The Sun. — London, England, 1860-03-10 00:00:00

1 Ic nit nd 'at his country than that which we may simply obtain by the treaty now before us for consideration. But if—and I for one would not at all have critically examined the decision of the Government—if they had arrived at that decision, if on the whole it had been thought wiser at once to have entered into some agreement with France, and not to have waited for what I cannot but believe, though it might have been the gradual, must have been the inevitable decision of the French nation—if that had been the opinion of the Government of this country, taking into consi deration those vast and various circumstances that must have been placed before their examination on an issue so important —if that were their decision—if it were wise at once to enter into some agreement with the French Govern ment, I still think it would have been better, by some alte ration of our mutual tariffs, to have attained all those ends that could at the present moment be acquired, and then, when the period of July, 1861, had arrived—profiting, II hope, by experience—we might have completed the work and h ave accomplished all those ulterior results which, by the present treaty, are not achieved but only contemplated. I think that, under ordinary circumstances, that would have been the course it would have been wiser for us to have taken, and which this house would have had no diffi culty in sanctioning. But I believe that there are objections to a treaty even for the purpose of attaining an object so desirable as the increase of our commercial relations with °ur neighbours, and that it is to be objected to both on s cientific• and political grounds. I have not throughout the debate heard, either on scientific or political grounds, Why it has been deemed expedient to tie up the policy of the country for a term of years so long, and to accomplish results which might, I think, have been realised by a ahnpler process. These are the views with which I have con sidered this subject under ordinary circumstances. Under ordinary circumstances, I should have regretted if the Go vernment, in order to attain a very desirable end, should have availed themselves of questionable means, but no one can for a moment maintain that this treaty has been nego tiated under ordinary circumstances. The circumstances, art the contrary, are indeed of the most exceptional character, and under these circumstances I object to this treaty on three grounds—financial, diplomatic, and Political. I will not enlarge on the financial, because a fair opportunity has been given to the house to decide on that portion of the subject, and, though I cannot agree in the decision at which it arrived, I am content to •take it as one which at least precludes me from at present entering into a lengthened review of it. I think that the condition of the revenue is at the present moment such that it is not Prudent for us to increase a large deficit by creating a con siderable deficiency in addition, in order to obtain the corn- ntercial arrangements which are secured by the present in sftrruens it. en t. Th e h ouse h as h a d the question f a i r l y p asse d b e - Howeve r , tl ee y may ultimately regret the se arrange rno epts, for I believe the time will come, and that, too, ra pidly, when they will - deeply regret it. However much the Scheme propounded by the Chancellor of the Exchequer t his Year may be considered to be unsafe in principle, im provident in arrangement, and pernicious in its conse duences, I do not think that to-night we are called on to es, it. So far from regretting that decision, I for-one should not have thought I was doing my duty to my con stituents and the country had I been silent I think the de cision of the house was not to the advantage of the country; b ut I do not look with any regret to the means by which t hat decision was arrived at. I think the time will come when the principle the minority then held will be recog nised as sound. (Cheers.) Although my objections to this treaty are founded on what I deem the pernicious influence it will have on our financial condition it is unnecessary wnv to deal with it in detail. Being, therefore, under ordinary cir cumstances, in favour of any policy that may increase the co mmercial relations between the two countries, I neverthe -488 cannot agree with some gentlemen in the exaggerated views they took of this impending increase in our commercial intercourse with France. It has always been one great fault °f the English people—having, as they no doubt have, com mercial instincts superior to all other nations—it always has b een their failing to exaggerate the importance of particular markets ; and it is a verycurious thing that they have always ev er -estimated those markets that have proved the last pro ductive and the least advantageous to suchintercourse. The Markets of South America, some years ago, were always bralted In t his house in point of importance above the mar- Ps —those solid and substantial markets—of our North '"nterican brethren which have since been a source of so m uch wealth to this country ; and so at this moment hon. F a pntlemen speak of commercial intercourse with France as it they had a new California or a new Australia opening to their enterprise and energy. (Cheers.) The hon. gentleman W ho seconded the address, and who, representing as he did great district of country, did so with authority, used argu ts much too frequent, to the effect " Australia, with her milliont of inhabitants, takes £11,000,000 of imports; France 8.3 6,000,000 of population ; multiply the trade of Aus tralia by 36, and you will form some faint idea of the com mercial intercourse that is about to take place between the t wo countries" (Cheers.) These were just the observe „lions indulged in. (No, - no.) Brazil was also taken, with. 'Tr limited population of 5,000,000, and her great commer cfV4 exchanges with this country, and in the next sentence ' L ey were told that France had eight times the population „" "i Brazil, and from this hon. gentlemen might calculate W hat would be the results of the new commercial policy. Fr ance But ancient and long - established countries like ', r anee will never offer to a country like England the same mart that virgin colonies, like Australia or California, or countries settled under circumstances of modern civilization like the Brazils offer. We must remember that the menu „setures of France are on the whole, with some few excep ,l°llB, more acient than the manufac t tures of England, and !aat they are n as skilful, if not more so ; and although no i nconsiderable increase between the commercial rola !loons of France and England will accrue from this treaty These relations must still be of a comparatively limited cha racter, and depend upon it, no great branch of industry in France would ever be allowed to be superseded by any great branch of industry in this country. No doubt the intro duction of our goods will increase the d eman d f or th e i rs, stimulate invention, and reduce the cost of Fre nc h goo d s . No doubt the French consumer generally will be benefited, and great advantage may accrue from that, but the moment there is any prospect of a large branch of French industry b eing susperseded by equal industry on this side the Chan nel steps will be taken to prevent this result, and for this reason alone, if not for others. France, whatever may be her form of Government, is a democi acy—and a democracy `will never su b m i t to any great supercession of the native in dustry of her country. His noble friend was perpetually ...iPettling with prize to the instance of France and the a uited States as vourable to the protective principle he u PPorts, and you may rely on it that if you succeed with your new Reform Bill, and especially with the aupplemen- IsrY reform bill announced by the member for Birming siii, you will soon produce a protective interest in this house, which will be the result of what you little anticipate. think we are rather led away by a too sanguine view of What may be the consequences to o ur commerce o f o p en i ng those new markets. This new market will be subject to all those co nditions that prevail in ancient ' populous, and • ghly civilised countries, and the consequence will be cer f ain limits to our enterprise which we do not see at present. I object to this treaty further o n di p l om a tic grounds. It s PPears to me to be a treaty unskilfully and negligently ne gotiated. I have heard nothing with reference to the pro Posed arrangements of either a satisfactory or advantageous ic,oaracter, although more than one minister has addressed Li s house I have not heard any answer yet to account for th e l . ‘ , mysterious appearance of the 3d article, which refers to ;o ditties on shipping. There is no apparent reason why. t hat subject should have been introduced into a strictly c ß ° rarnercial convention ; but when the hon. member for l ' s ta mford reminded you that all the differential duties have been temporarily terminated, indirectly or di rectly, between England and France, we re only tem - Orarily te r minated, and that it was within the p ower Of the Government of France within a few months to Put an end to the treaty of 1825, and that, under these cir cumstances, differential duties will exist between French and English navigation, not only as to the direct but ludirect trade, it is a question that must occasion great a nxiety, and the very fact that in the 3d article navi gation should be introduced into the treaty is one of a cha .trater to create great apprehension in the public mind. With - reference to the article which is the subject of the resent amendment, there is a great objection to that article. am told we are incapable of discussing it because it. is legal," but it is a new theory in this house that members of it should no t g i ve a pu bli c op i n i on on a l ega l s ubject. As understand it, the Sovereign is entrusted with a certain Power, and the a d v i sers o f h er M a j es ty h av e advised her to P art with that power ; and now we are told that that being a legal question members of Parliament are not competent to give an opinion on it. I believe that the dispensing power Was once considered a subject which members of Parliament were perfectly competent to give an opinion upon. (Cheers.) It appears to me to be not at all shrouded in obscurity ; and I ask the house to consider how unwise it would be t• evade this question, and by saying it is a legal question sanction the bases of this treaty. And suppose we evade the difficulty —assume that we agree to this address to the Crown. We shall then communicate that address to the other house of Parliament, which can hardly be prohibited from inquiring into the legal question ; and what may not probably happen in the other house of railiament by our evading the fulfil ment of our duty in this house ? The 11th article will be discussed there, and it will probably be decided by the other house that it is not possible to carry that article into effect ,Without an Act . of Parliament. The other house, if it mayclearly resolve to address the Crown on the treaty, but at the same time they may, probably, introduce an Act Of Parliament to carry that 11th clause into effect; but What h um ili a ti on and reproof to this house if we should ""•°° an Act of Parliament sent down to enable us to corn- Pieta the matter. I will not enter into any discussion of a etatistical kind as to our resources in coal and iron, to which tho amendment refers. I take it for granted that the ri g ht b "s i .,,,, c 'n• gentleman made no statement on tha t matter of the h of which he was not deeply convin ced ; but we h ave also had a speech from one who, o n such a subject, „ ks with great authority. He bears the name of one with whom I was intimate in this house, and