man whom the mumbler had insulted and slandered, with all the malignity -not of a fiend-but far worse-of an old woman?

But Mr Sheil could now afford to do or say any thing honest Lord Althorp chose, in his stupidity, to ask in a low tone of voice, and in a lower tone of spirit. An innocent man stands in light, and candour is his robe. "The noble lord has stated, that if he (Mr Sheil) would state that he had not done those things which had been imputed to him, he should feel bound to believe him. He accepted the noble lord's apology and his invitation at the same time; and he did solemnly declare that he was not guilty of any of the charges that had been made against him. He had been led to make these observations" (we cannot quote his most manly speech)" against his original intention. After all that had been said and circulated against him upon this subject, the materials that had been furnished to newspapers for months past to wound and slander a reputation dear to him, not on his own account merely, but on account of others, who were dearer to him than his life, and to whom his reputation was more dear than their existence, he had found it impossible to remain silent. He accepted the apology of the noble lord, and if on his deathbed, at that moment about to appear in the presence of his God, he would fearlessly protest that he was not guilty."

Mr Secretary Stanley then addressed the House; and we shall say nothing either in praise or censure of what he said-though we might well do both-till we come to the conclusion of his speech, and that, we are sorry to say, was a shame to the name of Stanley. "He also stood acquitted upon his own statement of having held conversations of the character imputed to him, the imputations having originated in loose reports and exaggerations. He did not wish to derogate from the triumph of the honourable and learned gentleman; but he was bound to state that his noble friend would not have advanced the statement if he had not believed it! He was glad the House had been spared an enquiry into loose and vague conversations. He hoped the honourable and learned gentleman was satisfied with the manner in which Mr Secretary Stan

ley expressed himself. He had obtained a complete vindication of character, and was relieved from the painful situation in which he had stood. There was not now the shadow of a doubt resting upon the word of the honourable and learned member." If there was not a shadow of a doubt, then pray why should Mr Secretary Stanley strive to create one? But Sir Henry Hardinge would not suffer this fresh injustice to escape exposure. "The Right Honourable Secretary appeared to him to have assumed most unjustly that the vindication of the honourable and learned gentleman_rested in part on his own denial. The report acquitted him, not only from the charge brought against him at Hull, but also from every other charge whatever connected with the subject." Mr Stanley had the grace to interrupt Sir Henry --and say-" he had exonerated the honourable and learned gentleman in the most full and complete manner." Well -be it so.

"Sir H. Hardinge reminded the Right Hon. Secretary that he had expressly declared that the Noble Lord's informant believed in the truth of the charges, and that the Noble Lord himself believed in the veracity of his informant.-(Cheers.)

Now, the gentleman who had given evidence before the Commit. tee, and who was the informant of the Noble Lord, had declared very frankly and honourably, that when he mentioned the matter to the Noble Lord, he attached no importance whatever to it-(Loud cheering from the Opposition benches)and further, that the conversation he had held with Mr Sheil was held at dinner in the Athenæum Club House, and that Mr Sheil then expressed to him the strongest disapprobation of the Coercion Bill. (Continued cheers.)-He (Sir H. Hardinge) had asked the witness whether he had ever stated the particulars of the conversation to any other person, and his answer was that he had not, not having thought it of any importance. He had said also that he did not mention the matter to the noble Lord till December, which was after the statement made by the honourable and learned Member for Hull.(Hear, hear, hear.)-Under these circumstances,

he must contend that the exoneration of the honourable Member for Tipperary rested, not upon his statement, but exclusively and comprehensively upon the Report of the Committee of Enquiry. He did not mean to cast blame upon the Right Hon. Secretary; but he thought the hon. and learned Member for Tipperary entitled to be relieved from the distinction which the Right Hon. Secretary appeared disposed to draw. -(Hear.)

