On this page

• Text (2)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    On one occasion when Mr . Disraeli asked for a weekly account of the Admiralty expenditure , the Board looked on that as an unwarrantable interference of the House of Commons with the Admiralty . This illustrates the difficulty of Mr . Stafford ' s position : Mr . Disraeli always advised him to conciliate as much as possible , and to explain privately to each member of the Hoard the nature of our Parliamentary Government . Mr . Stafford never consulted Mr . Disraeli with regard to such " small matters" as the patronage of the Admiralty .

    " Ho would speak generally as to the extreme difficulties which he found in carrying on his office , and he would very naturally come to me for support and counsel , lhese conversations with Mr . Stafford took place in the House of Commons . I had a great deal to do then , and I had no formal interview with Mr . Stafford . After questions were answered , about half-past four o ' clock , behind the Speaker ' s chair , if he wished to consult me , he did consult me I never pressed Mr . Stafford or any member of the late Administration on the subject of his or their patronage , or with the view of influencing either him

    or them in the exercise of that patronage for the purposes of elections or anything else . Such a subject never could occur to me , nor do I think that it could occur to any person in my position . It did not fall under my consideration in any way . These are subjects which devolved on other persons to consider . Mr . Stafford expressed and repre-Bented to me from the first the very great difficulties which he had to contend with , and from what I could see , this sort of spirit—the spirit of jealousy and suspicion that arose from the cause I have adverted to—appeared to me to wear off . "

    Respecting Sir Baldwin Walker , Mr . Disraeli , speaking generally as regards all permanent civil servants , advised Mr . Stafford to treat them in a spirit of conciliation and confidence , as he himself had done at the Treasury , and with the result of being served with real , fidelity , and even devotion . His particular knowledge of Sir Baldwin Walker ' s letter of resignation arose as follows : — " Mr . Stafford consulted me in the House of Commons , behind the Speaker's chair , on the letter which Sir Baldwin "Walker wrote to the Duke of Northumberland . Mr .

    Stafford showed it to me . I do not know whether ho showed me the original letter or a copy . I cannot charge my memory with that , but I know that the letter was put before me in a hurried way , as a proof that he had not succeeded in establishing that good understauding which I felt and told him was required , and which I recommended him he should endeavour to establish . When I read that letter I confess I was excessively annoyed , and I remember making this observation—for I was not then familiar either with the office or cho person of Sir Baldwin Walker—I said to Mr . Stafford , ' Well , really , if this is the

    tone in which your overtures are accepted , I think he had better resign . ' Now , I distinctly recollect Mr . Stafford saying , ' Oh no , it ia quite out of the question ; the Duke of Northumberland has mado up his mind to consider this merely as a strictly confidential communication , and I suppose I must bear it , and do what I can to make things up . ' I said , ' If you make up your mind , if that is the case , and Sir Baldwin Walker does not resign , rely upon it you had bettor see him and have some private conversation with him , and make him undorstand that you wish to work cordially with him , and do not remain with any hostilo feelings on either side . ' "

    All these misunderstandings Mr . Disraeli attributed to the want in the Admiralty of that connexion of the House of Commons which other branches of ndministration possessed . With the late Admiralty the House of Commons was at first " ignored , " and its authority and influence looked upon with jealousy . The board was composed of men of the highest professional reputation , but they were not sufficiently acquainted with the nature or practice of our Parliamentary Government . Regarding any " other cause of misunderstanding" Mr . Disraeli said : — " There would be no other cause of misunderstanding between the Jlousu of Commons and thts ' . Hoard of

    Admiralty aH far as the ( joveriiment were concerned , but of courso I can euHily understand that among various members of Parliament supporting the Government , looking nt tlni fair disposition of patronage which was referred , to , and respecting which one of tho lion , members said Mr . Stafford stated in his evidence he was pressed , and I duro-Bay that they did press Mr . Stafford—if ho found that , ho was in a position in which he could not fairly satisfy their wishes , it might bo Ihe cause of similar misunderstundingH between him and individuals . There is no doubt ., us every momberof tho committee must know , that , the particular party that supports tho Government , whether m the Houfo

    of Commons or out of the House of Cornwall !* , naturally looks to have , iih it is called , a fair distribution of patronage . I dure say ( . hut may have hid to misunderstanding , but I only wish it to be underHtood , ho far iih 1 um concerned , that these were questions that were never brought under my consideration m any wi » y . Therefore it is quite ini ]) oasible that 1 could have urged Mr . Stafford to any course of conduct , on the subject . J should have boon perfectly astonished if any member of the Administration hud expressed himself as Mr . Stafford ia alleged to liavo done . "

    Ihe conclusive statement came thus : — Tho Chairman : And the committee understand that you had uovor by any means in any way boon brought , to consider the ( mostions of promotion cither in tho navy or in tho dockyunlit P Mr . Diuriwli ; JSot ux any way whatever .

