^y^iT 
 
 
 %
 
 a I E) RARY 
 
 OF THE 
 UN IVLRSITY 
 Of ILLI NOIS
 
 iB§>?^»^'li^' 
 
 m
 
 / 
 
 [Publication No. XIX.] 
 
 THE 
 
 MINISTERIAL CRISIS. 
 
 SPEECHES 
 
 OF THE 
 
 RIGHT HON. W. E. GLADSTONE, MR, 
 
 AND THE 
 
 RIGHT HON. B. DISRAELI, M.P. 
 
 (THE LATTER REVISED BY AUTHORITY). 
 
 PUBLISHED BY THE 
 NATIONAL UNION OP CONSERVATIVE AND CONSTITUTIONAL 
 
 ASSOCIATIONS, 
 PARLIAMENT STREET, WESTMINSTER. 
 
 Maech, 1873.
 
 London : 
 
 Printed by the Central Press Company (Limited), 
 112, Strand, W.C.
 
 HOUSE OF COMMONS, 
 
 THUKSDAY, MARCH 20th, 1873. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone : — I am now able to acquaint the House that those who 
 were my colleagues in the Cabinet until the vote of Wednesday morning 
 last, haye consented, and have received Her Majesty's gracious permission, 
 to resume the administration of the offices which they respectively held 
 (cheers), and that we are prepared to carry on the work of the Government 
 as before. But, Sir, a desire was naturally felt and expressed in many 
 quarters, after the very succinct statements which were made to the House 
 by myself, and subsequently by the right hon. gentleman opposite, for some 
 further information as to the manner in which the time was occupied between 
 Thursday afternoon in last week, when the right hon. gentleman, as he has stated, 
 declined to undertake the formation of a Government, and Sunday evening, 
 when I felt it my duty to place any services I could render at the disposal of 
 Her Majesty. I will endeavour, very succinctly, but I hope, very clearly, to 
 explain both the facts and the causes connected with the lapse of time. On 
 Friday morning I had the honour to receive from Her Majesty, in 
 writing, the reply which had been submitted to Her Majesty by the 
 right hon. gentleman ; and Her Majesty was pleased to ask for my advice 
 thereupon. Upon examining that reply I doubted whether I could collect 
 its effect with all the precision which was obviously requisite before I could 
 proceed to tender advice to Her Majesty founded upon it. I, therefore, 
 answered Her Majesty's reference to the effect that I did not feel quite cer- 
 tain as to the purport of that reply. On Friday evening I received a commu- 
 nication from Her Majesty, which, as I stated on Monday, completely put an 
 end to any doubt I might have entertained, and satisfied me that that reply 
 was an unconditional refusal on the part of the right hon. gentleman to take 
 office. Thereupon, I thought it my duty to submit a statement to Her 
 Majesty, the nature of which I will presently explain. That statement I 
 prepared on Friday evening, and sent to Her Majesty on Saturday, and it 
 was made known by Her Majesty to the right hon. gentleman opposite. Her 
 Majesty received the reply of the right hon. gentleman at Windsor early in
 
 the evening of Sunday, and at ten o'clock on tlie same evening Her 
 Majesty transmitted to me that rei3ly, together with Her Majesty's 
 inquiry whether I was prepared to resume my office in the 
 Government. Having read the reply, I believed its nature to be perfectly 
 unequivocal. It removed from my mind the last vestige of expectation I had 
 entertained that a Government might be formed by the efforts of the party 
 opposite ; and, therefore, without any delay whatever, on the same evening, 
 I returned an answer to Her Majesty to the effect that I would endeavour to 
 arrange for the reconstruction of, or the resumption of office by the Govern- 
 ment which had previously served Her Majesty. That task I undertook on 
 Monday, and it has now been completed. (Hear, hear. ) I have given thus 
 far merely what I may term the chronology of tlie case. I said that, on 
 learning that the reply tendered by the right hon. gentleman on Thursday 
 amounted to an unconditional negative, I felt it my duty to prepare and 
 submit to Hei Majesty a statement upon that subject. There was a diffe- 
 rence of opinion, in truth, between the right hon. gentleman and myself as 
 to the precise measure of what might be expected from a party in Opposition 
 under the circumstances in which the overthrow of the Government had 
 occurred. I do not consider that I am here to assert the correctness of my 
 own view of the case or to enter into any discussion whatever with regard to 
 it. It maybe a perfectly proper and legitimate subject for the consideration 
 of Parliament should Parliament be disposed to take it into consideration. 
 But my duty now is simply historical, and I do not wish, so far as it depends 
 upon me, to say anything which can by possibility lead to controversy on 
 this occasion. I will, therefore, state the opinion I entertain, which differs 
 ■ from the opinion of the right hon. gentleman, simply by reading, with Her 
 Majesty's permission, an extract from the statement which, as I have said, 
 I submitted to Her Majesty on Saturday. The statement contained a rather 
 lengthened reference to what had occurred on the occasions of previous 
 changes of Government. To all those references I shall now make no 
 allusion, but shall read the passage in which the view I took of the case is 
 set out : — 
 
 '' It is in Mr. Gladstone's view of the utmost importance to the public 
 welfare that the nation should be constantly aware that the Par- 
 liamentary action certain or likely to take effect in the overthrow of a 
 Government, the reception and treatment of a summons from your Majesty 
 to meet the necessity which such action has powerfully aided in creating, 
 and again the resumption of office by those who have deliberately laid it 
 down, are uniformly viewed as matters of the utmost gravity, requiring 
 time, counsel, and deliberation among those who are parties to them, 
 and attended with serious responsibilities. Mr. Gladstone will not 
 and does not suppose that the efforts of the Opposition to 
 defeat the Government on Wednesday morning were made with a 
 previously formed intention on their iDart to refuse any aid to your 
 Majesty, if the need should arise, in providing for the Government of the 
 
