part, and Tierney and Scarlett[32] on the other. This latter
spoke for the first time, and in reply to the two former. The
Opposition came to Brookes' full of admiration of his speech,
which is said to be the best _first speech_ that ever was made in
the House of Commons. I, who hear all parties and care for none,
have been amused with the different accounts of the debate; one
man says Peel's speech was the best of the night and the finest
that has been made in the House for a length of time; another
prefers the Solicitor-General's; then on the other side it is
said that Tierney was excellent, Mr. Scarlett beyond all praise.
The friends of Government allow great merit to the two latter
speakers, but declare that Peel was unanswerable, besides having
been beautifully eloquent, and that Scarlett's speech was a
fallacy from beginning to end. Again I am told Peel was not good;
his was a speech for effect, evidently prepared, showy, but not
argumentative; Scarlett triumphantly refuted all his reasoning.
Thus it is that a fair judgment is never formed upon any
question; the spirit of party influences every man's opinions. It
is not extraordinary that each individual of a party connected by
general similarity of opinion should adhere to the great body,
even in cases where he may not happen to agree with them, and
excellent reasons may be adduced for his sacrificing his own view
for the great object of unanimity; but it is very improbable that
on a particular question, unconnected with any general system,
where arguments are adduced from opposite sides, and submitted to
the enlightened judgment of an assembly, the same arguments which
are looked upon as satisfactory and unanswerable by one set of
men should be deemed without exception utterly fallacious by
another. If any proof were requisite of the mighty influence of
party spirit, it would be found in a still stronger light in the
State trials in the House of Lords. I have in my mind the trial
of Lord Melville; when each Peer had to deliver his judicial
opinion upon the evidence adduced in a matter so solemn, and in
the discharge of a duty so sacred, it might be imagined that all
party feelings would be laid aside, and that a mature judgment
and an enlightened conscience would alone have regulated the
conduct of every individual. Yet either by an extraordinary
accident or by the influence of party spirit we beheld all the
Peers on the Ministerial side of the House declarin