    Mr . Stafford has been re-examined two or three times , but he has not been able to state anything more damaging to his character than what has already appeared . Some confessions , however , serve "tothicken other proofs . " With regard to the charge Mr . Stafford made in the House against the Whigs , that when leaving office they made rules securing future appointments for their own partisans , he was obliged to admit , in answer to the keen queries of Lord Seymour , that he did not say this on " his own authority . " "A

    letter in the Morning HeraU , " and statements by " members of the House / ' induced him to " suspect " that such was the case . He also got private letters on the subject , but he would not reveal the names of the writers ; he would not like to be the means of injuring any poor person . Mr . Bere , solicitor and agent for the Conservative party at Devonport , made a rather bold statement , " While the Whigs had power , no man in the dockyards was safe unless he became their devoted servant . "

    Sir F . Baring ' s testimony does not much more than confirm what has been already evidenced by his letters , confidentially written , but now so honourably published . While First Lord he had made it a point to bind down the superintendents by a distinct pledge of honour not to interfere in politics . Respecting disfranchisement in the dockyards , he did not think that would cure the evil complained of . He believed it was practically impossible to prevent jobbing in the yards , unless those at head-quarters were in earnest . His conviction

    was that after the arrangements of Lord Auckland they were improving . It took time to convince the dockyard people that the Admiralty was in earnestthey had been so often deceived ; but if they were once convinced that politics would not affect promotion , the desired object would be obtained much better than by depriving them of the franchise ; for , if it were the wish of the Admiralty to "job" in promotions for electioneering purposes , the disfranchisement of the dockyard men would be no bar .

    When Lord John Russell was First Lord of the Treasury , he had allowed Sir Francis Baring full liberty to adopt his own course , which was , that all promotions should be made , with a sole reference to the public

    . Lord Derby gave his testimony yesterday . He briefly re-echoed Mr . Disraeli ' s theory of the cause of the misunderstandings—the want of a close connexion between the Admiralty and the House of Commons . He stated that he had never directed nor sanctioned the transfer of civil patronage from the First Lord to "tha Secretary of the Admiralty ; he always held the Duke of Northumberland responsible for the

    administration of the Admiralty . Respecting Mr . Stafford's statement that he was " pressed by Lord Derby and Mr . Disraeli , " Lord Derby said : — " I should be very much surprised to hear that Mr . Stafford had made such a statement , because I have a high opinion of Mr . Stafford ' s personal honour , and lie must have known that it was untrue , entirely inconsistent with the fact , and that there was not the slightest foundation for it . " ( Sensation . )

    [ I he report of this answer in the Globe made Lord Derby say , " I had a high opinion of Mr . Stafford ' s personal honour . " Last evening Lord Derby complained of this , and . said : — " My answer was , that I should he very much surprised to hear Air . Stafford rrmko that statement . I had tho highest opinion of Mr . Stafford ' s honour and veracity , and I was quite convinced he could not have mado such a statement , ns ho must known it was wholly inconsistent with fact , and entirely without foundation . In making that statement I expressed what I felt , perfect confidence in Mr . Stafford's veracity , and that 1 should feel great surprise if he had made such a statement , and that I could not bring myself to believe such n statement . " ]

    Untitled Article

    LETTERS FROM PARIS . [ FltOM OUIt OWN ConitBHl'ONDENT . ] LKTl'JHt LXXII . Paris , Thursday , May 12 , 13 Sj . Tins week bus not been much innrked by political events . Almost the only point of interest it presents is the quasi-hostile attitude of tho Corps- Lt ' njislatif . The session , as at lirnt arranged , was to terminate on the Kith ; but , honourable members , seeing they had but five or six days left to pass tho Budget , began by

    declaring that they would not do as they had < lono last year , when " they had been obliged to piiHH tho various bills at u band gallop for want , of time to examine them . " They alleged , too , that , " as tho stnmtus consult of tho 25 th December prohibited them from voting the Budget article by article , the least they could now do wan to examine it in detail , in order that they might be able to pass it in a lump . " So they flatly declined to M . Billimlt , their President , that the thw remaining days of tho session wero not enough , and that accordingly they would not paaa tho Budget at all . ¦ Al armed

