CAPTAIN MACKINNON said, he would beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty, If any measure is contemplated to remedy the grievances of retired Officers of the Navy, especially those under the head of H. I. K., who complain of unjust treatment; First. in compulsory re tirement; Secondly. Refusing to admit them to the benefits of other retired Captains and Commanders for length of service as awarded to all others? MR. CORRY said, in reply, the hon. and gallant Member was mistaken in supposing that the retirement of the Officers in question was compulsory. The conditions offered to them were distinctly specified in the Orders in Council which constituted the list, and the Admiralty had no intention of altering the present arrangement. COUNTY FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS. QUESTION SIR WILLIAM GALLWEY said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, When he proposes to nominate the Select Committee on County Financial Arrangements? MR. GATHORNE HARDY said, he hoped shortly to proceed with the arrangements. DUKE OF EDINBURGHHER MAJESTY'S ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS. Answer to Address [27th April] reported, as follows: I receive with deep satisfaction your sympathizing Address. The attempt upon the life of My Son, the Duke of Edinburgh, has, I feel sure, only further aroused the loyalty of My Australian Subjects, so heartily displayed in His reception. I am very sensible of the Divine Proteotion afforded Him; and in My anxiety still trust in it; while in this, as in all trials, I derive consolation and support from the affectionate attachment of My Parliament and People. MINISTERIAL STATEMENT-DEFEAT OF THE GOVERNMENT ON THE IRISH CHURCH RESOLUTIONS. MR. DISRAELI: Sir, after the division on Thursday night, I mentioned that, in our opinion, it altered the relations between Her Majesty's Government and the House, and that it would be necessary for them to consider their position; and with that view I asked the consent of the House to an adjournment for some few days. I now ask further permission from the House to make a short statement on the subject, to give them the result of the consideration of our position, and to state the course which, in consequence, we think it our duty to pursue. I believe I am trespassing on the strict rules of the House in making a statement of this kind without a Motion, but these are rare occasions, and I am sure I can trust to the indulgence of the House. The House will recollect that when, in 1866, the Earl of Derby was summoned by the Queen to take the ma nagement of affairs, his party was in a very considerable minority in this House, which was elected under the auspices and at the appeal of his political opponents. It was, therefore, quite open then to the Earl of Derby, in the spirit of the Constitution, to recommend Her Majesty to dissolve this Parliament; and it is possible that, considering the somewhat distracted state of the Liberal party at that moment and the general anxiety which prevailed to support a Government with some principle of cohesion, that the appeal might not have been made in vain. But the Earl of Derby recollected that this Parliament itself was then but recently elected, and there were other reasons of gravity and principle, which induced him to hope that he might be able to carry on affairs with the present Parliament, and therefore he waived what has been considered a constitutional right upon that occasion. The next year, 1867, the Government of the Earl of Derby found itself called upon to meet one of the most difficult and important questions of modern times-namely, the Reform of this House-one which had baffled all statesmen and had broken up and discomfited all parties. Nevertheless, the Government of the Earl of Derby attempted, and attempted successfully, to deal with that question, and they passed a measure which all must admit to have been large in its conception and provisions, and which, I believe, has given very general satisfaction to the country. At the close of the year, after the passing of such a measure, it would have been the Earl of Derby's wish to advise Her Majesty to dissolve this Parliament-a right which he had waived in the first instance-and to take the opinion of the country upon his conduct and that of his Colleagues in carrying this large measure of Reform. But the House is aware that the Earl of Derby was prevented from taking that course, because, notwithstanding the efforts of the Government and the equal efforts of this House, there were certain supplementary measures connected with the settlement of the Reform question which it was really impossible to pass last year. But all these measures, in principle, were accepted, and adopted last year; and, accordingly, there was a fair prospect that, under these circumstances, the Earl of Derby having completed the measure of Parliamentary Reform, and carried all the other measures that were absolutely necesfor the good government of the country, might have had, at the close of this Session, the advantage of that appeal to the country which he believed he had fairly earned. The Earl of Derby having waived, what was not strictly perhaps, though practically it had been held to be, the constitutional right of a Minister upon taking office, to advise the Crown to dissolve a Parliament elected under the influence of his political opponents; having waived that right at the end of 1866; and