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

148 derstaud that wars in India, undertaken for India,' objects against native princes, stand upon a different footing. But in the present case British troops are spoken of and the whole affair is treated as a British and not an Indian war. Itis a war entered into by direction of the Home Government, and is dearly a British war, and, if so, it ought to have been declared by a British sovereign and brought before Parlia ment. (Hear, bear.) I know not what answer my noble friend opposite may make, I presume that he has consulted the authorities of the Crown on the subject, but my own impression is, that as the war is an unfortunate one, so the proclamation of it has been unconstitutional, nay, almost illegal. ( Hear, bear.) But if I deplore the commencement of the Persian, ten times more do I deplore the opening of the Chinese war—(cheers)—accompanied as it has been by proceedings unknown in civilised warfare--(Hear, hear)—but which I have to night heard with asto nishment characterised as being marked with great forbearance. (Hear, bear.) Ido not say that the Chinese have not violated the treaty into which they entered, but what I do say is, that I consider it extremely doubtful whether the lorcha Arrow was under the protection of the tiag of this country, and, if not, our whole case falls to the ground. Sir J. Bowring admits that the time for which the Arrow was entitled to carry the British flag had expired: but he adds that the Chinese did not know that such was the case. He also states that under the colonial register she was entitled to carry the British flag until her return to Hong Kong. Now, I very much doubt the legal validity of the colonial register, and of this I am sure, that there is infinite danger in allowing any authority at a distance to grant British protection, and to enable persons, whatever their character may be, to advance a claim to British influence. I believe, however, that the colonial register is of very doubtful validity, because I think that it is inconsistent with, and repugnant to, the law of England, and it is clearly laid down that colonial law shall not be repugnant to the law of the parent State. I believe that this colonial register confers the privileges of British vessels upon vessels which are not the property of British subjects, but of persons who, being foreigners, have been allowed, on the payment of large sums of money, to take leases of land in Hong Kong, thereby becoming resident in that colony, but who do not thereby become British subjects, and who cannot by the general mercantile law claim for their vessel the pro tection of the British flag. But, my lords, admitting even the legal validity of the colonial register—supposing even that the Chi- nese had been ten times more in the wrong—sup. pose the insult had been more grave and had even been repeated. I say that the course taken by our representative is one which I had expected to have heard censured, anl not vindicated. The Arrow was in Chinese waters, although I know I may be told that the power of the consul extends over those water:. There was a man on board that vessel chargeable—and. I believe, fairly so—with the commission of acts of piracy ; that man was arrested, and also the re oi cue crew. On the demand of the consul, however, the Chinese offered to restore the crew, retaining the man. Now. I say, that in this case, whatever may have been the inadequacy of the reparation. it was a cas? in which the British repre sentative ought to have received the men, although he might express disapprobation at the proceeding., and at the same time apply to his Government for instructions. Instead of adopting that course, he takes upon himself to enter upon hostilities of the most acrid character. He destroys their forts, but he goes still further in that course of forbearance so mach lauded by the Government. tA laugh.) In time of peace—that is to say, with no war legally proclaimed—without, I believe, giving any notice of his intention, upon his own authority, with out the sanction of the Crown, he orders the admiral on that station to do—what? You took great credit for sparing Odessa. tLottil cries of " Hear, hear.") You were told that Odessa was full of food and military stores : you were at war with a mighty empire ; this country was taxed to the utmost but you said that, on grounds of humanity, you would not destroy a commercial town. But now in the time of peace, without the sanction of the Crown, the Ilritish representative takes upon him self not only to destroy forts, but to bombard a peaceful commercial town with an indiscriminate slaughter of unoffending citizens—t Hear, hear)—a town with which you have no relations but commer• cial relations, and the destruction of which can simply b e fatal to your own commercial interests. And we are told that such a bombardment is an act of signal forbearance My lords, I look upon that transaction with pain, and with no expectation of the b ene fi ts which we are informed wilt result from it. At all events, if such benefits do result, it is probable that they have been the real object from the first, and that you have gone to waron talc?. pretences. (Hear, hear.) But I doubt whether you will gain the andel- THE PRESS. ' pated advantages. I doubt whether the literal ful filment of the Treaty of Pekin will ttnid to augment our trade with Canton, which has increased so largely within the last few years ; and I doubt whether the best means for gaining admission into the interior of the country is the bombardment of a large town and the massacre of its unotiending inhabitants. My lords, I have now gone through the topics which are adverted to in the Speech. It is not my intention, nor do I think that it is upon general grounds advisable, to move an amendment which might interfere with the unanimity with which the house would otherwise pass the Address. While I rejoice, however, in the prosperity of the country which is announced in the Speech, and which, with some exceptions, I believe to be a correct represen tation of the case, I cannot but see in the foreign policy of this country, which I regret to find occupies so large a space in the Speech, another unfortunate repetition of that meddling spirit and uncalled for interference with foreign countries which has so often characterised the previous proceedings of the noble viscount at the bead of the Government, which can not raise our character or procure us friends in foreign countries, and which will interfere by its per petual disturbance of our commercial relations with that which I trust will long be the growing and in creasing prosperity of this great country. My lords, I cannot approve the course which has been pursued ny the Government in its foreign policy ; but I for bear from embodying the opinions which I have ex• pressed in any amendment, because I trust that they will be modified by the papers which I presume her Majesty's Government will shortly lay before ,Par liament. ([be noble earl resumed his seat amid loud cheering.) SPEECH OF MIL DISRAELI, The SPEAKER having put the Address from the chair, Mr. DISRAELI said,—l confess, sir, that when I listened to the speech of the hon. mover of the Address—who has to night spoken with an ability which, from the manner in which he had formerly addressed you, did not at all surpri:e me—(cheers) — I was for some time inclined to believe that the