THE PAST SESSION.

Lyttelton Times, Volume VIII, Issue 536, 23 December 1857, Page 4

THE PAST SESSION.

(From the 'Times/ August 29th.)

"The first Session after the General Elec■tion has passed without founding any new •reputation. Satirists 'delight to dwell on 'the seeming- mediocrity of the qualities. -which .are required in a popular assembly, /.. .arid a stranger dropping in occasionally 'during a prosy debate might be inclined to adopt the same slighting tone; but that can be no easy struggle in which so many competitors fail, notwithstanding the uni.versally coveted prizes which reward sue-; cess. Year after year passes by, and Parliament succeeds Parliament: but the same leaders remain-in possession of the superiority which several of them attained in a "bygone generation. Lord Palmerston was already an old member of the House, long esparisneed in office, when he first entered t/13 Cabinet., 30 years ago; Lord John | jß.u3.seil was the leader of the dominant | party in 183 i. At a still earlier period Sir iJames Graham was a prominent colleague of Lord Grey. Mr. Gladstone, although iie beiongs to a young*er generation, was a successful speaker in the clays of Lord Melbourne. Mr. Disraeli boasts a Parliamentary experience of more than 20 years. Some aspirants. to senatorial honours may bs kept silent by the restraints of office, but-t-he g-rsat body of independent or unplaced members are compelled to recognize the accustomed leaders. Mr. Gladstone has not raised his position by the recent displays of his wmvalled oratorical powers. In the early part of the Session he ap- . peared to be atoning by a judicious silence for .the'intemperance of his unsuccessful attacks on the Government; but, although the Estimates were allowed to pass without comment, the Persian debate onca more reminded the House that its most eloquent speaker was also most deficient in tact. The Divorce Bill seemed an occasion contrived for the jmrpose of exhibitingall Me Gladstone's defect?. The religious questions which were introduced into the debate, called forth all his hair splitting ingenuity •; and the detailed nature of the discussion in Committee gave abundant opportunities for wrangling' anil for refining". A considerable minority sympathized with the efforts which were made to defeat -. -the Bill: but few amoiirr them can hava .-.felt-that Mt, Gladstones advocacy had really beneSit*&f their cause. Sir R. Be;•'"..":tbell gained :sParlir.TTjentary reputation by ' V rondiriese -e^nal to that of his untiring adversary. An assailant is expected to be

fertile in objections; but the subtlety which is regarded as vexatious in conducting- an attack does credit to the resources of the defence.

Mi*. Disraeli has not gained the Parliamentary ground which has been lost by his rival and recent ally. As a speaker the Opposition leader becomes more pompous and tiresome as he gains addditional confidence from length of tenure. His pretensions to statesmanship have not been confirmed by his principal effort during the Session. No discussion was wanted in a matter on which the nation was unanimous in feeling 1, and far more anxious to watch events than to ascertain their causes. A military mutiny is not to be talked down, and the mode of suppressing it is altogether irrespective of its origin. A patriot would not have seized the opportunity of dilating on the alleged mistakes of Indian rulers, and he would have carefully avoided any phrases which might seem to identify tlie interests of the mutineers with those of the Princes of India. It may be added that a. judicious party poli-tician-would in this and in other cases have assumed the language of a patriot, but Mr. Disraeli, in his anxiety to display his cleverness, too often forgets that it is impossible to be thought wise without appearing to be in real earnest. The secondary luminaries of the Conservative party were from circumstances temporarily obscured. Mr. Walpole took a liberal course on the Divorce Bill, and Sir John Paking-ton, with laudable candour, supported the admission of Jews~into Parliament. The tendency of the most eminent leaders of the party of resistance to imitate Sir Hobert Peel in his gradual concessions is curious and instructive. Sir J. Pakington deserved the reward of a fieldday on education, followed by the summary rejection of & Bill which he would have obtained leave to introduce; but unfortunately the exigencies of public business, and the prolixity of Mr. Gladstone on Divorce; rendered it imposible toassign a day for the triangular duel of Sir J. Pakington, Mr. Henley, and Lord J. Russell.

The veteran Whig Leader has carefully abstained from renewing,the demonstrations against the Government -which had helped to precipitate .the general election. In the Persian debate Lord J. Russell, without retracting his censures on recent proceedings in.the east, expressed disapprobation of Mr. Roebuck's motion. His resolution, brought forward at the close of Mr. Disraeli's essaj on India, exhibited something of his ancient readiness in observing and directing the inclination of the House, The victory on the Oaths Bill was too easy to be glorious, and the subsequent attempt to effect the same object without legislation incurred the condemnation of failure. The recent changes in the personal composition of the House of Commons have probably deprived Lord J. Russell of his former confidence in his own power. Although he has apparently no younger rival to dread, it is doubtful whether he will hereafter be able to recover his former position. Sooner or later he will probably deem it advisable to seek in the Upper House a fresh field of utility and influence.

The members of the ministry have not been called upon to talce a prominent part in the debates. Sir C. "Wood lias only had occasion to explain various naval details, and to utter a final protest in favour of the ill-omened Transit, which will never again call for his apologies. Sir C. Lewis was allowed to carry through his financial proposals without much opposition, and the House always listens with respect to a Minister who is perfectly acquainted with the business of his department. The present Chancellor of the Exchequer also enjoys a certain advantage from the contrast between his unpretending statements and the luminous and voluminous orations of his predecessor. That large class of members which habitually accepts Budgets on trust always suspected the soundness of Mr. Gladstone's schemes, because they appeared so plausible, as described in his speeches.

Lord Palmerston has, perhaps, never succeeded in managing- the House of Commons so well as in the present Session. The confidence derived from a larg*e majority may have rendered his task easier, but he also appears to have acquired additional skill from the experience of a Premiership now extending- far into its third year. Readiness in explanation, calmness of temper, and judg-ment in selecting- the •moment of interference are the first qualities required in the leader of the House of Commons. Lord Psilmerston eeldom epealca unnecessarily, and he always speaks

with authority. In discussions on foreign policy or on other political questions of pressingl interest, it is natural that his knowledge and reputation should add peculiar weight to his statements of opinion. A more peculiar opportunity for exhibiting* Parliamentary tact was afforded by the debates on the Divorce Bill. The Prime Minister left the Attorney-General to bear the brunt of the battle, but when his subordinate was hard pressed he was always ready to interfere with an effective rebuke to his opponents, or with a welltimed compromise. Prosperity and success are highly. favourable to the development of the faculties. Lord Palmerston is for the first time in his long career at the head of a party.as well as of the Government, and he shows that he knows how to maintain his position. His enemies -charge.him .with"a disposition to provoke diplomatic quarrels, but the House of Commons uniformly finds him the most temperate and gracious of leaders.