Sir, let me take that particular question on which my difficulty would arise. Who can conceal from himself that my difficulties were not Canada; that my difficulties were not Jamaica; that my difficulties were Ireland? (ironical cheers). I admit it freely, and thank you for the confirmation of my argument which these cheers afford. And what is the fact? I, undertaking to be a Minister of the Crown, and wishing to carry on public affairs through the intervention of the present House of Commons, in order that I might exempt the country from the agitation, and, possibly, the peril of a dissolution--I, upon that very question in a minority of upwards of twenty members. A majority of twenty-two had decided in favour of the policy of the Irish Government [that is, of the Irish policy of Lord Melbourne]. The chief members of the Irish Government, whose policy was so approved of, were the Marquis of Normanby, and the noble lord opposite, the member for Yorkshire [Lord Morpeth, afterwards the Earl of Carlisle]. By whom are the chief offices in the Household at this moment held? By the sister of Lord Morpeth [the Duchess of Sutherland], and the wife of the Marquis of Normanby. But the question is--Would it be considered by the public that a Minister had the confidence of the Crown, when the relatives of his immediate political opponents held the highest offices about the person of the Sovereign? My impression decidedly was that I should not appear to the country to be in possession of that confidence; and that impression I could not overcome; and upon that impression I resolved to act. Who were my political opponents? Why, of the two I have named, one, the Marquis of Normanby, was publicly stated to be a candidate for the very same office which it was proposed I should fill--namely, the office of Prime Minister. The other noble lord has been designated as the leader of this House; and I know not why his talents might not justify his appointment, in case of the retirement of his predecessor. Is it possible--I ask you to go back to other times; take Pitt, or Fox, or any other Minister of this proud country, and answer for yourselves this question--is it fitting that one man shall be the Minister, responsible for the most arduous charge that can fall to the lot of man, and that the wife of the other--that other his most formidable political enemy--shall, with his express consent, hold office in immediate attendance on the Sovereign? Oh no! I felt it was impossible--I could not consent to this. Yes, feelings more powerful than reasoning on those precedents told me that it was not for my own honour or the public interests that I should consent to be Minister of England. The public interests may suffer nothing by my abandonment of that high trust; the public