Liberal politicians, who some years ago were very loud for justice to Ireland, and would maintain at all hazards the identity of the interests of the two countries, have of late frequently found it convenient to omit that kingdom from their statistical7 bulletins of national prosperity. Lord George Bentinck, on the contrary, would impress on his friends, that if they wished to maintain the territorial8 constitution of their country, they must allow no sectarian considerations to narrow the basis of sympathy on which it should rest; and in the acres and millions of Ireland, in its soil and its people, equally neglected, he would have sought the natural auxiliaries9 of our institutions. To secure for our Irish fellow-subjects a regular market for their produce; to develop the resources of their country by public works on a great scale; and to obtain a decent provision for the Roman Catholic priesthood from the land and not from the consolidated10 fund, were three measures which he looked upon as in the highest degree conservative.
When the project of the cabinet of 1846 had transpired11, Lord George at once declared, and was in the habit of reiterating12 his opinion, that ‘it would ruin the 500,000 small farmers of Ireland,’ and he watched with great interest and anxiety the conduct of their representatives in the House of Commons. It was with great difficulty that he could bring himself to believe, that political liberalism would induce the members for the south and west of Ireland to support a policy in his opinion so fatal to their countrymen as the unconditional13 repeal15 of the corn laws; and, indeed, before they took that step, which almost all of them have since publicly regretted and attempted to compensate16 for by their subsequent votes in the House of Commons, the prospect17 of their conduct frequently and considerably18 varied19.
The Earl of St. Germans, the chief secretary of the Lord Lieutenant20, introduced the Coercion21 Bill to the House of Lords on the 24th of February, and, considering the exigency22, and the important reference to it in the speech from the throne, this step on the part of the government was certainly not precipitate23. It was observed that the strongest supporters of the measure in the House of Lords on this occasion were the leaders of the Whig party. Lord Lansdowne, ‘so far from complaining of the Government for bringing forward the measure at so early a period of the session, was ready to admit, that after the declaration of her Majesty24, a declaration unhappily warranted by facts known to many of their lordships, every day was lost in which an effectual remedy was not at least attempted to put an end to a state of society so horrible.’ Lord Clanricarde ‘gave his ready assent25 to the bill;’ and even Lord Grey, ‘though he regretted the necessity for this measure, was of opinion that the chief secretary had established a sufficient case for arming the executive government with some additional powers.’ When, therefore, at the end of the month of March, Lord George Bentinck was invited to attend a meeting of his friends, held at the house of Mr. Bankes, to consider the course which should be adopted by the Protectionist party with respect to the Coercion Bill, it was assumed, as a matter of course, that the coalition26 of the government and the Whigs must secure the passing of the measure, even if the Protectionists were disposed, for the chance of embarrassing the ministry27, to resist it; and of course there was no great tendency in that direction. Men are apt to believe that crime and coercion are inevitably28 associated. There was abundance of precedent29 for the course, which seemed also a natural one.
In less than a century there had been seventeen coercive acts for Ireland, a circumstance which might make some ponder whether such legislation were as efficacious as it was violent. However, assassination30 rife31, Captain Rock and Molly M’Guire out at night, Whigs and Tories all agreed, it was easy to catch at a glance the foregone conclusion of the meeting. One advantage of having a recognized organ of a political party is, that its members do not decide too precipitately32. They listen before they determine, and if they have a doubt, they will grant the benefit of it to him whose general ability they have acknowledged, and to whom they willingly give credit for having viewed the question at issue in a more laborious33 and painful manner than themselves. Without a leader, they commit themselves to opinions carelessly and hastily adopted. This is fatal to a party in debate; but it often entails34 very serious consequences when the mistakes have been committed in a less public and responsible scene than the House of Commons.