 /^\%
 
 country ; and the summary refusal, which is the only fact before him, he 
 takes to be not in full correspondence, either with the exigencies of the case 
 or, as he has shewn, with Parliamentary usage. In humbly submitting this 
 representation to your Majesty, Mr. Gladstone's wish is to point out the 
 difficulties in which he would find himself placed where he to ask your 
 Majesty for authority to inquire from his late colleagues whether they, or 
 any of them, were prepared, if your Majesty should call on them, to resume 
 their offices, for they would certainly, he is persuaded, call on him, for their 
 own honour, and in order to the usefulness of their further service if it 
 -should be rendered, to prove to them that according to usage every means 
 had been exhausted on the part of the Opposition for providing for the 
 Government of the country, or, at least, that nothing more was to be 
 expected from that quarter." 
 
 Sir, the conclusion at which I arrived on Sunday evening was distinctly and 
 definitely this — that nothing more was to be expected from that quarter, 
 and consequently I thought the time had arrived when it was my duty un- 
 equivocally and at once to tender to her Majesty my humble services. It 
 has been remarked by many, and probably by impartial observers, that the 
 delay which occurred between Thursday and Sunday was due to my reluc- 
 tance to resume office. I can only say it was not consciously due to such 
 reluctance. I should never think that a sentiment of this kind, whatever 
 might be its value, was a reason for delay in settling a question material 
 to the interests of the country. (Hear, hear.) At the same time I do not 
 disguise the fact that I felt reluctance, and I may have been unconsciously 
 influenced by it. I felt it i)ersonally, from a desire for rest (cheers), 
 the title to which had possibly been in some degree earned, so far as it can be 
 earned, by labour. (Cheers.) I felt this reluctance also because I do not 
 think that, as a general rule, the experience we have had in former years 
 of what may be called returning or resuming Governments has been very 
 favourable in its character. There was a case in 1832 when the Government 
 of Lord Grey, after a crisis in the House of Lords, returned to office, and 
 returned even with augmented vigour, to pursue their task. But that was 
 a case in which the Government returned to take up again the Bill upon 
 which the crisis had occurred and carry it to a successful conclusion. Since 
 that time there have been similar cases in which Governments after resigning 
 have returned to office. I do not wish to refer to them in particular, but I 
 think that the subsequent fortunes of such Governments lead to the belief 
 that, upon the whole, though such a return may be the lesser of two evils, 
 yet it is not a thing in itself to be desired. (Hear, hear.) It reminds me of 
 that which was described by the Roman General according to a noble ode of 
 
 Horace : — 
 
 " Neque amissos colores 
 " Lana refert, medicata fuco ; 
 
 " Nee vera virtus, cum semel excidit, 
 " Curat reponi deterioribus. " 
 
 (Hear, hear.) And I am bound to say that there is a special consideration
 
 which likewise aided to inspire and strengthen the same feeling in my mind 
 on the present occasion, because we must all feel that the relations of the 
 party in Opposition to the party in Office, after what has occurred, and after 
 the negative answer given to Her Majesty — I am not now insinuating any 
 opinion as to the propriety of the negative, but am simply refering to the 
 fact — the position even of the Opposition itself relatively to the Government 
 is to some extent modified ; and I greatly doubt whether that modification is 
 of a character likely to contribute to the efficient and satisfactory 
 working of our system of Parliamentary Government. (Hear, hear.) 
 Such, Sir, are the views which undoubtedly I entertain and which 
 possibly may have influenced my conduct in a manner more 
 decided than I have been myself aware of. But we have resumed our 
 offices and, having resumed our offices, we shall endeavour fully and 
 honourably to discharge the duties appertaining to them. (Cheers.) We 
 have resumed our offices with the belief that there is nothing in the events 
 which occurred last week to warrant us in arriving at any conclusion 
 whatever — any special conclusion whatever — with regard to the duration of 
 the existence of the present Parliament, as connected with any particular 
 course of business or any particular limit of time, (Cheers, and some 
 murmurs.) In that respect we stand now as we stood before, 
 prepared to abide the course of events and to act as they may 
 require. (Hear, hear.) But I have felt it my duty to say this much 
 upon the subject because nothing can be more inconvenient and mora 
 injurious to the country than the prevalence of a floating, indefinite opinion 
 (cheers) of an intention — not avowed by the Government, and not distinctly 
 disavowed — to bring the present Parliament as soon as possible to a conclu- 
 sion. (Cheers.) Such an intention is, I trust, now distinctly disavowed 
 (hear, hear), but of course I need not say that we retain the liberty which is 
 at all times essential to the discharge of the functions of a Government. 
 (Hear, hear.) We shall endeavour to proceed, both with respect to legisla- 
 tion and administration, in the same manner and upon the same principles as 
 those which have heretofore governed our conduct, and we shall address 
 ourselves to the discharge of our arduous public duties, relying stedfastly 
 upon the continued confidence and support of the House of Commons. 
 (Loud cheers.) 
 