    afc this threat , M . Billault posted off to Bonaparte ; and next day he announced that "the Emperor had promised him to grant the Corps Legislatif all the time necessary for the examination of the several bills laid before it , and consequently the Chamber might reckon upon a prolongation of a fortnight . " A decree , published in the Moniteur , has in fact prolonged the session to the 28 th of May . The Jury Law has been passed against ; a minority

    of fifteen , instead of being thrown , out , as everybody expected . The causes of this singular result were as follows : —The committee , all but three members , agreed to reject the bill , as conferring an absolute power on the Government . Unfortunately , however , the committee appointed M . Langlais , as a lawyer by profession , to draw up their report ; and this very M . Langlais was one of the minority of three who were in favour of the measure . He made the most curious

    report that ever was known . In tho name of the committee he inveighed against the existing tendencies of the Government towards absolutism , and proved that all the provisions of the law were calculated to deprive the country of the few securities that still remained to it ; but instead of concluding , as he should naturally have done , with a recommendation that the bill should be thrown out , he terminated his report without recommending anything one way or the other . When this report without a tail was read , the deputies showed manifest tokens of their dissatisfaction ; but when the moment was come to vote , the dread of publicity

    overcame them ( the votes are taken by name ) , and to avoid incurring the anger or the disfavour of their gracious Sovereign , the majority said Aye , and only fifteen had the pluck to say No . Among the latter were MM . Gouin , d'Andelarre , Legrand , Montalembert , and de Flavigny . The true cause of this cringing meekness is to be found in the corruption of these representatives of the principles of property . They were all of them to have an audience of the Emperor that same evening , and they had all to solicit from him the sanction or concession of some privilege , some money-making scheme or another . After

    the reception Bonaparte exhibited to his private circle eighty applications for concessions of railways , laid before hi : n in an audience that had lasted three-quarters of an hour , being at the rate of two per minute . The deputies are now aware that Bonaparte has been making game of them and their expectations , and they are filled with rage and mortification , and regret that they had not the courage to go through with what they began . A considerable number of deputies did not vote at all , some being unwilling to oppose the Government , and others not liking to have their names appear in the always brief list of those who vote

    against it . The discussion , however , presented a remarkable incident . The Government being far from confident as to the result , Bonaparte sent down M . Barochc , President of the Council of State , and M . Rouher , its Vice-president , to support tho Bill . It was M . Rouher who had to reply to M . Langlais , the reporter of tho committee , and he was so led away by his zeal as tp speak in favour of absolute power . He went so far as to say , that " he could not comprehend how any ono could tulk of the privileges of the country , when the

    prerogatives of the Crown were in question , " a declarations which was met by murmurs from all parts of the Assembly , so loud and angry that M . Rouhcr was brought to a deiul stop . He stammered out some excuses , and then humbly asked permission to explain his meaning . Tho permission was granted ; but his explanation showed the same tendency to exalt the Government above the country , and wan received with no less strenuous murks of disapprobation , and he concluded his speech in utter discomfiture .

    I he same sort of reception has just been given to a proposal for a grant of money , made under the influence of M . de Porsigny in favour of his mother-in-law , the widow of Marshal Ney . Certainly , if there is a glorious or a popular namo in France , it is that of Marshal Ney . And yet thv , Honapartists are come to the pass , that in a chamber nominated by them mid composed of their creatures , a proposal on the part of the Government for a national recompense to the Marshal ' s widow has provoked vehement signs of

    repugnance , llnj secret of this is , that the family havo already obtained more than 10 millions in railway concessions , favours of various kinds , and presents of cash . The threw . sons of the Marshiil , and Persigny , their brother-in-law , have each realized a considerable ! fortune . All this is mutter of common notoriety ; so when it was wen that these ; people had the effrontery to ask for an additional sum of : i ( K ) , O ( K ) Cranes , tho whole Assembl y was unable to suppress a shout of indignation .

    Tho Corps Ui / hlatif has ulso shown its teeth at tho last railway concession—that of Genuv / i and Lyons . You uro nwaro Quit this conceHBiou wuh grunted to tho

    Untitled Article

    462 THE LEADER . [ Saturday ,

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), May 14, 1853, page 462, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1986/page/6/