supposed to indicate the slightest want of that regard
and respect to which he was so justly entitled. So far
from its having been the intention of the cabinet that
there should be a change in this bill, he had never for
one instant considered that, with regard to Irish paupers,
the change should be made in the same bill.—Mr. T.
Duncombe thought, if the explanation of the noble
lord was satisfactory to Mr. Baines (to whom he paid a
warm compliment), it could not be so to the house.—
Mr. Packe likewise expressed a strong sense of the
ability, industry, assiduity, and courtesy of the right
hon. gentleman.—Mr. Disraeli said, the statement of
Mr. Baines had left his honour untouched, and
congratulated the country upon his retaining an office
in which he had acquired the public confidence while
administering a most unpopular law. It was a
remarkable circumstance, Mr. Disraeli added, that within
twelve months five members of the administration had
felt it their duty to resign office, and almost immediately
to return to their posts. He thought some machinery
might be devised by which these internal bickerings
might be terminated without being divulged to the
country. A court of arbitration might be difficult to
construct; but he imagined that recourse might be had
either to the youngest bishop or to some retired
diplomatist, whose intervention might prevent the repetition
of scenes always to be deplored.

The third reading of the Income Tax Bill having been
moved, Sir J. Pakington criticised the mismanagement
of the public finances by the present Chancellor of
the Exchequer, and contended that, while the budget
was not proposed until the 18th of April, the government
had received on the 15th of that month the most
significant warning to prepare for war.—Mr. Cardvvell
submitted that the negotiations in April last exhibited
only a difficulty, by no means warranting the expectation
of war. Briefly noticing the criticisms upon the financial
policy of the government, he maintained that the
income tax was not more unjust in its operation than
other taxes, and that the reductions on tea and soap
were beneficial in themselves, and not inexpedient under
the circumstances in which they were proposed. The
result of their policy had been to inaugurate a period of
unexampled prosperity, and to give the country the
pride of knowing that all the war expenses which the
house had hitherto found it necessary to sanction, would
be defrayed without adding to the burdens of the great
masses of the people or to the amount of the national
debt.—Mr. Malins said his belief was that the finance
system of the government was most burdensome and
oppressive.—Mr. Laing pointed out the successful
results of the remission of indirect taxes during the last
ten years, and inferred thence that the great majority of
the country would prefer a double income tax to
retracing our steps by reverting to a system of indirect
taxation.—Mr. Vansittart and Mr. Greaves
censured generally the financial policy of the government.
—The bill was then read a third time and passed.

The adjourned debate upon the nomination of the
committee of inquiry upon Conventual and Monastic
Institutions was resumed.—Mr. Goold moved that the
name of Mr. T. Chambers, by whom the appointment
of the committee had been originally proposed, should
be omitted from the list of members. He objected to
the hon. gentleman, because his views were extreme and
his language offensive. The composition, of the whole
committee was, he urged, partial and one-sided,
comprising men of only one way of thinking, who had
already prejudged the question. The motion was
seconded by Sir J. Fitzgerald.—A division was taken
at once on the question that the name of Mr. Chambers
should be retained. There appeared—ayes, 117; noes, 60.
Mr. Chambers's name was then ordered to stand upon the
list of the committee.—The second name, that of
Mr. Walpole, having been proposed, Mr. Lucas moved,
as an amendment, that the further nomination should
be proceeded with that day six months. This amendment
was seconded by Mr. D. O'Connell.—The
personal qualifications of various proposed members of
the committee, and the general character of the body,
were remarked upon by Mr. Massey, Mr. Spooner,
Mr. J. Ball, Mr. Kinnaird, Mr. Goold, Mr. V. Scully,
Mr. Searjent Shee, and other members.—When the
discussion had lasted some hours the house manifested
great impatience, which was met by the supporters of
the amendment by a motion for adjournment, more than
once renewed, and negatived, upon division. Ultimately
their perseverance triumphed, and the debate stood
adjourned.

On Friday, March 31, Lord J. Russell moved the
Address in Reply to Her Majesty's Gracious Message,
of which the terms have already been made public.
Dwelling emphatically upon the vast responsibility of
the task which the British government had undertaken,
the noble lord recalled to mind that more than fifty years
had elapsed since a notification such as that conveyed by
the royal message had been communicated to the house,
and depicted in forcible language the advantages which
forty years of peace had enabled us to attain. The
momentous change that was now inaugurated by the
commencement of war called for the fullest explanations
to show its cause and justify its conclusion. Lord
J. Russell then entered into a detailed narrative of the
events and analysis of the arguments and propositions
with which the history of the last twelve months has
been filled, and in which Turkey, Russia, and the
Western Powers of Europe were all deeply interested.
Upon every point he contended that proof was shown
of a consistent determination on the part of the English
ministry to discountenance the attempts of Russia, to
repudiate her proffers and baffle her intrigues, at the
same time that no effort was spared to accomplish a
pacific solution of the difficulty. Showing how the
question grew continually more intricate and threatening,
he remarked that a last perplexity was added when
the Sultan declared war against Russia, admitting,
however, that the step must be considered justifiable, even
by those who most regretted it. Russia, indeed was
altogether in the wrong, and Turkey so much in the right
as to have compelled the adherence of two powers—
Prussia and Austria—who had long been closely united
with the Russian emperor. Bringing his narrative down
to the present moment, the noble lord stated the result
of the last opportunity for repentance offered to the
Czar, and urged that when it failed no alternative but
war was left, if they wished to maintain the equilibrium
of Europe. Under these circumstances war had been
declared, as announced by the royal message. It was an
event of the utmost gravity, but rendered indispensable
by considerations for the position of the country and the
interests of England and of Europe, which would be
imperilled by the aggrandisement of Russia. England
could not stand aloof from all the disputes that might
arise between the other European nations. She was
sometimes bound by duty and by interest to become a
party or an arbiter in those controversies. With respect
to the allies that were to stand by our side in the contest,
the noble lord stated once more that with France we had
been and were in cordial communion. With Austria
and Prussia the relationships were less satisfactory.
Those powers had joined in recommending the Russian
emperor to accept the last proposals for peace and
evacuate the principalities. But neither of them was
bound by a convention or had ever given an assurance
of joint action with the western powers. Prussia
especially had evinced a narrow spirit, and regarded the
question from a Germanic instead of an European point
of view. Nevertheless he hoped for the best, knowing
that the interests of Germany were identical with those
of England and France, and trusting that the sovereigns
of Germany would soon become awake to that truth.
As to the prospects and the terms of peace, he ventured
to say that the indispensable condition would be the full
security of the Turkish empire, though of the exact
manner in which that condition should be accomplished
it was premature to attempt a prognostic. Meanwhile
a convention had been agreed upon by England, France,
and Turkey, wanting only a formal ratification, which
specified the character and principles of the assistance to
be afforded to the Sultan, and bound him in turn not to
conclude peace without the consent of his allies.—Mr.
Layard, without intending to oppose the address,
announced his purpose of preferring a charge against the
government which, if the house thought fit, he should
hereafter frame into a formal discussion, and carry to a
solemn vote upon their conduct. For this purpose he