The Press. — London, England, 1857-02-07 00:00:00

126 ceeding on the part of this country is one that ought to have been made known to Parliament—(Hear, hear) — and may have an essential bearing on the measures that may have been taken iu reference to Italian affairs. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman has said, we are not reaping the fruits of peace—that the Government, by perpetual quarrels, distracts the public mind, keeps up a lavish ex penditure, and stops the progress of improvement at home. The right hon. gentleman has stated, with respect to Switzerland, that at the period when Switzerland had agreed, with the aid of France, on certain terwsof arrange ment with Prussia, the British Government applied moral force to Switzerland, which led Switzerland to attempt alterations of her bases and to return to the terms pro posed to her by France when she found she was unable to obtain any definite promise of support front this country. It is perfectly plain, if that be true, that the affair of Switzerland is a very different one front that represented in the Speech from the Throne, and the Government is bound to let the house know exactly how the matter stands. The accouet which the right hon. gentleman has given, if it be correct, materially bears on the advice given to the Crown by the Government in preparing the Speech from the Throne. These various questions must, I fear, occupy much of the attention of the house. I know nut why, but undoubtedly for the last six months we have been kept in a state of perpetual disquietude by one foreign broil after another. (Hear.) has strange that, when the genius of the noble lord is in the ascendant, we have ten quarrels for one that occurs under any other Minister's reign. (Laughter.) It is strange that we should always have to break with all the world in succession—that in every case we should find ourselves to be unquestionably right, and should have to denounce, one after the other, the rest of mankind as either knaves or fools, and that in every case we should begin with bold and braggart language, with high-sounding pretensions, and yet, in every case, the result should 5e our coming down pretty nearly to the terms our opponents had offered us at first. ( Hear, bear.) I want to know how it is that these things happen ; for I confess I think there is some justice in the statement of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli), that, although we have attained to peace, although the people of this country• have accepted peace at some sacrifice of feeling, but with a desire that it should be a real and profound peace, and bring forth its proper fruits, yet we have not seen those prospects realised, and our foreign relations, together with our establishments and expenditure, are not such as can he considered satisfactory. With respect to the kingdom of Naples, inasmuch as in her Majesty's gracious Speech we are told that the papers shall be laid upon the table, I will not now enter into any detail upon that very interesting and most important and difficult subject. All I shall say is this—l, myself, have stood in a somewhat different position from other mem bers as to transactions in the kingdom of Naples. I have perhaps a stronger impression of the intensity of the evils which have prevailed in that country and of the nature of the measures which evils so intense might justify or require ; but I did not scruple last year, while avowing any concurrence in the sentiments of her Majesty's Go vernment with regard to what has taken place at Naples, to express my doubts and misgivings as to the policy, as to the justice, indeed, of that policy—tor I can have no donhts as to the prudence and ultimate humanity of a practice of introducing for discussion at conferences the affairs of powers which are not represented at those conferences, and of recording conclusions in the face of Europe to which conclusions the powers chiefly interested have been no parties. (Hear, bier.) At the same time lam strongly of opinion that it was for the interest of Europe that the great powers should unite to enforce and urge upon the King of Naples the adoption of those measures which are required to establish legality and good government in his dominions. Every effort which her Majesty's Government could use to bring the powers of Europe to such a con cert would have deserved the support and commendation of this house ; but the question of the interference which has actually taken plate is one the consideration of which we had better defer until we have the correspondence before us, and we are able to examine into the nature of that interference, the prospects of success by which it was attended, and the amount of authority by which it was sus tained. Unfortunately, the Neapolitan question is the only one of all those matters of interest adverted to in the Royal Speech upon which, as far as I am aware, any information has been promised us. Were it not the Queen's Speeches are documents framed with grave consideration and minute care, I would infer that the omission was accidental. But there was a question relating to the Treaty of Paris which at one time appeared to menace a European convulsion, and when discussions and dissensions ran so high as to exhibit England almost en;aged in military action opposed to France. Here was a question, the gravity of which could not be over-estimated, but the settlement of which, I believe, has been altogether satisfactory, and I must say that nothing can in my opinion be more becoming or more proper than the language in which that result is announced in the Royal Speech. But, at the same time, the Government will, I think, admit that from the extreme gravity of the circumstances, the agitation which pervaded the country, and the tone which the Prime Minister felt it necessary to assume, the colour which he deemed it his duty to give to the case, were so serious and formidable, that it is right the matter should be brought authentically before Parliament, and that the fullest in formation as to those transactions should not be withheld. T he charges made weft too serious—the interests at stake too grave—the controversy too menacing—to pass over lightly ; and it is right we should know whether the Go vernment were or were not drawn into that controversy, and that the steps they adopted were required by a great and overruling necessity, in order that we may give them that justification which, if they have acted prudently, they