brougham,
the Earl of DERBY explained that, independent of more
exciting topics, the government certainly proposed to
deal with measures for legal reform and social improvement,
both of which were called for by the country.—
The house then adjourned upon an understanding that
judicial and private business only would be taken until
after the re-election of those members of the government
who belong to the other house.

On Friday, March the 12th, Lord BEAUMONT gave
notice that on Monday he would (on the presentation
of a petition) ask Lord Derby whether or not it was the
intention of government to recommend to parliament
any alteration of the present corn laws as soon as
another parliament could be assembled.—The Earl of
ESSEX deprecated any attempt upon the part of the
government to re-impose any duties upon corn, whether
under the name of protection or revenue; and said,
if such an attempt were made, he should oppose it—
Lord LYNDHURST, after remarking upon the agitation
set on foot by the Anti-Corn-law League, for the
purpose of procuring a dissolution, observed upon the
detriment which such an interruption of public business
would cause to the progress of the measures for law
reform now before parliament.—The LORD CHANCELLOR
stated at considerable length the intentions of the
government with respect to the measures now in
progress on the subject of Reform in the Court of Chancery.
As to the necessity for legal reforms there was no
division of parties, and her Majesty's government were
quite as anxious as their predecessors to proceed in this
direction. The noble and learned lord then mentioned
the several measures, and gave an analysis of their
objects, describing in great detail the extent to which
he intended to support them. In the course of his
observations he stated it was intended to abolish at
once the whole course of proceeding in the Master's
office, and that the judges in the Court of Chancery
should adopt the same rules as would govern a judge
at Chambers.—Lord BROUGHAM expressed great
gratification at hearing from his noble and learned friend
that he intended to adopt entirely the recommendations
of the Chancery Commissioners, and he recommended
that the Criminal-law Commission should be renewed
at the earliest possible period.

On Monday, the 15th, Lord BEAUMONT presented a
petition from certain inhabitants of the West Riding of
Yorkshire, praying that they might be relieved from
the uncertainty which existed as to the maintenance of
free trade; and put the question to Lord Derby whether
or not it was the intention of the government to recommend
an alteration of the present policy with regard to
the Importation of Corn as soon as a new parliament
could be assembled.—Lord DERBY denied that there
was any greater necessity for the solution of the free-
trade question now than before the accession to power
of the present government. A great party in the country
had declared that the question could only be solved by
a general election, and in proportion as the formation of
the present government rendered the prospect of such
an election more immediate, in the same proportion did
its accession to power render the solution of the question
more certain. For his own part he thought that the
appeal to the constituency ought to be made as speedily
as was consistent with the great interests of the country,
but at the same time he must declare that neither
taunts, nor calumnies, nor mortifications would induce
him to recommend a dissolution one moment sooner
than he thought it expedient. He had assumed, he
would not say office, but its responsibilities, from no
party motive of his own; the late government fell by their
internal weakness, by their own notorious incapacity, by
the lukewarmness of their friends, and by their own
quarrels. They had declared a dissolution inexpedient
for themselves, and he wished to know with what face
they now came forward in factious opposition and
sought to drive him to appeal to the country after his
declaration that the system of free-trade should not be
altered during the present session, but that the attention
of the government would be solely directed to those
great measures of legal and social reform on which the
heart of the nation was set. If the business of the
country were factiously interrupted, the evil that might
result would be visited, and justly visited, on the heads
of those demagogues and agitators who caused that
interruption. Though he desired to repair the injustice
which certain classes of the community had sustained
by the repeal of the corn-laws, and though he thought
it might be possible to do this by imposing such a duty
on corn as would realise a large revenue, while it
enhanced the price of the food of the people in an almost
inappreciable degree, such a step could only be taken
after careful deliberation, and then not by a bare majority,
but after an expression of very general concurrence on
the part of the country. He would even go further,
and declared that when he appealed to the country it
would be on far higher grounds, and not on the
question of a paltry duty on corn. The question he
would then ask the country would be, "Will you give
your confidence to the men who deserted the helm of the
state in the hour of danger, and then joined in factious
opposition to render all government impossible? Or
will you rely on the government which did not shrink
from the post of danger, which is determined to uphold
the protestant religion, to strengthen religious and
moral education, to resist the aggression of those
demagogues who employ their power over the masses only to
mislead them, and to maintain the prerogatives of the
Crown and the privileges of parliament?" These were
the principles on which he should appeal to the country,
and he would, therefore, conclude in the words put into
the mouth of the meanest criminal, but not unworthy
of the First Minister of the Crown, "I elect to be tried
by God and my country."—Earl GREY characterised
the answer of the noble lord as evasive, and complained
that the course ministers were taking, in not immediately
appealing to the country, was unconstitutional.—The
Earl of Abinger, the Marquis of Clanricarde, the Earl
of Harrowby, and other peers, spoke on the subject,
which was allowed to drop without any more detailed
information being elicited.

On Tuesday, March 16, the Marquis of CLANRICADE
inquired whether ministers intended to propose any
alteration in the present application of public funds
for Educational Purposes in Ireland.—The Earl of
DERBY thought, under existing circumstances, the
subject was a proper one for a committee of inquiry, but
beyond that he was not prepared to pledge himself. In
expressing his regret that the protestant clergy had
stood aloof to some extent, he suggested that it would be
well to consider whether, without departing from the
existing system, it might not be possible to remove or
mitigate their objections. In principle there was no
objection to giving assistance to schools exclusively
Roman Catholic if it were extended to schools exclusively
Protestant. The only question was, whether it was
possible to combine the independence of internal
management with government superintendence. These
were subjects which a committee might well investigate.
He was most anxious that Roman Catholics as well as