whom we all Featly respected ; but having myself not been altogether th a n with the district to which he refers I know ‘nat the railways of the present day have penetrated every give n in the South Wales district, and a stimulus has been ti'iien. to ,the production of coal in that part of the country Which if - is not at all likely can be 'sustained. But it is im ossibl e to settle a question of this kind by local experience. ei question has occupied men of science of the greatest Cnenoe. I do not pretend to offer any statement to the t :its, t e to influence their opinion, and I can only refer them b n 'tiose general statements which the highest authorities accepted. The general result has always been con sidered to be that there are in England and Wales 12,000 square -miles of coalfields; that the half of that quantity is citinot workable ; that every year exhausts 160 square miles ; _ id therefc re every hon. gentleman can, if he think right, ma ke out the account. If such a quantity would, at the pre 'bent consumption, last 300 or 400 years, everybody can e stimate the result if the produce and exportation from the call-fields w h en d ou bl e d. I cannot pretend that the caloula- Lu should influence legislation ; but when the hon. gentle n, from his local experience, and speaking under the ex citement of the recent explorations made in South Wales, I %list remind receiv the house that these are calculations which we h ( mid e with due distrust, and that we must recollect ;that there are estimates which are sanctioned by the highest Points an d men o f science. There are many ether Faints in this treaty which appear to me to prove that it has not brath_een negoeiated with the skill, knowledge, and attention th; re zequired in such an instrument, that on the contrary re are evidences of precipitation and carlessness. There 1444 been no SPAiatactc.ry aWlWer to the charges that have been made. It does appear a very improvident arrangement that the silk manufactures of England cannot enter France without bring subject to 30 per cent. duty, while at the same time the raw material from Franco is also subject-to. a high duty. I have heard no answer to that matter. What said the Preeident of the Board of Trade last night? Ho said, "If you try to settle exacty the rate of duty on every detail of every branch of manufacture"-- having, no doubt; in his head the celebrated passage which used to be quoted from Mr. Eden as to the difficulties of ne gotiating treaties of commerce—" if," said the right hon. gentleman, "we had tried to do that, we should not have got over the matter by this time." But this is no answer to the unfortunate silk manufacturer, who is subject to 30 percent, duty, and receives at the same time the raw material of his manufacture subject to a high duty. He naturally says, "Why are there governments ; why are there negotiators ; why, above all, are there secret neceetiators---(cheers)--if my interests are not considered ?" And, ' so far as I can learn —but of course I speak with hesitation on that subject— there would have been no difficulty on the part of the French Government if this claim had been preferred. If the claim had been preferred and refused, it would not have been in dicative of amity on the part of the French Government to refuse it; but if it was not preferred I say it was great ne gligence, We have had no answer to these matters which is of a satisfactory character. It may seem a little point. I believe it is a point of great importance when you come to the arrangement of a commercial ti eaty. I have not heard an answer to the complaint of the English brewers, that when they are sending into this country French wines the English brewers do not obtain a market in France. • I am assured that if that claim had been preferred to the French. Government they would not have objected to :the proposi tion. Task the house is it evidence of sedulous attention to English interests to have omitted a provision of that kind ? (Cheers.) Why was this state of things permitted ? Would such a request have offended any of the principles of the new commercial system ? Not at all ; for even the hon. member for Birmingham would not pretend thet the exchange of British beer for French wines would have been contrary to the principles of free trade. But all this shows me that this treaty has been negotiated with precipi tation ; and the very tone of the Government, when you make your criticisms upon the treaty, confirms that suspicion for what do they say ? They do not vindicate their instru ment. They say, "We are aware of it; we admit that there is et good deal of truth in what you say, but we have madea representation to the French Government and there is a fair prospect of obtaining a remedy for the grievance." But what was to be gained by this precipitation? My objections I have now stated shortly against this treaty financially and diplomatically. Financially it affects injuriously a revenue in a state of dilapidation, and diplomatically it appears that it does not fully provide for British interests. (Cheers.) I am now to consider the political objects of this treaty, and this is a part of the subject that I cannot avoid, because we are challenged to consider this treaty on political grounds. This is a commercialtreaty between Englandand France I admit; but it is a treaty between England and France mainly and avowedly negotiated fora political purp9se. (Cheers.) This treaty was not introduced to us by any Minister of the Crown; we incidentally became acquainted with its provisions while involved in the dreary labours of committee on the Customs Acts. But we have the basis of the treaty in a great public state paper, which regulates the principles on which thenegociation should le carried on, and the character of the instrument contemplated. To that alone we are in debted for our understanding of the nature of this instru ment, and the objects to be obtained by carrying it into effect. The noble lord, in language which has been referred to part ly, but not completely, in his instructions to the negociators, which is infect the state paper on which the treaty is founded, while he talks of the advantages of commerce says, "But over and above this consideration the Government attaches a high social and political value to the conclusion of a com mercial treaty with France." Political value, and therefore I am obliged to consider this treaty in a political sense. Those who have deprecated introducing political conside rations into the discussion of this treaty, seem to have en tirely forgotten the standing point on which this instrument rests, and the introductOry terms by which the House of Commons was made acquainted with this instrument. These were the words quoted by the mover of the amendment. The noble lord says,—" Its signification at the present mo ment is that it would powerfully re-assure the public mind in some parts of Europe ;" but there the noble mover stop ped short, and omitted this, " that on these grounds the Government are prepared to enter into negotiations." I do not blame the noble lord ; all I say id; that in discussing the treaty of commerce that is preceded by a state paper of this character, the noble lord should not cavil with me if I endeavour to ascertain the soundness of the principles upon which he proceeded. Thenoblelord has gone out of his way though I am sure he thinks in due fulfilment of his duty to inform the judgment of the country what were the principal considerations in negotiating this treaty, that they were po litical—that it was on these political grounds the Govern ment were prepared to enter into this negotiation. The noble lord has received compliments from both sides of the house for the spirit in which he maintained the character of a British minister in those negotiations. I am not apt to be lieve that any one who occupies the noble lord's position would be wanting in his duty to the Crown or the country upon any occasion of importance. (Hear, hear.) lam not disposed to believe that the noble lord would form an excep tion to that rule. But the noble lord will not be offended with me if I do not address him in those terms of compli ment and eulpgy with which his name has been associated. The noble lord will not be offended with me if I offer him some criticism upon a portion of his political conduct as Foreign Minister. I shall confine myself to facts, and what is even dryer than facts, to dates, and then 1 shall deduce and draw inferences so strikingly logical that I am sure the noble lord himself will be willing to admit their accuracy He will not be offended if, by way of contrast to the compliments, he has received, I shall ask him to give the house some satisfaction on a matter connected with the treaty, and that he will afford me that explanation which I shall require before I give my assent to the motion. (Hear, hear.) The night when the address to the Crown was first to be moved it was unexpectedly post poned. Some discussion, however, then took place upon the question of our relations with France. I had not read at that time the papers which were circulated only that morning, and therefore, I would not have presumed, even had the discussion then gone on, to enter at that time into the question. But I have read those papers since, which have been noticed in different moods by different speakers. But nobody had made the inquiry of the noble lord which I wish to-night to make, because until I have an answer from the noble lord I cannot form a correct opinion of the state a Europe, which he describes to be so critical, and which in consequence he considers as a reason for entering into this treaty with France. Now 'have read these papers, and I am bound to say that the conduct of the French Government upon the question of Savoy, which is the question above all others that renders the condition of European affairs so critical, appears to Me, so fir as the Eifglish Government is concerned, to have been sincere, frank, and straightforward. (Hear.) That is my opinion, and I am prepared to prove it in a very short space of time. The house will remember in July last, when the noble lord the present Secretary for Foreign Affairs announced the preliminaries of the treaty of Villafranca to the house, and congratulated us on the fact that France required no ac cession of territory, he referred to the distressing rumour that had previously prevailed—namely, that it was the in tention of France to demand the annexation of Savoy. Well, that circumstance showed that the mind of the noble lord was perfectly alive to that question. And, indeed, he must have found in,the archives of his office that it was a question which had occupied in such a sense and manner the consideration of his predecessor. Iu July last the noble lord was aware that the question of the annexation of Savoy had then been given up, and he justly congra tulated the house upon the fact. Well, we have a despatch amongst these l papers, in which,,the Government are in formed, that after the preliminaries of Villafranca had been signed the. Emperor of the French had renounced his intention of mooting that question, and that the annexa tion. of Savoy was entirely given up. But it now appears in those papers before us, by the despatch dated tho' end of January _last, that in the interval between the despatch which announced that the Emperor had given up all in tention to annex Savoy and the subsequent despatch, that on more than one occasion, in consequence no doubt of the difficulties which stood in the way of the carrying out of the treaty of Zurich, the minister of France had,frankly in formed the ambassador of the Queen at Paris that, in the event of the treaty of Zurich not being carried into effect, the Emperor of the French would certainly look to the annexa tion of the duchy of Savoy and the pi evince of