The Sun. — London, England, 1859-07-29 00:00:00

arrived from Paris that it was the intentionof the Emperor of the French to reduce his armaments both by sea and land. Well, that is excellent news, and its value depends entirely upon the manner in which that policy is carried out. I should not have noticed that, considering that all the information which we had was merely by telegram, had not a Minister called our attention to it in his place at the moment he rose, and evidently with the intention of in fluencing the opinion of the house. I think myself—in deed, I ventured to make the observation the other night— that it is of great importance that the armaments of the grmt Powers should be reduced. (Hear.) I did not when made that observation lay claim to any originality. I was not aware at the time that I was at all trenching upon the peculiar manor of the hon. gentleman the member or Birmingham. He informed me afterwards with great exultation that the proposition to reduce armaments after war was an original principle in politics invented by himself. (Laughter.) I observed that articles of peace were never yet signed, or at least no peace was ever yet con cluded, without members of this house pressing upon the Government to avail themselves of the opportunity of re ducing their armaments, and, knowing that our predeces sors in this assembly for 150 years, to my knowledge, recom mended that policy, I certainly was astonished that the hon. member for Birmingham, although he spoke, I must say, with considerable courtesy of me as his pupil—(a laugh)— should have taken that opportunity of informing the house that he himself was the inventor of that policy. (Laughter.) I remember some very absurd observations made by the hon. gentleman 10 years ago upon this subject, in the course of which he maintained that peace was the natural state of man in the present day, because the commercial principle was stronger than the political, and in which he said that France could never go to war again in consequence of the alteration of the tenure of land in that country, there being then about seven millions and a half of proprietors . I re minded him then—in the year 1848—that the same tenure obtained in France wider the Republic and under the first Empire ; that there were then also about seven millions of proprietors, but that did not prevent the French go to war. He then expressed othe r opinions, whi I had Ch i ngped for his own sake were quite forgotten, and therefore I shall not now touch upon them ; but when peace is announced by a Minister, as it was announced in this house, a peace between two great military monarchies of Europe, espe cially at a time when the taxation of this country has been greatly increased in consequence of the adoption of very necessary means of defence, there was nothing very wild —there was nothing, I think, very unwise in suggest ing that our ally should take this oportunity of esta blishing in the eyes of Europe, and especially of this country, the sincerity of his friendship for England— which I, for one, have no wish in any way to doubt — by the reduction of his armaments. It seemed to me to be a very natural policy, a policy which would pro mote the Emperor's own interests, and one which, if he en tertain it, he will, I have no doubt, carry out with sincerity. The Emperor ought, however, to understand if that is the policy which the English Parliament wishes him to adopt, that if he does adopt and pursue it with sincerity we are prepared to respond to it in a reciprocal spirit. He ought clearly to understand that we suggest that policy from no wild sentiment, but in a plain business-like manner ; and that if he agrees to it we, on our part, are prepared to carry it out in a business-like manner. But then we must know what the reductions are. (Hear.) We must see that re ductions are being made in his forces, as clearly as he will know what are the reductions which we are making. He must not suppose that it is because what is called the peace principle is prevalent in this house that such a policy is re oommended, because if he thought that he would have the feeling which some attribute to him, but which I do not be lieve he entertains ; he might then treat the House of Com mons like children, and hope that by telegrams made up of unmeaning phrases he could influence the policy of this country. That great Prince is too sensible a man to enter tain such an opinion for a moment ; but, as the question has been introduced to us by the Secretary of State, I think there should be no mistake as to the opinion of the House of Commons upon the reduction of armaments by the Em peror of the French. The reduction of armaments is a na tural and proper policy, and one which we may fairly ex pect to be followed when peace is concluded. It is a policy which this country would hail with satisfaction, and which would give us that security which, under such circum stances, our ally might be expected to give ; but it must be a real, absolute, undoubted reduction of armaments—(hear) —and not a mere exchange of fine, vague phrases. If that is, as I believe it is, the sincere policy of the Emperor, it will be met with eq ual sincerity on our part ;it will put an end to great misconceptions as to the views and conduct of that Prince, which I, for one, am more than willing to believe have no foundation whatever ; and then, indeed, we may regard as an event which has effected some good for humanity even this war, which, though it has been a bloody has been a brief one, which has brought many persons to their senses, and may tend to restore and establish a good understanding between England and France. (Cheers.) Mr. BOWYER said that no speech could have been more calculated than that of the noble lord (J. Russell) to prevent any advantage arising from a conference. He had no confidence in the present Government with regard to this matter, for they had been for years connected with the revolutionary party in Italy. He believed they were equally without the confidence of the Continent—even of the Liberal party there. (Hear, hear) The noble lord said that a difficulty arose because Sardinia had a constitu tional form of Uovernment. What did the noble lord mean by that ? Did he mean to say that because the Government of Sardinia was constitutional that Sardinia should have it all her own way at the conference ? Federation was said 100 have something to do with liberty of conscience. But federation had no more to do with that than it had to do with the paving and lighting of the various federal States. That was a matter for each State to settle for itself. The war broke out in consequence of the breach of international law on the part of Sardinia. Sardinia received deserters from the Austrian army contrary to international law, and contrary to treaties existing between the two countries, and that was the real reason why Austria went to war. ith respect to the duchies, they found the Sardinian minister a most diszraeeful revolt, and WE I' IVI - C11,47 GLEN Lat cos, - encouraging, through the secret societies, officers and sol diers to violate the oaths which they had taken to their Sovereign. (Hear, hear.) Neither was it true to say that the Grand Duke left his duchy in the way that James 11. left England. He was compelled to depart, and the Sardi nian Minister was placed at the head of a provisional government. The noble lord had told them that Bologna wished to be united to Sardinia. (No.) He (Mr. Bowyer) could not believe that statement. Bologna, under the Pope, was exempt from the conscription and lightly taxed, and was the seat of a university which was closely connected with the Papal court. United to Sardinia, she would have the conscription, and would be heavily taxed, whilst, de prived of her university, she would be much in the same situation as Oxford, should such a deprivation happen to the latter city. Under these circumstances, he could not believe that the Bolognese wished to be separated from the Pa States. Lord J. RUSSELL—I never said that Bologna wished to be united to Sardinia. Mr. BOWYER—Surely the noble lord could not have contemplated Bologna setting up as an independent state for herself, and it should be remembered that Signor d'Azeglio had already been accredited to these states as commissioner from the King of Sardinia to foment revolution and levy ar maments against the rightful sovereign, He did not believe in the ovation to d'Azeglio. It was easy to create a mob and to call it an ovation, nor neither did he think there was any foundation for the noblelord'sfunnystoryabout the cardinal. It seemed to be what was vulgarly called a cock-and-bull story. (A laugh.) He (Mr. Bowyer) denounced the whole of the proceedings of Sardinia as a violation of the law of nations, and thought that if they were to be held good, Vattel and Grotius and Paffendorf must be superseded, and an entirely new treatise written. The noble lord never lost an Opportunity of stigmatising the Roman Government as the worst in the world. (Cries of " Hear, hear.") He (Mr. Bowyer) asserted that to be a calumny, and asserted that that Government had been an improving one for many years— (laughter)—that it was a good Government--(continued laughter)—that it was a progressive Government. (Great laughter.) One fact he had to tell the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and that was that the Pope had got a surplus revenue. (Much laughter.) In conclu sion, he implored the noble lord to take ne part in the con gress, which in no way concerned the interests of this coun try. He believed that the greatest Italian name was that of the Pope, and the Pope had been the head of the Guelphs in former times who formed the Italian party. Pope Julius 11. said to the Ambassador of Venice, " Only two really Italian things remain, your ducal cap and my tiara." The tiara was now gone. (Loud laughter and cries of Hear, hear.) He meant the ducal cap, and the Pope was all that remained of the ancient nationality of Italy. He was, therefore, the fittest head that could be thought of for an Italian confede ration. Lord PALMERSTON—I refrained from answering at once the questions put by the right hon. gentleman opposite, because I was unwilling to interpose between the house and the gentleman who has just spoken, knowing as I do the strong interest he takes in at least one part of Italy, and in one of the governments which unfortunately rule in that country. (Laughter,) In my opinion the statement of my noble friend was perfectly clear a s to the views of the Go vernment; •but the right hon. gentleman opposite wants still to know whether the powers which were neuter in the war, including, of course, the British Government, made any proposal to Austria of terms less favourable than those which were subsequently voluntarily conceded by France at Villafranca. My noble friend stated that no proposal had been made by the British Government, in so far as he was aware of, or by any of the neutral powers, but the right hon. gentleman seemed to have pretty accurate information from some quarter as to what really passed, and that which did pass was as he imagines it, with one exception. At one period of the war the French ambassador gave my noble friend a small paper, upon which certain terms of arrange ment were written out very generally, asking my noble fridnd that the British Governmet should transmit them to that of Austria, recommending them as a basis upon which a treaty of peace might be concluded. My noble be u n becoming bec e o lfri d- thought that, on the one hand, it would in this Government, anxious as it must have bee n fo r the cessation of war, absolutely to decline being the channel of communication ; but, on the other hand, he, and we, felt that the position in which the two contending parties stood at that moment did not justify us in actually interposing. We therefore took the course which I