have a right to claim at our hands. So much for the goes• TILE PRESS. tion connected with the Treaty of Paris; but there are other questions not yet settled, and about which we ought to have some information. Most important matters are involved in that brief para graph which refers to America. The Central American question was one of those difficulties which during the last summer were upon the hands of the Government which have never been wanting since the conclusion of peace, and of which I am much afraid at the present time it is not possible to foretel the termination. We have seen in the newspapers an arrangement, which I think a fair arrangement, with the United States about the Central American dispute; but I must say, although it is no fault in my eyes, it does give a sanction to the opinion that the settlement was based upon concessions to America which previously we had long and unhappily re fused. The capital point in this matter upon which American opinion and argument ran highest related to the Island of Ruatan. That point has been conceded, and my right hon. friend the Secretary for the Colonies has allowed this gem—if it be one—to be removed from the diadem of his Sovereign. lam far from regretting that loss. In my opinion it was wise and just to give it up. It was unfortunate that it should ever have been occupied, or that such occupation should have received the sanction of the Government at home ; but still I do think there is a great constitutional question involved in the surrender of Ruatan, about which we ought to have had some informa tion, and which we are still entitled to ask for. Ruatan had become by a regular and competent act a portion of the settled dominions of the Crown, and I apprehend that by the law her Majesty has no right to give away her settled dominions without the assent of Parliament, although with respect to territories acquired by war another and a different principle prevails. if that be so, I am afraid the treaty we have made with the United States, the substance of which I approve, has not been drawn with all the care that was desirable ; because, instead of making a surrender contingent upon the assent of Parliament, the island of Ruatan has been absolutely handed over to the State of Honduras. If I am wrong in these statements I shall be glad to be corrected ; but the subject is one to which I feel it my duty to call the attention of the Govern ment, and respecting which 1 submit that information ought to be given to this house. Sir, with respect to the unhappy events which have oe earred in China, I must say it would have been agreeable to me if they had been noticed in the Royal Speech in somewhat different terms. (Hear, hear.) Whoever may be right or wrong in that complicated affair, it has cost the blood of hundreds, if not of thousands of innocent and helpless men—(Hear)—subjects of a power which dies not come up to our ideas of civilisation, but which, at least, has nu intrigues of policy, no schemes of aggrandise ment, no designs upon India, no fleets upon the Caspian, but is a power whose subjects, after all, are our fellow creatures, and I must say, if the stupidity or bad faith of their governors has rendered it necessary—a point on which at present I give no opinion —for to us have recourse to arms, I could have desired to see some expression of regret—(Hear, hear)—upon the ground of common humanity, in that portion of the Speech which treats of this most painful subject. ( Hear.) With regard to another question of great importance—l mean Persia—l am disposed to complain that no promise of information has been given to the house. Upon the merits of that quarrel at the present moment I do not pre sume to pronounce; yet at the same time I must proceed to the point of saying that no facts have appeared in the public journals, or in any sources of information open to me, which afford any adequate justification for our pro ceedings. (Hear. hear.) Ido not speak of justification merely on the bare and dry point whether, as an advo cate in a court of justice, we can show that somebody has committed an abstract wrong. Much more than that is required to justify the Government of England involving the country in hostilities. The cause must he adequate and the necessity strong. (Hear.) I trust, therefore, we shall hear that information with regard to Persia will speedily be laid before the house. But there are tw, other questions, and questions of great importance, in connection with this question of Persia, upon which I think it my duty not to refrain from offering a remark, because these two questions do not de pend on any matter of right touching the controversy, or touching the local or even the Asiatic policy of this country, but relate to matters of domestic importance, having a powerful and immediate bearing on the welfare of the people and the duties of Parliament. The first is this—Bv whose authority has the war against Persia been waged . ? (Hear, hear.) I think it is not difficult to see that the war against Persia has its root elsewhere than in Cal cutta. Of the sentiments of the Governor•tieneral I have no knowledge, except the knowledge derived from his own proclamation ; but I must confess the terms of that proclamation conveyed to my mind the impression that the expedition to Persia was undertaken by commands from Landon, and not by order of the Supreme Council at Calcutta. The expedition from Bombay sets sail, but by whose command? By commands from Lon don ; and this, unless I am much mistaken, cuts very deep into the consideration of the question, by what system is our government of India carried on ? (Hear.) ))•ho is it that has given orders for this Persian war? I speak in ignorance, but I ask for information which I think the house is entitled to receive. (Hear, hear.) Has it been done by the Court of Directors of the East India Com pany? The theory of our East India Government—which, to use a homely phrase, is in a verb• leaky state—is, that it is a subject not fit to be handled by the rude hand of Par liament, that there must be an intermediate body, apart from the influence of Parliament, beyond a remote influ ence, in order to secure the good government of India. I can cwiceive the advantage, though not paramount to the objections, of governing India through the medium of a body not under the direct control of Parliament. I can conceive the advantage of placing India under direct par- SATIIIIDAY, liamentary government; but there