In the present case, there was only one individual who took any considerable lead in the management of the party who ventured to suggest the expediency35 of pausing before they pledged themselves to support an unconstitutional measure, proposed by a government against which they were arrayed under circumstances of urgent and unusual opposition36. The support of an unconstitutional measure may be expedient37, but it cannot be denied that it is the most indubitable evidence of confidence. This suggestion, though received with kindness, elicited38 little sympathy, and Lord George Bentinck, who had not yet spoken, and who always refrained at these meetings from taking that directing part which he never wished to assume, marking the general feeling of those present, and wishing to guide it to a practical result advantageous39 to their policy, observed that the support of the Coercion Bill by the Protectionists, ought to be made conditional14 on the government proving the sincerity40 of their policy by immediately proceeding42 with their measure; that if life were in such danger in Ireland as was officially stated, and as he was bound to believe, no Corn or Customs’ Bill could compete in urgency with the necessity of pressing forward a bill, the object of which was to arrest wholesale43 assassination. He was, therefore, for giving the government a hearty44 support, provided they proved they were in earnest in their determination to put down murder and outrage45 in Ireland, by giving a priority in the conduct of public business to the measure in question.
This view of the situation, which was certainly adroit46, for it combined the vindication47 of order with an indefinite delay of the measures for the repeal of the protective system, seemed to please every one; there was a murmur48 of approbation49, and when one of the most considerable of the country gentlemen expressed the prevalent feeling, and added that all that was now to be desired was that Lord George Bentinck would kindly50 consent to be the organ of the party on the occasion, and state their view to the House, the cheering was very hearty. It came from the hearts of more than two hundred gentlemen, scarcely one of whom had a personal object in this almost hopeless struggle beyond the maintenance of a system which he deemed advantageous to his country; but they wished to show their generous admiration51 of the man who, in the dark hour of difficulty and desertion, had proved his courage and resource, had saved them from public contempt, and taught them to have confidence in themselves. And after all, there are few rewards in life which equal such sympathy from such men. The favour of courts and the applause of senates may have their moments of excitement and delight, but the incident of deepest and most enduring gratification in public life is to possess the cordial confidence of a high-spirited party, for it touches the heart as well as the intellect, and combines all the softer feelings of private life with the ennobling consciousness of public duty.
Lord George Bentinck, deeply moved, consented to become the organ of the Protectionists in this matter; but he repeated in a marked manner his previous declaration, that his duty must be limited to the occasion: he would serve with them, but he could not pretend to be the leader of a party. In that capacity, however, the government chose to recognize him, and there occurred in consequence, very shortly after this meeting, a scene in the House of Commons, which occasioned at the time a great deal of surprise and scandal. The Secretary of the Treasury52, in pursuance of one of his principal duties, which is to facilitate by mutual53 understanding the conduct of public business in the House of Commons, applied55 to Lord George Bentinck, confessedly at the request of Sir Robert Peel, to ‘enter into some arrangement’ as to the conduct of public business before Easter. The arrangement suggested was, that if the Protectionists supported the Coercion Bill, which it was the wish of Sir Robert Peel should be read a first time before Easter, the third reading of the Bill for the Repeal of the Corn Laws should be postponed56 until after Easter. The interview by appointment took place in the Vote Office, where the Secretary of the Treasury ‘called Lord George aside’ and made this proposition. Lord George stated in reply, ‘what he believed to be the views of the party with whom he served,’ and they were those we have already intimated. The ‘arrangement’ was concluded, and it was at the same time agreed that certain questions, of which notice had been given by Lord John Russell, relative to the progress of these very measures, should be allowed by the Protectionists to pass sub silentio. This ‘pledge,’ made by the noble lord for himself and his friends, was ‘scrupulously observed.’ Nevertheless, after all this, a letter arrived from the Secretary of the Treasury, addressed to the noble lord, stating that the secretary ‘had not been authorized in saying as much as he had said,’ and requesting that the conversation which had taken place might be considered private. Upon this, Lord George Bentinck drew up a statement, ‘setting forth58 all that had passed,’ and forwarded it to the secretary as his reply. Subsequently, he met that gentleman, who admitted that ‘every word in that statement, as respected the conversation which had passed, was perfectly59 correct.’
