The Press. — London, England, 1856-07-05 00:00:00

630 never wai intended he denied, on the ant consuls, that any suc by the British Governinentierid Ilority of Mr. Crampton find the illegal enlistment had taken • of the British authorities. sovereigl righth, of the I by eiallitift Subjects ~ disputed; ciintepding .nent were justified in'aceept persons in qeestion beyond the ded States. He should 'oppose A that any attempt iimntry was eentrtiry 'tit that the enticing • - this i iiiiuntry to enlist ri e v asion of their b ' 1#1314 sovereign ?het* ' kihre various ghouC ttileji l liole affair of the illegaltty 'nf 'the Lord Clarendon io4rds )ere was a reinarkable itforward behaviour. The \vouring to steer clear of .. tunit iv of the 'United; States ; i will dernational law end the of - were based *ere en- If ner _ajesty's Gcniernment were not justified in the clandestine and secret scheme they had set on foot, and carried out for the purpose of evading the neutrality law of the United States, the dismissal of our Minister was perfectly right on the part of the American Government, and we must submit to an indignity and an insult in con sequence of the acts i gpfl i t i nwn. He should vole for the resolution. Mr. S. PHILLIMORE i n that, first, if any wrong wire done, it was without the sanction or encourage ment of Lord Clarendon; and, secondly, the only evidence showing that any offence had been com mitted was utterly worthless. Mr. BAILLIE argued that Mr. Crampton could not be ignorant of the acts of the British agents which amounted to en infractii.n of the law. Mt. Cramp ton had denied that he had ever hired or retained men within the United States ; but no one had accused him of doing so. The instructions of MIN Crampton, however, were, in his opinion, written for the express purpose of evading the municipal law of the United States. The law of nations, he remarked, had been violated by the British Government in Prussia, Switzerland, and the Hansa Towns, but their remonstrances were treated very differeutly from those of the United States. Sir G. GREY said, the enlistment proceedings in the United States had originated in the offers of persons resident there—British subjects and foreigners—to enter her . Majesty's service, and Mr. Crampton communicated this fact to the American Government ; but, although every precautinn was taken by him to prevent any violation of the muni cipal law of the United States, it,., appear tat persons had engaged in the transagtme, peofesstng to sot with an authority they had never received, and whose proceedings here ealcitlilted"ta compro mise our friendly relations with the'United States. 114 r Majesty's Government pot an end to this scheme, and offi.red.an ample apology to the Govern ment of the United States for these unauthorised acts, which itorati ! concluded, apparently by .Mr. Buchanan INlnmelf„ tecspl i hare been deemed sibs factory" •-it c ifultol9ooo4..,thn Affair, He asked the uomap 4a, s,the„geniall obaracter of the de spatches, an say 'whether it was prepared to con demn the Government for having endeavoured to avail themselves, witheitt• infrimeng the law, of the offers 'of resickents a'ititallnftires States, and tor havin ~a t tatelit . 4ciuriri 'aid!, bile it VineelEt a jeald' ter"thir . l`iononf i arid- 'd Msity of Englund; show . t iiiiiiiiip .fo'thainten unimpaired the friendly relatiMsotween the two'countries. '=- "I ' Sir 3.'"iratia Moved that the debbbalbSi ad journed ; 401 ,11• J‘ , -iii • J. , • -II pon 4/ ilivitilort,! Oil ' WWeil war sagenktalleby 220 to I'lO 'arid .•,,I .-c, 4 !id) 14' ,t' '11. , :r 111E11 , 11, Sir J. 'ty.2l.9fuprotielitie titi'irett, in suppers be the resoltitinte, elk the. 13kietitnisienti by not distniseing Mr. Delfts, admit that; they or Mr. Crampton had been in the wromt, etill'ito- shonght the &fees. of that gentleman tufty' Went ite ;thew that he bsal-saa oeede4 in evading di:isle/1C En •.• ••' • • ''' '' ' ' 1.1 "• 1 On the motion of Mr. MAPltallaivilbailistme• has adjourrild efiarruig i ewpabe na.l .tbx ,le.vil .11 91i aiiii4l t 1• 'L • I t i t cyliti i iig!!..l4ll, Inl 4, 5 4 0771'n noiieie. The 'bonne then went into COliMUßißelipl Ckqj bill. " The ATTORKEY;ORItERAL for Inatrap ' , it, was bis intention to stake clause It) out of the. 11. .. On clause 17, on the moti on o f t . ' 'Nast, the chairman reported progress, a n d obtaiffifi kiwi ,te sit again on Thursday morning. - 7 .fl/. , ~. , . . , rti . - I ( 9 l'he • Grand Jury Assesements Bill, after . feelse vette amendments had been introduced, was mid a third time and passed. THE The Exchequer-bills (4,000,000/0 Bill was peed a third time and passed. The Church Building Commission Bill peaked through committee pro koNnit. •ii..)40. The Bankruptc,'lM Insolveney Chi We ries, Ac.; ial weetittrougls committee: "' The Drainap (veland) Bill was read ,'ltitpird OW If ' 1 • Managettieitt'Aid 'Amend oftwied through committee. ' d 'llirratestates' Personal Estates Bill was read ,Airfiliiieand passed. vh6Waitivisons Bill passed through committee. "The Dissenters' Marriages Bill was read a third time, and additional clauses having been