570 The New Ministry. [JUNE, 



And, unquestionably, it is a state of things extremely laughable, and a 

 good fair illustration of the true value of political and party tirade and 

 invective, to see Mr. Canning now supported, and lauded to the skies, by 

 men who, for years past, have been almost nightly engaged in personal 

 hostility with himself, and constantly inveterately opposed to the govern- 

 ment with which he was identified. It is not only a fair subject for joke, 

 but a sound lesson of the very cautious reliance which ought to be placed 

 upon the declarations of men who speak and argue for a particular object, 

 when we find the ministerial benches of the House of Commons filled as 

 they are filled at present. When we find that Mr. Tierney, who swore 

 that he " never would take office, unless subject to the grant of Parlia- 

 mentary Reform," joining the government of Mr. Canning, who avows 

 that, as long as he lives, that measure " shall have his opposition." 

 When Mr. Brougham, who has a great deal more to answer for in the 

 way of " pledge " even than Mr. Tierney, takes his seat behind that right 

 honourable gentleman as First Lord of the Treasury, whom, as Foreign 

 Secretary, he accused of " truckling for office," in such furious and unqua- 

 lified terms, as induced the right honourable gentleman to retort, in other 

 terms, better suited perhaps to his own warm and rather hasty temper, than 

 to the gravity and decorum of the place in which he sat. And, again, 

 when Sir Francis Burdett, who walked out of the House of Commons 

 but a few years since, when the question of " Catholic claims " came on, 

 because the "touching that question," unless ministers were prepared to 

 " make a cabinet question of it," was no better than " a farce," now 

 supports an administration which refuses to bring on the Catholic Question 

 in any shape at present, and by which the fact that it is not meant at any 

 time to be brought on, as a " cabinet question," is declared. All these 

 retirements from, or disrememb ranees of, political " declaration " and 

 " profession " expose those concerned in them, no doubt, to a certain 

 quantity of obloquy in the first instance, and form a fair subject enough, 

 under any circumstances, for quips and jests except, perhaps, that it is 

 not a very new one. But the difference between the abandonment of 

 " words" and of " things" is one which we must not allow ourselves to 

 lose sight of; and one, indeed, which we cannot very easily lose sight of, 

 because it is quickly indicated in the result. The compromise of either, 

 when it takes place, is equally sure to be laughed at ; but the difference 

 is that, where the waiver applies only to the first, with the momentary ridi- 

 cule, the punishment inflicted ceases. Every man, although he laughs at the 

 Dilemma of the party, would think a serious accusation founded upon it a 

 more laughable matter still ; and is perfectly sensible of the difference that 

 exists between the abandonment of party oaths of hatred and hostility, 

 which were never worth intrinsically twopence, and the neglect or deser- 

 tion of those practical and fundamental principles of general policy which 

 the individual concerned had professed, and which it would be impossible 

 for him, without degrading his personal character, and forfeiting the con- 

 fidence of his country, to depart from. 

 Because 



" Qui n'aime Cotin n'estime point son roi, 

 Et n'a, selon Cotin ni Dieu, ni roi, ni loi !" 



Who is there, not interested in the misrepresentation of such a questi on 

 that is uot aware that the war between two parties in the House of Com- 