"Lord Althorp said, that after the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet, it became necessary that he should address a few words to the House. The gentleman (Mr Wood) who had appeared before the Committee had certainly given him (Lord Althorp) such information as had just been stated to the House. But he was not the only person who had given him information-(Cries of Oh!') He did not mean to retract what he had said. He had the greatest reliance on the veracity of his informant, but he did not wish to go into that question. He was then only defending himself from the charge of having made a statement of a conversation different from that which he had heard. Mr John Wood was undoubtedly one of his informants, but there was another, whom he did not intend to name. He thought the Honourable and Learned Gentleman stood perfectly clear from imputation."

You have heard much, we do not doubt, experienced reader; but heard you every any thing at all comparable with that? He believes Mr Sheil guiltless, and he believes the person who told him that Mr Sheil was guilty! He has entire confidence in his informant's veracity-not in the least shaken by the conviction that he had told him nothing but falsehood. Is that Lord Althorp's meaning? Or does he dare yet to doubt Mr Sheil's honour ?-Is this mere folly or is it something worse than folly?

Leaving every one to answer that question for himself-may we be permitted to say that Lord Althorp, in this affair, shews himself, in various ways, very like an ox?

First, he is like an ox chewing the cud, or ruminating, and you must be well acquainted with the half-asleep

countenance of the animal when engaged in that employment;-next, he is like an ox, after rumination, lazily returning with no very voracious appetite to his cut mangelwurzel and oil-cake; then, he is like an ox in an enclosure unwieldily tossing up head and heels, and giving himself a clumsy set of airs, in imitation of the "fortunate youth," his brother; again, he is like an ox lowing in a lane, without any ostensible motive or object whatever ; soon after, he is like an ox, marching with vacant eyes and unprophetic soul in below the archway of a slaughter-house; anon, he is like an ox presenting his numbskull to a succession of blows from an axe expertly handled by a man in a blue apron; ever and anon, he is like an ox shuddering and staggering under the hits that confound his brain, till down he sinks on his knees, rises up again, and then falling on his side with a squelch, seems to expire; finally, he is like an ox, in whom the vital spark is extinct, hauled out of the stall of slaughter by mules, like and unlike the famous Andalusian Bull, Harpado, so justly and so finely celebrated in one of Mr Lockhart's Spanish Ballads.

As for Mr Hill, the honourable member for Hull, we cannot recollect, at present, any word in any language by which we could fitly designate his conduct. Up to the last minute, did he insolently stick to his slander; and his dignified demeanour so far imposed on the House, that he was cheered with frequent hear hear hears! In spite of his solemn asseverations of innocence, Mr Sheil seemed indeed standing on the brink of a precipice, over which he was, by a power in Mr Hill's hands, to be pushed to perdition. The word was given in the Committee of Privileges to apply the power-and it fell on the unquaking "Irish Member" like a goose-feather wafted on the wind. The whole charge was a fabrication of his many calumniators' want of brains! Nobody had ever told Mr Hill what he told his constituents in the Cross-keys! The gentleman appealed to for confirmation of the truth of the tale he had drivelled, declared he knew nothing whatever about it! The Committee of Privi

leges and the House had indeed "a specimen of the sort of mistakes to which the reporters of conversations were liable. Such was the mistake in this case, that the conversation was the very reverse of what had been reported." Crest-fallen, the Bantam will never crow again-the feathers are up on the nape of his neck-and he gives vent to a lamentable scraugh. How changed from that Bantam clapping his wings to his own shrill clarion in the Cross-keys!

Do we say that Mr Hill invented the accursed calumny? No-no-no. It was a lie begotten by many fathers on a common cloud. Not one of them all but disowns the monstrous birth-the black bastard dies an unnatural death-and is stuffed away, we suppose, among the chaff that deadens the ceiling of the room -if there be one-below that of the Committee of Privileges.

Mr Hill has confessed himself to be at the best-a foolish and a dangerous gossip. The Committee may praise him as it will-but all the rest of the world can feel for him but pity more or less mingled with contempt.