Nice as a necessary consequence. (Hear, hear.) That fact appears clearly in these papers. Now, I want to ask this of the noble lord. It appears that the noble lord was fully aware that under certain circumstances clearly indicated—namely, the aggrandisement of Sardinia—that is, if Sardinia became a considerable power in Italy=-France would require as com pensation for such a cir ( c H ums r ta h n e c e e r th ) e aHnenNevxaetainione o f then t t h h o e s n e , Sardinian provinces. ea , that the noble lord from that moment pursued a policy ces to France inevitable(Hear.) The of those provinces which, if successful in Italy, would have rendered the an onth T a h t e th n e e a b g le gs l a e n ra ti and se rnen tef nobleSardinialord was w a c e l clearly o r Sardinia, end to make it a Power of con eys i a f b result. ii to strengthen Sar don't let us enter into a his colleagues colleagues were of olainion that it was an English inte restsiderable importance. Now I have no doubt the noble troversy upon that point now. of England to pursue convinced that it was for the interest'tale—th, while they lord and his colleagues, after mature consideration, were that policy. But this result is inevi must have known that Sardinia, her Majesty's Government were pressing this policy in Italy for the aggrandisement of Hear hear.) annexation by France of those two pro vinces. ( ? the success of their endeavours must n ecessarilyd h lea to te What ' is all this Well, if that b e th e case , how can her Ma,jesty's Govern ment now turn r oun d t o France and say, for? You have taken us by s urprise ; we find that you are going to ann ex S avoy an d Nice to France—this is be having in a ma nner w hi e h can only be described in the language used in the despatch of the noble lord —that such a course will produce distrust and suspicion throughout Europe—" it will disturb the settlement of Europe, and will lead men's minds back to the long and sanguinary struggles that took place some years ago ; and perhaps, after all, the result may prove fatal to your own happiness." (Hear, hear.) But so strange are the facts contained in those papers laid before Parliament —so much better informed is every other nation under the sun of its foreign affairs than is the British public—(hear, hear) —by a remarkaple circumstance there isno record on the table of the fact to which I have just referred. 'I here is not amongst those papers an official document disclosing the attempt of the noble lord at the commencement of the year to settle the affairs of Italy. At the commencement• of the year the noble lord produced four propositions for the settlement of the affairs of Italy. Lord J. RUSSELL—They are numbered in the paper. Mr. DISRAELI—There is no:printed record of them. At all events the fact does riot affect myargument. But wehavo a despatch of the Foreign Minister remarking and serament ing on those four propositions which have been published to all Europe. But strange to say, owing only to the casual inquiry of the hon. member for Tamworth, the noble lord in his place here expressed what those propositions were. Although this circumstance took place a fortnight, or per haps, a month ago, it is only on this evening that they have been placed upon the table of this house. (Hear, hear.) Now, let us look to these propositions. The gist of them, if thay mean anything, is the establishment of Sardinia as a powerful Government in Italy. The noble lord will not deny that. The noble lard proposes that it shall be left to the voice of the people in Central Italy to arrange to whom they shall belong. Surely the noble lord must have been impressed with the conviction that the declaration of the people would be in favour of their annexation to Sardinia. Well, as I before said, the gist of the four propositions is that Sardinia should be established as a powerful Govern ment in Europe. Well, these are offered for the coxsi deration of France, and France agrees to them and accepts them all, except in ondvaryminor particular. (Hear, hear.) But I want to knew, then, from the noble lord—when he of fered a proposition for the settlement of Italy to the French minister, the result of which was that Sardinia should be aggrandised in this manner, did the Minister of France in form the noble lorgi,h4 his Government renounced the con ditions they had-previously attached to such an event— namely, that Savoy and.. Nice should be annexed to France? (Hear, hear.) That is a question which we must have an swered by the noble lord. The noble lord was aware six months ago, by tizlottoefrom Lord Co' len that in cm!) of THY SVtk_ i _'LOINIPON, SATURDAY EVENING, • Sardinia being aggrandised in this manner France would claim Savoy and Nice. (Hear, hear.) Now Ido not think the noble lord will rise and say that the French Government had announced any intention of changing their original po licy in this respect. (Hear, hear.) But is that all ? The noble lord sent his propositions to the great powers, to Austria, RussiaT and Prussia. I ask him, when he sent those pro positions to the great powers for the settlement of the affairs of 'talk by the annexation to the dominions of the King of Sardinia of the central states of Italy, did he inform those great powers that if that policy were adopted it was within his knowledge that France would demand an expansion of her frontiers in the direction to which I have referred ? (Hear, hear.) But if the noble lord, with the possession of that knowledge, did not impart it to those powers, I ask the house to say whether that is the mode in which the diplo macy of a great country like this is to be carried on ? (Hear, hear.) These are subjects upon which, when we are asked to agree to a treaty on account of the critical condition of Eu rope, I think we are bound to demand the fullest informa tion from the noble lord. There is one point in regard to the subject of these dispatches I consider to be of the utmost importance, on which we should have the fullest information from her Majesty's Government, and that is the manner in which very important information of'zes out which otherwise never could have reachdd the ear of Parliament, and that is by what is called " private.letters." (Hear, hear.) Now, I am willing to admit to the noble lord that it is not only of the utmost advantage, but of the greatest importa n ce , that the most unreserired communication should exist between the Secretary of. State and the ambassadors and minis - sters of the Queen at foreign Courts. (Hear, hear.) Our ambassador in France has sometimes to write as often as three or four times a day. There were many observations and views which it was his duty to communicate to the Secretary of State, and which ought to form the subject of a private letter and not of a public despatch. (Hear, hear.) But it is right that the house should understand what these private letters are, and that the private letters of an ambas sador to the Secretary of State are purely private, as the epithet implies ; and that the Secretary is not bound to show these letters to his colleagues. (Hear, hear.) Rarely are they shown to any of his colleagues, with the exception of the Prime Minister. Indeed, they came so rapidly that his colleagues could not afford the time to read them all; but as a matter of usage he is not bound to show them even to the Sovereign. When he quits office he takes those letters with him, and they form no part of the regular dip lomatic correspondence, or of the records of public business. It would be a most unwise step to put an end to this confi dential communication between the Ministers and the agents of his Sovereign. No man would undertake the responsi bility of such an office as that of Secretary for Foreign Affairs if he were deprived of such advantageous means of carrying his duty into effect. (Hear, hear.) But from the very nature of those confidential communications it is not right that a Secretary of State or an ambassador should, in his public despatches, fall back on his private letters. (Hear.) I find, however, from those papers, that the most important information is contained in private letters which do not appear. (Hear.) We should have no evidence that the French Minister, subsequently to the despatch which announces that the Emperor had renounced in July his in tention of annexing Savoy, neutralised and qualified the intimation of that renunciation, but for the private letters of Lord Cowley. (Hear.) Here we have an ambassador ecnding is public despatch, in which it is positive/ an nounced that the Emperor has given up the intention of an nexing Savoy ; and it is only by these private letters we dis cover afterwards that circumstances having been changed, the French ministers have with perfect frankness informed her Majesty's ambassador, at least once, that the treaty of Villafranca not having been carried into effect, the Empe ror should turn back to his original intention. (Hear.) A diplomatic narrative placed before this house should be a complete n,arrative. (Hear, hear.) I think that the hi g hest interests of the State are involved in that principle. Suppose there had been a change of administration at the beginning of this year, the first duty of the new Ministry would have been to consult on the affairs of Italy. It might have been their opinion that the policy that would be most advanta geous to England and Europe would be to strengthen Sar dinia and establish her as a power of considerable import ance ; but so far as the records in the Foreign-office were concerned, they would have been completely in the dark on the fact that the carrying out of that policy would necessarily have led to the annexation of Savoy and Nice to France. (Hear, hear.) It now appears that from the month of July, or a little afterwards, her Majesty's Government were per fectly aware that if the treaty of Villafranca was not virtually carried into effect the intention of France was to again claim the annexation of Savoy and Nice. All this time her Ma jesty's Government were pursuing a policy which, for the sake of argument, though I do not agree in it, I will grant was an advisable one, but which certainly was one that would have led to the annexation of Savoy and Nice to France. (Hear, and cheers.) Under these circumstances it is that her Majesty's Government have asked the house to eater into this treaty with France, perfectly well aware as they were for so long a period Before, that it was the inten tion of France to annex those provinces. Mr. Grey, her Majesty's Charge d'Affaires at Paris, in a despatch of the 9th January, communicated to the Government the alarm that existed in Switzerland on the subject of the annexation, Still the - negociations for the treaty went"on, and no attempt was made by her Majesty's Ministers to instruct Mr. Grey on the subject or to take or adopt any other proceeding, and it was not till the 27th or 29th, or some day near the end of the month of January, that the noble lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs wrote that despatch for which he has received the compliments of several hon. gentlemen. Is that despatch any compensation for the negligence of the Minister? Is it right that after all the mischief is done he should take refuge in a grandiloquent despatch ? (Hear, hear.) I should like a despatch in that spirit to have been sent to the French Government months before. The Em peror of the French is a Sovereign who is said, and I be lieve with justice, not to be insensible to public opinion. That is a quality not to be despised, but we do not see that any effort was made by the noble lord. He was silent. Yet the noble lord commences this session by placing upon the table a despatch which is to be the foundation of a treaty of commerce between this country and France, which he re commends on account of the critical position of the conti nent, and of the significance of the treaty, because it would reassure the public mind in the various countries of Europe. These are questions which require explanation when we are asked to consent to a treaty of the nature of that now under discussion. (Hear, hear.) With all duo respect to the house, I must say that I think it has been placed in a very embarrassing position, brought about by a ladles which I think it will ultimately regret. I endeavotired at the time to call attention to our true position, but unfortunately the house was not then sufficiently aware of the circumstances, and the matter was hurried on, not, I believe, to the advan tage of the Government, and I am sure greatly to the dis- ' advantage of the house. (Hear.) Had we only understood then what we are beginning to understand now, what was the course adoped in 1787, we should not be at present in the position in which we now find ourselves. If the treaty had been put before the house first, not in a committee on the Customs Acts, but in a committee on the commercial treaty, all this embarrassment would have been avoided. That was the motion which I made, not in form, for the rules of he house would not allow of that, but in effect. The Government might, if my motion had been adopted, have carried all their resolutions in commit tee on the commercial treaty, and after that might have addressed the Crown. (Hear, hear.) And under such cir cumstances the revenue would not have been disturbed; the resolutions would have been only provisional, subject to the approbation of the treaty by the house. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) It is idle now to think that you are in a po sition to enter with effect into thismost momentous subject. The hon. gentleman who moved the address accused me of thinking that the most advisable thing we co uld have done would have been to consider the treaty before we addressed the Crown. No such nonsence ever entered my head. (Hear, hear.) How could you consider the treaty but on a motion for an address to the Crown ? What I said was—" Do not go into committee on the Customs duties till you address the Crown; because I knew if you did so, moving the ad dress would be an idle-ceremony—(hear, hear)—and an idle ceremony it is to-night, for whatever may be my opinion on the treaty I feel it is idle and impossible now to oppose it on diplomatic grounds. You cannot refuse to address the Crown on financial grounds because you have already lost your revenue. (Hear.) Let us understand the ground on which her Majesty's Government are now calling for our decision. Does such a state of affairs exist as that which we were led to believe in when this treaty was laid upon the table? From a throne it has recently beeii announced the' empires have natural boundaries. Who can foresee wha will be the result of such a policy ? We know that at the eleventh hour her Majesty's Government have protested against such a doctrine. We knew that it has been described and denounced as one of the most dangerous :that can be pursued—as one that must fill Europe with suspicion, appre hension and distrust—as one that has been associated with long and sanguinary wars, with the fall of empires, and with the fate of dynasties. (Hear, hear.) This is your description of the critical condition of Europe, and it is under these circumstances that we are called on to ap prove this treaty with the power which the noble lord has described as the power of disturbance and distrust. Sir, all the circumstances are changed sines the right hon. gentleman introduced to us his financial motion. We are not influenced by the same feelings, the country is not influenced by the same considerations ; all is altered ; all is altered from the day when I endeavoured to lead you to a safer course--(cheers Pram the Opposition)—which everybody now feels and in private acknowledges—(derisive cheers from the Ministerial benches)—which was then met with rhetorical gibes, as it is met now with unmeaning laughter. (Hear, hear.) But, sir, I hope we shall at least have the satisfaction, before this address is voted, of hearing some explanation from the Secretary of State of the incom prehensible passages in his despatch to which I have called attention. I hope we shall hear from him why, being in possession—full and frank possession —of the policy of the French Government, he did not communicate it to us and our allies, why he followed a policy in Italy which favoured and even precipitated that policy of France which he him self disapproved of, and why, when he placed these Thipers before us, he placed them in such a manner that it is with the utmost difficulty that we can arrive at the policy of the Government, but of which, under these circumstances, I oh " fee i a t rl fi y ll p s e m no e w w ith en dis w tr e ust, and I e will only say of it what the noble lord has said of the Em perorto d i s t u r b a n c e . " soair(byLli but fouuantd arise, e h e w e cheers.) 8 . ) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, who was of , he French—that belive will lead received with cheers from the Ministerial benches, said—l think, hbee important opinion s o p f eech mle. fa that tttehres t that right t a h t e h t h i ao m vn e e. f ea o eff r eou t r h pd e ieed f d u full of the honourable member for Bridg water gentleman t h h ed t ihasg. greater t ue n sa p o st t i r eo e r y n b e p a t oa h fr i a y r r i v e d ( h e a r d , h h e a r ) b u t willshall h b e invited by the motion Government, ' ce of Savoy. (Hear, hear.) At pre reference to the province to enter aohndthefe etohnesidpeersaittleoun of ef th th e e co e n eu du n c tr t;of w t i h th e eitti clay la s difficultyb before, ry v eE e u r u y sr; little pean on 0 l t i h t i ri s other question of before the time when the substance of sfp ; : r nri e ent l i i tgi. e nt : Pifs G otlh ( ni ) eveeyeeqreuna upon a e m a st r e i y n o Nt n v f h o m r i ofei which h e at Savoy,t possibly s s y difference of opinion with the Cabinet other Majesty at the tthivieslytreraetnyiewteas and hypothetical as en a d com l compara tively inasmuch as, in the state dependent countries like England an which exists at the present day, you cannot expect a if we were to contemplate the possible occur uniform concurrence of opinion betweedn ytwroahig.eernee,caetthoaefnrcdeafeisnree-s in which it migh be our duty frankly t o s our dissent from evi l s w a n h y i rye to 'te n of strengthening our own position for all eve nts e p h r omp might h i t t i ° f n. () Lf ,, F v r i a t ri s a ce, d e a p n t d i e t h o , ptoehix:l3tvr express h t o s h t er modt h the e was benefit cordially to with bollscountries, France in a t e greatwhi which t we ef werepoli c policy, franklyfraught invited with by her, and which, whatever might, occur, wa s the best prepal G ation for friendly relations betimen the two o vernnients, because it tended not only to create these friendly relations between the Governments, but also to give them a broad and peep and solid basis in th friendly sympatliia of the two' nations. (Hear, hear.) With 'expect to On COWS@ of the debate I roust onfegi ) should be peifectly content to rest the'argument for thd treaty of commerce with France, irrespective of the abl. speech made by a member of the Government, upon th, various speeches which-have been delivered by hon. gentle• men, most of them, though not all, sitting on this sid( of the house, beginning with the admirable speech , of my hon. friend the member for Middlesex, sq ably seconded by the hon. ' member for Leeds, and fol; lowed by a long list of gentlemen who brought to the sup- 7 port of this treaty every gift of knowledge and ability, and among whom if I do not include the hon. baronet the memo ber for Tamworth it is only because of the much too favourable and flattering terms in which he thought fit to allude to myself. (Hear, hear.) At the same time I am sorry to say that there was one speech which, if I estimate it aright, stands in striking contrast with th general tone of the debate. I refer, of cousse, to th speech of my honourable friend the member fo Stroud. (Cheers.) Her Majesty's Government have been unfortunate beyond description during the present ses sion in attempting to win the favour of my right honour able friend. (A laugh.) Scarcly had the session opened when he complained that never 'did a Government pre sent to Parliament se scanty a programme of busi ness ; but scarcely had it proceeded three weeks more when he again complained that such was the crowd and mass of business forced upon the attention of the house by the Government that they were greedily and irrationally demanding from private members a portion of time which did not belong to them. (Cheers.) My right hon. friend told us to-night that he is an older Freetrader than any gentleman except one who sits upon the Treasury bench— (cheers from the Opposition)= —and yet almost in the same breath he informed us that the country which diminishes its import duties makes a present of its revenue to the foreigner. (Cheers and laughter.) Two millions, says he; of import duties we shall have made a present of to France before France begins to act upon this treaty. Such is the mode in which my right lion: friend illustrates his old ex perience and his happy conception of the doctrines of free trade. (Cheers and laughter.) My right hon. friend says that the Government have contrived in this treaty to betray the interests of England, and at the same time to ruin the interests of France ; for, he tells us, whoever supports the plans of the French Emperor is, in the opinion of the French people,. ruining the interests of France. He says, again, that by the 11th article of the treaty my noble friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, who is necessa rily in a peculiar degree responsible for every treaty, and the entire Government have abandoned and betrayed the highest and most vital interests of this country ; and yet he is perfectly satisfied, as he declared in another part of his speech, to leave in the hands of my noble friend the conduct of our foreign relations. These are the declarations of my right hon. friend, but they are declarations of secondary importance, booause they merely express the criticisms of an individual member of Parliament on the conductoftlie Government. There were graver matters involved in his speech—(hear, hear)—and, as a member of the House of Commons, as an Englishman, and not less as one holding office under the Crown, I must take leave to enter my respectful protest against the whole tone and language of my right hon. friend, when he described the character, policy, and conduct of a neighbouring and friendly nation. (Cheers.) My right hon. friend, in drawing a contrast between England and France, said that the policy of France was "aggression, aggrandize ment, and war." (Cheers from the Opposition.) I admit to my right hon. friend that if the time has really come when it is the duty of a member of the British Parliament, of a man of ability and experience like my right hon. friend, thus to describe the permanent and standing character and policy of a neighbouring and friendly nation, then, indeed, it is inappropriate to be discussing either treaties of cora merce or amendments to treaties of commerce, not to speak of some paltry amendment relating to the export of coal,but we ought to have a sweeping and unmistakable vote of con- demnation passed at once upon the treaty that has b en made and upon the Government that has made it. (Hear, hear.) Again, says my sight hon. friend, it is not the best way to secure peace with the French people to wound and --- irritate their feelings. That is one of the dicta necessary to make up the budget of inconsistencies and contradictions which my right hon. friend has exhibited to-night. "It is not the best way to wound