a corn-law majority in a new House of Commons,
and, in case of success, re-impose the corn-laws. Lord John Bussell, Sir
James Graham, Mr. Gladstone, Lord Palmerston, Sir A. Cockburn, and
other prominent men on the liberal side of the house, expressed their
determination to offer every resistance they could employ to the
re-imposition of any duty, in any form, upon the importation of corn.

Rumours began to circulate, that the government would endeavour to go on
with the public business in the face of an adverse majority, and on the
19th of March, the Duke of Newcastle demanded explanations in the lords
from the premier. The duke presented a petition from the Commercial
Association of Manchester, praying for relief from the confusion and
uncertainty thrown into commercial operations by the speeches of the
leading members of government, in fact, demanding that the question of a
corn-law should once more be submitted to the country. Lord Derby
denied the assertions of the Manchester Association, refused to dissolve
parliament, or to give any explicit information as to his intentions in
reference to free-trade.

In the House of Commons, the same night, Lord John Bussell demanded that
the public should be at once relieved from all uncertainty by an appeal
to the country. So decided and angry was the aspect of the house, and so
loud the demonstrations of its determination not to be trifled with on
the great subject of a corn-law, that Mr. Disraeli was compelled to give
that assurance which Lord Derby refused, and pledged the government to
dissolve parliament, and meet the new house within the year, and as soon
after the public business necessary to the country was disposed of.

It was, however, found difficult to transact business--the house was so
excited; so that the question of dissolution was again and again renewed
in angry and almost boisterous terms. Mr. Cobden called the attention
of the house to the fact that the country had once more a protectionist
government; that the fact was indisputable, and ought to be met with
that intelligence and decision which became the greatest question of the
day. He urged the house to limit the rates of supply, until the country
decided whether it wished a tax upon bread, to enrich the landlords. Mr.
Cardwell, in language as decided as that of Mr. Cobden, urged the house
to fulfil its constitutional obligations, and compel the government of
the minority to give suitable assurances of