This being the state of the case, on the second night of the debate on Mr. Eliot Yorke’s amendment60, which we have noticed, and after the adjournment61 had been moved and carried, the government proceeded with some motions of form, which indicated their intention to secure, if possible, the third reading of the Corn Bill before Easter. Upon this, Lord George Bentinck, after a hurried and apparently62 agitated63 conversation with the Secretary of the Treasury and others connected with the government, rose to move the adjournment of the House. He then gave as his reason the circumstances which we have briefly64 conveyed. A scene of considerable confusion occurred; the Secretary of the Treasury admitted the correctness of the statement; the First Lord of the Treasury rejected the alleged65 authority of the secretary. Mr. Tuffnell, on the part of the Whigs, intimated that public business could not be carried on if the recognized organs were repudiated66 by their chief. The feeling of all parties coincided with Mr. Tuffnell; finally, an Irish repealer rose and announced that the government were bartering67 their Corn Bill to secure coercion to Ireland. Lord George Bentinck said the Coercion Bill was ‘a second Curfew Act,’ that nothing but necessity could justify68 it, and if it were necessary it must be immediate41. Sir Robert remained irritated and obstinate69. He would not give up a stage either of the Corn Bill or the Coercion Bill; he wanted to advance both before Easter. The mere4 division of the House between Free-traders and Protectionists had already ceased; there were breakers ahead, and it was not difficult from this night to perceive that the course of the government would not be so summary as they had once expected.
This strange interlude occurred after midnight on the 26th of March. On Friday, the 27th, the House divided on the amendment of Mr. Eliot Yorke, and the Corn Bill was read for the second time. On the reassembling of the House on Monday, the 30th, an extraordinary scene took place.
It appears that the cabinet, after painful deliberation, had arrived at the conclusion that, notwithstanding the importance of sending up the Corn Bill to the House of Lords before Easter, it was absolutely necessary to proceed at once with the Coercion Bill; and it was resolved that the Secretary of State should on this evening lay before the House the facts and reasons which ‘induce the Government to believe in the necessity of the measure.’ Mr. O’Connell and his followers70 had already announced their intention of opposing the first reading of the bill, an allowable but very unusual course. It is competent to the House of Commons to refuse a first reading to any bill sent down to it; but the journals afford few examples of the exercise of such a privilege. A member of the House of Lords may lay on the table, as a matter of pure right, any bill which he thinks proper to introduce, and it is read a first time as a matter of course; the orders of the House of Commons are different, and a member must obtain permission before he introduces a bill. This permission is occasionally refused; but when a bill comes from the House of Lords, the almost invariable custom is to read it for the first time without discussion. There are, however, as we have observed, instances to the contrary, and the Irish Coercion Bill of ‘33 was one of them. So pregnant a precedent could not be forgotten on the present occasion. The government therefore were prepared for an opposition to the first reading of their bill; but trusting to the strength of their case and the assumed support of the Whig party, they believed that this opposition would not be stubborn, more especially as there were numerous stages of the measure on which the views of its opponents might be subsequently expressed, and as they themselves were prepared to engage that they would not proceed further than this first reading until the Corn Bill had passed the House of Commons. The consternation71, therefore, of the government could scarcely be concealed72, when they found on Monday night that they had to encounter a well-organized party opposition, headed by Sir William Somerville, and sanctioned and supported in debate by Lord John Russell and Sir George Grey.
It would seem indeed a difficult and somewhat graceless office for the Whigs to oppose the first reading of a government bill, concerning, too, the highest duties of administration, which had received such unqualified approval from all the leading members of their party in the House of Lords, who had competed in declarations of its necessity and acknowledgments of its moderation, while they only regretted the too tardy74 progress of a measure so indispensable to the safety of the country and the security of her Majesty’s subjects. A curious circumstance, however, saved them from this dilemma75, which yet in the strange history of faction76 they had nevertheless in due time to encounter.
As the Coercion Bill coming from the Lords appeared on the paper of the day in the form of a notice of motion, the Secretary of State, this being a day on which orders have precedence, had to move that such orders of the day should be postponed, so that he might proceed with the motion on the state of Ireland, of which notice had been given. The strict rule of the House is, that on Mondays and Fridays, orders of the day should have precedence of notices of motion, so that it was impossible for the Secretary of State to make his motion, that a certain bill (the Protection of Life—Ireland—Bill) should be read a first time without permission of the House, a permission always granted as a matter of course on such nights to the government, since the business which can be brought forward, whether in the shape of orders or motions, is purely77 government business, and thus the interests and privilege of no independent member of Parliament can be affected78 by a relaxation79 of the rules which the convenience of a ministry and the conduct of public business occasionally require. However, on this night, no sooner had the Secretary of State made, in a few formal words, this formal request, than up sprang Sir William Somerville to move an amendment, that the orders of the day should not be postponed, which he supported in a spirited address, mainly on the ground of the great inconvenience that must be suffered from the postponement80 of the Corn Bill. The motion of the Secretary of State would produce a long, exciting, and exasperating81 debate. Time would be lost—for what? To advance one stage of a measure which it was avowedly82 not the intention of the government to press at the present moment. Sir William concluded with a very earnest appeal to Lord George Bentinck and his friends, who might at no very distant period have the government of Ireland entrusted83 to them, not, for the sake of a momentary84 postponement of the Corn Bill, to place themselves, by voting for this measure of coercion, in collision with the Irish nation.’ He called upon Lord George Bentinck to weigh the position in which he was placed.
