privation and suffering to which the labouring classes
in some districts of the country are exposed -- what
has been your neglect of duty in permitting five years
to elapse without bringing forward, on the part of a
united Government, a proposition for the remedy of
these abuses? Why have you allowed this question
to be an open question in the administration ? . . . .
I should have thought that, after returning to power
after a lapse of ten years, there would have been a
universal impression that it was but reasonable that I
should not be called upon within a month to propose
an alteration in this law. I should have thought that
it would have been felt that there might be advantage
in the access to official information -- that it might be
desirable to avail ourselves of the information that
exists. . . . I do wish that the noble Lord had taken
the sense of this House of Commons -- elected under
his advice, and under his auspices -- with respect to
the reasonableness and justice of the demand which I
make upon its confidence; and had thus enabled me
to judge whether the House of Commons approves or
disapproves of the course which I mean to pursue.'
The Whigs had no notion of submitting such a question
to the House; they knew too well what its answer
would be. Parliament was prorogued before Sir
Robert had stated his plans. It met again, on the
3rd of February, 1842, with unusual excitement and
splendour. The Queen had recently given birth to
the Prince of Wales; a strong monarchical feeling
animated both the country and the Legislature; both
Houses voted addresses of affectionate congratulation

-93-