It is much to be regretted that Sir James Graham did not choose to speak the truth at an earlier stage of his career. Since the clatter of the muskets of Pride's detachment of soldiery was heard in the House of Commons, no more insolent sound has jarred on the ear of that popular assembly than this suggestive harangue. We pass over the declamatory passages about the ploughboy and the shepherd without comment, as mere bombast; but Sir James Graham ought to know, and if he does not he should be made to know, that such language as he used with respect to the British army is not more offensive than it is greatly dangerous to the State. Are gentlemen of the House of Commons, acting upon their own honest convictions of what is best for the interests of the State, and deputed by constituencies to represent their feelings and opinions, to be threatened by a Privy-counsellor and Ex-minister with the attack of a Prætorian guard? Anything so monstrous--so unpardonable as this, it has never been our lot to comment upon. Not only the dignity of the law, but the liberty of the subject, and the prerogative of the Crown, are here passed over as matters of no account; and a presumption is directly reared--that the soldier is a political functionary, and may exercise his judgment as to what side he should adopt, or what course he should pursue, in the event of any legislative enactment whatever! Grant but that, and we are indeed on the verge of anarchy. Now, we entreat our readers and the public to weigh well the meaning of this language, considering the quarter from which it came. It is no trifling matter. Those sentences were not the rapid conceptions of an orator in the heat of debate. Their context shows that they were prepared, studied, and committed to memory, with a serious intent and purpose; and the sooner we understand their entire significance the better. This gentleman, Sir James Graham, after having assumed all the postures of the weathercock--after having looked, in the maturity of his years, all winds of political doctrine in the face--finds himself at last in the position of a Cabinet Minister, pledged to his constituents to uphold a certain line of commercial policy. The head of the Cabinet, equally, or even more, deeply pledged, wavers, turns round, belies his former profession, and carries his colleague along with him. Having carefully ascertained that a considerable number of the representatives of the people, though pledged directly or indirectly to an opposite course, are ready to obey their orders; and being thus certain of a majority, these statesmen refuse an appeal to the country, and proceed to obtain the sanction of the law for certain measures diametrically opposite to the opinions which they formerly professed. They are so far successful, that the measures are carried, but the Cabinet shortly afterwards falls, in consequence of the treachery of its members. A new Parliament is summoned, and the members of that Parliament are