perhaps between it and any other man in the House.
. . . . I could have wished to give the honourable
gentlemen opposite my support from increased con-
fidence in them as public men; but I regret to say
that I am unable to do so. I give them my support
on public grounds, as ministers of the Crown, who
want it. I mean no disrespect to the House; but I
think, as I have thought from the beginning, that the
great change which has been made in its constitution,
requires a change in the conduct of the public men
who are disposed to agree with me in politics. . . . .
When the House of Commons was divided into two
great parties -- one of them in power, and the other
not, but confident in its principles, -- it was natural
and right that they should adopt those tactics which
might have the effect of displacing their opponents. . . .
Circumstances have now changed, and I do not feel
myself at liberty, holding the opinions that I do, now
to resort to what may have been the necessary and
legitimate tactics of party. When I see the Govern-
ment disposed to maintain the rights of property, the
authority of law, and, in a qualified sense, the esta-
blished order of things against rash innovation, I
shall, without regard to party feeling, deem it my
duty to range myself on their side. . . . When I say
this, I do not admit the justice of those taunts which
represent the party with whom I have the honour to
act as adverse to all reform. I opposed your plan
of Parliamentary reform, because I had a strong
confidence in the disposition of the House, as con-
stituted at that time, to consider all useful and safe
reforms in our institutions; but I utterly deny that I

-61-