the course of circumstances having again prevented him from availing himself of that right at the end of 1867,-The Earl of Derby, I say, felt that he was placed, unintentionally, of course, by any one, but still inevitably, in a position of some unfairness, and regretted that he had not had the opportunity which, I think, all must admit he might legitimately have expected to enjoy. I will ask the House to permit me succinctly to inquire whether, in the administration of the country by the Government of the Earl of Derby, and during the period in which I have had some influence in affairs, anything has occurred to derogate from the effect which the exercise of such a constitutional right under our advice might have been expected to produce? Sir, I am most anxious, on this occasion, to use no expression which can for a moment be considered in the slightest degree coloured; and I would speak, if I could, on an occasion so critical as the present, with the judicial accuracy of the Bench. But I think I may say, speaking in the hearing, I hope, of fair, though I know of vigilant critics, that during the period we have so held Office the conduct of our administration in no important branch was ever impugned. I think I may even go further. Not only was the conduct of no important branch of our administration ever impugned during that period, but our administration in every branch was supported by this House, and commended even by our opponents. I will take, notably, the administration of Ireland, that being the country the proposed legislation respecting which has brought about the present political crisis. It is on record that the Leader of the Opposition, Earl Russell, has on more than one occasion, and in the most marked manner, expressed his entire approbation of the administration of Ireland under the Marquess of Abercorn. He has congratulated the Earl of Derby on possessing such a Colleague; and he has publicly in was attacked in the other House of Parliament with some acrimony. The conduct of my noble Friend was triumphantly defended on that occasion, and by whom? By the noble Earl the Leader of the Opposition! He himself had been Foreign Secretary, was cognizant, therefore, of the merits of the case; and he vindicated in a complete manner and gave his entire approval to the management of the Turkish question by my noble Friend. Allow me to say that foreign affairs, although they have not been much brought before the House, have been in a very critical state during almost the whole time that we have been in Office; and I claim for my noble Friend that by his judgment and by his great ability he has kept this country clear from very perplexing difficulties. Well, Sir, what happened with regard to affairs in Turkey really has happened with regard to all our other external relations in the most important parts of the world during the greater period of the time we have conducted the Government of this country. They have been in a state of great tension, requiring perfect temper, calm judgment, conciliatory manners, and a clear conception of the interests of this country. But I need not dwell upon this subject, because if I were to call witnesses in favour of the administration of our foreign affairs, by the present Government, they would be found on the Benches opposite; for those affairs have never been brought under the consideration of this House without the warmest and most generous attestations of the judgment and skill of my noble Friend, notably in the case of a prospect of a collision be tween France and Prussia, which terrified the civilized world, and, notably, also, in the management of our relations with the great trans-Atlantic Republic, which when we acceded to office were in a state far from satisfactory; but which I can say now promise to realize the best expectations which statesmen can indulge in. Indeed, if it had not been for those unfortu nate domestic misunderstandings which have prevailed and have diverted the attention of the public men of America from other duties, we have had on more than one occasion recently a very probable prospect of a settlement of those questions which had perplexed our predecessors, and been a source of great anxiety. Sir, I will say, also, that at no period within my recollection has the influence of England been greater on the {MAY 4, 1868} Ireland announced that, under the Viceroyalty of Lord Abercorn, the Irish enjoy an impartial administration of justice. It will be remembered that the administration of Ireland has been conducted under the most difficult and trying circumstances; and, speaking in the presence of many Irish Members of great ability, of long acquaintance with Parliamentary matters, and of extreme vigilance as to the conduct of Ministers, I appeal to their recollection whether, during the whole period of our administration, the conduct of the Government in Ireland has not always been spoken of with respect and sympathy by hon. Members opposite? That administration has been acknowledged by many of those hon. Members to have been a firm and successful, but, at the same time, a lenient and merciful ad ministration. If we look to the administration of our own home affairs, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State had to cope with that dark and fell conspiracy which infested Ireland, without the ad vantages which the Marquess of Abercorn possessed in the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act