acted on. I hope that the House will candidly consider this measure. As far as we are concerned, we have spared no pains, no thought, and have not shrunk from what was more important, perhaps, in endeavouring to bring it before the House. I will not advert unnecessarily to the circumstances attending the framing of this measure, which has now been brought before the House of Commons, under very great difficulties and at very great sacrifices. I do not wish to disguise that I have felt great chagrin and great mortification in connection with what has taken place; but I believe I have done my duty, and under the circumstances I do not think I could have done other than I have. In attempting to bring the question to this point we have lost those whose absence from our councils we more than regret; we have had to appeal to a high-spirited party to make what no doubt to some was, to a certain extent, a sacrifice of principle, much sacrifice of sentiment, and much sacrifice of interest. But we have not appealed in vain, because the members of that party were animated by the same feeling which influenced us—a sense of duty and conviction; they felt that the time had arrived when this question must be dealt with and settled extensively and completely.

I hope, therefore, the House of Commons will give this measure a fair and candid consideration. We believe it is one which, if adopted in spirit, will settle its long differences, and that is qualified to meet the requirements of the country. I am told for certain there are objections against it, but I beg to remind the House of the distinctions which we draw between popular privileges and democratic rights. I am told that in this measure there are checks and counterpoises, and that it assumes in this country the existence of classes. If there are checks and counterpoises in our scheme, we live under a constitution of which we boast that it is a constitution of checks and counterpoises. If the measure bears some reference to existing classes in this country, why should we conceal from ourselves, or omit from our discussions, the fact that this country is a country of classes, and a country of classes it will ever remain? What we desire to do is to give every one who is worthy of it a fair share in the government of the country by means of the elective franchise; but at the same time we have been equally anxious to maintain the character of the House to make propositions in harmony with the circumstances of the country, to prevent a preponderance of any class, and to give a representation to the nation.

F late years, indeed for more twenty years past, whatever may have been our personal rivalries, and whatever our party strife, there was at least one sentiment in which we all coincided, and that was a sentiment of admiring gratitude to that throne whose wisdom and whose goodness had so often softened the acerbities of our free public life, and had at all times so majestically represented the matured intelligence of an enlightened people. Sir, all that is changed. He is gone who was "the comfort and support" of that throne.

It has been said that there is nothing which England so much appreciates as the fulfilment of duty. The Prince whom we have lost not only was eminent for the fulfilment of duty, but it was the fulfilment of the highest duty under the most difficult circumstances. Prince Albert was the consort of his Sovereign; he was the father of one who might be his Sovereign; he was the prime councillor of a realm, the political constitution of which did not even recognise his political existence. Yet under these circumstances, so difficult and so delicate, he elevated even the throne by the dignity and purity of his domestic life. He framed and partly accomplished a scheme of education for the heir of England which proved how completely its august projector had contemplated the office of an English king. In the affairs of state, while his serene spirit and his elevated position bore him above all the possible bias of our party life, he showed on every occasion all the resources, all the prudence, and all the sagacity of an experienced and responsible

statesman.

Sir, I have ventured to touch upon three instances in which there was on the part of Prince Albert a fulfilment of duty-duty of the highest character, under circumstances of the greatest difficulty. I will venture to touch upon another point in his character equally distinguished by fulfilment of duty, but in which the duty was not only fulfilled, but was created. Although when he was adopted by this country he was, after

all, but a youth of tender years, such was the character of his mind—at once observing and contemplative-that in due season he discovered that, notwithstanding all those great achievements which long centuries of internal concord and public liberty had permitted the energy and enterprise of Englishmen to achieve, there was still a great deficiency in our national character, which, if neglected, might lead to the impairing, not only of our social happiness, but even of the sources of our public wealth. That was a deficiency of culture. But he was not satisfied with detecting a want, he resolved to supply it. His plans were deeply laid; they were maturely prepared; and notwithstanding the obstacles which he inevitably encountered, I am prepared to say that they were eminently successful. What might have been his lot had he completed that term which is ordained as the average life of man, it might be presumptuous to predict. Perhaps he would have impressed upon his age not only his character, but his name. But this, at least, posterity must admit, that he heightened the intellectual and moral standard of this country; that he extended and expanded the sympathies of classes; and that he most beneficially and intimately adapted to the productive powers of England the inexhaustible resources of science and art.

Sir, it is sometimes deplored by those who admired and loved him, that he was thwarted occasionally in his undertakings, and that he was not duly appreciated. But these are not circumstances for regret, but for congratulation. They prove the leading and original mind which has so long and so advantageously laboured for this country. Had he not encountered these obstacles, had he not been subject to this occasional distrust and misconception, it would only have shown that he was a man of ordinary mould and temper. Those who improve must change, those who change must necessarily disturb and alarm men's prejudices. What he had to encounter was only a demonstration that he was a man superior to his age, and therefore admirably adapted for the work of progress.

There is one other point, and one only, on which I will presume for a moment to dwell, and it is not for the sake of you, sir, or those who know me, or of the generation to which we belong, but it is that those who come after us may not misunderstand the nature of this illustrious man. Prince Albert was not a mere patron, he was not one of those who by their gold or by their smiles reward excellence or stimulate exertion. His contributions to the culture of the state were far more powerful and far more precious. He gave to it his thought, his time, his toil; he gave to it his life. On both sides and in all parts of the House I see many gentlemen who occasionally have acted with the Prince at those council boards where they conferred and consulted upon the great undertakings with which he was connected. I ask them, without fear of a denial, whether he was not the leading spirit, whether his was not the mind which foresaw the difficulty, his not the resources which supplied the remedy; whether his was not the courage which sustained them under apparently overpowering difficulties; whether every one who

worked with him did not feel that he was the real originator of those plans of improvement which they assisted in carrying into effect.

But what avail these words? This House to-night has been asked to condole with the Crown upon this great calamity. No easy office. To condole in general is the office of those who, without the pale of sorrow, still feel for the sorrowing. But in this instance the country is as heart-stricken as its Queen. Yet in the mutual sensibility of a sovereign and a people there is something ennobling-something which elevates the spirit beyond the level of mere earthly sorrow. The counties, the cities, and the corporations of the realm-those illustrious associations of learning, and science, and art, and skill, of which he was the brightest ornament and the inspiring spirit, have bowed before the throne. It does not become the parliament of the country to be silent. pression of our feelings may be late, but even in that lateness may be observed some propriety. To-night the two Houses sanction the expression of the public sorrow, and ratify, as it were, the record of a people's woe.

The ex

A volume might be filled with "good things" from Mr. Disraeli's speeches and letters. What could be better than his description of Sir Robert Peel's tactics in 1845? He said, "I know there are some who think that he is looking out for new allies. I never believed anything of the kind. The position of the right hon. gentleman is clear and precise. I do not believe he is looking to any coalition, although many of my constituents do. The right hon. gentleman has only exactly to remain where he is. The right hon. gentleman caught the Whigs bathing, and walked away with their clothes. He has left them in the full enjoyment of their liberal position, and he is himself a strict conservative of their garments." Again, Mr. Disraeli said, when Sir Robert introduced the bill for the increased grants to Maynooth, that with him "great measures were always based on small precedents; that he always traced the steamengine back to the tea-kettle; that, in fact, all his precedents were tea-kettle precedents."

In short no English statesman has said so many good things that will live as the subject of this “Day.”