 Mr. Disraeli : — Before I refer to the allusions which the right hon. 
 gentleman has made to some controversial elements which during the 
 last few days may have arisen between him and myself, with respect 
 either to the conduct of this side of the House in reference to the recent 
 vote, or my own in declining the high responsibility which Her Majesty 
 graciously suggested to me to undertake, I think it may be convenient 
 that I should as clearly as I can place before the House exactly what
 
 part I have taken in these recent transactions, and give fully the reasons for 
 the counsel which I presumed to offer Her Majesty under the circumstances. 
 It was on this day week, when I was about to enter the House of 
 Commons, that I had the honour of receiving a letter from the Queen in- 
 forming me that Mr. Gladstone — I am correct in mentioning the right hon. 
 gentleman's name (Hear, hear) — had just then quitted the Palace, having 
 offered his own resignation and that of his colleagues to Her Majesty in 
 consequence of the vote at which the House of Commons arrived on the 
 preceding Tuesday, and that Her Majesty had accepted those resignations. 
 The Queen inquired from me whether I would undertake to form a Govern- 
 ment, and commanded my attendance at the Palace. When I was in 
 audience I inquired of Her Majesty whether she wished that I should give 
 a categorical answer to the question asked in Her Majesty's letter, or 
 whether she desired that I should enter fully into the political situation. 
 Her Majesty was graciously pleased to say that she should like to have an 
 answer to that question, and that afterwards she wished me fully 
 and freely to speak upon the present condition of affairs. The 
 question being whether I would undertake to form a Govern- 
 ment, I at once said that I believed I should have no material 
 difficulty in forming an Administration which could carry on the 
 affairs of this country with efficiency, and be entitled to Her 
 Majesty's confidence, but that I could not undertake to conduct Her 
 Majesty's affairs in the present House of Commons. (Hear, hear.) After 
 that I proceeded, with Her Majesty's permission, to lay before the Queen 
 the reasons which had induced me to arrive at this conclusion ; and I will 
 now, in as succinct a manner as I can, give these reasons to the House. I 
 called Her Majesty's attention to the fact that although the course of the 
 public elections during the last two years had shewn, in a manner which I 
 think must be acknowledged by all impartial persons, that there was a 
 change, and even a considerable change, in public opinion and in favour of 
 the narty with whom I have the honour to act in Parliament — (Hear, hear) — 
 still it was a fact which ought to be placed clearly before Her Majesty that 
 the right hon. gentleman opposite, notwithstanding all these gains by the 
 Conservative party, was supported by a very large majority, and that I could 
 not place that majority at a figure which could be accurately expressed un- 
 less I stated that it approached more nearly to 90 than 80. I believe I was 
 correct in saying the majority of the right hon. gentleman was 88. Then 
 I called the attention of the Queen to the fact that the recent division indi- 
 cated no elements to which I could look with any confidence to obtain subsi- 
 diary or extraneous aid which would in any considerable degree, or perhaps in 
 any degree whatever, modify the numerical position of the right hon. gentle- 
 man (Hear, hear) ; that the discomfiture of the Government was caused,
 
 8 
 
 and the majority against them created, by the vote of a considerable section 
 of the Liberal party, consisting of Irish members, who might fairly be des- 
 cribed as representing the Roman Catholic interest, and that there was na 
 common bond of union between myself and that party. (Loud Opposition 
 cheers.) I stated that they would act, and most honourably act, with a view 
 to eflfect the object which they wish to accomplish, namely, the establishment 
 of a Roman Catholic University ; that in my opinion that question had been 
 definitively decided by the nation at the last General Election ; but that, 
 totally irrespective of that national decision, events had occurred in Par- 
 liament since which rendered it quite impossible for me to listen to any sug- 
 gestions of the kind, because, since the last General Election, the endow- 
 ments of the Protestant Church of Ireland had been taken away from it 
 (cheers) — a policy which I entirely disapproved, which I had resisted, and 
 which they had supported (Hear, hear), and which, having been carried into 
 eflfect, offered in my mind a permanent and insurmountable barrier to the 
 policy which they wished to see pursued. (Hear, hear.) Under these cir- 
 cumstances, I had to place before Her Majesty that I with my colleagues should 
 have to conduct her affairs in a House of Commons with a most powerful 
 majority arrayed against us. I had to point out to Her Majesty that this was . 
 a position of afi'airs of which I had some personal experience (laughter and 
 cheers) ; that I believed it to be one detrimental to the public interest 
 (hear, hear) ; that it permitted abstract resolutions on political affairs to 
 be brought forward by persons who had no political responsibility, 
 and that those resolutions were referred to afterwards, and 
 precipitated the solution of great public questions which were not ripe 
 for settlement. I represented to Her Majesty that this was a state of 
 affairs which diminished authority, weakened Government, certainly added' 
 no lustre to the Crown, but, above all, destroyed that general public confidence 
 which is the most vigorous and legitimate source of power. (Hear, hear.)' 
 Under these circumstances I felt it my duty to ask Her Majesty graciously 
 to relieve me from the task which she had suggested to my consideration. 
 Now, Sir, it will be asked, and has been asked, no doubt, in every 
 street and every chamber in this town, why, when being able to form an 
 efficient Administration, and having been summoned to the Councils ot Her 
 Majesty deprived of the assistance of her previous advisers, the only 
 obstacle before me being that I had to encounter a hostile majority in the 
 House of Commons— it will be asked, I say, why, under these circumstan- 
 ces, I did not advise Her Majesty to dissolve Parliament. To that point, 
 with the permission of the House, I will now address myself. Sir, a Disso- 
 lution of Parliament is a political function respecting which considerable 
 misconception exists. It is supposed to be an act which can be performed' 
 with great promptitude, and which is a resource to which a Minister may
 