think was the prop er one. We said, "We will, as you w ish, communicate to the Austrian- Minister the contents of t hi s paper, containing as it does your notion, not ours, of an arrangement, but we will not accompany it by any ad vice or opinion of our own. We shall distinctly say that it comes from you, not from us, and we think it our duty merely not to suppress it." That was all that passed. My noble friend gave the memorandum to the Austria n re sal was not ours, Minis ter, t e lling him that the p Po but that of the French Government, and that Austria could deal with it as she pleased. We did not refuse to be the channel of communication, but we gave no advice nor did we express any opinion as to the provisions contained in the memoran dum. But the right hon. gentleman seemed t b o sa o y ur that this proposal came from us, or was accompanie y 'emnronndation, and I have only to repeat that on this. t po re int . .he was completely misinformed. He also said, reverting o a topic which is often alluded to on that side of the house, tb at we were likely to fall into a mistake similar to that of 010 Government of 1848 respecting the affairs of Italy. Now that transaction has been repeatedly misrepresented, even after the papers had been published completely explaining it. The truth was, that at that time the Government of England had no control over the powers that were waging war in Italy. Baron Hummelauer came here with a pro at the time when Austria had been driven out of Lom- Var?ly, and when a Provisional Government had been estab lished, so that for us to have supported such a proposal eAould have been a mere mockery on our part. The same proposal was made at Milan by an Austrian agent, and was treated with scorn and derision. Baron Hummelauer then offered another arrangement, in which he said he was not authorised by his Government, but that, if we thought Sar dinia would accept it, he would go back and recommend it at Vienna. We suggested that no arrangement would be com plete which related only to Lombardy. At that time Venice was in revolt, defending itself against Austria, and I thought it unlikely that any proposal would be accepted that did not include that State. The state of things, however, soon altered, and the fate of war turned in favour of Austria. General Radetsky won great victories, and recovered Lom bardy, and therefore any proposal previously made fell to the ground. I hold that the decision we took was the sound one, considering the state of things that existed when the proposal was made. The right hon. gentleman is now of opinion that we ought not under any circumstances to go into the conference, considering that if a representative of this country were to be there we would have only to regis ter what the other powers had previously settled between themselves. Now, my noble friend had already explained that there are two completely distinct branches of the ar rangement between France and Austria ; the one including the stipulations relating to Venetia and Lombardy, the latter having been ceded to France to save the honour of Austria, but being ultimately to revert to Sardinia ; and in this branch, no doubt, the two parties are entitled to decide, relating as it does to territory which has formed the subject of the war. But there is another branch ; there were other conditions relating to parts of Italy which the contending armies had not occupied, and with which the contracting parties had no authority to deal. (Hear, hear.) What, then. my noble friend stated was, that before we adopted any decision as to taking part in the conference, we should wait to learn what had been done at Zurich between France, Austria, and Sardinia. My noble friend stated the vari ous difficulties that might arise in consequence of the ar rangements that had been sketched out at Villafranca with regard to the confederation. Austria and France might pro pose such a confederation, but it could not be carried out without the consent and goodwill of all the States to which it referred. (Hear, hear.) The difficulties, in fact, in the way of this arrangement must strike every one. How, for instance, can it be e xp ected that the representatives of Sar dinia and Austria will sit like friends at the same table, or the Pope's Nuncio, seeing that the King of Sardinia has been excommunicated by his Holiness ? (Laugh ter, and " No, from Mr. Bowyer). Not personally, it is true, but every one who entered the Papal territory in a hostile fashionwas excommunicated, and under that ban the Marquis d'Azeglio entered the legations and took possession. It does not re quire much logic or acumen to prove that the King of Sar dinia lies under the excommunication of the Pop e . (Hear, hear.) But, even supposing' actual excommunication not to have taken place, I am sure that the hen. and learned member for Dundalk will allow the relations between the two Powers to be not so agreeable as to render it probable that their respective representatives could sit at the same board in amicable consultation. (Hear, hear.) As my noble friend stated, the questions of religious toleration, of the liberty or license of the press, might arise, with the dif ferent degree of freedom to be accorded in political matters, and these questions would have to be discussed at a diet at which Austria must sit beside Sardinia, and Rome, Naples, and Tuscany. How could they expect such a confederation to work harmoniously? (Hear, hear.) These are our ob jections to the confederation, and until we see our way to their removal it is plain that it will not be expedient for this Government to enter into this conference. On the other hand, if we do see our way towards moulding thoee general arrangements so as to modify the existing evils, and laying the grounds for future improvements, then I think not only that it would be advisable, but that it would be the duty of her Majesty's Government to use its influence in the hope of moulding these different arrangements. (Hear, hear.) The hon. and learned member for Dundalk has told us that the Government of Rome is much maligned ; that it is, in fact, one of the most improving and progressive govern ments in Europe. How is it, then, that for the past ten years, but for the presence of foreign troops to preserve order, the Roman Government would have been overthrown? (H ear.) (" No, no," from Mr. Bowyer.) Well, the hon. and learned gentleman may not think so, but it certainly has been the opinion of the Roman Government itself, (Laughter.) I suppose its members know as well as the hon. and learned member the state of relations between them and their subjects. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Well. it is not in the nature of man to wish to overthrow govern ments without some reason. It is true that man is called a destructive animal, but certainly not to that extent. We find that in this country, when in 1848 some revolutionary symptoms were exhibited, 100,000 well-disposed citizens of London turned out and armed themselves, not with stilettoes and swords, but with honest English bludgeons, to keep down insurrection. Solelythrough their exertions the peaee was as well preserved on the 10th of April as it had been on the day before, or could be the day after. So it would be in Rome if Rome were well governed, but the discon tent of the people and their distrust and want of confidence in the Government and all that belongs to it is the most decisive proof that Rome is not only not well governed but that the Government of Rome is amongst the worst in the whole civilised world. In 1831 the great Powers of Europe gave good advice to the Government of Rome. It was said, I am aware, that the Protestant Powers should not inter fere to give advice to the ecclesiastical Government of Rome ; still in 1831 that objection did not prevent England, Prussia, and Russia, and other nations from joining with France and Austria in recommending to the Government of Rome certain changes and improvements, which if they had been adopted at the time would have saved years of misfortune and difficulty, and many other evils which have since fallen upon Italy. (Hear.) I do not see why the same ccurse should not again, when the proper occasion presents itself, be followed by those Powers. And if the united voice of Europe should have any weight with that excellent Government— that Government which, according to the hon. and learned gentleman is so well disposed, so beloved by its subjects, in smoothing away its difficulties and inducing it to go a little faster—l do not see any reason why some useful advice should not be given. (Hear, hear.) The hon. and learned gentleman does not believe a statement made by my noble friend as to the number of people in Naples and in others of the Italian states, who are under the surveillance of the police. I am sure my noble friend would not state anything that was not based upon good in formation, and as the tact which he has stated is well founded, I say that of itself is strong proof of the degree in which the governments of those countries render wretched those unfortunate people who are subject to their sway. (Hear, hear.) And when it is said that we are the advocates and encouragers of revolution in Italy, I reply that it is not we that are the advocates and promoters of revolution, but those governments whodistrust their people, and drive them to resort to dark conspiracies, and those other crimes which men who have no other hope are often led into to relieve themselves from the calamities and sufferings which they are condemned to endure. The right hon. gentleman says that my noble friend taunted him with having treated the idea of Italian liberty with a sneer. He did nothing of the kind ; but the right hon. gentleman retorts that my noble friend is always under the delusion that in Italy as in Eng land there was a great whig party. That is perfectly true. There is a great constitutional party in Italy, as there is in this country, which has made way year after year against the party that is opposed to liberty, and being numerically the more powerful, must continue to make progress. But the similitude between Italy and England is even greater than according to the right hon. gentleman my noble friend represents it to be. Not only is there a great Whig party in Italy, but there is also a great Tory party there. (Hear.) That Tory party happens to be the party in. the Government, and it is the conflict between the great Whig majority and the Tory minority that is in power, that is the cause of all the difficulties and all the evils to which Italy is exposed. Unfortunately there the resemblance ceases, for Italy not having the advantage of constitutional government, though the Whig party are the majority, they have had no means of carry ing a vote of want of confidence in the Government (a laugh)—and were censequentfy still writhing under the arbitrary power of the governing minority. (Hear, hear.) Under these circumstances we naturally feel that sympathy which the right hon. gentleman no doubt ridicules we do feel sympathy with the constitutional party in It aly, and frankly avow that we should be glad to see a constitutional government established in that country, and that rational freedom insured upon which alone the safety of a nation depends. (Hear, hear.) Then I say that we have not yet come to any decision in the direction of the conference, nor can any decision be come to until it is known more com pletely what are the proposals to be made at Zurich, and how far the parties may propose to deal with matters that they have no real authority to deal with, and how far they will leave open to their allies other matters upon which, although they may have no power to pronounce a decision, they are at least entitled to recommend and to notice. But the right hon. gentleman may rest satisfied that we shall not go into any conference with the view of