as an instrument by which he might baffle the intrigues of foreigners. Yet I think it has been generally and generously admitted in this House, and I believe also in the country, that my right hon. Friend met these difficult circumstances with great firmness, with unceas. ing vigilance, and with complete success. If we look to our financial measures, not one of them has been questioned or opposed; and I must acknowledge that those which I myself brought forward were supported, generously supported, by the right hon. Gentleman opposite. So much for our Government of Ireland and for our administration of home affairs and of finance. I now come to the greatest Department of the State, one, which perhaps, is brought less prominently before this House than others-but which, after all, more than any other affects the prosperity of this country. Upon the judicious management of our foreign affairs depends peace or war; the tranquil pursuits of industry, and the amount of taxation which must be levied in the country. For by a single blunder in the conduct of our foreign affairs the most provident arrangement of finances ever planned may in a moment be cancelled and destroyed. Just before the House adjourned for the holidays the conduct of my noble Friend the Secretary of State in the affairs of Turkey VOL. CXCI. [THIRD SERIES.] 3 I Continent of Europe than it is at the present moment; and that not by busy, intermeddling-not by thrusting our opinions on other Powers-but by a conviction on their part that the Government of this country is animated only by justice, by a sincere desire to maintain peace, and by an anxious wish to conciliate other Powers by a fair and not obtrusive sympathy. The consequence has been that, though the Government was established on a liberal but clear basis of non-interference, I believe that no Government, during the period that it has been in power, has been applied to more frequently by all the Great Powers of Europe for its friendly offices and to exercise its influence than the present one. Now, Sir, in the management of our foreign affairs there was one subject which occasioned my noble Friend-avowedly a lover of peace, and, as all know, a most cautious Minister-the utmost anxiety. That was the state of affairs we found in Abyssinia, our relations with which country were of so painful and perplexing a kind that my noble Friend, after great hesitation and deep reflection, felt it his duty to call the attention of the Cabinet to that state of affairs, as one that could not longer be tolerated, and which for the credit of this country ought to be terminated. The House is well aware of what were the consequences of that appeal to the Cabinet by my noble Friend. I do not arrogate for a moment to ourselves the merits which attach to admirable troops and admirable commanders; but the House knows that if the Expedition had failed we must have borne the responsibility; and I think every impartial mind will admit that in its management there were some circumstances for which Her Majesty's Government may claim credit. First of all, for the decision that the Expedition should be undertaken; secondly, for the selection of the commander; and, thirdly, for the energy and fertility of resource with which our troops were sustained and supported. Though that Expedition necessarily took its origin from the Department over which my noble Friend presides, its management fell to the Secretary of State for another Department; and whatever may be the fate of the present Ministry, I am sure my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for India will ever be remembered in reference to that Expedition by the House of Commons with respect and by the country with confidence. I think that in attempting to put before the House the position of the Government I have shown that if we were entitled, according to the spirit of the Constitution, when we acceded to Office, to advise Her Majesty to dissolve Parliament, and if we were further entitled to take such a step in consequence of having passed the Reform Bill, there is nothing in our administration of the affairs of this country, under the great heads to which I have adverted which ought to deter us from adopting, such a course, or ought to make us fear an appeal to our fellow-countrymen, It Now, Sir, in this state of affairs a new question arose in the House of Commons. It arose suddenly at a few days' notice. I am not imputing that as any blame to the right hon. Gentleman. I am only stating facts. I do not wish to have any controversy on an occasion like this, but I am recalling the recollection of the House to facts. At a few days' notice the House was asked to consider a proposition of a startling character, which was, in fact, no less than the disestablishment of the Church in a portion of Her Majesty's dominions. It so happened, as the House is aware, that on the Motion of the Leader of the Opposition (Earl Russell) there had been a Royal Commission issued by the present Government to inquire into the condition of that Church. It was also well known that the Commission had been intrusted to very able men, and that they were pursuing their labours with considerable energy and determination. was even known that there was more than a prospect of their reporting the result of those labours to Parliament this year. Therefore, considering the peculiar duties which devolved upon the Government-namely, of passing the supplementary Reform