 9 
 
 recur with the utmost facilit}-. But the fact is that great mistakes prevail 
 respecting this important exercise of the Prerogative. A Dissohition of 
 Parliament is a very different instrument in different hands. It is an in- 
 strument of which a Minister in office, with his Government established, 
 can avail himself with a facility of which a Minister v/ho is only going to 
 accede to office is deprived. (Hear, hear.) A Minister in office, having his 
 Government formed, with many indications probably of the critical circum- 
 stances which may render it imperative on him to advise the Sovereign to 
 exercise this Prerogative, has the opportunity of disposing of the public 
 business preparatory to the act which he advises. But the position of a 
 Minister who is only going to accede to office is in this respect very different. 
 In the first place, he has to form his Administration, and that is a work of 
 great time, of great labour, and of great responsibility. (Hear, hear.) It 
 is not confined merely to the construction of a Cabinet, which, when you are 
 honoured by the confidence of many companions in public life, is often the 
 leaat difficult part of the task ; but it requires communication with probably 
 more than fifty individuals, all of them persons of consideration, with whom 
 you must personally confer. The construction of a Ministry falls entirely 
 on the individual entrusted with its formation. It is a duty which can be 
 delegated to no one. All the correspondence and all the interviews must be 
 conducted by himself, and, without dwelling on the sense of responsibility 
 involved, the perception of fitness requisite, and the severe impartiality 
 necessary in deciding on contending claims, the mere physical effort is not 
 slight. As a matter of time it materially affects the position of the Govern- 
 ment. Now, in the present case it would not have been possible for me to have 
 formed a Government and to have placed it on that bench and in the other 
 House in working gear until Easter. Well, the holidays would have intervened. 
 After the holidays it might have been possible, by having recourse to methods 
 I greatly disapprove — namely, provisional finance, by votes of credit, or 
 rather votes on account, and by taking a step which, for reasons I will after- 
 wards give, I highly reprobate— namely, accepting the Estimates of our 
 predecessors — it might have been possible to have dissolved Parliament in 
 the early part of the month of May. But when the month of May arrived, 
 this question would occur— what are you going to dissolve Parliament about 1 
 (Cheers.) There was no particular issue before the country. (Cheers.) At least 
 it cannot be pretended for a moment that there was any one of those issues 
 before the country that have previously justified extraordinary Dissolutions 
 of Parliament — questions which the country wished passionately to decide, 
 and when in a political exigency of that kind a Minister is perfectly 
 justified in having recourse to provisional finance, or any other means 
 by which he can obtain the earliest decision of the country. (Hear, 
 hear.) I wish the House for a moment to consider impartially what
 
 10 
 
 was the real position of affairs. Her Majesty's Ministers had resigned. 
 Her Majesty had called on the leader of the Opposition to form a Ministry, 
 while he had nearly a majority of ninety arrayed against him. It was in 
 his opinion necessary, of course, in the circumstances to appeal to the coun- 
 try, in order that that majority might be changed, probably into one, 
 though perhaps not of that amount (a laugh), in his favour. (Cheers. ) But 
 if that be the real state of the case — if there were no issue before the coun- 
 try — for I do not suppose any one would maintain that the Irish University 
 Bill was a question on which we could dissolve — the right hon. gentleman, 
 by dissolving, might have wished to punish those who voted against him, but 
 I could not take that course, for I was one of the criminals (cheers and a 
 laugh) — if the case be as I state, that we could not carry on affairs without 
 an appeal to the country upon grounds which would justify the consti- 
 tuencies in giving us a majority, is it not quite clear that we could not 
 appeal to the country without having a matured and complete policy l 
 (Cheers and counter cheers.) Hon. gentlemen opposite may laugh at the 
 word " policy ;" but I would suggest that it is impossible for those who sit 
 on the Opposition bench suddenly to have a matured policy to present to 
 the people of this country in case Parliament is dissolved. (Cheers.) An 
 Opposition, of whatever party it may be formed, is essentially a critical body : 
 it is not a constructive one, and it cannot be. Upon all the great subjects of 
 the day, no doubt, gentlemen sitting on this side of the House have certain 
 views and principles which guide them in dealing with the circumstances and 
 measures before Parliament ; but they must know that on all these questions 
 they cannot for a moment rival the information possessed by a Government. 
 However they may wish to do their duty to this House and offer their views 
 and arguments for discussion, there is a degree of information which it is 
 impossible to obtain by any but a Minister. Take a case illustrative of this. 
 There is the question of our relations at this moment with Central Asia. 
 No one will deny for a moment that this is a question of the highest import- 
 ance — (Hear, hear) ; — it is one in some degree of instant interest, but still 
 more grave from its ultimate consequences. If there was a discussion of the 
 Central Asian question Imyself, or my friends around me, might presume to offer 
 our opinions to the House ; but, so far as I am concerned, I should speak, 
 as I trust I do on all matters of foreign policy, with reserve and miaffected 
 diffidence, because I know very well that, were I to cross the floor of this 
 House and enter the archives of Downing-street, I should find information 
 there which I do not now possess, which might modify, nay, entirely change, 
 my views, which might render it even necessary that, after much delibe- 
 ration, we should place ourselves in communication with agents and authori- 
 ties, and that we might even have to shape a particular course. All this 
 cannot be done in a moment. And yet, how could we dissolve Parliament,
 