carrying out those embarrassing arrangements which he deprecates. At the same time I must say that the course which the right hon. gentleman and his friends now take is not very con sistent with that which they took before the war broke out, and when they were in office. (Hear.) Then they advocated a congress, though now condemning a conference, and although the one was proposed before the war actually began, and the other is proposed after hostilities have ceased, that does not constitute, as far as I can see, any valid objection. A conference usually follows a treaty of peace, to settle and modify arrang ements which, if left in complete, would probably lead to the renewal of war. But, says the right hon. gentleman, "do not go into this con ference and embarrass this country with any prospective en gagements." Excellent advice. If you refer to the blue books you will see the right hon. . gentleman and his friends were ready to guarantee Sardinia for five years from any hos tile attack. (Hear.) Now, if there can be a prospective en gagement that would be all but certain to embarrass this country it was that. If the contemplated attack was to come upon Sardinia from some power over which you exercised a controlling influence, well and good ; and though you might have measuredsthe expense and counted the damage, you might have set against these disadvantages the advantages to be gained on the other side, and upon the balance you might have said, " It is a hazardous undertaking, but we feel that we can fulfil it." But how would the right hon. gentleman have fulfilled such an engagement so as to pre vent Austria from attacking Sardinia ? Would helave sent an army to Genoa to assist the Sardinians, or would he have sent a naval force to attack Venice ? (Cheers.) But the right hon. gentleman will tell us, no doubt, that it was not an engagement to be entered into by England, but by England and France conjointly. That was, that we 'were to be parties to the guarantee, but France was to bear the burden of furnishing the army. But the French Govern ment very naturally said, " We will not enter into any such guarantee ;" and the engagement fell to the ground. I merely mention this to show that while we are told to abstain from taking part in the conference by those who urged and were ready to take part in the congress, when we are warned from entering into embarrassing engagements—those who press that advice upon us were themselves ready to en ter into prospective engagements of a nature which could not have but occasioned embarrass ments whenever they were required to he fulfilled. Our wish is simply the well-being of Italy. We think it is a country deserving offreedom ; it is a country endowed with every gift of nature, and requires but good government to make it one of the happiest countries in the world. The hen. gentleman says the Italians are not like ourselves — that we must not treat Italians as we would treat English men—that we must not expect public opinion can be called forth in Italy as in England. Unfortunately that is too true ; but there is no reason why Italy should not be treated as England —there is no reason why Italians should not be Capable of appreciating the same institutions and attaining to the s ame s t a t e o f h a ppi ness with which Providence has blessed Us ; arid if the great European powers by any ar rangements hich the Governments that m ay be brought intocommunication for that purpose . may devise should b e ena b led to produce such a result, they will deserve the praise o f all who value the peace and happiness of the world. (Hear.) Mr, H. BAILLIE said that the interference of this country in the affairs of other countries had always ter minated disadvantageous ly revolution A Ny tis hic til a a t that had been seen. T h f e or r us e , " : . ul the noble e lo n r d d ed opr isas site tro ( us Lo i r y d fo P r al t m he ers l t w el anhas had excited while we h a d seen an Englishmrn cut down in the streets of Florence, and our relations with Austria became such as to render it almo st im p ossible for En glishmen to travel in that empire. He could not conceive upon what grounds, there f ore , w e should be advised to attend thi s mimes. In his judgment, it would be far better for us to attend to the state of our defences, than to think of entering into some of those eagagements which in past times had led to so much embarrassment. Whilst on that part of the subject, he would take occasion to ask the noble lord whether there was any truth in the rumour that it was in tended to effect a mutual disarmament of the forces of Eng land and France. He had heard with considerable sur prise that the right honourable gentleman the member for Buckinghamshire recommended a mutual disarmament. Disarmament in England and in France meant totally dif ferent things. In France it meant simply this, that the Minister issued an order giving to 100,000 men, who had served only three or four years of their time, their conge, and those men returned to their villages and immediately engaged in agricultural pursuits. But should there be any sudden need of their services, on a new order being issued, they would be forthcoming to a man in the space of ten days. He could hardly suppose that the Government could have consented to reduce our standing army, when with all our efforts we could scarcely bring 35,000 men into the field, or that they would reduce the newly-formed navy. If such arrangements, however, were to be carried out during the recess, he could assure the Government that the people of this country would not give their consent to them, and would take the earliest opportunity of manifest ing its strong disapprobation of such policy. (Hear). Mr. M. MILNES said that if by neutrality was meant that England was to stand by quietly and see foreign Powers dispose of the destinies and interests of continental States at their will and pleasure, he was sure the people of this country would never accept the principle in that sense. There was every reason, moreover, why England should wish to see Italy satisfactorily settled; for the present ar rangement of that country rested very much upon the trea ties of 1815, to which we were parties in a very distinct, and, he feared, a very unfortunate manner. The Emperor of Austria of that day regarded the annexation of Lom bardy to his dominions as a most unfortunate event, and it was only carried out in consequence of the persistance of the other Powers. So far from the loss of Lombardy being a source of weakness to Austria, he believed it woule ren der her a greater, safer, and happier Power. The future fe deration of Italy must depend on the power with which Sardinia entered it. If she entered it alone, she might be overridden by other States, but if she were assisted by the neutral Powers, there was some hope that constitutional principles might prevail in Italy. He quite agreed that the right hon. gentleman the member for Buckinghamshire had used a most inappropriate expression in speaking of the Whig party in Italy, as the Government party included only the ecclesiastical classes; while the Liberal party em braced the middle and higher classes. The Italian people were well versed in politics and diplomacy, and so far main tained their 'ancient reputation for it, that they made the fewest political theories of allmodern nations, and they now awaited the settlement of their country. (Hear.) That peace of Villafranca might be so guided as to produce a lasting benefit to Italy. It was not the business of that house to decide whether her Majesty's Government should enter upon a conference or not. That was a matter of peace or war, and depended solely upon their own responsibility. Their only hope was that the Government would combine the consideration of the question of neutrality with those necessities which attached to them as one of the first na tions of the world. Mr. WHITESIDE was anxious, in consequence of allusions which had been made to a matter in which he had been personally concerned, to offer a few observations to the house. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in a very lumi nous speech, had pointed out the necessity which existed for imposing new burdens on an overtaxed people, and the noble lord at the head of the Government and the noble lord the Foreign Secretary, speaking in succession, had practically refuted the arguments of the right hon. gentle man. The expenditure of the country did not depend on Dover or Galway contracts, which, to borrow a poetical phrase which had been lately used, were only fleabites but on the expense of our armaments, and their nature and ex tent depended our foreign policy, and it was to consider the conditions of that policy that they were invited to-night. He had heard reference made to Greece and Rome, but he was not inclined to go back to the exemplar states of an cient history, or to interfere with the right of the Chancel lor of the Exchequer to dealwith the descendants of Ulysses. He wished to understand that which was the question be fore the house—the condition of foreign affairs. His right hon. friend (Mr. Disraeli) had asked whether the Govern ment had transmitted to our ally, as he was called, the Em peror of Austria, propositions which contained terms diffe rent to those which were embodied in the treaty of Villa franca ? He did not ask whether the Government them selves had of their own motion submitted such a proposition —but whether they had been made the catspaw of some other power which was not named, and which had induced our Government to submit to Austria a paper the contents of which were not stated, and in which it was not stated from what neutral power it came. His right hon. friend was substantially right, and the Government had virtually assented to the terms contained in the paper. Lord PALMERSTON—I beg the right hon. gentleman's pardon. I positively stated that we gave no advice and stated no opinion, and said that we had nothing to do with it. Mr. WHITESIDE—That was no answer to what he had stated. He did not say that the Government had, given any opinion, but he spoke of the fact that the Minister of Eng land, in forwarding a document to Austria, that power would naturally infer that it had their assent. (Hear, hear.) His right hon. friend said that the paper required Austria to give up Venice and the Venetian territories. It was of course in tended that the paper which reached Austria should be known to the Emperor of the French, who would be able to say that from that Austria might see what her allies would do for her, and that she would find in the victorious conqueror in seve ral battles amore merciful diplomatist than her allies. He believed the Emperor of Austria acted upon that paper, and he repeated that the English Minister had been made a cats paw of by some power in an important matter which led to the peace of Villafranca. His right hon. friend had said that the blunder of 1848 had been repeated, and the noble vis count, in that jesting manner in which he treated serious subjects, had answered him (Mr. Whiteside), as he was the person who had originally made the statement, and saidthe charge could no longer be sustained. He ventured to think that the noble viscount would not again repeat what he had said to-night. The noble viscount from the beginning, that is for the last ten years, had pursued one consistent policy, and that was to extirpate the power of Austria from Italy. That was the principle always maintained by him, although the noble lord within the last few days had said that " no one he ever heard of meant to deprive Austria of her terri tories in Lombardy or Venice, which had been awarded to her by the treaty of 1815." The noble lord spoke thus at Tiverton, and he (Mr. Whiteside) had had the pleasure of purchasing the revised edition of the noble lord's address at a railway station. The hon. gentleman who had just