brought up acid agreed'at,"the bill passed. The title waraltered toit "Bill t 9 Amend the lilarrilate•Aetitt tie; • I , [clod lit. la" L:d.:6II.LL/...1%1:,... if If. ix nortstist 441,(4.1,0* u r r f o ultDT AT. tiA Powririti moved the 'seeen iirtni' "Of ili ; e Burial Acts Amendment Bill, but the Motion was negatived and the bill withdrawn. rnr IRISH REPRESENTATIVE Pink The Earl of DONOUGHMORE moved for a committee to inquire into the expenses now incurred by Irish peers claiming the right to vote for representative peers. It cost bim loss that) 51, to take his seat 'a British peer, but not less 'tio:ll'lsM to proviihis ,‘ l ,, right to vote as an Irish representative peer. The LORD CHANCELLOR concurred in the mollies. tOtiph was agreed to. -1:1 ItOW' , Z.,(11111'. HOUSE OF COMMON'S - 7 TorsoAr. P • . ) I r,r cotorax LAYS AND ,cownr: pczaDALF. , .1 Lord PALMERSTON, in reply to kr. Oliveira as to whether some substantial mark of opprobetiop might not be given to Lieut.-Colonel Lake and Lieut4olonel 'Teesdale for their distingaishfad Bermes st,•Kars, said that Colonel Lake's position as a colonel would enable him to receive the Order of the. Bath, bat it was not usual to recommend Parliament to make any pecuniary provision for any officers except those who happened to be at the head of the forces by which a distinguished achievement was accomplished. DEPARTMENT OF PURL= JUSTICE. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that the notices of motion be postponed till after the ad- journed debate on the amendment for going into committee of supply. Mr. Nariza said, be bad bad a motion on the paper since the Easter recess for an address, praying her Majesty to take into consideration the formation of a separate and responsible department of public justice, and he thought it rather hard that no oppor tunity had been afforded him of bringing it before the house. On the 12th of February a resolution had been agreed to:— That, in the opinion of this house, as a measure of . . administrative reform, provision shoUlA 'bah made with a view to secure the skilful preparation sad roper structure of parliamentary bills and promote the progressive amend ment, of the laws of the United Kingdom- But since the report of the Statue Law Commission, recommending the appointment of a single responsible erson to superintend the amendment of the law, nothing had been done, and our legislation had been getting worse and worse. Sir G. kittEy said if on a future day a question on the subject were put, the ChaocMor of the Ezche quer would make a statement which would enable the right hon. and learned gentleman to judge whe ther it would be worth while to bring forwar t his motion, but it would be quite impossible fur the Government to :iallow that motion at. once. to be carried. 9113 411 _ ji The motion of the Chancellor of the igreliequer was then agreed to. 'l6lk! As ENLISTMENT QUILBTIONF The edloarned debate Mo 4 rt.suirsed: , by tilutiaa GIBSON, who argued that. in organising an elsensive.systerm of "persatawieu," .with paymente.in money, to induce man to enlist in our - , ny„:)- British:authoriqes had violated the - of -- army,. the municipal and international law . the United States. Lord Clarendon's lawns** to. Mr. Marcy had been insult. ing and• irritating, and he regretted that the motion had not been couched in more admits terms so asho coovey fe more emphatic cestaurn f ottithe qinidgct. of the Oritibh "i• I :• - s • MT. :BAX T ER believed that Mr. tlnmpton, had acted injudiciously arid even illegally, but exonerated the Home Government from all responsibility for his movements. They had never authori3ed any slues. tionable proceediuge, aati repudiated them when committed: their policy throughout being marked ,by a straightforward and conciliatory spirit vithickit was much- to be regretted the Cabinet. t at,Pcesident Pierce had failed to reciprocate. lit PHAROCIER supported the motion. Mr. Seonsita confessed his inability to decide the legal point"; involved in the question, but he was assured that, in the existing position of affairs, the matter might both honourably and expechtintly be left to the Government , until thR pas diPg fltiBo l / 4 4 * KI , were concluded. Mr. Ordiewrotte contended that the Government of this country had been guilty of co ic. aline it to wards the United States with referenze to tins en listment question ; had deluded the American Govern ment with inisreprezientsitions; anti had not only itself been guilty of a breach of the municipal law of America, but thate'their agents had knowingly vio lated its provisinne. He made no distinction between t e agents and the Government. Every act of Mr. Crempton had been approved by the Government, and every claim made by him maintained. Mr. C ramp ton never had informed the American Government of the intention to establish enlistment agencies in the United States; be had promised Mr. Marcy in all the enlistment proceedings to confine himselt simply to the " communication of information" to such persons as desired to enlist., but had be done so ? Money; and money's worth, had been given to induce persons to