and irritate their feelings." I ask him to put himself in their position, and then to inquire of himself whether, if he had heard such a speech delivered by a subject of a nation in peace and alliance with his own, his feelings would or would not have been wounded and irritated ? (Cheers.) But my right hon. friend endea voured to save himself by drawing a minute distinction be tween the Government and the nation, and he told us that we were conspiring against the French people with their ruler. Does he really imagine that, in order to soothe the feelings of the French people, he has only to draw these distinctions between them and their Government, which no foreign nation has a right to draw ? We have no right, I re peat, to draw suchdistinctions. It is not only an interference, but it is an interference of the most offensive kind—(cheers) —and if there be in France one spark of that patriotism which we weretold to foster in England, every Frenchman must read, as every Englishman would read , with indignation much of what has been said to-night. (Cheers.) It appears to me that ;here is no great difficulty in construing the passage which has been quoted by the right hon. gentleman opposite from the despatch of Lord Cowley on the subject of the treaty. I think he gives it too narrow a emstruction if he intends it to be understood that the opinion of the Government was that only onpolitical grounds was this treaty to be judged. We have always frankly admitted that the treaty must be tried upon its merits with reference to commerce and trade, and with reference also to the indirect effects which com merce and trade would produce. (Hear, hear.) With re- spect to political grounds, wo could not, undoubtedly, be insensible to the fact that there was much at the time when hese negociations were going on in which France and Eng- [and hada common feeling, and in which France and Eng- [and jointly ware the main European champions of the principles and representatives of the Powers bywhich alone we could hope to seethe affairs of Europe settled. When we looked to Italy, which has long been a suppressed vol cano, certain to burst out and to produce most dangerous complications in Europe, no impartial man could deny that, whether the Emperor's title to make war in Italy was good or bad, no inconsiderable effects had been produced by the war, whether they were due to the valour of France or to the moderation of Austria, and no inconsiderable progress made towards the settlement of Italian affairs, which upon every ground of European interest and of British feeling was a c onsummation much to be desired. (Hear.) Take the state of feeling in Italy. It surely could not be possible for any rational man to see the state of things that prevailed in Italy and not to desire to make an effort, in itself beneficial, but likewise recommended by the likeli- hood of its being successful, for the purposes of applying a remedy, or at least a palliative. We had the greatest alarm and apprehension in the public mind on the score of military preparations. We had an immense and constantly growing increase of our own expenditure, connected verymuch with that alarm and apprehension. Last year it was the painful duty of the Government to propose a great addition to the burdens of the country, and well d the prospoet of further ad ditional expenditure in the present year and for a long sue- cession of years. Was not that a reason for endeavouring to act upon the alarm and apprehension which prevailed, not by the discontinuance of measures which the safety of the country requited, but by the adoption of a process which, like the silent and ceaseless processes of nature herself, would bring into play a thousand beneficial .influences on the side of peace, and which from day to day and from year to year would counteract the prevailing alarms by under mining their causes, and by substituting for whatever re mained of panic on the one hand or undue military spirit on the other those solid habits and usages of friendship which are cemented and strengthened by the peaceful in tercourse of commerce and trade? (Cheers.) But the political part of the treaty I will not dwell upon, and I will go to those portions of it which are more within my own proper sphere. And here I have listened with great satis faction to the course of the present debate, because I take it for granted that the best objections that could be made to the treaty have been made. And what do they come to ? We have heard something of bargains, and we have been told that this treaty is a bargain, that we have asked for equivalents, and that we have not got them. Sir, I deny that this treaty has ever been a bargain, for it is of the es sence of a bargain that you give away something which it would be of yalue to you to retain, and that you receive something which it is important to the other party to keep. (Hear, hear.) This is a reciprocal instrument if you like, but a bargain it is not, for you are giving nothing to France that is not a gift to yourself, and you are receiving nothing from France except measures by which France confers a a benefit upon herself. (Cheers.) 'ln the first place it would be unnecessary, and in the next place it would be mischievous, to inquire the precise measure of percentage on this article or on that—whether the restraint on the exportation of rags is duly balanced by the duty on paper, or whether the duty which France leaves on the raw silk she sends to us shall be removed when we are sending her enormous quantities of raw silk without any duty at all. All these propositions it was unnecessary, and much worse, than unnecessary, to en tertain. The hon. member for Stamford fell into a ludicrous error last night. He speaks of the slovenliness of the treaty with regard to the export of rags. He says we have covered that by obtaining the removal of the prohibition, but that is only one fault in the treaty, and there aro 20 others. But that is not a fault in the treaty. We have never attempted the impossible task of constructing such a system of equi valents. We have had warning enough in the experience of former years. And what says the hon. and learned mem ber for Belfast, who finds fault with us and comes forward to instruct us ? Ho finds fault with us for not having en tered into these minute adjustments—for not having settled how much duty should be levied on linen goods, and then he says, "Why not go to Spain and see whether she will not enter upon these minute and endless discussions ?" I will tell him why. Because we knew quite well that, if there were any means of obstructing the progress of free trade, it was by entering upon these, negociatious in the spirit of bargain that he recommends. And oven that is not all, for, not only would ho have been entangled, if he had had the management of these negociations, in hopeless complica tions that would have made him times out of mind pray his stars that he had never meddled with it—(cries of " Oh I") —but while he was involved in the attempt to disentangle these inexplorable difficulties and complications—and I really pay him, the compliment of saying that he was the man to do it if it could be done—the whole of these proceed ings, involving millions of r evenue, wou l d have become pa tent the public, and the last result of that blessed under taking would have been a total paralysis alike of trade and of revenue, and of no inconsiderable portion of the commerce and industry of the country. (Cheers.) These, sir, are the reasons why we declined these negotiation, and it is no blot on the treaty that it does not provide for the free export 'of rags. We came to the conviction • that if France once frankly, sincerely, and de cisively entered upon the career of freedom of trade, her own experience of the commencing stages would be a secu rity for her proceeding onward&-towards its confirmation ou ch as w e mild laot - by any other wow obtain, (Cheers.) MARCH ,g):4(,;186Ai( That is the meaning of the treaty, and that is the reason of the avoidance of these minute arrangements, which, hope- less and impossible at any ti m e, would have been mrschip vous and absurd under the particular circumstances, be cause ''they would have led to a total misconception of the fundamental principles of the treaty. That is the reason why the treaty has been framed subh as it is, and not such as has been recommended .by the hon. and learned gentle man opposite, I will only say one word on what fell from the hon. memberfor Norfolk, who says that the increase of the income tax is due to this treaty. I must say that is a very inaccurate statement of the care. In the first place it must be recollected that the loss really due to the treaty is extremely small in amount. In all the stages of our pro ceedings we never have given it with precision —I h ave never heard any computation of 'the exact loss of revenue we shall incur by the treaty with France, because we have endeavoured to deal with it conjointly with the whole loss arising from the treaty. But France is not to be charged with the benefit arising to Spain or Portugal through the admission of their wines at a low price, nor are we, so far as I am aware, bound by any treaty to extend unconditionally to those countries the benefits we extend to France. The whole annual amount of loss of revenue' under the treaty on our commerce with France cannot, I think, even at the outset, be estimated at more than £60,000 or £70,000 a year —that is, including the ultimate fall of the wine duties, which will not take place before the expiration of 9 months. On commercial grounds, then, I put against a very small loss of revenue for azear the promise of a very great exten sion of trade. (Chris.)_ Wish regard to the great staples of France, wine and brandy, the reuction of duty is such as to promise a great increase of trade. As regards our selves I wish to call the particular attention of the house to this—that we have long acted on the principle lad all differential duties are impolitic and bad, and teat here is not even a single duty of any moment—l am not sure there is even one of the very smallest that we abandon under the treaty with France that is not strictly a differen tial duty. (Cheers.) I look to France, and I must gay that I can conceive no measure more qualified to attach the people of France than a treaty like this. We have been told that the people of France, forsooth, are opposed to this treaty. So far as I have had opportunities of judging, I should say it appears to me the case is this—that there is a limited and powerful class in France to which, at any rate for the me. went, the treaty may be obnoxious. But you have hardly any country where so large a mass of the population are so directly interested, not only as consumers, but also as pro ducers, and whose productions .would immediately receive so greatly increased a value from a commercial treaty, and you will have another most powerful agencythat will attach the people of France to this treaty and all connected with it. France is likely to receive a very large increase of Customs revenue under this treaty. What can be more beneficial to France than a treaty which will enable the Government to reduce the additions to the direct taxation of that country ? I believe that even the hon. member for Birmingham will admit that the people of France are not so enamoured of direct taxation as not to see with pleasure the prospect of its remission. (Hear, hear.) I must confess I have the strongest conviction that there is another great commercial benefit not alluded to in this debate, but which may be anti cipated from this treaty. Should circumstances be favour able to its development, I do not think that anything could withstand the moral contagion of France and England acting together in the sense of liberty of commerce. (Cheers.) As long as England