if I thought I might, by a chance majority, bring back the system called 'protection,' I would shrink from it. That is a thing which must be done out of the House, _and done out of the House by no chance majority, but by the free unfettered expression of public opinion_; and no other result can be satisfactory to any class, or conducive to the general welfare. I have expressed this opinion before, and honourable gentlemen opposite, if they will condescend to recollect what I have said, will do me the justice of admitting I have done so. I repeat it now, because I wish no one to be in error with respect to my motives, my object, and the policy I wish Government to pursue." As to the distinctness of this statement in all its parts, there can be no difference of opinion. Some who are not merely smarting, but writhing under the injuries inflicted by Free Trade, may think that Mr Disraeli has taken too dispassionate a view of the case, and that the line of conduct which he has announced, and which he declares himself determined to follow, is less energetic than suits the emergency of the present crisis. Deeply as we deplore the misery which exists, and the evils which have been occasioned, we cannot do otherwise than express our entire concurrence with the views so ably stated. Protection cannot be regained by a side-wind, or a mere casual and hasty vote. It must be brought in by the voice of the constituencies, and according to the forms of the Constitution, or not at all; and he is no friend of the agricultural body who would counsel otherwise. Therefore we say, that Mr Disraeli performed a most manly, proper, and timely act in making that distinct declaration; and we verily believe that nothing could have galled the Free-Traders more, or struck greater consternation into their ranks, than the simple and clear avowal of the principles by which the advocates of native industry are determined to abide. Lord John Russell evidently felt himself placed in an awkward position. He was of course prepared to combat any proposal for a return to protection, but he had not one argument to meet the demand for justice which Mr Disraeli so strongly urged on the part of the agricultural body. Where could he find any? We have seen that, five years ago, he acknowledged the justice of the claim, and, by a broad admission of agricultural distress in the Speech from the Throne, he virtually confessed that the time had arrived when all fair remissions should be made, more especially as he had the means to do so. But, finding it impossible to meet Mr Disraeli on the only ground which he occupied, the shifty Premier thought fit to evade the question altogether, and, under the sheltering shield of Sir James Graham, who preceded him in the debate, to utter a harangue upon the dangers to which the country would be exposed should protection carry the day. Now, we have nothing whatever to say upon the subject of Lord John Russell's vaticinations, simply considered as such.