enlist ; travelling expenses were paid; and who, after this, could say that the United States' law had not been violated ? The Government not only concealed their proceedings front the American Go vernment, but used measure% likely to deceive and delude that Government. Her Majesty's Govern ment were informed they were breaking the law, yet they deliberately, against the opinion they had taken, coistinuecl to break the law for months after they had professed to have abandoned their proceedings; for although it was asserted that the recruitment bail ceased on the 22nd of June, it was continued up to August. Could it then be said in that house that the American law had not been violated, and that no cause of complaint had been given to the American Government, or no wrong done? Lord Clarendon, in arguing with the American Govern ment, asserted that anything short of making an actual contract might be innooently done ; but. a contract made in America would be void, and there fore there could be no contract at all. If that doc trine were admitted, anything might be done ; but he did not stop there, be want on to speedy what might be done, and set. himself up in opposition to the American court:, in opposition to the opinion of his own lawyer, and in opposition even to the declara tions of Mr. Lumley. Such was the case with regard to the British Goveinment. It was said the Amem ican Government had accepted their apology; ho (Mr. Gladstone) admitted the feet, and did not seek to detract from the force of IL But what was the state of things? The American Government acquitted the British Government, but punished Mr. Crampton and the consuls; the British Government maintained the acts of Mr. Crampton and the consuls, but ac quiesced in their punishment, and accepted "with sa tisfaction and joy" their own acquittal. That appeared to him to be a most unfortunate state of things, and one unparalleled in the history of the world. He melt that Mr. Crampton had been made emphatically a scapegoat—by whom, was a questiqn,be would not enter on ; but lie would wish to know 0114 singln act of Mr. Crampton had not been covered 14 the fullest manner by the British Government? There bad not been a single act of Mr. Crampton which was nett covered by his GovernmenL 1 :The disniisial of' M. Crampton was either wrong, %It was not ; if i Americh had no just cause of offeue,e,Als dismistial 9nght not to i.e acquiesced in., H. ,. ~.. , 1 ft uw- .., • ••I . i The Soucaroa-Gzrwarked that . the..sHies don turned principally, lapels the interpretation of certain legal enactments in force in the United States. This interpretation, he contended, was vague in itself, and bad been rendered in very different ver sions by various authorities among the, Americans themselves. The. British functionariee s ,per Tat ranted in believing that their attempts - A* obtain recruits were not, ht. entiou of thp.,#me in law, while the Unit State& Government ere entitled to enforce their . sync iokrpretation, jin, lit. 7 British Administration their , turn were diplornati call,y,coneVained to accept the meanins so attached by,,Alse , 4 *erican Ministers to their own enact ments. Sir 4„kiarseross thought that the papers lately issued exhikited a most discreditable succession of trensactious, of which the. aisgiace could only he assigned to the 13ritish Ministry. 'Their conduct had comprnnised t4w, character of the country, had brought mi l tp i this, verge of it,war, and bad compelled us to accept.atieavy r inflignity at the hands of the American Government,. ate F, having v,iP4 offered them the most abject aprilqwesi, Mr. BENTINCR, who rose together wit) TAM, mg raerston, moved the adjournment Of the . chate, Lord PALMERSTON said that in the awl trovemy with the United States neither her ALejesty'e Government nor their agents had violated the laws of the Suites. What violeeions took place were committed by person, wholly unauthorised by the English functionaries. if the British consuls had likewise offended, they weal equally open to prosecution, being shielded by no tiiploosatic protection. The noble lord repudiated the allegation that concealment or deception bad been practised towards the American authorities, declaring the:, nothing was done which they were not told, or' at all events, might not have ascertained-with perfeot ass if they had inquired. When, however, it ap- place with the sanction of the The allegation that the Novel Unittd States had been violated I of the United States at all he d that, the British Governmont Wei ing the services of the persons in boundaries of the United States. the resolution. Sir F. Tursioga contended evade the municipal law of a con the spirit of international law, a and per-u Min persons to leave in a foreign ,* ,(4nl, which was neutraliktla , Was a bre rights of I nc States. ' indications through( which arg earte4 sense of I proceedings. On tbeiart of Lop the .American Governm'ent ibpte want . of ,eaudour and straightfors mists** wide was by endeavouri the letter of the municipal law o the principles upon which intern fnendly intercourse of nations tirely overlooked. If her MI