The Press. — London, England, 1857-02-28 00:00:00

202 in the wrong as to justify the terrible punishment we have inflicted. Englishmen are not the Dracos of legislation. Every offence with us is not punishable by death. Are we mild philosophers in our domestic legislation, and ruth less exterminators in the enforcement of points of interna tional law ? It would be a monstrous inconsiateucy if, while we ate mitigating, and have for the last thirty years been mitigating, our criminal code, and dealing mildly with offenders who prey upon the very vitals of the State, we should wage a ruthless war —no, not a war, but a whole- sale massacre on our helpless customers at s remote corner of the globe. And what for? Why to maintain a trim pery ordinance which our own Board of Trade deems rather questionable, and which is at direct variance with the orders of our own Imperial Parliament. The deliberate stvement of Sir John Bowring to Yeh, that the Arrow was entitled to our protection, in the face of his admission to Mr. Parses that she was not, Sir Edward Lytton animadverted upon in strong terms : Why, sir, here we have not only the telling of a lie, but tly! suppression of the truth, and this contemptible excuse for a great crime Lord Clarendon, a Minister of the Crown, does not hesitate to re•echo and Approve. In the mogul. lo {vent appeal with which the Colonial Secretary eon chided his l,e•rorat.ion he talked loftily of vindicating the h mour of the nation. The houour of the nutlet, ! Sir, p evarication and falsehood have nothing to do with the h mom of the English nation; they appertain rather to t►e honour of an Old Bailey attorney, We have heard a g eat deal about the dissimulation and duplicity of Russia. I think, air, Russia will chuckle at our dealings with C iina. Here is a Minister of the Crown, the austere n Iptiittor of the Paris Conference, the rabliker of Rus Sian duplicity, aiding and abetting in what he may call a diplomatic suppression of the truth. The language used by Consul Parkes in his correspon dence with Commissioner Yeh he censured as repug nant to the rules of diplomatic intercourse, and he condemned with vehemence the hostilities carried on by our commanders upon the miserable plea of an alleged affront to our flag, for the refusal of an entry int ) Canton was not a tenable ground, it being a question whether the Emperor of China himself could practically enforce that article of the treaty, or, if he could, whether the effect would not be perni cious to his people. One of the highest authorities on international law had said that when a treaty, concluded with upright intentions, becomes difficult o" ref ti!mont. nothing could be mots honourable, snore praiseworthy, or more conformable to the histo. rte, oi I.,tyrtiational treaties than to relax the terms of such treaty as far as possible without exposing yourselves to danger. How much more, then, was it our interest to do so in such a case as this, where we run the risk of considerable danger and loss? Or could we have any more unhappy occasion for attempting to enforce our treaty than the present, when at the very moment we have been bombarding the forts, shelling the city, incensing the people, and leaving every man who has lost a son or• a brother thirsting for revenge ? Mr. L. DAVIES opposed the motion, which was nominally for a committee to inquire into our com mercial relations with China, but really it went, he said, to assail the whole of our movements in the war, to paralyse our efforts, and to encourage the enemy. Sir J. RAMSDEN observed, that the three points in this question put by Sic B. Lytton were short and clear, and mu , t be decided by the evidence. First, was the Arrow a legally registered British vessel, owned by a British subject, and entitled to British protection; secondly, was the boarding of the Arrow aid the forcible abstraction of part of her crew a violation of the treaty ; and, thirdly, were the pro ceedings of the British Consul in demanding an apology and reparation, and, when denied, adopting strong measures, justifiable under the circumstances ? Reasoning upon the facts, he resolved the first two questions in the affirmative without hesitation ; and, With regard to the last, although ho deplored the violent measures resorted to, and the destruction of life and property, he found no evidence of a single hasty or ill considered act, or of one angry expres sion on the part of the British officials. Sir T. HERBERT supported the motion, expressing his regret at the resort to extreme measures without the pre:ious sanction of the Home Government. Sir E. PEtinv likewise supported the motion. The motion, he observed, raised two questions—whether the British authorities were right in their demand upon the Chinese, and, if they hail right on their aide, whether they were justified in resorting to ex treme measures? Applying principles of law to the facts, he argued that the Arrow never could claim the rights of a British vessel ; but, assuming that he was wrong in his law, he maintained that the hostilities were not justifiable. Mr. UREGSON supported the Government. Lord J. HUSEET.T, said, he had listened with great attention and anxiety to the statement of Mr. La bouchere, hoping that the ambiguity which seemed to rest upon