 11 
 
 and appeal to the country for its confidence, without guiding it on a sub- 
 ject which, although the English people are not fanatically anxious to inter- 
 fere in foreign affairs, unquestionably much occupies the public mind, and 
 especially of those thoughtful classes who influence opinion. (Hear, 
 hear.) And yet until we were in office, and had the means of consider" 
 ing and maturing our policy on the subject, the House must feel that 
 would have been imj)ossible. We should have had to go on that and other 
 matters with a blank sheet of paper to the constituencies. Would that, I 
 ask, have been an appeal becoming us to make to a sensible people like the 
 English nation '? (Cheers.) Take another question. My right hon. friend 
 the member for the University of Oxford (Mr. Gathorne Hardy) has given 
 notice of a motion, upon a subject infinitely more important than any 
 Irish University question — (Hear, hear), — which concerns the highest in- 
 terests of the country — one on which it is, in my opinion, the duty of a 
 Minister to take a decided course, and arrive at a precise resolution — I 
 speak of those three rules which Her Majesty's Government are 
 attempting to introduce into International Law, which touch most 
 intimately the rights of neutrals, and if misinterpreted must 
 injuriously affect this country. (Hear, hear.) How would it be 
 possible to appeal to the people of England so to exercise their 
 suffrages that they should convert the large majority of the right hon. 
 gentlemen opposite into a majority in favour of those who sit on this side of 
 the House if we blinked giving our opinion on that vast question ? 
 (Cheers.) They would say, you appeal to the country, you ask for our con- 
 fidence — what do you mean to do about that mysterious and perplexing 
 question of the three new rules proposed to be introduced into Inter- 
 national Law which affect all the rights of neutrals, and on which the posi- 
 tion of this country may ultimately depend ? It is clear that on such a matter 
 we must sjjeak with decision and act with energy. (Cheers.) How are we to 
 do that unless we have the opportunity of investigating affairs with the in- 
 formation which is only at the command of a Minister who can then come for- 
 ward with a policy for which he is ready to be responsible ? (Cheers.) I do 
 not wish to push the case with regard to foreign affairs farther, but I would 
 remind the House that there is also the question of the mode of payment 
 of the compensation money awarded by the Tribunal of Geneva. (Hear, hear.) 
 That also is a question in which the country wants to be guided and instruc- 
 ted by a Ministry. (Cheers.) There is, however, one other point I cannot 
 help noticing, and that is the French Treaty of Commerce. I have en- 
 deavoured to follow the negotiations with respect to that Treaty, but I confess 
 I feel somewhat at sea with regard to them. I really do not know the engage- 
 ments into which the Government are about to enter, but it is a subject 
 of vast interest to the country. (Hear, hear.) Judging from
 
 12 
 
 the communications made to me within the last week from the great 
 seats of industry, no Minister could dissolve without speaking on that sub- 
 ject in a precise and definite manner. (Pheers.) 
 
 I mentioned to the House just now the necessity, in case we dissolved 
 Parliament in the month of May — which would be the earliest possible 
 period — of accepting the Estimates of our predecessors, which are on the 
 table. As a general rule, and at all times, I highly reprobate that^ course. 
 Nothing but a political exigency, nothing but the existence of a question' 
 on which the country is passionately determined to have an instant decision, 
 can justify a Minister in taking that course. But look to our particular- 
 position with respect to this subject. You must remember that at the last 
 General Election the country was particularly appealed to on the head 
 of Expenditure. (Cheers.) The Expenditure of the Government of which 
 I was the head was denounced as " profligate ;" and the manner in which it 
 was so held up to the people of this country greatly influenced the Elections 
 — (cheers) — quite as much as the question of that unfortunate institution, 
 the Irish Church, the spoliation of which, I believe, is not now so popular 
 as it was at that time. (Cheers.) I speak with due diffidence on the point ;. 
 there are alterations made in the mode of keeping the accounts since the 
 Election of 1868 ; but, making all the deductions I can on this head, it 
 does not appear to me that the expenditure of the country at the present 
 moment is less than it was when it was denounced at the Election of 
 1868. I certainly do not wish on this occasion to make any charge 
 against the present Government ; but this I may say, it is a subject most 
 important and interesting to the people of England, and one which, if I 
 were a responsible Minister to-morrow, it would be my first task and effort 
 to scrutinize with a view to find out whether there was any ground for the 
 denunciation of the expenditure of 1868, and whether there are adequate 
 grounds for the expenditure which at present prevails. This is a most 
 grave business, which cannot be done in a moment. The Estimates of thi& 
 country cannot and ought not to be settled by a few Treasury clerks. I 
 have endeavoured to impress upon the House more than once — and gener- 
 ally speaking the principle has been accepted — that Expenditure depends 
 upon policy ; and, therefore, before we could decide what was the fitting 
 expenditure of the country, especially in armaments, we must be minutely 
 and accurately informed what are our engagements and relations with the 
 various Powers of the world. If it be true that Expenditure depends upon 
 policy, I beg the House to remember that, since I was at the head of public 
 affairs, the greatest Revolution has happened in Europe since the first great 
 French Revolution at the end of the last century. Much greater changes have 
 occurred in Europe since the Government of 1868 than were effected by the 
 Congress and the Treaty of Vienna. The Congress and Treaty of Vienna left
 