This amendment was seconded by Mr. Smith O’Brien, the member for the county of Limerick, who warned the government that they ‘were entering on a contest which would continue for months.’ He taunted85 the minister with governing the country without a party. What chance was there of reconciliation86 with his estranged87 friends? After the treatment of that ‘disavowed plenipotentiary,’ the Secretary of the Treasury, who would be again found willing to undertake the mission of patching up a truce88? He was not present when the terms of the treaty were exposed: but he understood, that if the government introduced this Coercion Bill before Easter, then that Lord George Bentinck would deem it wise, proper, and expedient; but if after Easter, then the complexion89 and character of the bill were, in the noble lord’s judgment90, utterly91 transformed, and it was declared to be quite untenable and unconstitutional. Was that the kind of support on which the government calculated for passing this measure?
The Secretary of State made a dexterous92, conciliatory, almost humble93 address, in reply to the taunts94 of Mr. Smith O’Brien. He said that he was well aware of the fact of which he had been just reminded, that, in the present state of parties, the declared adherents95 of the government were a small minority; he even, while excusing the delay in the progress of the Irish measure, reminded the House of the curious fact, that since the meeting of Parliament, two successive Irish secretaries had lost their seats in the House of Commons in consequence of supporting the administration of which they were members.
The case of the government was really so good and clear, that for a moment it seemed the opposition could hardly persist in their unusual proceeding: but this was a night of misfortunes.
There had been for some time a smouldering feud96 between the secretary and the Recorder of Dublin. The learned gentleman had seized the occasion which the present state of parties afforded, and in the course of the recent debate on the second reading of the Corn Bill, had declared that the asserted famine in Ireland was, on the part of the government, ‘a great exaggeration.’ The secretary had addressed himself particularly to this observation in his speech on the 27th, the night of the division, and had noticed it in a tone of acerbity97. He had even intimated that it might have been used by one who was a disappointed solicitor98 for high office, and whom the government had declined to assist in an unwarrantable arrangement of the duties and salary of the judicial99 post he at present occupied. The learned Recorder, justly indignant at this depreciating100 innuendo101, resolved to make an opportunity on the following Monday for his vindication and retort. He rose, therefore, immediately after the skilful102 and winning appeal of the secretary, and pronounced an invective103 against the right honourable104 gentleman which was neither ill-conceived nor ill-delivered. It revived the passions that for a moment seemed inclined to lull105, and the Protectionists, who on this occasion were going to support the government, forgot the common point of union, while the secretary was described as ‘the evil genius of the cabinet.’
