DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16869#0005
Idnrkrtifln
-4-
VOLUME XLIL-JANUARY TO JUNE, 1862.
THE PALMERSTON CABINET—1862
First Lord of the Treasury
Lord Chancellor ....
Chancellor of the Exchequer
Chancellor of Duchy of Lancaster .
President of the Council
President of the Board of Trade
Lord Privy Seal ....
Home Office .
Foreign Office ....
Colonial Office ...
War Secretary
India Secretary .
Admiralty .....
Postmaster-General
Poor Law Board
Viscount Palmerston.
Lord Westbury.
Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone,
Right Hon. E. Cardwell.
Earl Granville.
Right Hon. Thomas M. Gibson.
Duke of Argyll.
Sir George Grey, Bart
Earl Russell.
Duke of Newcastle.
Sir G. Cornewall Lewis, Bart.
Sir Charles Wood, Bart.
Duke op Somerset.
Lord Stanley of Alderley.
Right Hon. Charles P. Villibrs.
POLITICAL
'“TEE death of the Prince Consort cast a cloud over the
opening of the year which would otherwise have had a
bright commencement, as the commercial and agricultural in-
terests were prospering with one exception, and that an
important contributor to the national wealth—the cotton
manufactures.
The Royal Speech at the opening of Parliament of course
contained some touching allusions to the loss Her Majesty
had sustained: —
“We are commanded,” said the Lord Chancellor, “by Her Majesty
to assure you that Her Majesty is persuaded that you will deeply participate
in the affliction by which Her Majesty has been overwhelmed by the
calamitous, untimely, and irreparable loss of her beloved Consort, who has
been her comfort and support. It has been, however, soothing to Her
Majesty, while suffering most acutely under this awful dispensation of
Providence, to receive from all classes of her subjects the most cordial
assurances of their sympathy with her sorrow, as well as of their appreciation
of the noble character of him, the greatness of whose loss to Her Majesty
and to the nation is so justly and so universally felt and lamented.”
The progress of the Civil War in America was a subject of
great interest to this country, and the telegrams were looked
lor and read with much anxiety. An amicqble adjustment
ol “ the Trent Affair ” was a great relief to the public mind.
Still the want of the usual cotton supply was severely felt, and
a period ot great distress to the Lancashire weavers loomed
darkly in the future.
The next subject of interest which occupied the public
attention was the Revised Code of National Education, and
the debates, which were numerous, were characterised by
more than the usual eloquence of the Houses of Lords and
Commons.
Sir John Trelawnet again brought forward his sessional
SUMMARY.
motion, for the Abolition of Church Rates, and on a division
was defeated by a majority of one. Nor was Mr. Whalley
more successful in his opposition to the Maynooth Grant,
which Sir Robert Peel, as Secretary for Ireland, defended.
There were other matters necessarily continually arising in
connection with America which occasioned constant reference
to that country in Parliament, and International Law and
Neutral Rights formed the subjects of more than one debate.
The blockade of the Southern ports was formally brought before
both Houses of Parliament early in the month of March, and
fully debated, and much contrariety of opinion prevailed as to
the effectiveness of the blockade, and whether it ought to be re-
spected. Whatever difference of opinion existed on this matter,
an universal desire evidently prevailed for the observance of a
strict neutrality on the part of this country. Other discussions
arose out of American questions—one very important one
upon a motion of Mr. Horsfall, the Member for Liverpool,
who proposed “ That the present state of international marine
law, as affecting the rights of belligerents and neutrals, is
ill-defined and unsatisfactory.” A very animated debate
followed, and led to subsequent legislation in 1866.
The infamous proclamation of General Butler at New
Orleans, threatening to flog women who showed any disrespect
towards the flag of the United States, furnished occasion for
comments in Parliament, and Lord Palmerston declared
that no man could read that infamous proclamation without a
feeling of the deepest indignation. Englishmen must blush
to think that it came from a man of the Anglo-Saxon race—
a man who was a soldier, and had raised himself to the rank
of a General; but he was of opinion that any interference of
-4-
VOLUME XLIL-JANUARY TO JUNE, 1862.