sat down had truly said that which no one knew better than the noble lord, that in 1815 Austria did not desire to have Lombardy, but the great Powers obliged her to take it, in order that the French might be driven out of Italy. Austria by a solemn treaty obtained Lombardy, and she was our ancient ally. He admitted that the Austrian rule in Italy was what M. d'Azeglio called the government of the stranger. Many of the minor states of Italy were inclined to join themselves to Austria on account of the mode in which justice was administered between man and man in her dominions, which was not the case in many of these states. But her government was that of the stranger, and it was, therefore, not popular. In 1848 disturbances broke out. He admitted that at that time Austria was in trouble. He would take as his authorities, one statesman, one historian, and one emperor ; the statesman was the right hon. gentle man the member for Carlisle ; the historian Sir Archibald Alison; and the emperor was the Emperor of the French. They all saw the policy of the noble viscount ; and it ap peared that the noble lord must have forgotten what he wrote and did. Who was our ambassador at Vienna in 1848? Lord Ponsonby ; and he supposed the veracity of that noble lord would not be denied. What was the condition of France ? She had been through one of those usual revolu tions which were the blessings of that country. He believed that Cavaignac was then up, and was occupied in fighting for the existence of society against republicanism and so cialism. What was the :condition of Austria? She was looking to the noble viscount, and believing that in him she had a faithful friend. What was the condition of Sardinia ? Much what it was now—looking out for what she could ge t —(laughter)—and looking for a pretext on which she could seize her neighbour's property. Lombardy, he ad mitted, had thrown off the yoke of Austria, and had what was called in the language of revolutions a provisional government. In 1848 that provisional government wrote to the noble lord asking what they were to do with regard to Austria, and he having commuhicated with Lord Pon sonby that noble lord stated to him the substance of a conversation which he had with an important personage at Vienna, in which he said : "The fate of Italy is in the hands of England ; you are at pre sent the sole power who has influence there ; it is the greater because it is single. The easy overthrow of Louis Philippe, the establishrhent of a republic in France, have produced a real panic ; but while admitting your power, which you certainly have no right to complain of our doing, allow me at the same time to assign to you the responsibility of events, at least as regards ourselves." Lord Ponsonby referred the noble lord to what had led to the outbreak. He said, "What the Piedmontese have done is an intervention in the Austrian territories, for the purpose of giving support to rebels against the Austrian i legal authority. It is n contradiction to the recognised principle of non-intervention, for there is no act even as serted bythe Piedmontese to have been done bythe Austrians injurious to any Piedmontese interests, or dangerous to the Sardinian King's rights or territories. Vague reports circulated by the Sardinians themselves, of designs enter tained by:the Austrians to attack Piedmont, which reports have proved to be unfounded, are not justifications for real attackaupon a neighbour." That was the opinion of Lord Ponsonby. It was true that Baron Hummelauer had visited this country; but before he did so the noble lord had received all necessary information from Lord Ponsonby. He (Mr. Whiteside) did not know if the royal word of the ruler of Austria was to be believed, but he fount that Lord Ponsonby, in the most distinct manner, informed the noble lord as follows':—" That the Archduke John had said that the Lombards might have the absolute disposal of their fate —they might have Charles Albert for their King and their own form of Government." Mark the line of the Adige, not the line of the Mincio. Lord Pensonby said further : —" It was necessary to protect Trieste, and the Arch duke authorised him to state this, and he was of opinion that the Archduke was right in saying that unless the line of the Adige was preserved it would lead to a contest in Italy. Lombardy, by the retreat of the Austrians, was able to complete the course taken by the Modenese. As to the proposition withregard to Venice, there was no strong feeling against the proposed arrangement." The next day Lord Ponsonby wrote a letter to the noble lord, having forgotten to state what had been stated with regard to Venice, and he said "I neglected to say that, sup posing Venice was to continue under the rule of Austria, she would be governed under a free constitution." What followed ? The noble lord, in the multiplicity of his occu pations, forgot that all this had been describ"Ed by the his torian. The noble lord said that what Baron Hummelauer offered was, that Lombardy should remain under an Aus trian archduke. After what he had read was such a pro position surprising ? Baron Hummelauer arrived, and en • tered into communication with the noble lord, and having stated his proposition in conversation, no doubt the noble lord desired him to put the proposition in writing, which was to be submitted to the noble lord, and by the noble lord to be submitted to the cabinet of which he was a distin guished member. He accordingly did so, and he stated shortly what he wished ; and what the noble lord now said with reference to the archduke was a mistake, for what was said was this. The document was dated the 24th of May, and it stated that Lombitrdy was to be independent, was to be allowed to choose her own government, to be united with Piedmont if she liked. He (Mr. Whiteside) admitted that, as regarded Venice, he made the same proposition as was stated by Lord Ponsonby; that it s connex i on w ith Trieste m ade it impossible that it should be made independent, but that it should have a free constitution, under the govern ment of an archduke —should have a national army, and a representative at Vienna who should represent its interests. The noble lord took from the 24th of May to the 3d of June to consider the matter. The date of the 3d of June was im portant in reference to the provisional government at Milan. On the 3d June the noble lord wrote a despatch, which was very creditable to him, in which he stated that according to the treaty of 1815 he had not . a word to say with regard to the offer as to Lombardy, which was m ay satisfactory) THE SUN, LO/ 4 1D014, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 49, 1859. and in reference to that he was ready to mediate, but, as regarded Venice, which was in possession of those who demurred to shake off the power of Austria, it would not be possible to get them to agree to the terms proposed, and unless the same terms were given as regarded Venice as were granted to Lombardy he would not mediate. To this the Austrian plenipotentiary replied that he would not do so, he had no authority to that extent. The noble lord perverted what was said by Baron Hummelauer, and sup posed him to say he had no authority to treat as regarded Lombardy, whereas it was only as regarded the latter part of the proposition that he stated that he had no authority. He (Mr. Whiteside) admitted that the noble lord was right when he said that the provisional government at Milan would refuse to accept that proposition. The date of the letter of the noble lord was the 3d of June, and the refusal of the provisional government at Milan was on the 18th. He (Mr. Whiteside) believed that the noble lord communi cated to that government or their agent in this country the refusal of England to accept the terms proposed, and he admitted that when the Austrian Government sent a simi lar proposition to the provisional government at Milan, it met with the same result. Austria was willing to give up Lombardy, but you would not have it, and she offered a free constitution to Venice, but you would not have it. There was a very curious paper in connection with this subject. Mr. Abercromby was then our Minister at Sar dinia, and the noble lord acquainted him with all that he (Mr. Whiteside) had stated. On the 10th of July, before the battle was fought which changed the whole aspect of the contest, Mr. Abercromby wrote to the noble viscount, stating that it had just been confidentially communicated to him that the King of Sardinia would accept propositions which gave the Adige for the eastern frontier of his king dom, and which recognised the annexation of.Lsmbardy, Parma, and Modena to it. Charles Albert's language was, that "should the Austrian Government make direct to him anf propositions for peace based on such a territorial ar rangement as above described, or should they be offered him by her Majesty's Government as mediator, he would not hesitate to aeoept them." The King of Sardinia, then, desired these views of his to be confidentially communicated to her Majesty's Government, and it was added that " a peace concluded upon these terms, giving nothing but Lombardy and the line of the Adige, would, considering the relative powers of Austria and Sardinia, be both honourable and glorious for Sardinia." That would have been a peace asking nothing with regard to Venice. Sar dinia would have been satisfied with Lombardy, and Lom bardy was what Austria was willing to give, but the noble viscount would not mediate on the terms proposed. On the 28th of July the noble viscount wrote to Mr. Abercrombyp instructing him to send an attache to the camp, where King Charles Albert then was, to ascertain how things were going on. He wanted, in fact, to be informed whether Sardinia had a chance of beating Austria, and, if so, he would have been ready to fall on our old ally in the moment of her distress, and extort from her what she had been willing to give. (Hear, hear.) At a later period there was a conversation between the noble viscount and Count Revel, the Sardinian Minister, in which said the noble viscount, "I told Count Revel that her Majesty's Minister at Turin bad informed me that he had at one time reason to believe that the Sardinian Government would have been disposed to negotiate on the basis of the Adige, but from subsequent events it would not be satisfied with less than the line of the Piave," which would have included Venice. The noble viscount added, in his own account of this interview, given in a letter to Lord Ponsonby at Vienna, that he (Lord Palmerston) then expressed his opinion that Sardinia was in a good position, and should the war continue with suc cess, the basis of the settlement should be the line of the Piave. When the noble viscount told Lord Ponsonby of this, Lord Ponsonby replied, " You seek the unattainable, and the attainable you will not accept." (Hear, hear.) Lord Ponsonby at Vienna knew that those terms, involv ing the cession of Venice, would never be agreed to. Two or three days after the battle of Custoza was fought, which changed the whole character of the campaign. The noble viscount then wrote to Lord Ponsonby to say that he was now willing to take the terms which Austria had offered before ; but Lord Ponsonby replied, "My Lord, the Aus trian army has signed a round robin against giving up even Lombardy." Thus the noble viscount, having at one time, as he was told by Count Ficquelmont, by Lord Ponsonby, and by Baron Hummelauer, an opportunity of liberating the whole of Italy, but reserving Venice to Austria with a free constitution, did nothing. It ,was therefore that when the Emperor of Austria, a few days ago, had a document presented to him by the noble lord, by which he was called upon to give up I/ enice, he was advised rather to make peace with his generous enemy who would give him better terms than his pretended friend. The noble lord had thus