With indignation and disgust must all men, worthy the name of men, regard the attempts yet making by the malignants to shew that Mr Sheil's acquittal and triumph are not complete. We quote with pleasure a few sentences on such base endeavours, by that accomplished and honourable gentleman, the Editor of the Examiner, whose perspicacity political feelings have never obscured, and whose conscience political feelings have never tempted to forget its trust.

"The Times infers from the report, that_the_witnesses brought forward by Mr Hill declined to give evidence of the facts upon which they were questioned, on the score of their having reached them through the medium of private conversation;'

Mr

and the Courier states that the Committee cheered Mr Macaulay when he refused to answer their questions; and he asks why Mr Sheil and Mr Hill did not apply to the House to commit Mr Macaulay? adding that the Committee have reported without obtaining the necessary evidence, and Mr Macaulay is now on his way to India.' We lose no time in correcting these misconceptions. The only witnesses examined were Mr Hill, and Mr John Wood and Mr Macaulay, both of whom were called by Mr Hill. Mr John Wood stated that Mr Sheil had condemned the Coercion Bill. Macaulay stated that his conversation with Mr Sheil on Irish politics was previous to the introduction of the Coercion Bill, and that consequently nothing that passed in it could be relevant to the subject of the enquiry. As a matter of social principle, he declined disclosing a private conversation, unless compelled; and as the date of the conversation established that it could have nothing to do with the question before the Committee, of course he was not pressed to disclose what was obviously irrelevant. Thus the Courier may be assured that Mr Macaulay has not carried any information with him to India, that would bear on the abandoned charge against Mr Sheil. Nothing can be more complete than Mr Sheil's acquittal, unless it be the defeat and confusion of his assailants."

And who is the Gentleman in Black? The dark shadow in the back-ground? The lowest of all the Devils? Is his name in Greek, OUTIS? In Scotch-NOMAN OF THAT ILK? If he be not a non-entityand indeed in the flesh-we address him in a hackneyed quotation "Ferdinand Mendez Pinto was but a type of thee-THOU LIAR OF THE FIRST Magnitude.”

TIME was-and that not immemorial-when a single defeat told Ministers to resign, and when they would have been ashamed to retain their places for an hour, after having been left in a minority on a Ministerial question. But now-though beaten black and blue, over and over again-they will not budge, but keep as obstinately in their burrows as so many badgers. Shame, pride, honour, conscience-all once forbade our rulers to persist in being our rulers, in spite of the declaration of the House of Commons that they were unprincipled or incapable; nor would the country have endured such tenacity to office as is now exhibited by the rump of the Whigs, but plucked them from their places, and flung them aside like rubbish. The people seem now to have lost that power. There sit a set of men calling themselves a Ministry, all quarreling with one another, suspected, despised, or hated by all parties, and yet at times all talking big and all pocketing their salaries, as if they were toiling from morn to night for their country's good. Not a creature can you meet anywhere, out of the circle of their own immediate menials, who does not regard them with dislike, indignation, or disgust; and yet-look-there they sit with honest Lord Althorp, now apparently their head-resolved to sit for ever-immovable by groans or laughter-or rising up, ever and

anon, and insolently exposing honest Lord Althorp, then apparently their bottom, to the uplifted foot of the Nation, as if they dared it to attempt kicking them out of their shameful position. The sight is humiliating, and cannot be long witnessed without degradation of the national character.

What a House of Commons! It is not of the crowing of cocks, nor even of the braying of asses, that we complain-the imitations of the latter animal being generally perfect; nor is our wrath excited by those indescribable noises which baffle the art of the most skilful reporter. In a popular assembly it was still to be expected that there would frequently be heard oh! oh! oh! and even in a Reformed Parliament, we laid our account with meeting much expectoration. We have no objection to any quantity of coughing, provided it effect its purpose; but now nobody can be coughed down

not even Pease. Why should the House "here exhibit symptoms of impatience," each successive proser being a worser, till the debate is closed by an anonymous oddity from some manufacturing town, who, it is conjectured in the gallery, may be reading a lecture to the country-gentlemen in the unknown tongue?

A few years ago, it was ennobling to read the debates-though even then the age of eloquence was well