tbc Countrn.
On Monday, a deputation from the Reformers of Derby presented an address to Lord Melbourne, at Melbourne Hall. It expressed general approbation of the policy of the late Government, and regret for the extraordinary and unprecedented manner in which Lord Melbourne and his colleagues were dismissed. Lord Melbourne in reply, after thanking the deputation for their good opinion, stated that the removal of Lord Spencer to the House of Peers was the immediate cause of the breaking up of the Ministry— The death of Earl Spencer having deprived the Government of his services in the Lower House of Parliament it became his (Lord Melbourne's) duty to take the pleasure of his Majesty, and make the requisite arrangements for filling up the deficiency. It was sufficient to say, that in taking these steps his Majesty intimated to him that lie wculd not impose upon him that task ; but that lie intended to resort for that purpose to other counsellors. In saying this, how- ever, he did not mean to have it inferred that he had any just cause to feel per- sonally aggrieved by his gracious master ; the question was a great public one, the Kinn.' could not be guided by personal motives, and his decision was in no sense to be found fault with. its could not help saying, notwithstanding, that the dissolution of the Cabinet had occurred abruptly, and at a time when the public mind was in a state of especial calm and quiet.
He referred to the stories which the 7'imes and other Wellington journals had given currency to relative to his conversation with the King. They were full of falsehood— Every rumour had been seized upon ; and, Although it was the nature of the press to seize upon every statement in important cases, and although lie, on ordinary occasions, did not blame such proceedings, yet, in the present one, it had undoubtedly far overstepped the truth, and resorted to the publication of statements none of which were correct. Circumstances had been stated as facts which were utterly false ; and where any appearance of truth seemed to be made Out, or had any just foundation, it was so perverted as to be calculated to more mislead the public than absolute falsehood itself.
He contradicted the rumour of differences in the Cabinet— Nothing of this sort would at all have led to its breaking up, if the King had not dissolved it. " I beg" said his Lordship "to give a clear, distinct, and emphatic denial to this assumption. That some shades of difference on im- portant measures did exist, and would always exist, might he the case; but that any such variation in sentiment has caused the event is erroneous and untrue.'
Lord John Russell dined with a large party of his constituents, at Totnes, on Tuesday. He gave a summary of the principal events that have occurred since 1828, particularly as regards the compulsory abolition of the Test and Corporation Laws and of the Catholic Dis- abilities, by the Duke of Wellington : he also alluded to the Duke of Wellington's offer to carry the Reform Bill himself in May 1832. Ile enumerated the measures of the late Administration ; and denied, in unequivocal terms, that any plan of Irish Church Reform had been laid before the Cabinet, according to the assertions of the Tory organs.
" Gentlemen, it has been said that some plan was in preparation upon the Irish Church, with regard to which Ministers differed ; and It has been stated —ay, assertion has even gone so far as this—that I had prepared a plan which was of such a nature. that Lord Lansdowne and Mr. Spring Rice, and, I think, Lord Auckland, could not agree to it. Gentlemen, this statement is altogether false. No doubt, I have my opinions with respect to the Irish Church, as I have stated in Parliament ; and it is still my conviction that the Protestant faith would be be better taught in Ireland, and the Irish Church be more truly supported, if the notions which I entertain were adopted, than if the Church were left in its present situation,with many of the benefices in that country entirely sinecures. But, gentlemen I had prepared no plan upon the subject. There was a plan, which had not been submitted to the Cabinet—which had not been matured ; and I can say this further, that although no Cabinet had been held in which a plan fur the Irish Church Reform had been discussed and settled, yet there was every prospect that the Cabinet would have come to an unani- nious decision upon such a plan. I can likewire declare, that in all the con- versations I have bad with members of the Cabinet, especially with Lord Lansdowne and Mr. Spring Rice, there was no practical difference between as as to the measure which should be adopted. I say, therefore, gentlemen, the Government was not dissolved because any plan was traced and matured of what is called a sacrilegious' nature (for this is the word they used ;) and la they apply the term 'confiscation' to State Reform, so they apply the word 'sacrilegious to Church Reform ; or because such plan had received the assent of the Cabinet. And I likewise declare, that it is quite untrue that there was any practical difference between those members of the Cabinet who have been mentioned and myself." Lord John 'pointedly ridiculed the idea of the Duke of Wellington being a real Reformer; and said that the interview with the two Bank Directors at Apsley House reminded him of the passage in Richard the Third, where the Duke of Gloucester is pointed out to the Lord Mayor by the Duke of Buckingham in these words— "There stands his Grace between two clergymen." It would not give encouragement to the Reformers to see the Duke of Wellington so placed ; but two Bank Directors would answer very Weil- The Duke is—must be—favourable to Reform, since "There stands h6 Grace between two Bank Directors P' Lord John was repeatedly cheered by the company during the de- livery of this speech. It was agreed to support him unanimously, and to ask no pledges from him.
Previous page