 13 
 
 the boundaries of France untouched ; they left Germany divided among a 
 variety of Princes and Potentates ; they left a divided Italy ; and they left 
 Rome in the possession of the Pope. All these conditions have changed ; 
 and many of the most important considerations that the Government of the 
 day had to enter into when they decided upon our armaments in 1867 and 
 1868 are entirely changed. I do not mean to say there may not be new 
 quarters in which it may be necessary to take precautions ; but the House 
 will, I think, on reflection, agree with me that all the data upon which th e 
 expenditure for our armaments was calculated in 1868 are entirely changed. 
 The consideration of these subjects would be a task which a new Government 
 must enter into heartily, sincerely, and thoroughly. It would be impossible 
 to go to the country, especially upon this subject of Expenditure, in perfect 
 silence, and offer only a blank sheet. It is quite clear, if that be the case, 
 we have first of all to consider the engagements and relations of this country 
 with foreign Powers ; secondly, whether our armaments are eflicient and 
 sufficient for the purpose ; and, thirdly, whether that efficiency and sufficiency 
 have been attained in the most economical manner. Is this an affair that 
 can be accomplished with the faciKty with which, sitting on an Opposition 
 bench, you can write an address to your constituents ? The House 
 will see that, before making an appeal to the country, it would be 
 necessary that we should encounter preliminary duties of the gravest re- 
 sponsibility. I go further on this head. However auxious a Govern- 
 ment may be, in the contemplation of a Dissolution of Parliament, to 
 wind up public affairs, however anxious they may be to discharge only 
 those duties which seem absolutely necessary for carrying on the 
 public service, I have observed that there is always some large 
 question which cannot be shelved or shunted, either from the 
 peculiar interest which the country takes in it, or the engagements of suc- 
 cessive Ministers, and sometimes, and not uncommonly, from its indirect 
 influence upon Imperial finance ; and there is one of those questions now 
 — there is the question of Local Taxation. It would be impossible for a 
 Ministry formed from the benches on either side, certainly from these 
 benches, to go to the country and to be silent on the question of Local 
 Taxation. It is no light matter to grapple with. It is possible, I give no 
 opinion on that head now, that in attempting to settle it, you may have to 
 interfere with your Imperial finance, and that a Budget may be affected 
 by it. Well, what is the upshot ? (Hear.) The upshot is that 
 if we had accepted office we should have had to conduct the affairs 
 of Her Majesty's Government in Parliament for the whole Session, 
 and for a Session of no ordinary length, and I was not prepared to take a 
 step of that kind. I know from experience, as I mentioned before, what is 
 the consequence to a party and to the public interest, of endeavouring to
 
 14 
 
 carry on the Government of the country in a House in which a large majority 
 is arrayed against you. I am not referring to the period when I had the 
 honour to introduce and conduct through the House a Bill to amend the 
 Representation of the People. I said then, and I say now, I think that the 
 conduct of the House to Her Majesty's Ministers was independent, generous, 
 and spirited. To that Bill the right hon. gentleman opposite, as the leader 
 of the Opposition, offered an uncompromising opposition. I had the 
 assistance of the House, and that Bill was triumphantly read a second time ; 
 and after the Easter holidays, when the right hon. gentleman rallied his forces 
 and himself brought forward a motion which, if carried, would have been 
 fatal to it, the right hon. gentleman was singularly defeated. Therefore, 
 it is a perversion of terms to say that at that time we were carrying on the 
 Government with a minority, because on critical occasions we had a majo- 
 rity, and the leader of the Opposition was defeated. (Hear, hear.) But, 
 Sir, I have had some experience of conducting the Government really in 
 a minority. 1 take the case of the Government of 1852. It is well known 
 that Lord Derby was most disinclined to take office. He had declined it in 1851 
 under circumstances most painful to himself. The Queen was left for forty- 
 eight hours without a Government. In 1852 Lord Derby was obliged to take 
 office ; yet before he took it he made overtures to Lord Palmerston to con- 
 struct a Government with him ; and Lord Palmerston, who seemed not 
 unwilling to assist my noble friend, declined, on the ground that he had no 
 iriends. (Laughter.) A man whom we all remember as the most popular 
 Minister in England gravely, and I believe sincerely, gave that as his 
 reason. I believe Lord Derby on that occasion made overtures also to 
 the right hon. gentleman opposite. [Mr. Gladstone: ''No."] At all 
 events he spared no pains, and I know that to many gentlemen who 
 were not in political association with him he made overtures. Lord 
 Derby was obliged to take the reins of Government. He formed a Cabinet 
 of individuals who had never been in office ; and the leadership of this 
 House, for the only time, I believe, since the days of Lord Shelburne, 
 was entrusted to an individual who had not the slightest official 
 experience. If ever there was an occasion, one would think, for generous 
 treatment on the part of the House of Commons, however great the majority 
 might be, that was the instance. But what happened ? The moment he took 
 office the supplies were voted for six months only, forcing him to call Par- 
 liament together in November, when he was obliged to bring forward remedial 
 measures essentially financial, and when the permanent officers of the 
 Government declared that the Estimates could only be imaginary. I know well, 
 and those who are around me know well, what will occur when a Ministry 
 takes office and attempts to carry on the Government with a minority 
 during the Session with the view of ultimately appealing to the people.
 