stood alone it was easy to say—" This na tion has grown old and great by protection, and she can afford to throw away the ladder by which she has mounted to eminence." That is the current language. I admit that the admirable example we set has been but slightly, reluctantly, and partially followed, and I believe that the right hon. gentleman, who, I admit has spoken with mode ration, is in error in supposing that the Emperor was about to introduce a system of an analogous kind by independent legislation in France. Such an opinion is totally contrary to the information we possess. It rests upon no documents. The right hon. gentlemen has, I think, mistaken the nega tive promise of the Emperor, that no prohibitions should be removed before a certain date, for a positive promise of the Emperor that at that date those prohibitions shall be re moved. It was not a fraud practised on the people, but we enabled the Emperor to hold out to France additional in ducements by which the system of prohibitions might be altered. But the advantages to be derived from this treaty will go far beyond France, for I believe that the example of France joined with England in one course and policy will spread far beyond the limits of those two countries, and the results which the changes in this treaty ought to achieve will be not merely making 2d. into 4d., as an hon. member has said, but knitting together the hearts and minds of men, and the benefits will spread from region to region and from country to. country. (Cheers.) We must now consider shortly what are the articles on which many of the hopes of the opposition to this treaty are founded. Great hopes which had been entertained with regard to one item were dispelled by the prudent and kindly announcement we were per mitted to make the other evening on the part of the French Emperor—(cheers) —but, though rags have failed, yet some hopes were entertained until a recent period on the subject of shipping. The hon. member for Sunderland very frankly admitted that when he first read the article with regard to shipping—the 3d article—he, in common with the rest of the world, totally misunderstood it—(laughter)—but he congratulated himself that he had by study extricated himself from his error, whereas a portion of the world are still wandering in darkness. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) We have had unfortunate proof that such is the case. My hon. friend the' member for Stamford showed last night that he did not understand the article, and the right hon. mem ber for Buckinghamshire, following bins to night with ready confidence, has likewise exhibited a similar unac quaintance with the spirit and intention and whole effect and character of this article. The hon. member for Stam ford began by ascribing to Government a defence of the article which the Government did not make, and having set up a lay figure wherewith to fight, he, of course, had no difficulty in knocking it down. (A. laugh.) He said that the Government defended the article by asserting that it related to the indirect trade. My right hon, friend last night did not so defend it. I say that it does not refer to the indirect trade, but to the direct trade only. I want to give an example of the extravagancies into which ingenious men are led—(ironical cheers from the Opposition)—when there is something or other to which they must objet. "Now mind," . it is said, " you must object to the 3d article ; handle it, turn it over, see what you can make of it, but object to it you must ;" and so my hon. friend oppo site detected a deep plot in this article, and urged that the French Emperor had outwitted and entrapped the British negotiators. The article secures differential duties on French shipping • and it is true that these differential duties are not paid British shipping ; but my hon. friend says that the meaning is obvious, and that the French Em peror, having got the treaty of commerce, will give notice to terminate the treaty of navigation, and then the diffe rential duties will be applicable to British shipping. An argument more far-fetched, or more contrary to nature and reason, there could not be than one which supposed that the man who with almost unparalleled boldness has under takes to negotiate this treaty in France, in the teeth of so much interested opposition, would the day after pledg ing himself in the face of his people the principles of free trade, reverse the only instrument which prevents the unlimited protection of shipping, and revert te the old state before the treaty. But that is not all, for what would be the effect if the Emperor exercised this cun ning ? It is perfectly true that, if the treaty of navigation were at an end, this 3d article would enable the Emperor to impose against English shipping the differential duties which now exist in the French law,—that is to say, that by t erm i na ting the treaty of navigation he would obtain a limited power of imposing differential duties. But what should we get ? That proceeding would give to us the un limited power of imposing duties on French ships, for then there would be nothing to prevent our prohibiting the en trance of every French ship into our ports. (Hear, hear.) Let me give to my hon. friend the real, natural, and true account of this article. So far from having to apologize on account of this treaty to those who represent British ship ping, the Government maintain that the treaty does much for British shipping. What will be the increase of the coal trade under this treaty ? What is the meaning of your alarms and fears for the exhaustion of English coal in 300 years ? At any rate, as long as it lasts a great many more English ships will be employed in carrying it. (Cheers.) Perhaps you think that French ships will carry it all. On the contrary, of the shipping employed in the trade 69 per cent. aro British ships, 28 per cent. French Chips, and the other 3 per cent. are foreign ships. Those last, going from English ports to France, are in the indiriet trade, and lia ble to the differential duties ; and the article was inserted to prevent competition with the French shipping in the in direct hade on the part of Swedes, Danes, and others ; so that there is a small pinch of the powder of protection in favour of French shipping and likewise of British shipping. (Hear, hear.) At any rate the hon. gentle Man opposite will not think that that part of the treaty was written in Bedlam. (Laughter.) Ships constituted one of the points on which great hopes long turned, and those hopes have not been abandoned to might by the right hon. member for Buckinghamshire; but I trust that he also is now satisfied as to the object and scope of the article. Everything else having blown down, there still remained the subject of coal, which has been thought strong enough to bear the weight of an amendment. I do not think that the right hon. member for Stroiscl ' has done justice to himself, for this is but a narrow conolusion to a broad speech. His speech went much further, and the conclusion he has arrived at is, compared with the speech, so inade quate that I am afraid the right hon. gentleman cannot go home easy to-night. (Laughter.) At any rate, he has the consolation of reflecting that ho made'a gallant struggle to save one of the most vital interests of England. (A laugh.) I must say, however, that I do not think my right hon. friend relies much on what may be called the extra-com mercial part of the case. He did not enter into details on that part of the subject relating to the prerogative of the Crown, nor will I now attempt todo so. I will satisfy my self with stating that, so far as we are advised, with re spect to the rights of the Crown no duty arising out of any obligation that appertains to it is in the smallest degree compromised, qualified, or surrendered !by this treaty. (Hear.) The question we have to consider is entirely a commercial question. It is the question whether we ought to enter into an engagement, even for the period of 10 years, which absolutely binds us during that period—or longer should a continuance of the treaty be resolved on— to lay no duty on the exportation of coal to France. (Hear, hear.) It is clear, however, that we could not enter into any treaty of commerce with France without having assur ance of her and she of us that we would not be subjected to exceptional legislation. I think, therefore, no one will take the slightest objection to the 19th article, by which France is secured against any exceptional legislation on our part. The question, then, is whether we have done wisely or un wisely in undertaking that for a period of 10 years at least we shall impose no export duty on the 'article of coal • and w hether or art this is a fit subject for such an amendment as my right hon. friend has proposed. I trust the house wiil not entertain that amendment, on any other except the very strongest grounds. Thehouse is-going to the foot of the Throne to express its loyal sense of duty at this com mencement of an arrangement which it declares, willin its judgment, be beneficial to the interests of commerce and of peace ; and in such circumstances no person would obtrude such an amendment as is now proposed, except from a very strong sense of duty. (Hear, hear.) And what is that sense of duty ? That I had better leave inscrutable. (Alaugh.) But what I will ask is—What is the object or policy my right hon. friend hopes to defeat by pressing upon the house the adoption of this amendment ? I hope the notion has been disposed of that the object of France in regard to the article of coal is a military one. I am sure that in the mind of any impartial person it is impossible that such a.notion could remain for a single moment. (Hear.) In the first place, France has contrived at this moment to secure a fleet, by means of which flee, she has -considerably shaken the nerves of a portion of the population of England without the favour of any stipulation on our part not to prohibit the export of coal. (Hear.) The whole extent of the naval consumption of France is 160,000 tons, representing a value of £200,000. (Hear.) The whole affair is Utterly insigni ficant (Hear.) Why, as large a quantity has been raised from a single mine, and we have been told that at one iron work as much coal has been consumed as useless at the pit's mouth in the course of a single week. (Hear.) For the description of small coal here referred to a good market may cinder this treaty be found in France. (Hear.) This is a qtrestion of cost, and I may state that the estimated differince of cost, looked at from a French point of view, will he 108, a ten t The French expect to gain 100, a ton ; and from that very estimate it will become evident tethe honse that a great - deal of coal'is certain to' find a market in France. - (pear, hear.) Let me ,state, in a few words what is the rdtional construction of this article and what I the motives of France are with regard to it. t may be true thit the French Government plight have been in duced to surrender or qualify this article, but I should have been ashamed to demand such a concession--t(hetir, hear)—for there is no article of the treaty more beneficial in a commercial point-of view, or one that will more powerfully , tend to knit together ,in kindly feelings the two countries. (Hear.) To prohibit the export of coal is impossible, except the limited prohibition that might arise with respect to war. It is altogether outside the view of this article td stop the exportation of coal. • To do so is just as impossible as it would be to prohibit the import of cotton, or to prevent iron being dug out of the bowels of the earth. (Hear, hear.). France has abundance of coal_for those pur poses that may be termed political. For the domestic use of the rich and fcr all the purposes of the State her coal is abundant; but for commerce her coal