repeated pre cisely the same policy as he pursued ten years ago. Now he (Mr. Whiteside) would quote the testimony of the right hon. gentleman the member for Carlisle. That statesman had said, " I deeply lament the refusal of the noble lord to accept that settlement proposed by Austria. That caused the in surrection to proceed in Italy, and to break out in Hungary ; that caused the interposition of Russia in the affairs of Austria." An eminent historian, Sir Archibald Alison, went further, and said that the noble viscount's policy led, in the logical sequence of events, to Russia counting on the sup port of Austria, as one despotic power who had done a good turn to another, and that so Russia was emboldened to make an inroad on the Turkish empire. He might have remarked in addition, that Austria not having given Russia the aid which she expected in the Eastern quarrel, Russia, smart ing under that ingratitude, had lately made some agree ment, as was believed, with the Emperor of the French against Austria. The last authority he (Mr. Whiteside) would quote, was that of an Emperor, who was also an author. In the celebrated pamphlet, "Napoleon 111. and Italy," written, as he believed, by the Emperor of the French himself, and published just before the late war broke out, reference was made to the course pursued by the noble viscount in 1848. The Emperor of the French, in that pamphlet, praised the noble viscount's objects, which were to get rid of the domination of Austria in Italy, and to esta blish, not the revolutionary, but the national element there. After alluding to Lord Minto's mission as having been carried in that noble lord's ardour somewhat too far, the imperial author of this pamphlet quoted a despatch of Lord Palmerson to Lord Ponsonby, on the 9th October, 1848, in which the noble viscount observed that "it would be more prudent, and more useful to the Austrian empire, for Austria to stt the Italian population free from a yoke which could not be maintained except by a great display of force. and at considerable cost," and the noble viscount added, that otherwise he foresaw that "foreign aid would be im plored and granted." Those were the verywords of the noble viscount, and the Emperor of the French had now brought in that foreign aid, as he had carried into execution every thing else set forth in his pamphlet before the war. But the Emperor observed in his pamphlet, speaking of the events of 1848, that " Thre was a moment for the future of Italian nationality. Austria proposed the independence of Lombardy and a separate government for Venetia, on the sole condition of her suzerainty. Those proposals were carried direct to London; they were only known in France. It was then believed in England that Italy might obtain better terms, and the English Cabinet did not use their great and legitimate authority to obtain these terms." Now he (Mr. Whiteside) would give the noble viscount credit for the singleness of purpose with which he had always pursued his object of getting rid of the Austrian domina tion in Italy. The noble viscount had shown his sincere desire to accomplish that favourite object of his by attack ing dukes, kings, emperors, and popes. (A laugh,) The house had heard him that night pouring out ridicule on the unfortunate Pope, and the noble lord the member for the City of London did the same. Now, the Papal Government was not a good government, and he (Mr. Whiteside) did not admire it himself. But what would the city of Rome be without the popes ? Why, Rome without them would have been a mass of rubbish ; for he believed the popes had re paired the aqueducts and restored some of the monuments of ancient Rome. If the Pope's temporal authority were to be taken away, what substitute would be provided ? What was to be done now with the peace we had before us ? After listening to both the noble lords, he thought we had a curi ous prospect before us if they would meddle with it. The noble lord the member for the City of London said, " The first part of the treaty of peace I approve of." Well, he (Mr. Whiteside) was glad, so far, that the noble lord was willing Lombardy should share the fortunes of Sardinia. All the members of that house, he was sure, were equally willing that it should be so. (Cheers.) They would all re joice to see a powerful free state erected in the north of Italy, though they could not approve of the means by which that object had been attained. But the noble lord, admitting that, said the rest of the articles of the treaty were full of difficulties or impossibilities. So here was an entire treaty of peace, signed between two Powers who had fought a bloody fight, and the noble lord was determined not to allow them to make that peace ; for if his principles were to be carried out, this treaty could not be brought to a conclusion. The noble lord said he would take the part which he approved of, and agree to go into a conference if they would alter the part which he disapproved of. If they would not agree to do so, then he (Mr. 'Whiteside) presumed the war of indepen dence would recommence, so that if we set aside this ti eaty we could not tell what would be the result. He would be a most unwise minister who would go into a congress to dis cuss a treaty which he had already so unequivocally con. demiled. The noble viscount had said it was impossible to forin a federal union of the States of Italy. If that were the case, then the whole treaty was impossible, and could not be carried out. Then we ought not to meddle with it, and England ought not to be complicated in arrangements which it was alleged would prove no better than a hollow truce, when we had not thought fit to interfere with the late sanguinary war. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord asked how it was possible that the Italian states could ever agree. He said that the Pope would, of course, be for catholicity, and Sardinia for religious toleration ; and so nothing would come of the proposed confederation. But the noble lord's argument was founded in mistake. Lord Bacon stated even in his time that the Swiss confederation was built upon utility—that was to say, they were held together by the necessity of mutual defence. (Hear, hear.) The Ro man Catholic cantons were very strict in favour of their re ligion, and the Protestant not less strict in favour of theirs. They had often had disputes, and they had even come in con flict ; but they had nevertheless maintained their confedera tion in a manner that made them respected even "in the midst of greater Powers. (Hear, hear.) The noble vis count's argument was, therefore, false ; but, in truth, his whole speech was nothing but a ridicule of the whole plan. It was said that Lord Malmesbury had been a party to ne gotiations, but those negotiations were of a very different character. He had been a party to them from the first, and when a proposition was made that there should be a congress in order to prevent the shedding of blood, Lord Malmesbury at once assented to it, but at the same time he stated with the utmost distinctness what should be the propositions sub - mitted to that congress The noble lord might has , e better alluded to the protocols of Paris in 1856. He did not think the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself would be very hopeful of a congress, judging from the experience they had had of the protocols of Paris. He (Mr, Whiteside) had once had the good fortune to suggest to the right hon. gentleman a topic on which he had addressed the house with his usual eloquence and power, proving that the protocols trenched on topics with u hich they had no right. The right hon. gen tleman clearly proved - that the manner in which Lord Cla rendon had dealt with Belgium and the liberty of its press was quite unjustifiable. (Che'ars.) Lord Clarendon made a proposition that no power should go to war without first appealing to the friendly mediation of another power; but the very party which had brought on the late war had done so against the remonstrance of England, the principal party to the Congress of Paris. (Hear.) The proposed congress, therefore, did not give them much encouragement for the future. (Hear.) It would be wise and politic it this country which had no hand in making war, should also decline any share in making peace. She would then be free to take any course which her own dignity or interests might dictate, and she would also escape from those complications which Might hereafter ensue. (Cheers.) Mr. DRUMMOND thought that only scrimp jus'i9e had been done to Sardinia in the present debate, which he thought had not gone t o the root of the matter. He wished, therefore, to refer to a f e w facts to enable the house to arrive at a just conclusion. It was well known that Sar dinia was the only country that had attained to constitu tional government without revolution and without carnage. (Hear.) He thought that such a country deserved some consideration in a house which professed to have some ad miration for a constitutional Government, and which knew something of the dangers that had followed the attempt to attain it in France, Hungary, and other countri es, Hon. members should not, he thought, be so exceedingly anxious to find out little faults in the conduct of statesmen unused to the difficult position they held. It was essential to the establishment of freedom that the ecclesiastical power : should be subject to the civil. (Cheers.) Without that it was a delusion to talk of their liberty. Their liberty was a sham. They had no liberty while they were slaves of the priests. There were those in that house who could re member, as he could, the return of Louis XVIII. to France, where he found a priest who had been convicted of cutting his mistress into twenty pieces. (A laugh.) : An hon. member laughed ; he appeared to think : that a good joke, and that was the way some persons treated ecclesiastical delinquencies. (Hear, hear.) It was seven or eight years before the French Monarch, with all his power, dared to execute a righteous judgment on that priest. (Hear, hear.) No sooner had Sardinia subjected the priesthood to the civil power, by making them amenable to the same laws as civilians, than every member of the As sembly who sanctioned that change was excommunicated, and remained excommunicated to this day, and the author of it died without receiving the sacraments of the church. (Hear.) To Protestants those things might 'appear very trivial, perhaps ridiculous ; but Roman Catholics were aware of the dread with which their co-religionists in that country regarded exclusion from the privileges of the Church. About that time a Jesuit Confessor of the mother of the present Emperor of Austria got about him and made' him vow that if he lived to govern he would restore the rights of the Church in Austria by a Concordat. The words embodying that vow conveyed a lie. That Concor dat gave to Austria a position which no part of Germany ever had before—complete subjection to the Council of Trent. By it the whole of the youth in that country were placed exclusively in Jesuit schools. Not a single Protes tant in Bohemia or inlany of the Danubian provinces could be received into the civil service of the country without a certificate that he had been educated in some one of those Jesuit schools ; and as Protestants refused to send their sons to be taught there they were practically excluded from the civil service. Those Jesuit priests fomented the re bellion in Lombardy, and the Pope backed them. He (Mr. Drummond) eontended that it was impossible to keep that country free unless some decisive steps were taken to control the power of the church. (Hear ) It was not a mere question of territorial aggrandisement. From the year 1848 the ecclesiastical power had put forth an in fluence throughout Europe which it had not before dared to do since the French Revolution. There was not a single State in