 15 
 
 We should have what is called '' fair play." That is to say no vote of want 
 of confidence should be proposed, and chiefly because it would be of no use. 
 There would be no wholesale censure, but retail humiliation. A right hon. 
 gentleman will come down here, he will arrange his thumb-screws and other 
 instruments of torture on this table — (laughter) — we shall never ask for a 
 vote without a lecture, we shall never perform the most ordinary 
 routine office of Government without there being annexed to it some 
 pedantic and ignominious condition. ("No, no," and cheers.) I wish 
 to express nothing but what I know from painful personal experience. 
 (Laughter.) No expression of the kind I have just encountered 
 could divest me of the painful memory ; I wish it could. I wish it was not 
 my duty to take this view of the case. In a certain time we should enter 
 into the Paradise of abstract resolutions. One day hon. gentlemen cannot with- 
 stand the golden opportunity of asking the House to affirm that the Income 
 Tax should no longer form one of the features of our Ways and Means. Of 
 course a proposition of that kind would be scouted by the right hon. gentle- 
 man and all his colleagues ; but then they might dine out that day — (laughter) 
 — and the resolution might be carried, as resolutions of that kind have been. 
 Then another gentleman, distinguished for his knowledge of men and 
 things, would move that the Diplomatic Service be abolished. While hon. 
 gentlemen opposite were laughingin theirsleeves at the mover, they would vote 
 for the motion in order to put the Government into a minority. (Renewed 
 laughter.) For this reason : — '' Why should men," T;hey would say, 
 "govern the country who are in a minority?" totally forgetting 
 that we acceded to office in the spirit of the Consti- 
 tution, quite oblivious of the fountain and origin of the position 
 we occupied, and it would go very hard if on some sultry after- 
 noon some member should not " rush in where angels fear to tread " and suc- 
 cessfully assimilate the borough and the county franchise. (Loud cheers.) 
 And so things would go on until the bitter end — until at last even the Appro- 
 priation Bill has passed, Parliament is dissolved, and we appeal to those 
 millions who perhaps six months before might have looked upon us as the 
 vindicators of intolerable grievances, but who how receive us as a 
 defeated, discredited, and degraded Ministry whose services can be neither 
 of value to the Crown nor a credit to the nation. (Hear.) Well, Sir, with 
 these views, I think the House cannot be surprised that I should have felt it 
 my duty, in concurrence with all those with whom I have acted in public 
 life, humbly to represent to Her Majesty that I did not think it would be 
 for the public advantage or for the honour of the Crown that under such 
 circumstances — namely, the existence of a powerful majority against us — we 
 should attempt to conduct Her Majesty's affairs. 
 
 Having announced that, I did not feel it my duty to recommend
 
 16 
 
 Her Majesty to dissolve Parliament. I might, so far as Parlia- 
 mentary precedent is concerned, here drop this subject ; but there 
 have been misconceptions on this head which I wish to remove, 
 and therefore I may be allowed to say that Her Majesty on this 
 occasion — with that judicial impartiality which she disj^lays to all 
 who serve her — (hear, hear) — when, after the enumeration of these 
 difficulties, I hesitated in accepting the offer that was so 
 graciously made to me, did impress upon me that if I" under- 
 took the task I might count upon her most cordial support, 
 and that if a dissolution could at all assist me I might depend upon the 
 exercise of the Royal Prerogative for that result. (Hear, hear.) How- 
 ever, I was obliged to represent to Her Majesty, by means of the details 
 which I have given you, though not, perhaps, at so much technical length — (a 
 laugh) — that a dissolution of Parliament would not remove the .obstacles to 
 which I have referred. 
 
 I ought not to pass unnoticed the observations with which the right 
 hon. gentleman commenced his address. The right hon. gentleman 
 has, with candour and temper, referred to the delay which elapsed 
 between Thursday and Sunday in forming a Cabinet, and I think the 
 House will agree with me that he has acquitted me — at [least I understood him 
 to do so — of being the cause of that delay. The right hon. gentleman seems 
 to have misapprehended the decision which, on my part, I thought was 
 sino-ularly precise and definite. The right hon. gentleman has referred to a 
 controversy between us which has not appeared before the House on the 
 conduct of the Opposition in the course which they took on the motion for 
 the second reading of the University Bill. I have no wish to enter into any 
 discussion on this subject. The right hon. gentleman will bear me out that 
 in my letter to Her Majesty I at least did not shrink from arguing the 
 -question and vindicating on constitutional grounds the course which 
 we took. I refrain from further alluding to this subject, but I must 
 say, in passing, I thought it was a most gracious condescension on 
 the part of Her Majesty, to deign to become the medium of communica- 
 tions in order, to use* Her Majesty's language, " to prevent, if possible, 
 misconceptions." (Cheers.) As to the charge against myself that I did not 
 take sufficient pains or exhaust the means of forming a Cabinet on the 
 occasion, and which appears to have been the cause of the hesitation in the 
 ri<^ht hon. gentleman's mind, I hope that, as the right hon. gentleman has 
 read a passage on that head, I may also read a passage from my letter to 
 Her Majesty on the subject. In it I say :— 
 
 " The charge against the Leader of the Opposition personally, that by 
 *his summary refusal' to undertake your Majesty's Government he was 
 failing in his duty to your Majesty and the country, is founded altogether 
 
 1
 
 17 
 
 on a gratuitous assumption by Mr. Gladstone, which pervades his letter, that 
 the means of Mr, Disraeli to carry on the Government were not ' exhausted.' 
 A brief statement of facts will at once dispose of this charge. Before Mr. 
 Disraeli, with due deference, offered his decision to your Majesty, he had 
 enjoyed the opportunity of consulting those gentlemen >vith whom he acts in 
 public life, and they were unanimously of opinion that it would 
 be prejudicial to the interests of the country for a Conservative 
 Administration to attempt to conduct your Majesty's affairs 
 in the present House of Commons. What other means were 
 at Mr. Disraeli's disposal ? "Was he to open negotiations with a section of 
 the late Ministry — (loud laughter) — and waste days in barren interviews, 
 vain applications, and the device of imj)0ssible combinations I Was he to 
 make overtures to the considerable section of the Liberal party who had 
 voted against the Government — namely, the Irish Roman Catholic gentle- 
 men ? Surely, Mr. Gladstone could not seriously contemplate this ? 
 Impressed from experience, obtained in the very instances to which Mr. 
 Gladstone refers, of the detrimental influence upon Government of a crisis 
 unnecessarily prolonged by hollow negotiations, Mr. Disraeli humbly con- 
 ceived that he was taking a course at once advantageous to the public 
 interests, and tending to spare your Majesty unnecessary anxiety by at once 
 laying before your Majesty the real position of affairs." 
 
