oubt of that. Lord Stanley brought on a debate on the 18th of
June. He arraigned the policy of government with an eloquence which was
most formidable. He was supported by Lord Aberdeen in a disingenuous and
un-English speech. The government was never more feebly defended, and
the result was a signal defeat, Lord Stanley's motion of censure being
carried by a large majority.

In the commons, Mr. Roebuck brought forward a resolution of confidence
in the cabinet on the 24th of June. The speech of the honourable member
was constitutional and effective. Lord Palmerston delivered a most
powerful _expose_ of his foreign policy. Sir Robert Peel took much
the same views in the commons as Lord Aberdeen did in the lords, and,
considering that both these statesmen had by their impolicy allowed
the grievances to accumulate which it devolved upon Lord Palmerston
to redress, their conduct was equally inequitable and ungenerous in
withholding from him their support, not to say opposing him. The speech
of Sir Robert Peel was the last he ever delivered, and was remarkable
for that circumstance as well as for the ability it displayed; but the
principles of foreign policy put forth by the illustrious baronet were
such as tended to make the country weak in its foreign relations, and
were more calculated to subserve the immediate interests of Lancashire
than the permanent interests of that powerful district, or the honour
and weal of the empire at large. Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Cobden were also
among the prominent opponents of Lord Palmerston's policy. The minority
was large, the government policy having been supported only by a
majority of forty-six.

CONSTITUTIONS FOR THE COLONIES.

On the 8th of February, Lord John Russell made a statement in regard
to colonial government. His lordship denounced the imprudence of
the Colonial Reform Association, which, by its correspondence with
disaffected persons, kept alive discontent wherever it existed, and
indirectly promoted it everywhere else. The pith of the noble lord's
statement was, that the colonies were a source of strength in peace and
war, contrary to the doctrine propounded by Messrs. Cobden and Bright:
that it was the duty of England to preserve her colonial influence, and
to extend civilization and freedom wherever her flag was planted; and
that in most cases the colonies were in a position, as to population
and intelligence, to justify the institution of a constitutional form
of