hon. baronet had in his possession a copy of a Queen's Speech very different from that which I had had the opportunity of perusing, and which, until that mo ment, I had supposed t' be an authentic document- The hon. baronet informed me that the Speech which was on this occaiion delivered by the Royal Com missioners contrasted very favourably with the ad• dresses to which we have for the last two or three years listened on similar occasions. For example, that it conveyed to the house the gratifying informs. tion that her Majesty had received from all the great powers of Europe assurances of their continued friendship and goodwill ; but that is an expression which I have not found in the copy of the Speech which has been placed before me. The Speech de scribed by the hon. baronet also premised to the people of this country, as I caught from his lips, a reduction of taxation. That also is a promise which unfortunately has been omitted, I am afraid from some sinister motive, from the copy of the Speech for which until this moment I was grateful to the distinguished person to whom I am indebted for it. (Cheers.) The Speech quoted by the hon. baronet also promised a series of measures of domestic amelioration—the necessary consequence of our en joying the blessings of peace ; but no such promise is held out in the Speech which I bare read to-day. It is often said that a Queen's Speech is not generally so instructive or so impressive a document as an expression of opinion, or a statement of facts f rom such a quarter, and attended by such circumstances, might naturally be expected to be; but I confess that it seems to me in the Speech delivered by the Royal Commissioners to-day there is enough to set the people of this country a thinking, and to produce a very great impression upon the public opinion of these kingdoms. It is hardly a year, sir, since we indulged the idea —little dreaming that it was a delusive one—that we had terminated a great struggle, and by its termina tion had laid the foundation of a prospect of peace, probably more favourable on the whole than had heen offered to this country since the settlement of 1,45. Let the house for a moment recal to its re collection the circumstances under which the Treaty SATURDAY, of Paris was concluded. Our foe, deemed to be, and who had proved himself so powerful, had been completely baffled in the project of aggression and aggrandisement which he had contemplated and attempted to accomplish. It has been said—l know not with how much authority—that the late Emperor of Russia had declared that he would not accede to the terms of peace which were at one period of the war offered to him until his last man and his last rouble were spent. To that state the Russians were in fact reduced. Great as may have been their want of the " sinews of war," their ex haustion with regard to men was still more decided. Our foe was therefore utterly discomfited and de feated, and yet h 3 retired from the contest with dignity and without the humiliation which under such circumstances ha might have been expected to experience. I know that at the time there were many persons who alleged these facts and circum stances as reasons which should make us disapprove the settlement which had been come tc, and as being very little favourable to that tranquillity which we had gained at so great a sacrifice; but, in my opinion, they were circumstances eminently favourable to the maintenance of peace. Russia had been defeatedi n her object. That object had been disapproved by the mast eminent of her statesmen. Its attainment had been attempted in a manner which accorded with the strong character of her late sovereign, and you may say that in the tomb of the Emperor Nicholas his policy had been interred. By a fortu nate combination of circumstances, the death of the Emperor and the heroic defence of Sebastopol at once put an end to that policy, and permitted the Russians to see its termination without any loss of their self-respect. If the Russians had been humi. liated, if they had felt that that contest had diminished the respect generally entertained by Europe for their national character, they would have been uneasy in their new position, and you might have found in that uneasiness the elements of future discord, and even the cause of future wars ; but the fact that the termination of that struggle, conclusive as it was in favour of our policy, was one not humi hating to Russia, was an additional reason that the sincerity of her desire for peace was not to be ques tioned, and that her inclination and her interest were the same. Well, sir, looking to the condition of the two great military empires which occupy the centre of Europe, we found that probably at no period were the arts of peace more cultivated in those countries than they were even during the war. Both in France and in Austria great works were prosecuted, great banking establishments were founded, the application and distribution of capital occupied the attention of the most influential classes, and even the mitigation of the effects of commercial panics was in both countries much discussed and considered. If such were the dispositions of these empires while war was being waged, we had a right to suppose that when hostili ties were concluded they would prosecute these pursuits with increased vigour and determination. As to our relations with the United States of America, notwithstanding the squabbling and blustering which have prevailed upon that subject, I should suppose that no sane man ever doubted that they were deeply and decidedly amicable. No one supposed that war would break out between this country and America, o.- that the United States were about to declare war with any other great power of Europe. If this was the condition of these four great powers, what was that of our own country' Were we in a position which tempted us to engage in any fresh war? We had an empire open to our people such as had never before in our history been opened to them. We were founding au immense colonial empire on a scale unknown to the history of man— an empire of illimitable dimensions and of inexhaus tible resources. We had open to our citizens a career which secures all the excitement and enterprise of war without any of its eels and calamities. Under these circumstances I should think that any man whose opinion was worth having would have said that, at the period of which I ant speaking, there was a sounder foundation and a surer prospect of permanent tranquillity than had been offered to this country since the settlement of ISIS. That, sir, is hardly a sear ago, and I want to know why we have been disappointed. I( that view was a sound one, the country had a right to expect that we should see the consequences of such a state of affairs. We had a right to suppose that her Majesty's Ministers would have weaned the mind of this country from the ex citement which war engenders ; that they would no longer have permitted public attention to be diverted and distracted from the consideration of domestic affairs, and that well -matured and considerable mea sures of economical administrative improvement would have Leen prepared during the recess and sub mitted to the consideration of Parliament. (Hear, hear.) We might have looked for that which is supposed to be the necessary consequence o f peace— the mitigation of public burdens—(cheers),—and might bare expected that the capital and labour of