 (Cheers.) I spoke particularly from the experience which I, then myself 
 Inexperienced in public affairs, obtained when acting with Lord Derby and 
 witnessing the course he took with reference to the Government of 1852, 
 and if it be, as I hold, one of the greatest disadvantages of these 
 political crises that so much public time should be wasted, that Parliament 
 should become dislocated, that public business should be postponed or 
 measures given up, and that the public mind should be di^urbed, I consider 
 I was doing my duty when I took every possible means to make the period 
 during which the right lion, gentleman was absent from office as 
 short as possible. While upon this subject, I beg to say that 
 although I did not presume to give any advice to Her Majesty as to whom 
 she should send for, as this is a peculiar right of the Crown with 
 which no one ought to interfere, yet, in speaking of the difficulties of 
 the position in which Her Majesty was placed, |I did give my opinion that I 
 thought the cause for the resignation of the right hon. gentleman and his 
 colleagues was hardly adequate to the great event which had occurred. It 
 ;appeared to me that, under the circumstances of the'case, the right hon. gentle- 
 man was scarcely justified in the course^he pursued, because we must remember 
 that the unfortimate University Bill had been unpopular in tliis House from 
 the beginning, and that a large section of the Liberal party opposed it on 
 the same grounds on which it was opposed by gentlemen on this side of the 
 House — namely, that it sacrificed the educational interests of Ireland to the 
 claims of the Roman Catholic hierarchy. When we took that line in de- 
 bate, it was with a complete anticipation [that every gentleman connected 
 with the Roman Catholic interest in Ireland would support Her 
 Majesty's Ministers. (Ironical cheers and laughter from the Ministerial
 
 18 
 
 side.) But I said it was possible that the right hon. gentleman, in conse- 
 quence, I will not say of a hasty, but, as I think, of an unfor- 
 tunate, expression he used a month ago when he introduced the Bill, might 
 feel his honour concerned so far as to be obliged to resign office. 
 As regards his honour a statesman cannot be too nice and scrupulous ; 
 but I thought the right hon. gentleman's honour was vindicated by the act 
 of resignation, and that he might return to office without the slightest diffi- 
 culty. (Hear, hear.) 
 
 I am quite aware that the counsel I humbly recommended to Her 
 Majesty in these negotiations may have been disappointing to some of 
 my supporters in this House — (cries of ''No, no," from the Opposition) — 
 and to many of my supporters in the country ; but I would fain believe that, 
 when they have given a mature and an impartial consideration to all the 
 circumstances, they will not visit my conduct with a verdict of unqualified 
 condemnation. (Cheers.) I believe that the Tory party at the present time 
 occupies the most satisfactory position which it has held since the days of its 
 greatest statesmen, Mr, Pitt and Lord Grenville. It has divested itself of 
 those excrescences which are not indigenous to its native growth, but 
 which in a time of long prosperity were the consequence partly of negli- 
 gence, and partly, perhaps, in a certain degree, of ignorance of its traditions. 
 (Laughter from the Ministerial side.) We are now emerging from the fiscal 
 period in which almost all the public men of this generation have been 
 brought up. All the questions of trade and navigation, of the incidence of 
 taxation, and of public economy, are settled. But there are other ques- 
 tions not less important, and of deeper and higher reach and range, which 
 must soon engage the attention of the country. The attributes of a Consti- 
 tutional Monarchy, whether the aristocratic principle should be recognised 
 in our Constitution, and if so in what form — whether the Commons of Eng- 
 land shall remain an estate of the realm, numerous but privileged and quali- 
 fied, or whether they should degenerate into an indiscriminate multitude — 
 (a laugh, and "Hear, hear,") — whether a National Church shall be main- 
 tained, and if so, what shall be its rights and duties ; the func- 
 tions of Corporations, the sacredness of endowments — (cheers) — the 
 tenure of landed property, the free disposal and even the exist- 
 ence of any kind of property — (cheers and laughter) — all these 
 institutions and all those principles, which have made this country free and 
 famous, and conspicuous for its union of order with liberty, are now im- 
 pugned, and in due time will become great and ' ' burning " questions. 
 (Cheers.) I think it is of the utmost importance that when that time — 
 which may be nearer at hand than we imagine — arrives there shall be in 
 this country a great Constitutional Party, distinguished for its intelligence 
 as well as for its organisation, which shall be competent to lead the people
 
 19 
 
 and direct the public mind. And, Sir, when that time arrives, and when 
 they enter upon a career which must be noble, and which I hope and 
 believe will be triumphant, I think they may perhaps remember, and not 
 perhaps, with unkindness, that I at least prevented one obstacle from being 
 placed in their way, when, as the trustee of their honour and their interests, 
 I declined to form a weak and discredited Administration. (Loud and 
 prolonged cheering.)
 
 t 
 
 X
 
 
 
 fc-?.-*' 
 
 '^l"-?":^!-^ 
 
 
 ^^-^ 
 
 m 
 
 g^^X 
 
 
 7^^ 
 
 ^^ ^-.V/'^f-iAft 
 
 S