THE PALMERSTON CABINET—1862
First Lord of the Treasury
Lord Chancellor ....
Chancellor of the Exchequer
Chancellor of Duchy of Lancaster .
President of the Council
President of the Board of Trade
Lord Privy Seal ....
Home Office .
Foreign Office ....
Colonial Office ...
War Secretary
India Secretary .
Admiralty .....
Postmaster-General
Poor Law Board
Viscount Palmerston.
Lord Westbury.
Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone,
Right Hon. E. Cardwell.
Earl Granville.
Right Hon. Thomas M. Gibson.
Duke of Argyll.
Sir George Grey, Bart
Earl Russell.
Duke of Newcastle.
Sir G. Cornewall Lewis, Bart.
Sir Charles Wood, Bart.
Duke op Somerset.
Lord Stanley of Alderley.
Right Hon. Charles P. Villibrs.
POLITICAL
'“TEE death of the Prince Consort cast a cloud over the
opening of the year which would otherwise have had a
bright commencement, as the commercial and agricultural in-
terests were prospering with one exception, and that an
important contributor to the national wealth—the cotton
manufactures.
The Royal Speech at the opening of Parliament of course
contained some touching allusions to the loss Her Majesty
had sustained: —
“We are commanded,” said the Lord Chancellor, “by Her Majesty
to assure you that Her Majesty is persuaded that you will deeply participate
in the affliction by which Her Majesty has been overwhelmed by the
calamitous, untimely, and irreparable loss of her beloved Consort, who has
been her comfort and support. It has been, however, soothing to Her
Majesty, while suffering most acutely under this awful dispensation of
Providence, to receive from all classes of her subjects the most cordial
assurances of their sympathy with her sorrow, as well as of their appreciation
of the noble character of him, the greatness of whose loss to Her Majesty
and to the nation is so justly and so universally felt and lamented.”
The progress of the Civil War in America was a subject of
great interest to this country, and the telegrams were looked
lor and read with much anxiety. An amicqble adjustment
ol “ the Trent Affair ” was a great relief to the public mind.
Still the want of the usual cotton supply was severely felt, and
a period ot great distress to the Lancashire weavers loomed
darkly in the future.
The next subject of interest which occupied the public
attention was the Revised Code of National Education, and
the debates, which were numerous, were characterised by
more than the usual eloquence of the Houses of Lords and
Commons.
Sir John Trelawnet again brought forward his sessional
SUMMARY.
motion, for the Abolition of Church Rates, and on a division
was defeated by a majority of one. Nor was Mr. Whalley
more successful in his opposition to the Maynooth Grant,
which Sir Robert Peel, as Secretary for Ireland, defended.
There were other matters necessarily continually arising in
connection with America which occasioned constant reference
to that country in Parliament, and International Law and
Neutral Rights formed the subjects of more than one debate.
The blockade of the Southern ports was formally brought before
both Houses of Parliament early in the month of March, and
fully debated, and much contrariety of opinion prevailed as to
the effectiveness of the blockade, and whether it ought to be re-
spected. Whatever difference of opinion existed on this matter,
an universal desire evidently prevailed for the observance of a
strict neutrality on the part of this country. Other discussions
arose out of American questions—one very important one
upon a motion of Mr. Horsfall, the Member for Liverpool,
who proposed “ That the present state of international marine
law, as affecting the rights of belligerents and neutrals, is
ill-defined and unsatisfactory.” A very animated debate
followed, and led to subsequent legislation in 1866.
The infamous proclamation of General Butler at New
Orleans, threatening to flog women who showed any disrespect
towards the flag of the United States, furnished occasion for
comments in Parliament, and Lord Palmerston declared
that no man could read that infamous proclamation without a
feeling of the deepest indignation. Englishmen must blush
to think that it came from a man of the Anglo-Saxon race—
a man who was a soldier, and had raised himself to the rank
of a General; but he was of opinion that any interference of