is scanty; and the physical conformation of France, and the wants of her manu facturers 'have gone far to determine the manufactlizing enterprise of the country. Easy access to the raw material. and abundant supplies of fuel led to the creation of manu factures. Put these two together and you have the com bination that makes South Lancashire a manufacturin ,county, with the gre a t t own o f Li ver Pool behind it. The part of France in which there is the best access to the raw material; and therefore so far is the most desirable for her manufactures, is the seaboard of the Atlantic ; but then it is farthest from her supplies of fuel, that lie on the south 'coast. But give France this treaty, and an assurance that far commercial purposes she can depend on a supply of coal, and then the cheapest part for obtaining coal in France will be that part that gives easiest access to the raw material. (Hear.) The places where cotton and other articles that come across the sea are to be found will also be the places where the coal will be lowest in price. (Hear, hear.) I have been informed that there are already migrations con templated in France-from ' the centre and eastern parts of the country to localities on the Atlantic seaboard, where cheap coal is expected to be obtained. . That is the process that goes on in this country, where the iron trade has gene to the neighbourhood of the mal -1 pits, and where the cloth manufactures of Wiltshire and Dorsetshirs has moved into Yorkshire. (Hear, hear.) - You can conceive no process more beneficial for the com mercial interests et France than this, or one better calcu lated to promote tae advantage of the great mass of labour in both countries and to secure the peace of the world, (Hear.) The house will understand, then, why I declare that we could not take advantage of the offer of the French Government at one time, that rather than allow the treaty to be lost they Weald consent to an alteration of this article. (Hear, hear.) Btt there seems to be as honest fea r th a t, after all, we oughinot to part with our coal as it is so valu able. (Hear, heat) The right hon. gentleman (Mr. Dis raeli) most ingenhusly laboured to cut down that estimate of coal, though he seemed rather afraid to state the result of his figures. He rather evaded the point, and could not see the termination of our coal in less than some centuries. I am only sorry tint my hon. friend behind me (Mr. Vivian), who so clearly disclosed the facts of the case, was not heard by a larger numberof hon. members. (Hear, hear.) There is in the minds of the class of persons most closely con nected with coal-mining in England not the slightest ap prehension of an exhaustion of the stock. I have before me a letter from one of the best, most instructed, and most ex perienced coal-viemrs in the north of England, in which I am informed thatwe have coal in this country to last for upwards of 2,000 years. I allude to Mr. Nicholas Wood. (Cheers.) But, as my hon. friend (Mr. Vivian) observed, that does not repreient half the case • for you don't reckon the unworked se ar s ; y ou don't reckonl the deeper seams which are accessibb ; you don't take into view the hun dreds of cases of nev beds of coal which are discovered from month to month in England. But, after all, is my right hon. friend sincere in this amendment? It does all very well as a subject for a speech inthis house—(a laugh)—but are wo really afraid! Does my right hon. friend econo mise the use of coal in his own house ? No. (Oh I) An hon. member says "Oh." I agree with his sneer. The consumption of coal is 70,000,000 tons; the quantity sent to France is 1,000,000 tons ; if you are alarmed about the exhaustion of the existing stock you will economise on the remaining 69,000,000. (A laugh.) It would be absurd, it is said, when we consume 70,000,000 tons of coal at home, that we should export to another country 1,500,000 tons, which may increase to 3,000,000 ; we cannot afford it ; and therefore, we must retain power to restrain the export. Sir, those are not the grounds on which this house will carry an amendment to thaot of the Throne. (Cheers.) But I have done with this consileration. Thehon. gentleman the mem ber for Norfolk says he thinks a war with France and Eu rope would be bette, than this treaty should receive a final sanction. (A laugh) It is not often we have the benefit of hearing a gentlemat stand up and with engaging frankness state camly and coolly in this house that he would rather have a war with Frmce and Europe than see this treaty ratified—adding, in the same breath, that no man is more alive than he to theblessings of peace. (Laughter.) I must confess I don't feel at all disappointed at the course of the discussion with respect to this treaty. I hope the hon. gen tleman will not thinr it all disrespectful to him if I use free language, and if I confess I think that that one sentiment, and one or two others which he has used in these debates, are not worthy of the , high standard of legislative wisdom which I am sure he 'would seek and desire to attain. (Cheers and laughter.) Much has been said in the course of these debates that will not bear sober examination. Let us go back to the debates of 1787, and there we shall find that all the same foolish things and a great many others were said, and said too by very wise sod distinguished men ; but time casts a light on the events of those days. The mass of the coun try, at any rate so faras it can be tested by the ordinary re cords of the expression of opinion, has no share in these apprehensions. 1 don't wishto overstate the case, but when the right hon. member for Buckinghamshire travels backto a debate which took place three weeks ago, and rather glo- rifles himself on the a advice he then gave to the house, but which the house refused to follow, he _ought to recollect ;hat that refusal was uttered not Only by the members of the Government, not only by the majority which a party can supply; but that itto - thal majority there entered many of the most able and respected members from the opposite side of the house, who usually vote with the right hon. gen tleman himself. (Cheers.) lie appeals to the future—to the future we also appeal. We cannot presume to predict the course of events. The experience of Mr. Pitt would warn us against any such presumption. But although the instrument which he concluded was not intended to last, it did not on that account redound with the less honour to his name; we don't the less believe that even for the time it existed it may have done much to allay the excitement which in bath countries followed the close of the American war, and to produce greater feelings of self-command among the English people in the earlier stages of the French Re volution. It is not for us to presume to say that this treaty will work with such power as to control future events, but if, by the blessing of the Almighty, the spirit of justice, prudence, and moderation shall prevail in the councils of Europe, then, looking to the state of Europe—to the power of every country to attain strength and eminence through the development of its internal resources, and to theabsence of all legitimate causes of strife and collision, we ought to hope that that state of circumstances may remain under which this treaty may produce beneficial effects beyond any power of judging; and I must say that in that case I cannot but cherish the cheerful and sanguine expectation that it will of itself do something to make the year 1860 one memorable—memorable because fruitful of blessings- —in the annals of Europe and mankind. (Loud and prolonged cheers.) Mr. NEWDEGA.TE, amidst cries of "Divide I" was understood to ask whether the sth article of the treaty, which touched the larger number of commodities, was to apply to commodities imported from all countries, or from France alone ? Mr. lIORSMAN, in explanation, said the Chancellor of the Exchequer had mistaken him in supposing that he had said upon his own authority that there was any difference of opinion between the French Emperor and the French nation. He had quoted the language of the Emperor him self and of the French Journals. (Hear.) As there was a feeling that the carrying of any amendment ul.on the 11th article might effect the whole treaty—(laughter and cheers) —under those circumstances, in compliance with the wish that had been expressed by ie majority of those who agreed with him, he should not press his amendment. (Divide.) The house then divided, when there appeared— For the amendment Against Majority —226 The announcement of the numbers was received with cheers. Mr. NEWDEGATE inquired whether article 5 of the treaty would apply to goods imported from France alone, or to the goods imported from all countries. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said this was a point on which the hon. gentleman had before refused to accept his statement, and had expressed a strong opinion of his own. If any point should arise which required to be elucidated, reference would be made to the law officers of the Crown. The motion for an Address to her Majesty was then agreed to, and a committee appointed in conformity with a resolution to that effect to prepare the terms of the Ad dress. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the house adjourned at 25 minutes to 2 o'clock. [kommsEmENT.]—Mr. Benson, Ludgate-hill, has just published a new illustrated pamphlet on watches (free by post for two stamps). It should be read by all who are about buying a watch, as it contains prices and important informa tion as to—What watch to buy ! where to buy it ! and how to use it I [ADVERTISEMENT.]—HoIIoway's Pills, a certain cure for headaches, bile, loss of appetite, and lowness of spirits. These Pills can be taken without danger from wet or cold, and require no interruption of business or pleasure. They act mildly on the bowels, strengthen the stomach, and pro mote a healthy action of the liver, whereby they purify the blood, cleanse the skin, brace the nerves, and invigorate the whole system. They effect a truly wonderful change in a debilitated constitution, as they create a healthy appe tite, correct indigestion, remove bile, giddiness, headaches, and palpitation of the heart. Plain directions for using these Pills, at once so mild and efficacious, accompany each box, Hollow a y' s Pill s may b e fearlessly ta k en by the most delicate. [ADVERTISEMENT.]—Mothers and nurses will find DU Barry's delicious Revalenta Arabica Food admirably adapted to remove all disorders of the stomach and bowels to which infants and children are at all times liable, such as indigestion, flatulency, colic, dysentery, diarrhoea, consti pation, debility and restlessness. It strengthens, noft rishes, and is used with more advantage than milk in rearing infants. We quote a few out of many testimo nials :—" Amsterdam, 31st Dec., 1852.—Dear Sir,—Our child, up to the age of eleven weeks, was very delicate, and wasting away, and milk, sago, and arrowroot turned sour on its stomach, causing great suffering. We then fed it upon Du Barry's Revalenta Arabica, which agreed won derfully with her; and she is now, at the Dn.() of nine months, a plump and l ivel y little girl.—Daniel' Servas." " Wildervank, Holland, 20th . Sept. 1853.