which they had not done it. He was uet finding fault with the Pope for that. His (the Pope's) declaration the other day was manly and honourable—namely, that it was his duty rather to deny than forego his principles; but he (Mr. Drummond) said those principles were incom patible with the freedom of that country. (Cheers.) About that time the Bishop of Mayence excited the whole of the priests of Baden to rebel against the Grand Duke. He imprisoned many of them, but to little purpose; and at last things came to such a pass that he was obliged to appeal to • the Pope. Again, in the Rhenish provinces tho priests claimed the right of searching every house and seizing books obnoxious to their creed, as well as newspapers of every kind. Look also at France. When the Emperor prosecuted M. Montalombert for writing and publishing a panegyric on England he let all the rest who were in the habit of abusing England go free. (Hear, hear.) He encouraged the one, and depressed the other ; and the Univers had declared over and over again that the existence of Protestant England was incompatible with the improvement of the human race. Again, M. Co querelle, a well-known Protestant clergyman in Paris, had been silenced—or at least ordered to take care that in his sermons he said nothing offensive to Popery. At various other places the use of the Holy Scriptures had been entirely forbidden, on the ground, as was alleged, that they were opposed to the religion of the majority. {No, no, from Mr. Bowyer.] The hon. member had better be cautious. (A laugh.) He had better read the last Pope's Encyclical letter to Poland, in which Roman Catholics were expressly forbidden to read the sacred Scriptures. (Hear.) Either he (Mr. Drummond) had told a falsehood on that subject, or somebody else had. He held in his hand the Pope's letter, which said, " It is unnecessary to remind you how repeatedly the Church, by the mouth of the Roman Pontiff, has forbidden her children to read the Bible in any vulgar tongue whatever. [Mr.. Bowyer—There is something else besides that.] "His Holiness Pope Clement VIII. has, moreover, declared that no bishop whatever is at liberty to permit Bibles of the above description to be kept or read." It was notorious that, out of that house, there was scarcely a man to be found to deny that that was the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. (Hear.) Again, there was the childstealing—which they had all heard was going on almost everywhere. (A laugh.) It was practised in Ireland the other day. The truth was that the power of the Papacy, which was now growing at a greater rate than it had done for many • years past, was incompatible with freedom. (Hear.) If the Roman Catholic laity were to be emanci pated from that ecclesiastical slavery they must do it for themselves. This he knew, that England, as a Protestant country, cauld not meddle with any good effect. Now, as this must be the main business of the congress, Eng land, as a Protestant country, ought to keep out of it, be cause she could do no good. There were fidgets on all sub jects. There were private fidgets, county fidgets, and poli-. tical fidgets, and there was on the part of many people to do what sailors called "shove in their oar where there was no water." (A laugh.) It was a very dangerous thing for us to meddle in the settlement of a question which was essen tially religious, with which we could have no legitimate concern, which must produce irritation, and in which our views could never be fairly listened to, and this, he thought was an additional reason why, he did not mean that the Go vernment should have its hands tied by any resolution in that house, but why it was not good policy for us to inter fere in this congress. (Hear, hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER agreed with the hon. gentleman who last addressed the house, that the debate had not exhauited all the subjects of varied inte rest which it suggested. He was glad that the case of Sar dinia had been so fully considered and gone into. He was not speaking of the foreign policy of Sardinia, but with re spect to the internal government of that country there had not been one word too much said, The difficulties with which Sardinia was surrounded were enormous. Onthe one side there was the principle of absolutism, and on the other side - there was the principle of revolution. In matters eccle siastical there was the absolute dominion of the Pope on the one side, and the principle of religion on the other side. Still Sardinia steered her course with sagacity and success, and her conduct claimed the gratitude of every lover of order and liberty. (Hear, hear.) Having said so much with regard to Sardinia, he desired to follow the speech of the right hon. gentleman the member for the University of Dublin (Mr. Whiteside). It was not, for the first time, that the right hon. gentleman went into th e hi s t or y of 1848. He referred to documents,, he made ample quotations, he dwelt emphatically upon, and judging by the cheers which proceeded from the gentlemen behind him, there was ample demonstration of the fact, that his statement had been re ceived with gratification. (Hear.) Now he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not in the slightest degree intend to question anything but the accuracy of the right hon. gentle man, and he hoped that the valuable time of the house which had already been so largely occupied with this subject, would not be again taken up with its consideration. The right hon. gentleman, among other accusations which he brought against the noble viscount at the head of the Govern ment, made rather a good humoured accusation. He stated that his noble friend had made game of the Pope. (Hear, hear.) Now he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer), when he heard that statement, could not help remembering a memorable sentence uttered by ',the right hon. gentleman in a speech which he delivered on the sub ject of the College of Maynooth, a sentence redolent of the humour of the right hon. gentleman's nation and of his own good humour. (Laughter.) Addressinghis Roman Catholic fellow-subjects he said, " I assure my Roman Catholic fel low-subjects, that with respect even to the Pope I wish him nothing worse than a Parliament like the Parliament of Piedmont to keep the infallible man from going wrong every day of his life." (Laughter.) When the right hon. gentle man made such statements, he ought to administer, with commendable mercy, his punishment on those who happen to disapprove of the Government of the Pope. •(Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman had, unintentionally no doubt, but most entirely and completely misrepresented the case of 1848, on which he so liked to dwell. The right hon. gentleman said that in the month of May, 1848, Austria offered to the British Government, that if the British Go vernment interfered to restore peace, Lombardy should be rendered independent, and Venice should have a free con stitution; and the right hon. gentleman added, that at that period his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) right hon. friend the Secretary of State, had received a letter, or had the means of knowing, that Sardinia would be satisfied with that arrangement. The right hon. gentleman's accusation against the noble lords (Palmerston and Lord J. Russdll) was that in 1848 they had neglected the golden opportunity, and postponed the settlement of the Italian question, and that having done so once one year they would do the like again. Now, did the noble lords act as had been suggested ? Was it the fact that they so acted ? The right hon. gentle man's statement was grossly and entirely untrue. There was no such offer from Austria, but a document was received from Baron Hummelauer expressing his own individual opinion with reference to Lombardy and Venice. On the 23d May, 1848, Baron Hummelaur sent to the Foreign Sec retary a document stating that while the Lombardo-Vene tian kingdom was to continue under the sovereignty of Aus tria it should have what might be called a free constitution. That was the proposition of the Austrian Government. It made no distinction between Lombardy and Venice. It did not sepa:re - te Austria from anything at all. But said the hon. gentleman, " I did not quote the letter of May 23—1 quoted the letter of May 24." But was it likely that Baron Huntmelauer having made a proposition on the 23d, would on the 24th make a proposition diametrically opposite ? There was unfortunately no written answer to that paper of the 23d of May ; but there was an answer written on .the 24th of May which showed truthfully what occurred,, and it appeared from that that the noble lord, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, had represented to Baron Hum_ melauer that the terms submitted in that paper were not satisfactory, and it further appeared that Baron Humme lituer drew up a fresh paper, in which his noble friend and that distinguished diplomatist agreed. (Hear.) That do cument was dated the 24th of May, and by its terms it was arranged that Lombardy should be freed altogether from Austria--(hear, hear, and cheers)—and that the Venetian State was to be a free State under a new constitution. (Cheers.) The right hon. gentleman opposite, then, was not correct in his representation. Mr. WHITESIDE explained. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—The right hon. gentleman said there mut have been an official communication from Austria. Then the right hon. gentle man must have road the covering letter. Now he would read, if not the whole, at least an abstract of the covering letter—" Your lordships may rest assured that the Impe rial Government (meaning France) entertains precisely as the Government of the Queen, and as those of the Council (meaning the Cabinet Council.) I shall returnimmediately to Vienna, and urge the expediency of those terms being accepted." (Hear, hear, and cheers.) So, then, it is evi dent that the right hon. gentleman had fallen into a great error in believing that that was a proposal from Austria which was no proposal at all. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman said it was an Austrian proposal. Mr. WHITESIDE—I said it was submitted by the noble viscount as the proposal of the Austrian Government to Sardinia. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—If that be so, it was a gross error to send it at all. The right hon. gentleman was entirely mistaken. The right hon. gentleman said that that proposal was acceptable to Sar dinia. Now, what were the opinions and declarations of Sar dinia on the 24th of May ? Why, he had here t wo l e tt ers on the subject, both of them received on the 24th of May. The first letter declared that Austria must evacuate Italy (hear, hear, and cheers) —and the second said that no nego tiations could be entered into except on the complete eva cuation of Lombardy by Austria. (Hear, hear.) His hon. friend the member for Dundalk also objected to the British Government going into a congress. Now, with respect to the hon. member for Dundalk, he confessed ho did no t s h are his fears ; but he thought his hon. f r i en d' s f ears rea ll y were, that by some possibility !,ha British Government, if they went in to the congress, might be able to do some good there. (Laughter.) He hoped that ueither the Government nor the Howe of Commons would be bound by any terms that they did not approve of in the congress. Who knew- 3 at least he did not know—that Austria was a finally consent-; ing or dissenting party to a congress ? Who could even sayj that Austria had aszed for a congress? He did not dispute the temporal power of the Pope ; but he protested against the doctrine that this was a religious question. (Hear, hear.) It was not a religious question, but it was a great social ques tion. And was it to be said that England, who assisted in reinstating the Pope in his dominions in former years, was: not now to interfere in this question. (Hear, hear.) His: right hon. friend (Mr. Disraeli) said there were but two parties in Italy, and he had twitted her Majesty's Govern-' went with introducing their " Whig" notions into the of--j fairs of Italy—(laughter)—but he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) supposed that his righthon. friend apprehended that the Whigs were disposed to give them some share of constitutional freedom. (Laughter.) It was not true that there were but two parties in Italy. There were other par- , ties there. He would not cast ridicule and scorn upon any party who were prepared to rally for the freedom of Italy. ; It was not right to indiCate to the friends of moderate opi nions in Italy that they were to be abandoned by the Powers of Europe, and that the Italians were to be crushed between the Powers of absolutism on the one hand and the revolutionary party on the other. (Cheers.) The member for the University of Dublin and the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) had differed as to the manner in which the provisions of the treaties were to be carrried out. The former said "Do not touch the treaties." The latter, while denouncing the congress in terms equally strong, took a different view of the treaties, and observed that it was by gross mismanagement on the part of the Govern ment that they had missed and failed. He said, "If you had been clever enough, or if we had been in your place, we would have settled everything satisfactorily. (Laughter.) The right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) said, " Why did you not endeavour to get credit for obtaining large and liberal terms for Italy ?" On that point he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was bound to say that the Government were not anxious to compete with the right hon. gentle man. If he wished to obtain that credit, it would be a dip lomatic mission on which they would have no reason what soever to congratulate themselves. (Laughter.) He (Mr. Gladstone) entertained the strongest conviction that the House of Commons would not interpose between the execu tive Government—(cheers)—by calling on them to accept any declaration whatever which should preclude the exer cise of its discretion in regard to the measures that might be most prudent for them to adopt in giving to the peace that form which should be most favourable and less dan gerous to the future fortunes and permanent tranquillity of Italy. (Cheers.) Mr. MAGUIRE said the Government of the Pope in 1847 would have worked well had it not been for Mazzini and the revolutionary party. During the last few*years the Pope had been fully occupied in making material re forms, and he made• that assertion with all the responsi bility of a member of Parliament. The Pope had taken up £7,000,000 of bad money which had been bequeathed him by the revolutionary party, and had now established in his States one of the best currencies to be found in Europe. The revolutionary party had been convicted of the grossest atrocities on the evidence of Englishmen, and that was the party which the noble lords opposite were too ready to support on all occasions. It had been said that the prisons of the Papal States were filled with poli tical prisoners ; but that he quite denied, for in October last there were only seventy-two such prisoners. But be sides all this, the manufactures of the States were improv ing, and recently—and he heartily wished the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer could say the same—after paying off all debts, there was a balance in the exchequer. It was a small one, and the first there had been for a period of 30 years, for the heads of the Whig party were always too ready to lend assistance to the revo lutionary party, and then everything retrograded. As re garded education, he could assert i that there were now in Rome 23,000 pupils receiving a free education, and that 3,000 other pupils were taught at night schools. Nothing, in fact, could exceed the zeal of the Holy Father in effect ing social reforms. But let the Government guard against farther meddling in these affairs, which only made matters worse abroad, and had already damaged, irretrievably,their, own reputation as statesmen ; for, throughout Italy, the name of the noble lord the member for London was detested, and that of the noble lord the member for Tiverton ab horred. After a few words from Mr. P. URQUHART, Lord C. HAMILTON contended that the charge made against the noble lord the member for Tiverton was, that he did not in May, 1848, accept the terms from Austria in f ,vour of Lombardy, which were far better than those now granted by Austria in respect to that country. That was the charge made by his right hon. and learned friend (Mr. Whiteside) against the noble lord the member for Tiverton, and it had not been answered by his right hon. friend (Mr. Gladstone.) Now, what were the facts ? Why, that on the 23d May, 1848, Austria proposed that Lombardy should be separated from Austria. with a condition that she should . . either be an independent kingdom, or joined to Sardinia upon her paying a fair prbportion of the debt for which she was liable to Austria. The noble lord, the member for Tiverton, on the 12th June, 1848, and on the 17th of June, and even down to July, refused to accede to the terms, and would hear of nothing, unless Venetia was also made a separate kingdom. But, when Marshal Radetzky menaced Sardinia, and sustained the power of Austria against that country, the noble lord , on the 7th of August, 1848, wrote to Lord Normanby, and said that her Majesty's Govern ment, wishing to put an end to the state of things which existed in the North of Italy, would accede to the terms proposed by Baron Hummelauer, in May, in reference to Lombardy. But, Austria being successful, paid no atten tion to the despatch of the noble lord. These facts ap peared in the blue books which treated upon the question. Lord J. RUSSELL said the noble lord who had just ad dressed the house seemed to think that what he had just read diminished the force of the statement made by his right hon. friend (Mr. Gladstone), in reference to the, question under consideration. But the fact was, that what his right hon. friend stilted remained just in the same position in which it was. (Hear, and a laugh.) The proposition of the Austrian Government was stated on the 23d of May in the proposition of Baron Hummelauer, and at a subsequent date, according to the documents to which the noble lord had referred, his (Lord J. Russell's) noble friend (Loth' Palmerston) referred to the memorandum of the 23d of May. That was in perfect consistency with what had been stated by his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The noble lord seems to hav,e forgotten that the first ques tion is, whether the proposition is that of the Austrian Go vernment, or one which Baron Hummelauer had taken upon himself to propose. In reply to the hon. gentleman the mem ber for Dundalk, his lordship stated that, so far from Lord Minto having endeavoured to inflame the passions of the ex treme revolutionary party in Italy, with the view of over coming the constitutional party, his efforts were directed to exactly the opposite object, and the effect of his endeavours was precisely the reverse of that which the hon. gentleman had stated. Lord Minto's mission was to prevent revolu tion—to induce the Government to make wholesome re forms—to induce the leaders of the Liberal party to be satisfied with such reforms as could be made, and to re strain those parties who were bearing on to revolution. In that mission Lord Minto would have succeeded but for the Revolution of February, 1848, which broke out in France, and gave the republicans throughout Europe an impulse and a strength •of which it was impossible for Italy to escape the influence. Lord Minto did not even counsel the establishment of a representative assembly in Rome, as he thought it might not be conducted with moderation. The person who introduced representative assemblies, and granted a constitution, was the King of Naples. (Hear.) He did not know how it happened that the hon. gentlem an had two political creeds. Yet he set down the proposer of any reform in Italy as a friend of anarchy, as if no reform was consistent with moderation. If the Italian Go vernments were so excellent, why was it necessary that there should always be a French garrison at Rome and an Austrian force at Bologna ? (Hear.) It certainly seemed strange that so good a Government could not carry out its ,paternal designs for the benefit of its subjects without hav ing foreign troops to force it down the throats of the people. (Hear.) If the hon. gentleman were a Tory he could un derstand his taking such a position, but when the hon. gen tleman spoke on domestic affairs he said nothing about re presentative assemblies producing revolution. (Hear.) Mr. MAGUIRE—I never said anything of the kind, neither do I believe it. (Hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL said the hon. gentleman must be aware that these foreign troops in Italy had been used for the purpose, not of supporting, but of preventing represen tative institutions, which the people desired. (Hear.) Now the people were forming governments themselves, and mak ing elections by themselves, as they would have done ten years ago had they not been prevented by French and Aus trian troops. (Hear.) The hon. and learned gentlemen the late Attorney General said that if his (Lord T. Russell's) advice should be taken it would renew the war. But he (Lord J. Russell) thought the people of Italy ought to be allowed to form governments for themselves. He was quite willing to let them do so without giving them any advice. (Hear.) They might fall into some errors, and there might, and probably would be, popular outbreaks, but if the people of Italy were left to themselves, in no very long time they would form sound popular institutions, and order would be as well kept 'as in any other country in Europe. That was his (Lora J. Russell's) opinion. He did not want to advise those Governments, but when other foreign Govern ments did interfere--when they told them that the removal of the foreign troops would be the signal for a massacre— he said that when such advice was given them on the one hand, than ho was prepared to advise them on the other. (Cheers.) He thought that a renewal of the war would be much more likely to result from the return than from the withdrawal of the foreign troops. (Hear.) The Italians were better able to form their own governments than England, France, or Austria were able to form them for them. At Bologna there had been a revolution, the foreign troops had been withdrawn, the Papal Government had been overthrown, and yet be had not heard of any attack upon either life or property, (Cheers.) At Florence, the Grand Duke went away, abdicating his functions, but what disorder, or pillage, or massacre had taken place ? (Hear, hear.) In Sardinia the King had fostered free in stitutions, liberty of worship, and liberty of the Press, and he believed that the other countries of Italy, if left to themselves, would establish similar institutions, and then there would be an end of these wars on their behalf. (Cheers.) After a few words from Lord LOVAINE, Mr.' A. KINNAIRD, in reply to the member for Dun dalk, who had accused him of being the representative of Exeter Hall principles, said that he was not afraid to ad vocate in that house the principles which he advocated elsewhere, and the hon. gentleman, instead of finding fault with him for it, ought to respect him all the more for his openness. (Cheers.) He always advocated his opinions openly and honestly, and he hoped in a friendly spirit. (Cheers.) The subject then dropped, PUBLIC BUSINESS. Mr. DISRAELI said it would be for the convenience of the house if