a free-spoken
parliament is like quarrelling with the weather because there is too
much rain or too much sunshine. The casual inconvenience should be
forgotten in the permanent blessing. Acting upon these false imputations
a committee was even appointed, two years ago, of the most eminent
members of the House of Commons, to investigate the subject and suggest
remedies, and some votaries of the Transatlantic type recommended the
adoption of the rules of Congress where each speaker is limited to
an hour. But an hour from an uninteresting speaker would be a great
infliction. The good sense and the good taste of the House of Commons
will be found on the whole to be the best regulators of the duration of
a debate.

The truth is that the delay in the conduct of parliamentary business
which has been much complained of during the last few years, murmurs of
which were especially rife in 1848, is attributable to the fact that the
ministry, though formed of men inferior in point of ability to none who
could be reasonably intrusted with administration, had not
sufficient parliamentary strength. After all their deliberations and
foresight,--after all their observations of the times and study of the
public interest, their measures when launched from the cabinet into the
House were not received by a confiding majority, firm in their faith
in the statesmanlike qualities of the authors of these measures and in
their sympathy with the general political system of which the ministry
was the representative. On the contrary, the success of the measures
depended on a* variety of sections who in their aggregate exceeded in
number and influence the party of the ministers. These became critics
and took the ministerial measures in hand; the measures became, the
measures, not of the cabinet, but of the House of Commons; and a purely
legislative assembly became, in consequence of the weakness of the
government, yearly more administrative. This was undoubtedly a great
evil, and occasioned, besides great delay, many crude enactments, as
will be the case where all are constructors and none are responsible,
but the evil was not occasioned by the forms of the House or the
length of the speeches. Sir Robert Peel was unquestionably a very able
administrator, but if he had not had a majority of ninety he would
have fallen in as ill repute as has been too often the lot of Lord John
Russell.

Lord George Bentinck was very anxious that there should be a
p