is one system which has the recommendation of neither of these two, and it is this :—The setting up a body, nominally the governors of India, that shall really serve to stop Parliament consider. ing the interes:s of India, but at the same time shall have no power whatever to check the discretion or caprice of Ministers, either by privileges of its own or by any effec tive appeal to the House of Commons. If India is to be governed by a Court of Directors, then we are entitled to expect that these measures, which never had the sanction of Parliament, must have had the sanction of the Court of Directors. I beg to put the question to the First Minister of the Crown whether the expedition undertaken against Persia, and the policy of that expedition, have had the sanction of the Court of Directors, or been adopted with their knowledge? (Hear, hear.) I think no man can re gard the Persian war without considering how it is that wars of the kind have come to be waged under .:he name of being merely Indian wars. Would it be right that we, holding India as we do, and having entered into this quarrel with Persia, removed by so many hundred leagues from our Indian empire, should compel the people of India to bear the charge? If it is right that they should bear the charge, then it is right that the Court of Directors, who govern India, should have something to say; but we have no information upon the question, at whose charge this war is waged ? ( Hear, hear.) I wish to ask the noble lord at the head of the Government whether any arrangement has been made by her Majesty's Government with the Court of Directors, or otherwise, for charging either the whole or a portion of the expenses of the Persian war upon the revenues of this country ? ( Hear, hear.) I may be wrong, and it may be an old. fashioned notion, but I have less scruple in expressing it, because I cannot be deemed to say it in concert with any person or any party, but I frankly own that if her Majesty's Government have carried us into a European war, it was their duty to have called Parliament together at the first moment when they ventured to con template so serious a step. (Cheers.) I will not now inquire whether there be any precedent which may either palliate their neglect, or, in their own estimation, justity their proceedings; but I will say, without fear ot' contradic tion, that the practice of commencing wars without asso ciating Parliament with the first measures is utterly at variance with the established practice of the country, dangerous to the Constitution, and absolu'ely requiring the intervention of this house in order to render the re. cognition of so dangerous a proceeding utterly impossible, (Cheers.) I pass from the consideration of our foreign policy to our policy at home. When I read the paragraph in thegracaous Speech from the Throne in relation to the Bank and the currency, I was impressed with the belief that her Majesty's Government were about to invite us to legislate on those questions. I think that a proposal well matured by the Executive Government and supported by its authority would be much more likely to lead to a satisfactory con sideration of the question than the mere reference of the subject to a select committee ; but as I find the Chancellor of the Exchequer has given notice of a motion that a select committee shall be appointed for the consideration of these important matters, I will venture to express the hope that the Government will go into that select committee with the view of guiding its deliberations, aiel proposing to it a definite plan. (Hear, hear.) I oentiot too re. spectfully and, at the same time, I cannot too gravely sub mit to the house that unfortunate changes have for many years been tAking place in the credit,dignity, and efficiency of the proceedings of its select committees on questions of public interest and importance. There are happy exoop. tions ; there are cases in which select committees lave thoroughly investigated the matters referred to them, and presented most valuable reports, which have become, or may become, the basis of useful legislation; but I think the public feel that too much of a slovenly character on the whole marks the investigations of our committees—( Hear, hear)—and I think there are few members who have not found that the labours of the select committees of the other house have been contrasted with our select cont. mittees to the credit of the Upper and to the disadvant.g of this house. (Hear, bear.) I hope that will not be the case with his committee; and if he goes into that corn. mittee ready to propose a definite course on the. part 4 the Government, that will be likely to lead the committee to a safe decision. Ido not say what the nature of that course ought to be, and I think that this paragraph of the Queen's Speech was perhaps expressed with less of caution, than the importance of the subject deserved. It states, " Her Majesty commands us to recommend to your eon. sideration the expediency of renewing for a further period the privileges of the Bank of England." Now, sir, 1 have a very strong opinion that the privileges of the Batik of England, properly so called, require revisiou quite as much as renewal. ( Hear, hear.) The relations between the Bank and the State are extremely ill-defined. They date from a period when financial ideas were immature, when public faith did not exist, and when it was important to induce a body of merchants to become security for the State. These were the circumstances that called the Bank of England into existence. I admit that the Bank of England has rendered great services to the State, but much of the relations now existing between the State and the Bank of England is based upon these antiquated, and in the present day highly inappropriate ideas. (Hear.) Therefore I am prepared to contend that whatever arrangement is made with the Bank of England should be agreed to after comprehensive and careful investigation of the whole matter, and of the character of the Rank of Eng land as the agent of the State for the purposes of finance. I think that this paragraph ought not to have indicated a foregone conclusion with respect to the renewal of the act of I e-11. (Hear, hear.) That act was one of a long course of progressive measures. It did not pretend, in the judg ment of Sir R. Peel, its responsible author, to a character of absolute finality. I am not prepared to unsettle any portion of that act for the state of things that existed be-