the Government would state the probable course of public business. It was understood that on Monday the subject referred to in the course of the unex pected debate to-night would again be brought forward, while the Indian budget was fixed for the same evening. Now, the house would like to know what business would really be proceeded with. He did not think the subject of this evening had been sufficiently discussed (hear) • and it would be well if the opinion of the house could 'be pro nounced upon it ; in which case delay was very much to be deprecated. (Hear.) • Lord PALMERSTON could not, of course, answer for his noble friend (Lord Elcho), who was not now in his place, but the Government proposed to take the Income tax Bill in committee to-morrow (this day), and the Secre tary of State for India hoped that the noble lord would not stand in his way on Monday. (" Oh 1") It was very im portant that the Indian financial statement should be mad e at once. (Hear, hear.) Mr, DISRAELI was afraid that he had not made his meaning sufficiently clear. He thought he did not misin terpret the opinion of the house when he said that a dis cussion ought to take place on the motion of the noble lord (Elcho). Now, if there w as t o b e a discAsion on that question, it would be convenient that it should take place on Monday ; but then there ought to be a distinct under standing. The house ought not to be left in doubt whe- ther or not it would be called upon for an opinion on that subject. (Hear, hear.) Mr. ROEBUCK believed that the noble lord the mem ber for Haddingtonshire intended to bring on the discus sion on going into committee of supply; and it would not then be in the power of the Government to prevent that discussion. Mr. Alderman SALOMONS hoped that the Indian budget would be brought forward on Monday, as it was generally expected in the city on that day. Sir C. WOOD believed that great anxiety prevailed in the house and in the city with regard to the Indian budget, and that much disappointment would be occasioned if it were not brought forward, according to arrangement, next Monday. (Hear, hear.) Lord ELCHO had not heard the discussion which had taken place but he was certainly very anxious to bring the subject of his motion under the consideration of the house, and more particularly after what 'had taken place, for it seemed to him very desirable that there should be some ex pression of opinion as to the policy of joining in a confer ence. (Hear.) He was very anxious England should keep aloof from any congress ; but of course as to the time of bringing this question forward, he was in the hands of the Government and would submit it when it was most convenient to them to do so. REPORT ON SUPPLY. The report on supply was then brought up and agreed to. ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSION BILL. After some conversation Sir G. C. LEWIS consented that the committee on this bill should be postponed until to-morrow. HIGHWAYS BILL. - The order for the second reading was discharged. ' UNIVERSITIES INCORPORATION ACT AMEND' MENT BILL. This bill passed through committee, with amendments. ROMAN CATHOLIC CHARITIES BILL. , This bill was read a second time. The County CeSs (Ireland) Acts Continuance Bill was tead a second time. The Colonial Legislatures Power of Repeal Bill was read a second time. The Barbuda Government Bill was read a second time. QUEEN'S REMEMBRANCER BILL. After a brief explanation from Sir G. C. LEWIS, this bill passed through committee. The Militia Ballot _Suspension Bill, the Constabulary Force (Ireland) Bill, and the Vexatious Indictment Bill, went through committee. The Railway Companies Arbitration Bill, and the Im prisonment for Small Debts Bill, were read a third time. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS BILL • On the motion that this bill be read a third time, Mr. HENLEY moved that it be read a third time that day three months, upon which the house divided, whey the numbers were— For the third reading . Against it Majority —4O The bill was then read a third time and passed: The Weights and Measures Bill passed through cow. mittee. On the motion for going into committee on the Medical Acts Amendment Bill, Sir E. GROGAN moved that the Speaker leave the chair that day three months. (Laughter.) After some die" cussion, he moved that the house do now adjourn, on which a division took place, when the numbers were—, Fdr the adjournment Against it Majority. —2B The bill was then postponed. On the motion for reporting progress in commiitee on the Church Rates Abolition Bill, Mr. STANHOPE moved that the Chairman do • ucer leave the chair, upon which the committee divided, what the numbers were— For the motion 6O ' Against it Majority The bill was, however, postponed, and the house ea journed at two o'clock. THE NAVY. The Diadem, 32, screw, and the Curacoa, 31, screw, both arrived at Spithead yesterday, from. Devonport, exchaqing the usual complimentary salutes with the Victory, nag" ship of Admiral W. Bowles. C. 8.. Naval Commander-in: Chief. Both ships brought up in line with the Emerald and Mersey, the Curacoa forming the western and tke Diadem, the eastern ship of the division. Spithead now presents a ll imposing appearance, with 12 English and 3 Russian Pal v dants flying at the anchorage. Admiral Pelham and Captain Frederick left Devonpßr t , dockyard on Wednesd a y morn i ng i n th e P ort -Ad m iral , barge, and, having inspected th e guar d s hi p o f or di nar y, the Royal Adelaide, 104 2 Captain Woodford J. Williams, re" turned to the arsenal in the afternoon. The gunboats Forward and Grappler, at Devonport, Nre_ i r ° docked on Wednesday morn i ng , c l eane d an d overhaul" and undocked in the afternoon. Mr. William R. Mudge, tnaster of the flag-ship Imp'g o i nable, 104, at Plymouth, di e d i n t h e R oyal Naval Hospital there on Tuesday evening. The gunboat Hind, tender to the Russell, 60, - at mouth, arrived at Plymouth on Wednesday afternoon. The Collingwood, 80, saili ng s hi p, i n charge of Ju2.* Stokes, the assistant master-attendant of PortsinouT; yard, and a party of men from the dockyard riggers and the steam reserve, left Portsmouth yesterday in WV , the Lucifer steamer, with the Pigmy steamer in attend'_ ance, for Chatham, wher e sh e will be converted into a scre w steam-ship. COUNTRY MARKETS. MANCHESTER—RILY 28. The market was fairly a tt en d e d thi s morning. - 'Fres English wheat held for an advance of is to 2s per qr., u, the demand was limit e d. F res h made English flour mu d likewise be qu o t e d i s per sac k hi gher, but with 'a slow' sa l .P Other sorts were about stationary. Oats and oatmeal demand to a fair e x t en t a t th e prices of this day se'nnig .,T. '" Beans and Indian corn firm. BIRMINGHAM—Jury 28. A fair supply of wheat, and the trade closed dull at ra ther under the currency of last week. Barley and oaf taken in limited qu an titi es a t f ormer prices. Beans peas were the turn cheaper. LOUTH—JULY 27. • A small attendance to-day at the corn:exchange, and very limited business transacted. The few sales we lie L ':4 of were at a small advance on l as t wee k—f or red an d pus 40s to 43s per qr. B 0 ST ON—J tux 27. i dol.. This morning's market was thi n l y attended, and ho'ios of wheat and fl our b e i ng unwilling to make Canoe* d r. the business done was a t an advance of 2s to 30 per ' The little Spring corn on offer' sold at drooping prices. 2 61 Wheat .40s to 45s Oats.... 2ls " 490 White do .45 s t o 47s Beans 46s to 6, Barley —s to —s Peas ...4c0s tP 4 EDINBURGH GRAIN--JULY 27. at/ Sales were rea d y to-day for wheat, and prices for " „ better. Barley a dull sale. • Wheat on the top is 6d up.., average Os 4d lit u . Barley on the t o p•l s Od d own average Os 6d clu"" Oats on the top is 6d up...... average is Od ult, Beans on the top Os 6d up .. average Os ld d"" Averages per Imperial quarter. Wheat.... Barley ll3 2 8-12ths Oats 1 6 9 11-12ths Beans Total Supply, and Sales. Wheat .1040 qrs Sold 830 qrs Barley.... 263 qrs Sold 69 qrs Oats Beans 69 qrs Sold 38 qrs ' .t CORK—JULY 26. R e d 'The following were the quotations this morning 300 wheat, 21s Od to 22s Od ; white, 25s 3d to —s Od; barley Od to 32s Od; oats, 13s Od to 14s Bd. 1 [ADVERTISEMENT.]—M o th ers an d nurs e s will fol(ID° Barry's delicious Revalenta Arabica Food admirab l y adapted to remove all di sor d ers o f the stomach and bowels.4o which infants and children are at all times liable, such fc g, indigestion, flatulency, colic, dysentery, diarrhrea) " 1i i v patio; debility and restlessness. It strengthens, O m rishes, and is used with more advantage than -mill; rearing infants. We quote a few out of many testinlu_.. nials :—" Amsterdam., 31st Dec., 1852.—Dear Sir,—O w a child, up to the age'of eleven weeks, was very delicate, 9 n l . wasting away, and milk, sago, and arrowroot turn e d s; on its stomach, causing great: suffering. We the n fed 0 upon Du Barry's Revalenta Arabica, which a gre ed Wl tr , derfully with her ; and she is now, at the age of ail; months, a plump and lively little girl.—Daniel Se 0 " Wildervank, Holland, 20th Sept. 1853.—Dear baby, which Heaven presented us w i t h ten months bc, was attacked, when four w ee k s o l d, with a disease o f t'i s stomach and glands, by which our seven previous int n e d had all been carried off, and this last child seemed dest`r, u r to follow its sisters and brothers before many days, I br ,jcs, doctor, a very able practitioner, had, during three w e •be exhausted all his skill, and was at a loss what to preseZ l ;,,„, next, when he advised Du Barry's Revalenta A-r" l ijo which, I am happy to say, worked a great change for as better in a few days ;- and in six weeks' time the child 1 g .. „, perfectly well, and is now a cheerful blooming b 0:,„ source of the greatest happiness to us H. Vaalu!'"" 0 0; 4 In tins, at ls. 6d. ; 11b., 3 s . ; 21b., 5 5. 9d . ; 51 b ., 125.; p 265. The 101 b. and 121 b. tins carriage free, on receipt of Pr o . office order. Du Barry and Co., 77, Regent-street, LOU"6O, Fortnum, Mason, and Co. ' 182, Piccadilly ; Abbis , ,d, Gracechurch-street ; 4, Cheapside ; 63, and 150, street ; 330 and 451, Strand • 49 and 60, Bishopst at ; street ; 85, Tottenham-couri-road. Also at Du, Bewley and Draper ; at Edi n b ur O o, , Raimes and " ol d; at Liverpool, Nixon and Thew • at Manchester, SharP a y . Scott ; at York, Raimes, Blanchard, and Co. at 5° 4 ampton, Randall and Son. BIRTHS. ' w GALL.—On the 22d inst. at Cheltenham, the wife 0 04 1 s tenant - Colonel R. H. Gall, 14th Light Dragoons, ° son. SWANSTON.—On the 27th inst., the wife of G. Swall, stoo rd ' „ Esq., of 3, W arw i c k -terrace; Belgravia, and the P` of Trade, of a son. MARRIAGES. REDDALL—OLIVIER.—On the 27th inst., at St . Old-street, Mr. Edward Reddall, of Tottenham, to ~ of Helm, third survivi ng d aug ht er o f M r. O. H. Olivie r, 37, Finsbury -square. • eiCe r SH AKESPEAR—BRowN.—At Ashby-de-la-Zouch, T, tershire, Charles Shakespear, Esq., of Langley r 4", in the same county, t o Eli za b eth; the eldest daugl'"" Henry Brown, Esq., of Ashby-de-la-Zouch. DEATHS. jv ~uiad ELWOOD —On the 25th inst., at Cambridge, Mr. Elwood, University Marshal, aged 41. at o HORSFIELD.—On th e 24 t h inst ., C am d en- twn rrhora° Horsfield, &c., aged 86. oef PEIRSE.—On the 24th inst., Henry William de la P. F r- Beresford Pierse, Esq., of Bedale Hall, Yorkshire? a 39. PULMAN.—On the 24th inst., at Drake's-place, the r ot, IVm. W. Pulman, M.A., vicar of Wellington;Saw e aged 36. RICKETTI3.—On the 25th inst., at Salwarpe, Worcester sllit* Martin Ricketts, Esq., aged 68. l‘i d. SECKHAM.—On th e 28th inst., at the Rectory House', lington, William Seckh.am, Esq., aged 62. LONDON' : Printed and Published by 1111.1RDO ON ilk of No. 112, St ran d, P r i n t er , at T he Sufs Office, rich t , • s Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, In the COWS Middlesex, Friday, July 29, 1869.