—Dear Sir, —Our baby, which Heaven presented its with ten months back, was attacked, when four weeks old, with a disease of the stomach and glands, by which our seven previous infants had all been carried oil, and this last child seemed destined to follow its sisters and brothers before ninny days, for our doctor, a very able practitioner, had, during three weeks, exhausted all his skill, and was at a loss what to prescribe next, when he advised Du Barry's Revalenta Arabica, which, I am happy to say, worked a gre at change for the better in a few days ; and in six weeks' ti m e the child was perfectly well, and is now a• cheerful blooming boy—a source of the greatest happiness toms Vaalman." In tins, at ls. 6d. ; 11b., 3s. ; 21b., ss. 9d. ; 51b., 125.; 12th., 265. The 101 b. and 121 b. tins carriage free, on receipt of poiit office order. Du. Barry and Co., 77, - Regent-street, London Fortnum, Mason, and CO., 182, Piccadilly ; AVois, Gracechurch-street ; 4, Cheapside ; 63, and 150, Oxford street;ate 330 and 451, Strand ; 49 and GO, Bishopsg street ; 8.5 T o tt en ham-court-road. Also at D u bli n, 'Bewley 'and Draper ; at Edinburgh, Raimes and Co. •, at Liverpool, Nixon and Thew; at Manchester, Sharp Scott; at York, Raimes, r,Blauchad, aid Co,; Solth and amptop, Itaudall and eon, PARLIA IVISION. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—IVIAnerr 9. TREATY WITH FRANCE. Order read;, for resuming Adjourned Debate on Question (Bth March), " That an humble address be presented to her Majesty, to assure her Ma_ jesty that, ' having considered the treaty of commerce concluded between her Majesty and the . Emperor of the French, this house begs-. leave to approach her Majesty. with their sincere and grateful acknowledgments for this new proof of her Majesty's desire to promote the welfare and happiness of her subjects . to assure her Majesty that we shall proceed to take such steps as may be necessary for giving effect to a system which we trust will,promote a beneficial intercourse be tween Great Britain and France, tend to the extension of itrade and manufactures, and give 'l l additional security for the continuance of, the ,J blessings of peace." QuotionAgaiti _proposed —Debate resumed :—Another 4mendment pro- 7 1 posed, at the end of the Question, to add the I words " But humbly to represent to-her Majesty , that, in the opinion of this house, Article XI. ;1 imposes on the Crown and Legislature of the. country unnecessary and impolitic, restrictions to which this house cannot assent; and to pray her A Majesty to effect the omission of 'that Article,' T from the treaty." Question put, " That those f rft words be there added."—The house divided ;:" Ayes 56, Noes 282. L . :2114; Beach, W. W. B. Gore, J. R . 0. .• ~. : , 4,1417,11 171113 .1,47u.r , I P,eacocke, G. M. ~/ .r. Beninck. G.C. Greene, Capt. J It _e y, fir M. _ . Bond, J. IV;----H„.t opp; _ E. . B. ___A i v r ensep ,Viscount - Bovill, Wm., Hennessy, J. P. Bridges, Sir 8., Bt. 'Henniker, Lord ogers, John Brooks, R. Hill, Hon. It. Smith, Abel Spooner It Burghley, Lord Hubba r d, J. G. • Stirling ' W . l n ,- ( r• MT Cochrane, A. D. Ingestre, Visco un t Steuart, A. • •' •' slf Curzon, Viscount - king, J. K. . D. . ~, Talbot, Hon. W. C. '1 Darner, L. S. IV. 44. Knightley, R. Thynne, Lord E. - ~II Dawson, R. P. ' ' Lee -e, Sir H. U.'refusis, lion. c. IL , • Dickson, Col. Long, R. I'.: Valetort, Lord '.L Duncombe, W. E. Lygon, Hon. F. Vance, J o h n ~7-17 . 1(r..„ 4 " „: Dann, John Manners, Ld J. Vausittart, IViti.;", - ,i;;Zi - Edwards, Major H. Newdegate, C. N. Vernon, L. V. ~-_ it ,,,, t Egerton; Sir P. Nicol, William Way, Arthur E. i,: „I d El'phinstone, Sir J. North, Col. Fergusson, •Sir.J.- --Pakington, Sir J.-S-- - TELLERS: — Gard, R. S. Palmer, R. W. Horsman ,E. • - , George, John Parker, Major W. Bentinck, G. W. P. NOES-282. . . Adam, W. P. • - Freeland, .H. W. Moody, C. A. Adeane,‘ll. J. .- ' Gaskell, J. M. Morris, D. Agar-Ellis, Hon. L. Gavin, Major Mowbray, Rt. Hn. J. Agnew, Sir A. Gilison, T. M. Neivark, Lord Alcock, T. Gifford, Earl of Noble, J. Andover, Lord • Gilpin, C. Norris,.J. T. ' - ' Angerstein, W. Gladstone, Capt. North, F. ' Antrobus, E. ' Gladstone, W. E. O'Brien, P. - • Arnott, Sir J. - Glyn, G. G. Ogilvy,,Sir J. Atherton, W. Goddard, A. L. Onslow, Guildford Bagwell, J. Goldsmid, Sir F. Owen, Sir J. Bailey, C. Gordon, C. W. Packe, G. H. Baines, E. . Greaves, Edward Paget, C. Baring, Thos. Geo. Greenall, G. Paget, Lord C. E.. Bass, M. T. Greenwood, J. Palmerston, Visct. Bathurst, A. A. Greville, Col. F. Pattcn, J. W. Baxter, W. E. - Grey, Itt.- lin. SirG,P-axton,-SirJ.- - - Bazley, Thomas Grey deWilton,Lord Pease, H. Beale, Samuel. Gordon, B. Peel, Sir R. Bellew, R. M. Gurney, John 11. Peel, F. Berkeley, F. Gurney, Samuel Peto, Sir M. • Bethell, Sir R. Hadfield, Geo. Pilkington, James Biggs, John Hanbury, R., jun. Pinney, \l'm. - Black, Adam Hanbury, Captain Portman W. H. B. Blake, J. A. Handley, John Pritchard, John '. • Blencowe, J. G. Hankey, Thomson Proby, Lord. G. L. Botfitld, Beriah Hardy, Gathorne Pugh, D. (Carmar.) Bouverie, E. P. ..Hartnigton,Marquis Puller, C. W. Bouverie, P. P. Hayes, Sir E. S. Raynham, Viscount Brady, John Headlam, Thos. E. Ricardo, 0. Bramston, T. W. Henley, Lord Ridley, G. Bright, J. Herbert, H. A. Robartes; T. J. A. Bristow, A. Herbert, S. Robertson, D. Brocklehurst, John Hervey, Lord A Roebuck, J. A. Brown, James Hodgson, K. D. Rothschild,BaronL Browne, Lord J. T. Holland, E. Roupell, W. Buchanan, W. Hope, G. W. Russell, - Lord J. Buckley, Maj.-Gen. Hornby, W. H. Russell, Hastings Buller, J. W. Howard, Hon. C. Russell, A. J. E. Buller, Sir A. Howes, Edward Russell, F. W. Butler, C. S. Ilumberstone, P. S. St. Aubyn, J. Butt, 'lsaac Hunt, G. W. Salomons,Alderman Buxton, C. Hutt, W. Salt, Titus Byng, Hon. G. 11. C. Ingham, R. Scrope, G. P. Caird, James Ingram, H. Selwyn, C. J. Calthorpe, F. H. Jackson, W. Seymour, Sir H. Cardwell, Rt. Hn. E. James, Edwin Shafto, R. D. Castlerosse, Vist. Jermyn, Earl Shelley, Sir J. V. Cavendish, Hon. W. Jervoise, Sir J. Sheridan, R. B. Cayley, E. S. Johnstone, Hon. H. Sheridan, H. B. Childers, H. C. E. Johnstone, Sir J. Smith, J. B. Cholmeley, Sir M. Kendall, N. Smith, M. T. Clay, James Kershaw, J. Smith, Augustus Clifford, C. C. King, Hon. L. Smith, Sir F. Clinton, Lord R. Kinglake, Serj. J. Somerville, Sir W. Clive, George Kingscote, Lt.-Col. Stackpole, W. Coke, W. C. Kinnaird, Hon. A. Stafford, Marquis of Colebrooke, Sir T.E. Knatchbull-Hugess Stanhope, J. B. Cowper, Hon. W. F. Knox, Major W. S Steel, John Craufurd, E. H. J Laing, S. Stuart, Col. Crawford, R. W. Lanigan, J. Sykes, Col. W. H. Crook, Joseph Lawson, W. Taylor, Hugh Cross, R. A. Leatham, E. Tempest, Lord A.V. Crossley, Frank Lefroy, A. Thompson, H. S. Daiglisn, Robert Lee, W. Tite, Wm. Davey, R. L'egh, G. C. Tollemache, Hon.F. Davie, Sir H. R. F. Lewis, Sir G.C., Bt. Turner, J. A. Davie, Col. F. Liddell, Hon. H. G. Vandeleur, Col. Deasy, Rickard Lindsay, W. S. Verney, Sir Harry Denman, G. Lindsay, Colonel Villiers, Rt. Hon. e. Dent, John Dent Locke, Jos. Vivian, H. H. Dillwyn, Lewis L. Locke, John Waldron, L. Divett, Edward Lockhart, A. E. IValpole, S. H. Douglas, Sir C. Lowe, Rt. Hon. R. Walter, John Duff, M. E. Lyall, G. Warre, J. A. Duke, Sir James Lysley, W. Watkins; J. L. V. Dundas, Frederick M'Cann, J. Wemysg, J. Dunkcllin, Lord Mackie, J. Western, T. S. Dunlop, A. Mackinnon, W. A. Westhead, B. Egerton, A. F. Maguire, J. F. Whalley, G. H. Ellice, E., jun. Mainwaring, T. Whitbread, S. Emlvn, Viscount Marjoribanks, D. C. White, Luke Ennis, Jelin Marsh, M. IL Wickham, H. W. Evans, T. W. Marshall, IV. ' Williams, W. - Ewart, William Martin, P. W. Wise, J. A. Ewart, J. C. Martin, J. Wood, Tit Hn. Sir C. Ewing, H. E. C. Massey, W. N. Woods, Henry Fenwick, Henry Matheson, A. Wyld, James Ferinoy, Lord Merry, James Wynn, Col. Finlay, A. S. 3lildmay, 11. Wynne, C. G. Foljambe, F. J. S. Miller, William Wynne, W. W. K. Forster, Charles Mitchell, T. A. Wyvill, M. Foster, W. 0. . 3loncreitr, J. TELLERS. Fortescue, Hon. D. Monse'l, Rt. lin. W. Brand, H. B. Fortescue, C. S. Montgomery, Sir G. Dunbar, Sir Wm. RAILWAY INTELLIGENCE. GLASGOW AND SOUTH-WESTERN. The half-yearly meeting of this company was held in Glasgow on Wednesday; Sir Andrew Orr in the chair. The CHAIRMAN said there was a fear last half year, on the part of some o 2 their more prudent shareholders, that the directors in paying 5 per cent. had rather overstrained matters, thereby going a little beyond their ordinary prudent course. The results had removed all these doubts, as they had now not onlypaid 5 per cent. on all their stocks, with nearly £6,000 to begin the succeeding half year with, but the most liberal and ample provision had been made for contingencies. (Cheers.) If the traffic had not been so seriously affected from so many furnaces being temporarily placed out of blast in Ayrshire, to the extent of over £5OO a week, they might have considered the propriety of recommending even an addition to the 5 per cent., but the directors deemed it more prudent to adopt the course they had taken. During the last half year the addition to the capital account had been only £6,500 for additional plant and outlay at the new station at Dumfries. The payment of £lB,OOO for one half-year of the issued preference shares in the Castle Douglas Company he did iot view as an increase to capital, as it was a good 5 per cent. money cent. in vestment, e a n t t ,4w per hich cent. . beenThe They provided h found bfor their mineral trade lost i n increasingproviding s o f rapidly or ta proper at n o ae t e i n m in e ra m e u d s a t tio b n e . They were no w working the Castle Dougl as i n ad dition to the Ayr and Maybole Lailway ; the Gir van line they had agreed to work also. And all these, with rendered the growingthe addition de t m o a t n h d e s pla o n f t a th bs e n ir lu o tly w e n I indispensabl e . Alth oug h t h e l oan cap i ta l d ur i ng the half-year had been some £12,000 more than in 1859, still the charge for interest on mortgage was actually £l,OOO less than in the six months, owing to the reduction in the average rates of interest which had been effected by bonds falling in. Their rate of interest at present was only about £4 ls. Id. per cent. if they excluded some Dal mellington 5 per cent. bonds which they had to take over with that line. (Cheers.) The Port patrick Railway would add 60 miles to their sys tem, besides being the means of greatly increasing their traffic on the Castle Douglas line, on which they were interested to the extent of halfone- of the capital. They proposed tc increase the s cription to the Portpatrick from £60,000 to £lOO,OOO. He then alluded to the proposed amal gamation of the Caledonian, Edinburgh, and Glas gow, and Central Companies, to which he was fa vourable, and thought it should be further extended. A long discussion ensued, in the course of which the report was adopted, and a dividend at the rate of 5 per cent. per annum was declared on the ordi nary stock. Resolutions were also passed autho rising the purchase of a portion of the new prefe rence shares created by the Castle Douglas and Dumfries Company,' also of shares in the Maybole and Girvan Railway to the extent of £5,000; em powering the directors to subscribe an additional sum not exceeding £40,000 towards the Port patrick Railway, but at the same time expressing regret at the necessity for such an increase in their subscription. The retiring directors and auditor were re elected, and the proceedings terminated with vote of thanks to the chairman. LEWES AND UCK-F1EI.1). The report of the directors state;l that they were i n correspondence with the directors of the Brighton Railway Company as to the sale of the railway, and had ree(dr the latter th a t 1 cid a communication from they were prepared .object to the approval of their proprietors, to become the pur chasers by issuing to the Uckfield Company, as the consideration for such transfer, preferential 4 per cent. stock of the Brighton Company to theamount of £33,900, the Brighton Company taking upon it self the mortgage debt of the company, amounting to £13,400. The directors believed that those terms would be considered satisfactory, and intended convening a special general meeting of the shareholders at an early period to sanction a sale on such terms accordingly. They would meantime receive their dividend at the rate of 4 per cent. per annum for the past - ha l f - y ear. theyin the V N