the policy of the Government might be dispelled, and some view might be afforded of a dis• tinct policy to which Parliament might look for fixture security. In all these respects the speech of Mr. Labouchere had disappointed him. The ques tiqa he considered under these three heads—tirst; THE PRESS. the nationality of the Arrow ; second, the right to enter Canton ; third, the policy which the Govern ment intended to pursue, and the object at which they aimed in hostilities. Neither of the two provo cations, he contended, afforded a sufficient ground for the extreme measures resorted to, which were not a proper mode of settling such a great question ; and he thought her Majesty's Government ought to have considered that the British officials had committed a serious offence, having, without sufficient cause, put in jeopardy amicable relations with a great and populous empire, and proceeded to the solution of a question which a Secretary of State had expressly declared should not he decided without reference to the Government at home : What, however, was the language addressed by Lord Clarendon to Sir John Bowring and Sir Michael Seymour? On the 10th of January he informed Sir J. Bowring that " Her Majesty's Government entirely approve the course which has been adopted by Sir M. Seymour and yourself." Sir, I do think that this is a very serious matter; T do think that the giving their approbation in these few words, without explicit instructions, without saying what was to be done, without any notice of the assumption of authority, was neglecting the duty, the solemn duty, which was imposed on her Majesty's Government. And where was the affair to end ? He feared that, in the disorganised stato of China, asocial revolution might be produced, and it might cease to be a country in which commercial operations could be advantageously carried on. The worst part of the case was that Sir John Bowring, while he declared that the vessel had lost all right to British protec tion, set up that claim against the Chinese Commis sioner, and required. an apology to the British flag, as having been rightfully used. Much had been said about the prestige of this country, but he had no wish to see its prestige maintained separated from character, honour, and reputation : We have learned much of late—a great deal too much, I think—of the prestige of England. We used to hear of the character, of the reputation, of the honour of England. I trust, sir, that the character, the reputation, and the honour of this country are dear to us all—( cheers )—but, if the prestige of England is to be separate from those qualities, if it is to be separate from the character, from the reputation, and from the honour of our country, then I, for one, have no wish to maintain it. (Cheers.) To those who argue, as I have heard some argue—it is true we have a bad case ; it is true we were in the wrong, it is true we have committed injustice, but we must persevere in that wrong; we must continue to act unjustly, or the Chinese will think that we are afraid, I say, as has been said before, "Be just and fear not." Whatever we lose in prestige, of whit i I do not presume to be a judge, I am convinced that the character and the honour of this country will be raised higher by such a policy. Never will England stand higher in the world's estimation than when it can be said that though troublesome and meddlesome officials prostitute her arms and induce a brave admiral to commence hostilities which never ought to have been begun, yet the House of Commons, representing her people, have indignantly declared that they will be no parties to such injustice; and that neither for commercial advantages, nor for political advann g !s, nor for any other immediate advantages to their country, will they consent to stain that honour which, after all, has been and must he the sure foundation of her greatness. (Loud and con• tinned cheering.) Mr. Lowe observed that the argument that we could not by any municipal law give a right to Chinese subjects against their own Government proved too much, for the result would be that the greater portion of the British ships would not be within the treaty. He contended that the ordinance under which the lorcha was registered was legal in its inception; and as to the question whether the Chinese had viclated the treaty, what an outcry would have been raised, he said, if the British Consul had, upon a paltry quibble, repudiated the British charac ter of the vessel ! The real question, he contended, was not one of legality, but of the animus of the Chinese authorities, and it was impossible to acquit them of a bad animus in the matter. Much as he deplored the consequences, it appeared to him that upon those authorities, not upon the British Govern ment or its officials, rested the responsibility. On the motion that the debate be adjourned, Mr. Ginsom stated that it had been the intention of Mr. Cobden to submit his motion in two distinct resolutions, but, through some mistake, its form had been altered, and it had been put as one resolution. After some discussion, the motion was altered to its original form, and the first part of the motion was moved as one of the resolutions. The debate was then adjourned until the ensuing day. NOTICES OF MOTION. TUESDAY. Mr. T. Duscomne—that on the lilth of March he should call attention to the grieve. ices of certain petitioners connected with the Land 'frausport Corps, who had served in the Crimea, and move that the petitions be referred to a select committee. Mr. H. [teaseLey—that shortly after Easter he should. call attention to the necessity of protecting voters at polling booths. Mr. READLAM —that nn an early day he should move resolu tions to the effect that the income tax should not be continued for more than another year, and that it should be left to Parlia ment then to consider whether it should be continued for a longer time. He should make 4 /40t1011 to that afoot in cow• MEW° of wile and wean”. SATURDAY, Lord J. Rosszr.t.