After this, it was impossible to arrest the course of debate. Mr. O’Connell, who appeared to be in a state of great debility, made one of those acute points for which he was distinguished106. He said the government complained of the threat held out by those who opposed the bill, that they would avail themselves of the forms of the House to give it every opposition in their power. But what did the government do themselves? Why, they were trying to trample107 upon one of the sessional orders and to abrogate108 the forms of the House in order to coerce109 the Irish people. Lord George Bentinck said, that ‘the chief minister had told them, that this was a bill to put down murder and assassination; in that case, if this bill were delayed, the blood of every man murdered in Ireland was on the head of her Majesty’s ministers.’ Sir George Grey followed, and avoiding any discussion of the state of Ireland, in which Lord George had entered, supported the amendment of Sir William Somerville, on the broad ground that the bill for the repeal of the corn laws ought not to be for a moment delayed. ‘The debates on that measure had continued several weeks; and all who had any lengthened110 parliamentary experience must be convinced, that if the further progress of the Corn Bill was postponed until after Easter, they would have much longer and protracted111 debates in its future stages, than if the bill were pushed de die in diem. As he had understood, the government had intended that this bill should have gone up to the House of Lords before Easter, when it would have been printed, and the second reading could have taken place at an early day after the holidays; but if it were put off until after Easter, he would defy any man to show any reasonable expectation of its getting to a second reading in the other House before June, or July, or even August.’ This was encouraging, and the plot seemed to thicken. The Secretary at War was put up by the government to neutralize112 the effect of the speech of Sir George Grey, and he said, ‘I speak not only as a cabinet minister, but also as a considerable Irish proprietor113.’ He said, ‘that anything so horrible as the state of demoralization and crime in which many parts of Ireland were plunged114, anything so perfect as the suspension of the law in those parts of the country, anything, in short, so complete as the abrogation115 of liberty that obtained there, was, perhaps never known.’ He thought that, ‘no man and no minister could, under these circumstances, decline to admit that every and any measure ought to be postponed until a division had been taken, at least upon the principle of a measure which had for its object the suppression of these horrors.’ After such a declaration it was clear the government were in a false position when by the same organ it had to state, ‘that in asking to read this bill to-night, they only intended to postpone57 the Corn Bill for one night.’
Lord John Russell following, admitted, that ‘in voting for the motion of Sir William Somerville it was not to be supposed, that if the Secretary of State made out a case, he would not support the government bill;’ yet how the secretary was ever to find an opportunity of making out his case, if the amendment of Sir William Somerville was carried, was not very apparent. Sir Robert Peel, who was disquieted116 by the whole proceedings117 connected with the Coercion Bill, irritated by the episode of ‘the disavowed plenipotentiary,’ from which he did not for some time recover, and really alarmed at the indefinite prospect of delay in passing his all-important measures which now began to open, could not conceal73 his vexation in the remarks which he offered, and speaking of the amendment as one ‘of a frivolous118 character,’ indignant cries of ‘No, no,’ from his usual admirers, obliged him to withdraw the expression. His feelings were not soothed119 when, later in the evening, even Mr. Cobden rose to deplore120 the conduct of that minister whom he otherwise so much admired. ‘He certainly regarded it as a great calamity121. Something had actuated the government which he could not understand. He had a perfect belief in the sincerity of the prime minister, but in all human probability the Corn Bill would not now enter the House of Lords before the beginning or middle of May; and when it would come out again, heaven only knew!’
The House now divided, and being supported by all the Protectionists present, the government had a majority of thirty-nine, so the standing54 order was for that night rescinded122; and, although the hour was late for such a statement, the secretary proceeded with the official exposition. Notwithstanding the depressing circumstances of the previous debate, the speech of Sir James Graham was distinguished by all that lucid123 arrangement of details and that comprehensive management of his subject which distinguished him. The statement made a great impression upon the House and the country; but, unfortunately for the government, the more necessary they made the measure appear, the more unjustifiable was their conduct in not immediately and vehemently124 pursuing it. They had, indeed, in the speech from the throne at the commencement of this memorable125 session, taken up a false position for their campaign; and we shall see, as we pursue this narrative126 of these interesting events, that the fall of Sir Robert Peel was perhaps occasioned not so much by his repeal of the corn laws as by the mistake in tactics which this adroit and experienced parliamentary commander so strangely committed.