Bills, I do not think it was unreasonable in them that they should have met the proposition of the right hon. Gentleman by referring to the Royal Commission, by impressing upon the House the expediency of waiting until the Commission had reported, and then, either in this, or probably in the next Parliament, taking that course which the wisdom of Parliament, with the information from that Commission before it, should authorize and induce them to adopt. Well, Sir, the House was not of that opinion; and, therefore the question was brought before it, the distinct issue whether the Church should be disestablished in Ireland. Now, Her Majesty's Ministers were, entirely opposed to our general conduct in the administration of affairs. There were three reasons which convinced us that the decision of the House did not militate against the assertion of such a privilege on our part; and they were these:-In the first place, it was evident that no conclusive legislation upon the Church in Ireland could take place in this Parliament. That is acknowledged. In the second place, it was notorious that this question had never been hinted at on the hustings when this Parliament was elected. And thirdlyand I state this with the utmost respect to hon. Gentlemen opposite, and an unwillingness to assert an opinion which is not the opinion of the majority, but I am bound in duty to my Colleagues to express it - it is our profound conviction that the opinion of the nation does not agree on this subject with the vote of the House of Commons. that policy, and for distinct reasons which I will give. I go into this matter, not with a wish to obtrude any arguments on the House at this moment, or to introduce any matter of controversy; but merely with the wish that the House should on such an occasion clearly and distinctly understand what were the reasons for which we opposed the policy of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Lancashire (Mr. Gladstone). We opposed the disestablishment of the Church in Ireland, firstly, because we considered it to be a retrograde policy—that it was calculated to revive and continue animosity, and that it ran counter to that policy of conciliation of classes and creeds which had for thirty. four years been pursued in this country, and not unsuccessfully. Secondly, we opposed it because we thought it endangered property. Thirdly, we opposed the policy of disestablishment because it disunited the principle of religion from authority, Now, Sir, before I advert, as I will do in a and by so doing, in our opinion, degraded moment, to the course which we feel it our and weakened authority. And fourthly, duty to take with reference to that vote lastly, and chiefly, we opposed it because, on Thursday night, I would ask the inif that principle were adopted, we could dulgence of the House to touch upon a see nothing that would prevent its appli- subject which, indeed, concerns the intecation to England sooner or later, and in rests of the House itself. We have been our opinion, much sooner than was an- accused and, I am sorry to say, not ticipated. The consequences of the appli- merely out-of-doors-of unworthily clingcation of that principle to England would ing to Office, and of governing this counbe very serious. If the union between try by a minority. Accustomed as I am Church and State is abolished, the Church to aspersion, I should be perfectly willing must either become an imperium in im- to let these taunts pass unnoticed, but perio, and so become probably more power- that they involve-in my mind and in ful than the State, and weaken the action the opinion of my Colleagues-a public of Government, or it must break into principle of importance. Now, Sir, in endless sects and schisms, which would the first place I would observe that I finally be absorbed by the tradition and know of nothing in my conduct in this discipline of the Church of Rome. I House, since I have sat in it, or in the say, then, that equally, in either alterna- conduct of any of the Gentlemen who tive, the Royal supremacy must be de- on former occasions have been my Colstroyed. The Royal supremacy has hitherto leagues in the Governments of Lord been looked upon as the corner-stone of Derby, which at all justifies this taunt the Constitution. It is universally ad- of unworthily clinging to Office. I would mitted to be the only security for religious remind the House that in 1852, when liberty; and, in our opinion, it is one of the I was leading this House, and was put main guarantees for our civil rights. These in a minority on the measures which were the reasons why the Government I brought forward, I was openly adjured, opposed the proposition of the right hon. and I was privately solicited-and Lord Gentleman. The House, however by a Derby experienced the same appeals-not large majority, decided in favour of the to resign our trust. We were assured, then, policy of the right hon. Gentleman, and by the highest authorities, by Gentlemen we had then to consider whether the vote who were our rivals, and many of whom of the House in that respect militated became our successors, that the vote they against the constitutional claim to which arrived at was not a vote-being a finanI have before referred, to advise Her Ma- cial vote-which authorized our resignajesty to dissolve Parliament, and which, tion of Office: and the utmost efforts were in our opinion, was not weakened by made to prevent our retirement. Now, |