—that in committee of ways and means he should move amendments to the Chancellor of the Exchequer's proposals, to the effect that the tea duty should be is. 4d. in the yearsioST-SS and 1856-54., and that it should be reduced to is. to 1080. &art an* grasOnn. Her Majesty the Queen remains at Buckingham Palace. H►s Royal Highness the Prince Consort held the first levee of the season on Thursday at St. James's Palace. The Right Hon. the Speaker of the House of Commons will hold his full-dress levees at his house, 89, Eaton•square, on the evenings of Saturday, 7th March, and Saturday, 14th March, at ten o'clock precisely. Vo!Hun!. A CABINET CouNcm was held on Saturday at the official residence of the First Lord of the Treasury in Downing•street. The Ministers present were Viscount Palmerston, the Lord Chancellor, Earl Granville, the Marquis of Lansdowne, the Earl of Harrowby, Sir George Grey, the Earl of Clarenden, Mr. Secretary Laboueliere, Lord Panmure, the Chan eellor of the Exchequer, Sir Charles Wood, the Right Hon. R. Vernon Smith, Lord Stanley of Alderley, the Duke of Argyll, and the Right Hon. M. I'. Baines. A BALLOT MEETING was held in the Free-trade Hall at Manchester on Wednesday evening to sup port Mr. Berkeley's motion for the ballot. Mr. George Wilson was in the chair, and the meeting was ad dressed by the Hnn. F. H. Berkeley, M.P., Mr. Nicholson, from Melbourne, Mr. Whitehurst, of London, Mr. Archibald Prentice, and others. THE HUDSON'S BAY HOUSE OF COMMONS COM MITTEE has sat during the week. Colonel Lefroy, Dr. Rae, and Sir James Simpson have been the witnesses examined. They all admit that a vast amount of rich land capable of cultivation does exist, but that from the uncertainty of the climate, the severity of winter, and the brevity and heat of the summer, the crops were scanty. They were of opinion, also, that to preserve the fur trade it must remain a monopoly, for, it the trade were open, tral pers would kill the finer animals at all seasons and destroy the race entirely. Mn. 11VMPHREY BROWN, M.P., has this week been presented by his friends at Tewkesbury with a hand some silver centre-piece, engraved with the appro priate motto, " Perseverantia omnia vincit." Mr. Brown, in responding upon the occasion, generally denied the statements against him with regard to the British Bank, and a certain sum of 70,000/., but regretted that circumstances should prevent his giving a detailed statement which would entirely clear his character. Mr. Brown then made a rather remarkable statement : Although he had never given a party vote in the house of Commons he was much respected there, and to provo that such was the case, it was only necessary for him to relate a circumstance that occurred to him very lately. When a dissolution was expected, a member of her Majesty's Government met him in the lobby of the House of Commons, and said to him, " Brown, you have never been of our party, but I like your honesty of purpose and impartiality ; and if you want a qualification I will give you one with great pleasure." In conclusion, he begged once more to say that, how ever much they maligned his character and held him up to opprobrium, the time would come when he would return to Tewkesbury, and they would find ho was much illused. He had passed sleepless nights and wretched days, but the day was near when his innocence would be established and his enemies' treachery made apparent. THE SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING A REPEAL OF THE TAXES ON KNOWLEDGE held a meeting on 'Wednesday at SL Martin's hall. Sir J. Paxton, M.P., opened the proceedings, and said that previous to the meet ing of Parliament he had hoped that this would have been but a formal meeting held to congratulate themselves on having received an assurance from the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the tax on paper should be repealed. But from what had since transpired he was afraid that they would have to meet on many future occasions before the object they had in view was accomplished. In making his financial statement, instead of indicating any inten tion on the part of the Government to take off the tax, he rather indicated that they were in favour of it, though he was afraid in the prevent temper of the country to say so in as many words. The right hon. gentleman divided the tax under three heads— the tax on paper for printing, the tax on paper for writing, and the tax on heavy paper for packages, which latter, the right hon. gentleman admitted, was somewhat burdepsome, but, on the whole, ho