On this night of the 30th the government made no advance; immediately after the secretary had finished, the followers of Mr. O’Connell moved the adjournment of the House, and persisted in this line notwithstanding the almost querulous appeal of the first minister.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
allotted
|
|
| 分配，拨给，摊派( allot的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
jealousy
|
|
| n.妒忌，嫉妒，猜忌 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
depreciation
|
|
| n.价值低落，贬值，蔑视，贬低 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
authorized
|
|
| a.委任的，许可的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
essentially
|
|
| adv.本质上，实质上，基本上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
statistical
|
|
| adj.统计的，统计学的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
territorial
|
|
| adj.领土的，领地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
auxiliaries
|
|
| n.助动词 ( auxiliary的名词复数 )；辅助工，辅助人员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
consolidated
|
|
| a.联合的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
transpired
|
|
| （事实，秘密等）被人知道( transpire的过去式和过去分词 )； 泄露； 显露； 发生 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
reiterating
|
|
| 反复地说，重申( reiterate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
unconditional
|
|
| adj.无条件的，无限制的，绝对的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
conditional
|
|
| adj.条件的，带有条件的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
repeal
|
|
| n.废止，撤消；v.废止，撤消 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
compensate
|
|
| vt.补偿，赔偿；酬报 vi.弥补；补偿；抵消 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
prospect
|
|
| n.前景，前途；景色，视野 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
considerably
|
|
| adv.极大地；相当大地；在很大程度上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
varied
|
|
| adj.多样的，多变化的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
lieutenant
|
|
| n.陆军中尉，海军上尉；代理官员，副职官员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
coercion
|
|
| n.强制，高压统治 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
exigency
|
|
| n.紧急；迫切需要 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
precipitate
|
|
| adj.突如其来的；vt.使突然发生；n.沉淀物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
majesty
|
|
| n.雄伟，壮丽，庄严，威严；最高权威，王权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
assent
|
|
| v.批准，认可；n.批准，认可 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
coalition
|
|
| n.结合体，同盟，结合，联合 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
ministry
|
|
| n.(政府的)部；牧师 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
inevitably
|
|
| adv.不可避免地；必然发生地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
precedent
|
|
| n.先例，前例；惯例；adj.在前的，在先的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
assassination
|
|
| n.暗杀；暗杀事件 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
rife
|
|
| adj.(指坏事情)充斥的，流行的，普遍的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
precipitately
|
|
| adv.猛进地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
laborious
|
|
| adj.吃力的，努力的，不流畅 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
entails
|
|
| 使…成为必要( entail的第三人称单数 )； 需要； 限定继承； 使必需 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
expediency
|
|
| n.适宜；方便；合算；利己 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
expedient
|
|
| adj.有用的，有利的；n.紧急的办法，权宜之计 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
elicited
|
|
| 引出，探出( elicit的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
advantageous
|
|
| adj.有利的；有帮助的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
sincerity
|
|
| n.真诚，诚意；真实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
immediate
|
|
| adj.立即的；直接的，最接近的；紧靠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
proceeding
|
|
| n.行动，进行，(pl.)会议录，学报 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
wholesale
|
|
| n.批发；adv.以批发方式；vt.批发，成批出售 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
hearty
|
|
| adj.热情友好的；衷心的；尽情的，纵情的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
outrage
|
|
| n.暴行，侮辱，愤怒；vt.凌辱，激怒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
adroit
|
|
| adj.熟练的，灵巧的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
vindication
|
|
| n.洗冤，证实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
murmur
|
|
| n.低语，低声的怨言；v.低语，低声而言 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
approbation
|
|
| n.称赞；认可 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
kindly
|
|
| adj.和蔼的，温和的，爽快的；adv.温和地，亲切地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
admiration
|
|
| n.钦佩，赞美，羡慕 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
treasury
|
|
| n.宝库；国库，金库；文库 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
mutual
|
|
| adj.相互的，彼此的；共同的，共有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
applied
|
|
| adj.应用的；v.应用，适用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
postponed
|
|
| vt.& vi.延期，缓办，（使）延迟vt.把…放在次要地位；[语]把…放在后面（或句尾）vi.（疟疾等）延缓发作（或复发） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
postpone
|
|
| v.延期，推迟 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
forth
|
|
| adv.向前；向外，往外 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
amendment
|
|
| n.改正，修正，改善，修正案 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
adjournment
|
|
| 休会； 延期； 休会期； 休庭期 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
apparently
|
|
| adv.显然地；表面上，似乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
agitated
|
|
| adj.被鼓动的，不安的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
briefly
|
|
