ministers might be-whatever party might be in power? I fear there might be hesitation for a time-a want of decision-a want of firmness; but no one doubts that ultimately England would have said: "This will never do; we must prevent the conquest of Asia Minor; we must interfere in this matter and arrest the course of Russia." No one I am sure in this country who impartially considers this question can for a moment doubt what under any circumstances would have been the course of this country. Well, then, that being the case, I say it is extremely important that this country should take a step beforehand which should indicate what the policy of England would be; that you should not have your ministers meeting in a council chamber, hesitating and doubting, and considering contingencies and then acting at last, but acting perhaps too late. I say therefore that the responsibilities of this country have not been increased; the responsibilities already existed, though I for one would never shrink from increasing the responsibilities of this country if they are responsibilities which ought to be undertaken. The responsibilities of this country are practically diminished by the course we have taken. My lords and gentlemen, one of the results of my attending the Congress of Berlin has been to prove what I always suspected to be an absolute fact, that neither the Crimean war nor this horrible devastating war which has just terminated would have taken place if England had spoken with the necessary firmness. Russia has complaints to make against this country that neither in the case of the Crimean war nor on this occasion—and I do not shrink from my share of the responsibility in this matter was the voice of England so clear and decided as to exercise a due share in the guidance of European opinion. Well, gentlemen, suppose my noble friend and myself had come back with the Treaty of Berlin, and had not taken the step which is to be questioned within the next eight and forty hours, could we with any self-respect have met our countrymen when they asked, what securities have you made for the peace of Europe?-How far have you diminished the chance of perpetually recurring war on this question of the East by the Treaty of Berlin? Why they could say all we have gained by the Treaty of Berlin is probably the peace of a few years and at the end of that time the same phenomenon will arise and the ministers of England must patch up the affair as well as they could. That was not the idea of public duty entertained by my noble friend and myself. We thought the time had come when we should take steps which would produce some order out of the anarchy and chaos that had so long prevailed. We asked ourselves, Was it absolutely a necessity that the fairest provinces of the world should be the most devastated and most ill-used, and for this reason that there is no security for life or property so long as that country is in perpetual fear of invasion and aggression? It was under these circumstances that we recommended the course we have taken, and I believe that the consequence of that policy will tend to and even secure peace and order in a portion of the globe which hitherto has seldom been blessed by these celestial visitants. I hold that we have laid the foundation of a state of affairs which may open a new continent to the civilization of Europe, and that the welfare of the world and the wealth of the world may be increased by availing ourselves of that tranquillity and order which the more intimate connection of England with that country will now produce. But I am sorry to say that, though we taxed our brains and our thought to establish a policy which might be beneficial to the country, we have not satisfied those who are our critics. I was astonished to learn that the Convention of the 4th of June has been described as an "insane" convention. It is a strong epithet. I do not myself pretend to be as competent a judge of insanity as my right honorable opponent [Mr. Gladstone]. I will not say to the right honorable gentleman "Naviget Anticyram," but I would put this issue to an English jury-Which do you believe most likely to enter into an insane convention, a body of English gentlemen, honored by the favor and the confidence of their fellow subjects, managing your affairs for five years, I hope with prudence and not altogether without success, or a sophisticated rhetorician, inebriated with the exuberance of his own verbosity, and gifted with an egotistical imagination that can at all times command an interminable and inconsistent series of arguments to malign an opponent and to glorify himself? My lords and gentlemen, I leave the decision upon that convention to the Parliament and people of England. I believe that in that policy are deeply laid the seeds of future welfare, not merely to England, but to Europe and to Asia; and confident that the policy we have recommended is one that will be supported by the country, I and those that act with me can endure these attacks. My lords and gentlemen, let me thank you once more for the manner in which you have welcomed me to-day. These are the rewards of public life that never pall-the sympathy of those who have known you long, who have worked with you long, who have the same opinions upon the policy that ought to be pursued in this great and ancient empire. "Let him set sail for Anticyra." Anticyra was an island much frequented by hypochondriacs on account of the hellebore which grew there. These are sentiments which no language can sufficiently appreciate which are a consolation under all circumstances, and the highest reward that a public man can attain. The generous feeling that has prompted you to welcome my colleague and myself on our return to England will inspire and strengthen our efforts to serve our country; and it is not merely that in this welcome you encourage those who are doing their best for what they conceive to be the public interests, but to tell to Europe also that England is a grateful country, and knows how to appreciate the efforts of her public servants, who are resolved to maintain to their utmost the empire of Great Britain. R COBDEN ICHARD COBDEN, a distinguished English statesman and political economist, was born at Heyshott, near Midhurst, Sussex, June 3, 1804. He was the son of a small farmer, and at fifteen became a clerk in his uncle's warehouse in London, and subsequently a commercial traveller. With two friends he started in business in London in 1828, and in 1831 the partners established print works in Manchester and prospered greatly. Cobden, in order to supply the deficiencies in his early education, read and studied much in the years 1834-38, and also traveled extensively on the Continent and visited the United States. In 1838 he joined the newly formed Anti-Corn Law League in Manchester, and, being elected to Parliament as member for Stockport in 1841, persistently labored for the repeal of the corn laws, which was accomplished in 1846. The strongest of Cobden's many able speeches was delivered in support of this measure, March 13, 1845, and to him its success was largely due. As a testimonial of the general recognition of his services he was presented with a national subscription of eighty thousand pounds. For the ten years following 1847 he represented the West Riding of Yorkshire in Parliament, supporting electoral reform, a peaceful foreign policy, and non-intervention in foreign entanglements. During a second visit to the United States in 1859 he was returned to Parliament for Rochdale and was offered a cabinet position by Lord Palmerston, an honor which he declined on account of his disapproval of Palmerston's foreign policy. In 1860 he negotiated a commercial treaty with France on a free-trade basis, which continued in force for ten years. In return for this important service Palmerston offered him the choice of a baronetcy or the rank of a privy councillor, which Cobden also declined. During the American civil war Cobden was an outspoken sympathizer with the party which was struggling to preserve the Union. He died in London April 2, 1865. Cobden was the chief free-trade apostle of his time, and his influence was felt in all civilized countries. He was not an original thinker on the subject, but he brought it very forcibly to men's minds as an ethical question. His published works include "Political Writings" (1867); Speeches on Questions of Public Policy " (1870). ON THE CORN LAWS DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, FEBRUARY 24, 1842 IR,—The right honorable gentleman who has just sat STRE down [Sir Howard Douglas] would have given still greater satisfaction to the House if he had assured us that he would, when he spoke, always keep strictly to the subject-matter under discussion. I must be allowed to say |