| adv.简单地，简短地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
alleged
|
|
| a.被指控的，嫌疑的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
repudiated
|
|
| v.（正式地）否认( repudiate的过去式和过去分词 )；拒绝接受；拒绝与…往来；拒不履行（法律义务） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
bartering
|
|
| v.作物物交换，以货换货( barter的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
justify
|
|
| vt.证明…正当(或有理)，为…辩护 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
obstinate
|
|
| adj.顽固的，倔强的，不易屈服的，较难治愈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
followers
|
|
| 追随者( follower的名词复数 )； 用户； 契据的附面； 从动件 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
consternation
|
|
| n.大为吃惊，惊骇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
concealed
|
|
| a.隐藏的，隐蔽的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
conceal
|
|
| v.隐藏，隐瞒，隐蔽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
tardy
|
|
| adj.缓慢的，迟缓的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
dilemma
|
|
| n.困境，进退两难的局面 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
faction
|
|
| n.宗派，小集团；派别；派系斗争 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
purely
|
|
| adv.纯粹地，完全地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
affected
|
|
| adj.不自然的，假装的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
relaxation
|
|
| n.松弛，放松；休息；消遣；娱乐 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
postponement
|
|
| n.推迟 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
exasperating
|
|
| adj. 激怒的 动词exasperate的现在分词形式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
avowedly
|
|
| adv.公然地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
entrusted
|
|
| v.委托，托付( entrust的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
momentary
|
|
| adj.片刻的，瞬息的；短暂的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
taunted
|
|
| 嘲讽( taunt的过去式和过去分词 )； 嘲弄； 辱骂； 奚落 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
reconciliation
|
|
| n.和解，和谐，一致 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
estranged
|
|
| adj.疏远的，分离的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
truce
|
|
| n.休战，(争执，烦恼等的)缓和；v.以停战结束 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
complexion
|
|
| n.肤色；情况，局面；气质，性格 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
judgment
|
|
| n.审判；判断力，识别力，看法，意见 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
utterly
|
|
| adv.完全地，绝对地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
dexterous
|
|
| adj.灵敏的；灵巧的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
humble
|
|
| adj.谦卑的，恭顺的；地位低下的；v.降低，贬低 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
taunts
|
|
| 嘲弄的言语，嘲笑，奚落( taunt的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
adherents
|
|
| n.支持者，拥护者( adherent的名词复数 )；党羽；徒子徒孙 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
feud
|
|
| n.长期不和；世仇；v.长期争斗；世代结仇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
acerbity
|
|
| n.涩，酸，刻薄 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
solicitor
|
|
| n.初级律师，事务律师 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
judicial
|
|
| adj.司法的，法庭的，审判的，明断的，公正的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
depreciating
|
|
| v.贬值，跌价，减价( depreciate的现在分词 )；贬低，蔑视，轻视 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
innuendo
|
|
| n.暗指，讽刺 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
skilful
|
|
| (=skillful)adj.灵巧的，熟练的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
invective
|
|
| n.痛骂，恶意抨击 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
honourable
|
|
| adj.可敬的；荣誉的，光荣的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
lull
|
|
| v.使安静，使入睡，缓和，哄骗；n.暂停，间歇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
distinguished
|
|
| adj.卓越的，杰出的，著名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
trample
|
|
| vt.踩，践踏；无视，伤害，侵犯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
abrogate
|
|
| v.废止，废除 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
coerce
|
|
| v.强迫，压制 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
lengthened
|
|
| （时间或空间）延长，伸长( lengthen的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
protracted
|
|
| adj.拖延的；延长的v.拖延“protract”的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
neutralize
|
|
| v.使失效、抵消，使中和 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
proprietor
|
|
| n.所有人；业主；经营者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
plunged
|
|
| v.颠簸( plunge的过去式和过去分词 )；暴跌；骤降；突降 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
abrogation
|
|
| n.取消，废除 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
disquieted
|
|
| v.使不安，使忧虑，使烦恼( disquiet的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
proceedings
|
|
| n.进程，过程，议程；诉讼(程序)；公报 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
frivolous
|
|
| adj.轻薄的；轻率的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
soothed
|
|
| v.安慰( soothe的过去式和过去分词 )；抚慰；使舒服；减轻痛苦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
deplore
|
|
| vt.哀叹，对...深感遗憾 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
calamity
|
|
| n.灾害，祸患，不幸事件 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
rescinded
|
|
| v.废除，取消( rescind的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
lucid
|
|
| adj.明白易懂的，清晰的，头脑清楚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
vehemently
|
|
| adv. 热烈地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
memorable
|
|
| adj.值得回忆的，难忘的，特别的，显著的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
narrative
|
|
| n.叙述，故事；adj.叙事的，故事体的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |