The Sun. — London, England, 1860-02-29 00:00:00

I_MPEIZIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE 07 LORDS—(YESTERDAY.) The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at the usual hour. The Duke of MARLBOROUGH laid on the table the report and evidence on the Church-rate Committee. THE PLEA OF GUILTY. Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from the Law Amendment Society, praying their lordships to pass a of bill he introduced a few nights ago f or the purpose abolishing the plea of guilty or not guilty, and providing that the judge at a criminal trial should ask the prisoner, " Do you dz..: ire to be tzied or not." The noble and learned lord then explaind a miEimrehen sion that had arisen with reference to the annual aadress he had made at Bradford on the subject of bribery. Hie de liberate opinion was the same that it had ever been, viz., that it would never do to punish bllbery merely as a misde meanour, but that it must be der :t with as a felony, and until it was so treated it would never be finally suppressed. COMPANIES (1860) BILL. This bill passed through committee. PROBATE AND ADMINISTRATION (INDIA) BILL. This bill was read a second time. COURT OF CHANCERY BILL. This blli was read a third time and passed. OFFENCES IN IRELAND. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE moved for a series of returns relating to offences against the person, and the rewards that had been given by Government for the ap prehension of criminals, from 1850 to 1860. The noble lord entered at some length into the subject of crime in Ireland, and said he was utterly at a loss to understand how it was that in Ireland, where there was a constabulary amounting to 12,000 and 72 magistrates, crime was so pre • valent. - The Duke of SOMERSET said if the noble lord would slightly alter the terms of his motion there would be no ob jection to the returns moved for. The required alteration was made, and the returns were ordered. EMIGRATION OF LABOURERS FROM INDIA TO THE FRENCH COLONIES. Lord HARRIS asked whether a treaty had been signed, authorising the French Government to appoint emigration agents in India for the purpose of procuring a supply of agricultural labourers for their colonies. Lord WODEHOUSE said that the treaty was Rot yet signed, but was under the consideration of the foreign and Indian departments. The utmost care would be taken to protect the immigrants. The Earl of DERBY said his noble friend had very clearly stated the case in relation to the conditions under which the emigration was proposed to take place from India to the French colonies; and he might say the pro visions of the treaty were almost entirely the same as those which the late Government adopted. He admitted that her Majesty's Government were perfectly justified in en tering into this treaty, but it must be more carefully watched in its operation. The noble lord made an allusion to one point on which he (the Earl of Derby) should like to have some explanation. He wished to know whether there was any provision in the treaty in relation to the slave trade traffic. Lord WODEHOUSE explained that there was no pro vision in the treaty on the question of slavery, but there was a distinct understanding between the two Covernments of France and England that there was to be no traffic in the slave trade. That subject had been under and received the most anxious consideration of her Majesty's Govern ment. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH_said he had no doubt that the Indian Council would have sufficient independ ence to give our subjects in India a protection beyond what they had yet received. The subject was then dropped. The Probate and Administration (India) Bill was read a second time ; and The Court of Chancery Bill was read a third time and passed. Their Lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS.-(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. At the time of private business, Colonel W. PATTEN drew the attention of the house to the inconvenience and expense occasioned by the non-attendance of members on committees on private bills. The plan adopted was to appoint these committees for such times as hon. gentlemen might select as being most convenient for them to serve. The committee on Group No. 1 of Private Bills was to have assembled that morning, but Mr. J . P. Hennessy, mem ber for King's County, was absent ; the consequence was that the party interested in one of the bah, of the group was put to the expense of £3OO, and would perhaps have to pay even a larger amount. Mr. RIDLEY, chairman of the committee in question, also commented on the hardship inflicted by the non-at tendaace of the hon. member on the committee. Mr. BOUVERIE moved that the hon. member in ques tion be ordered to attend in his place on the committee to morrow morning. He thought that the house was entitled to an explanation of his conduct from the hon. member. After some conversation, in the course of which Colonel W. PATTEN stated that Mr. Hennessy had gone that day to Ireland, an amendment was moved to the effect, that "attend this house" should be substituted for attending the committee, which was agreed to, the ori ginal motion having been previously negatived. BOROUGH OF DUNDALK. The SPEAKER announced that he had receive . 1 a communication to the effect that the petition against the return of the members for this borough was withdrawn. CARLISLE. Mr. COBBETT, as chairman of the committee appointe& to try the merits of the petition against the return of Sir J. Graham and Mr. Lawson, stated, amid much cheering, that the committee were of opinion that the hon. members had been duly elected. WEYMOUTH PETITION. Mr. EGERTON announced that the committee on this petition were rianimously of opinion that Mr. R. Bruce and Viscount Raynham were duly elected. SAVOY AND NICE. Mr. M. MILNES said that he hoped the' hon. member for Bridgwater (Mr. Kinglake) would postpone the motion of which he had given notice relative to the proposal of the annexation of Savoy and Nice. The papers necessary for properly discussing the subject had not yet been laid on the table, and therefore hon. members were not in a position to enter on the consideration of the question. (Hear, hear.) Sir R. PEEL differed from the last speaker, and in °rile: to enable him to address hon. members, he would move the adjournment of the house. Rumours were afloat which, he feared, were only too well found I on truth, and he thought the present time was the best to enter on the con• sideration of the subject. He thought Min;sters should avail themselves of the earliest opportunity of placing their conduct in a clear and intelligible'"ht before the house and the country. If the Government proved that they had acted in reference to this matter in a proper and straight forward manner, they would receive the support ot hon. membllrs. (Hear, hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL said that the papers which he would shortly lay on the table would place the house in a better position than they were at present to discuss the subject fully and fairly. (Hear, hear.) They would also be better able to judge whether the conduct of the Government was praisewcrthv or the reverse. Mr. KIgGLAKE said that it was not his intention by his motion to censure her Majesty's Government, because it would be unfair to do so without the papers alluded to by the noble lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. He con sidered that time was of vital moment in regard to this question, and therefore he purposed to press his motion. The motion for the adjournment of the house was then negatived. . _ THE HALFPENNY STAMP. Mr. DAWSON asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he was prepared to consider the propriety of com mencing the scale f or th e t ransm i ss i on o f pr i n t e d ma tt er a t a halfpenny stamp for the first two ounces in weight ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that he would withhold any statement on the subject at present. SAVOY AND NICE. Mr. KINGLAKE then rose to move for copies of the correspondence which had tak en pl ace between her Majesty's `Government and the Governments of the Emperor of the French and the King of Sardinia, in respect to the proposal for annexing Savoy and Nice to the Empi re o f France. The hon. gentleman said he was now about to call the attention of the house to the rumoured annexation of Savoy and Nice to France, and he should endeavour to confine himself strictly to the matter in hand, not because there were not neighbouring topics of great interest and importance, but because he believed that by so limiting himself he should do the best to obtain that which was the main object of his motion, namely, such an expression of opinion on the part of that house as would show that they were almost, if not entirely, unanimous in their views upon this question. (Hear, hear.) The conjunction in which those two pro vinces were placed was so strange that he should find it difficult to discover any parallel for it. Here were two countries side by side, and so far as we know the sovereigns of both living upon terms of amity and friendship. They were comrades in the late war, and he was not aware of any grounds upon which one would be disposed to despoil the other of his territory. • And yet suddenly it became known or believed that a portion of the provinces of Sardinia was by some process or other to be transferred to the territory of the Emperor of France. In the autumn of last year he received a communication from Paris, which was very short and pithy, and was in these words : " Savoy and Nice are about to be annexed by universal suffrage." The rumour went on and gained strength, and in the early part of this year an impression that those provinces were to be severed from the territory of Sardinia became so general that the loyal subjects both of Savoy and Nice met in their respec tive states in large numbers, and publicly declared their un altered loyalty to the ancient House of Savoy. These demonstrations soon called forth some angry denuncia tions from that portion of the Parisian press which was supposed to express the views generally of the Impe, rial Government. The Pat?* and the Constitutionnel were foremost in this matter. The pretences for this annex ation were so strange that if for a moment they were enter tamed it would be difficult to say to what country they Would not have a similarapplication. One of these pretences Ile asked a t ake hat d the people- of Savoy spoke the French language. if they were askedwheter that was a sound principle to set up ; for to consent to this annexation on the ground of Byr e Nice themselves he thought the people of Savoy and proposition, and ha n a d given the most distinct answer to that remaining in the strongest expressions their intention of objections faithful to the sovereign of Sardinia. The ; against h annexation were of the most stringent kind in north of Savoy, that portione\ firstlneh place a portion of the consisted of Chablais, me not, In the full and complete v the term, a part of the kingdom of Sardiniaties s e er rst o ri f et naturally ,belanged to Switzerland, and t'he great Powers hail by t rea ty guaranteed this portion of th e N orth the same strictness as they had guaranteed to Eauvrooyptltomn'tihtohef integrity and neutrality of Switzerland. If this Savoy became a portion of the empire of Prang 1.3 ,Z WCs to become of the guarantee of neutrality ? It' France‘ had this new department, which was, ho believed, spoken of a 3 the department of Mont Blanc, would she not avail hetrserl!, of it to march troops across it instead of briogipg he round by a circuitous route. It was quite clear that for all purposes whatever, if this portion of Savoy were annexed to France, the security which Europe had endeavoured to obtain in the neutrality of Switzerland, would be frustrated. If there be one thing which more than anotherprevents that p art of the world being desolated by conquest, it is that dh 'trict being of a mountainous character. Our fathers so r.s.l.aed it that they engaged in the most solemn manner for tL e neutrality of Switzerland; and he was pleased to hear the noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs tell the house t that distinct and decisive language of which e N v t a iiivh a master, that by the treaties of 181h5 THE SUN LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 29, 1860. this country determined to stand. If any man cast his eyes over that part of the world he would see what would become of the integrity of Switzerland, if that part of it were to be surrounded in the way it would be by the French empire if this annexation took place. Switzerland would be jammed in between the fangs of two departments of France, and the maintenance of the neutrality of Switzer land, after such an event, would be an almost geographical impossibility. He knew it was constantly said that the treaties since 1815 had been thought so little of and so often violated that we need not make ourselves uneasy at the exact ob servance of any particular treaty. He could understand why erroneous views of this kind had originated, but he thought he would be able to show the house this kind of cynical indifference as to the application of treaties had no reference to the engagements by which we were bound as to those countries which bordered upon France. (Hear.) Many of the engagements made at the settlement of 1815— as for instance that iu reference to the republic of Cracow —were of such a nature that although the parties to those arrangements had a clear right to remonstrate if those arrangements should be violated, still there was no obliga tion on the part of any of those states to take steps in case they were violated. Such was the case with respect to Cra cow and the Italian States. Another class of treaties there was by which this country had guaranteed to some other States the ownership and independence of their territory ; of these Switzerland was one. But the third class of treaties was more important ; such was that by which the great Powers guaranteed that the territory verging on Fiance should not be annexed to the French empire. The defini tive treaty between France and the allied Powers was signed Nov. 20, 1815, and it provided by the first article that ,the frontiers of France shall be the same as in 1790, save and i except as to the modifications contained in that article, and then it went on to define the frontier of France exactly as it now stands. Had the matter remainedtkere it would have stood exactly on the same footing as the republic of Cracow with any other States of Europe to which the guarantee applied. But the feeling of the four great powers was not such as to leave the future policy of Europe at the whim and disposal of theotherpowers. One of the strongest acts known in diplomacy was resorted to, namely, that one of the four great powers was made to engage with each of the other great Powers singly, that it would maintain the treaty in full force and vigour. The treaty was signed the same day between this country and Austria, and subsequently similar treaties were signed between England and France. The high contracting parties respectively promised to main tain in full force and vigour the treaty signed by his most Christian Majesty, and to see the stipulations in the said treaty, as well as those particular conventions, strictly and faithfully executed to the fullest extent. By a protocol it was provided that the King of Sardinia (a protocol drawn up at the same time) should raise out of a common fund, under the control of the four great Powers, 10,000,000 f., which were to be laid out in fortifying and strengthening her defences bordering' upon France. But he wished the house to observe the effect which the annexation of Savoy would have upon what he must suppose was dear to every member of that house—freedom of action. At present it was important to us to stand aloof in any great European struggle, and to determine whether we should or should not take part in it ; but let this annexation once take place and our freedom of action is for ever gone. For, no sooner had the casus feederis arrived than Russia, or Prussia, or Aus tria, separately and without joint action, might call upon us to fulfil our treaty, and we should fulfil it or have the dishonour of not fulfilling our obligations. Ho could not forget that the kingdom of Sardinia was governed on princi ples which were in that country strongly respected. He did not intend to compare the institutions of Sardinia with those of this country, he would be pardoned for saying he preferred his own. In his opinion they' could not con sent to the loss of Nice and Sardinia without defacing the map of Europe. He did not see that there had been the slightest jealousy in this country of the large an nexations which. Fiance had made to her empire in the north of Africa—in Algeria. Neither himself nor any other tra veller, upon his return to this country, had shown any such feeling, though there could be no doubt but that France greatly enhanced her material strength and increased her military power by, those conquests. The reason why he was opposed to France annexing Savoy and Nice was, because the annexation of those districts would unsettle Europe. The Government of Sardinia was a settled Government, and the Government of France was a new institution. He could, therefore, very well enter into the feelings of those Savoyards and people of Nice who preferred remaining subjects of Sardinia ; they admitted the great glory of France, but they respectfallv said in that glory they had no desire to share, Where hadthis scheme for the annexation of Savoy originated ? The Emperor of France when he engaged in the last Italian war obtained the acquiescence of Europe on the solemn assurance that he entertained no scheme involving the aggrandisement of France. Count Walewski in a despatch to the Due de Malakoff, then Am. bassador here, said that the Government of the Emperor was not influenced by any arriere pense'e, or ambitious views, that he had nothing to dissemble and nothing to conceal. Coming more closely to the discussion of the pre sent subject, Count Walewski again wrote to the Due de Malakoff, that the passes of the Alps were not in French hands, but it was in the highest degree important to us (France) that the keys of them should remain at Turin solely (uniquenient). The count added, that the Emperor had no desire to separate his views rem those of his allies. We come next to a still more startling declaration made in the proclamation of the Emperor at Milan on the Bth of June: '—" Yore enemies, who are my enemies, hove endeavoured to diminish the sympathies that exist throughout all Europefor your cause, by trying to persuade the world that I am, in carrying on this war, actuated by personal motives, for the aggrandisement of France. are f e . eater by the morel influence they exercise than by any barren conquests, and this moral. influence I seek after by endeavouring to emanc'pato one of the most been tiful countries in Europe." He must frankly acknowledge that he did not understand the 'erect impel.; of these words of the Emperor, for it happened that he had in the cleawer of his table a document which led him to suspect that these words of the proclamation were not entitled to more weight than those of the bulletins of the former, so that his (Mr. Kinglake's) ideas were not of vei f recent date. Eleven months ago, in March past, when peace prevailed in Eu rope, he felt it to be his duty t r make a communication to the Governinent, a'though then in opposition, and he corn munieated to the elect a paper which, with the permission of the house, he wou'd now rer 1. He might be permitted to say that he had received this paper under circumstances which fully justified lim in making any use of it which he might have thought proper. But the house must not ask him to give the name of his auf hori;., ; all he could saY on that point was—speaking on his honour—that he had it from a sorece which made him fully believe in its truth. He spoke in the presence of an hon. gentleman op posite (Mr. S. Fitzgerald), who world bear kim out when he said this was not a new thought with him. The com munication was as follOWs :—" On the evering before the marriage of the Princess Clothilde a paper was signed•by the Emperor of the French, which was called a pacte de famille, not a treaty or convention promising aid offensive and defensive to Sardinia, the King on his side promising Savoy and Nice to France in return for whatever posses sions he may gain in Lombardy. The paper was signed by Walewski." Lord Malmesbury desired Lord Cowley to ask a question on the slibject ; but then the noble earl used the word tredly, and not pacte de fa mille. The answsr came, of course, following the words of the question, saying that there had been no treaty; but Count Walewski was very reserved on the subject of territorial arrangements. Lord Cowley's despatch to Lord Malmesbury wee to the effect that Count Walewski having given him an oppotunity, he thought it right, without putting to him any question on the subject, to let him know that her Majesty's government were in possession of information that a treaty had been si g ned on the 17th Jan. between France.an 1 Sardinia; and Count Walewski re plied, " that all he could assure him was that up to this moment there was no treaty whatever. He made no allu sion to the territorial question." No disclosure was made for a long time, and not until the month of Jelly, when the noble lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs announced the peace of Villafranca, and that he had authority to,announce that there was no intention on the part of the Efnperor to annex Savoy and Nice. The existence ,of this pacte de famille, or - this arrangement, seemed to have been well concealed until he gave his first notice of motion on this matter, and he then introduced into it the words " pacte de famine." It then became known that this was a matter which could be no longer concealed from Europe, and Lord Granville, on the 7th Feb. last, disclosed, not in complete language, but in language which shad owed out the trut h , the existence of something like the arrangement of which he had spoken. The noble lord said they had been told by the imperial government that there was no question on the annex ,i a noae t iaca i nturn o atheslhj n rrdenfeoNmio o fte Savoy; that one of the many points die cussed before the war was the annexation:4 Savoy under certain contingencies, but these contingencies not having occurred, there was at that moment no question of annexa tion • and the French Government added, that in the event' of Sardinia obtaining a great addition of territory, they would feel themselves at liberty to consider what conditions they should attach to such annexation. There apparently the matter stood. He did not doubt that before the war there was an arrangement that in exchange for Lombardy the Emperor of the French should become possessecia , avoy and Nice, but the Emperor having failed ntup i lis n oeroauomtpv:vii r ornlab e oysg c evit overing the whole of Lombardy the contingency failed teer the t ehd il h envaewtut rnopseti proposition esuree taeeanf foltni:yn, o c e te , ttahos b, h , fwe be nvhhutkgeeididti when kingdom C S aigeei nenf a tanra r oa 1 lit d moncre i aac n eFtlra i oe circumstancesrar nswfda, France c he did underbelieved,not escedoec whichuoccur. t e oaasutn a ael apparent d p noin i f r eo ie. intention a t iaaol n t ynn h ddo a cf t to haut began henl then the Emperor of the French reverted to his original notion, that if Sardinia was to become aggrandised, though not originally intended but in fact, h should feel himself en titled titled to insist upon the annexation of Savoy to France, under the provisions of the pacte de famille. But they had happily since been told that this 'annexation would not be carried into effect by the Emperor without consulting the great Powers of Eueope. Her Majesty's ambassador at Paris had addressed the Emperor on the subject, and he was assured that the Emperor would not proceed to a final decision in this matter without consulting the great Powers. If they were t6ld by a plain man that he would not do some thing witnout consulting a third party, they might infer that in addition to censulting, him he would be governed by the advice which he received. But when they found that contemporaneously with this statement that the Emperor would consult the great Powers, he asserted that a portion of Savoy was necessary to the empire of France, they would be led to fear that that was rather an indication on the part of France of what she meant to do, than any question of inquiry as to what the other Powers might think to be right. (Hear, hoar.) When the fou r great Powers were consulted upon this subject in the way now intended, he hoped and trusted that the answer of our Go vernment would be so closely similar to the answer of every other, that all Europe should know that the four great Powers were of one mind. (Hear.) He heard it said that it was well this country should be ailied to France, and that there should be a treaty of alliance between them. But treaties of alliance did not depend upon proximity, nor upon caprice, but on community of interests. Did they or did, they not desire the same as the other Powers of Europe He believed that England anxiously desired peace; then lie thought tlie,allice of England must also desire peace. Would the Emperor persist in this scheme ? _He believed he was naturally a man of much naeleration. He was a thought ful person, very alive to difficulties ; but he was armed with a power which had annexed to it a fatal condition, and it hid annoyed to it this condition, that he must use it, and he doubted whether he had such an amount of strength as to be able to resist the inilaence which urged him towards this annexation. At all events, he would no longer have it is his power to proceed by stealth. All Europe would see that this net if it were done would be in open violation of trea ties, and then they would, he thought, understand and per ceive that the right of nations wets made to depend in this e ti p t : at e ti h oh , ne. n He d not upon justice, but upon strength. Sir R. PEEL said he had great pleasure in seconding the ra felt not refrain,so de be f 1 deeply the enteringhe por t importance uponce of a this few s übje ct obser vations which he might have to offer, from tendering his thanks to his hon. friend for the clear and lucid manner in which he had submitted his statement. The house would be glad of this opportunity being afforded to the Govern ment to offer some observation s upon this great and impor- tant subject. (Hear, bear.) The question affected not only the whole of the Italian nation, but it affected the whole of Europe. It was one which not only affected the terri toial limits and geographical frontiers of France ; it not only affected Switzerland as regarded three of her pro vinces; but it affected the whole comity of nations; and in this way, that it attempted to make an inroad into the char ter of European tenure, which was the basis of the existence of territorial arrangements. That was an attempt which must be checked at once with a vigorous hand, or must be sanctioned by the consent of the great European powers, or it might lead to convulsions very shortly. (Hear.) This motion was not made in a spirit of hostility against the Go vernment of her Majesty. No hon. member would think that. He believed the present Government had followed :he policy of its predecessors during very troublesome and hazardous times, and they had been anxious to maintain friendly relations with all the powers of Europe, a nd that was a policy which all must desire to maintain. (Hear, hear.) That being the case, he could not but recollect what that venerated statesman (Lord Aberdeen), he might almost say of a bygone generation, had once said, viz., that the foreign policy of every Government had been more or less identical with the policy of its predecessors for the last thirty years. He (Sir R. Peel) believed the Government had followed out the policy of its sredecessors. They knew that was the policy of Lord Malmesbury, and that noble lord had de clared that his exertions and those of the Government to which he belonged were instrumental in confining the strug gle of last year between Austria on the one side and France and Sardinia on the other to the Italian states. (Hear, hear.) Ho (Sir R. Peel) believed there were many persons who thought that the Government of her Majesty had been desirous to abstain from involving this country in the dis putes of our allies and, our friends. But then how came it, after having resolved upon following that course, that he found on the 4th Februrky this communication from Lord Cowley to M. Thouvenel proposing a scheme for the settlement of the affairs of Italy, and to the effect that Venetia should remain under the rule of Austria, that the inhabitants of Central Italy should be allowed a year to vote the question of annexation to Sardinia, that France should allow them to accomplish their wishes, and lastly, that France should withdraw her troops from Rome. (Hear. hear.) He (Sir Robert Peel) believed that France answered that she was not able at that moment to send a reply, - and they now heard that the other foreign governments could not accede to the English propositions without reservation. But were her Majesty's Government leaving that indepen dent action which the Government of this country had pre viously followed ? (Hear, hear.) What had we to do with. asking France to allow Tuscany to become united to Sar dinia ? (Hear, hear.) France replied, " Yes, but France will then take Savoy." His hon. friend had said that this question of Savoy was long previous to this. It might be so. But it was patent to everybody that when the Govern ment proposed to annex Tuscany to Sardinia, France re plied, "With the annexation of Savoy to France." He believed the Government had been desirous of giving some prsctical effect to their adininistration ; and he approved greatly of the exertions they had recently made with a view of increasing and improving the commercial relations with France and other countries of the world. But he believed that on the very day the Government approved of the treaty of commerce the Emperor put forward his scheme of the annexation of Savoy. Now that looked very much as if the commercial treaty had some important political tendencies. (Hear, hear.) They had heard a great deal lately of the conciliatory spirit of the Emperor, and no one more than himself desired friendly relations Rath France, but he must say he had heard a great deal, not only of the conciliatory spirit of France, but of other things, and of course France had her own interests to consult, and not those of any other country. (Hear, hear.) Then how eame it that there had arisen at this time this apparent civility on the part of France—(hear, hear)—and was it the desire on the part of the Emperor to clear away those libellous charges which had been so plentifully heaped upon him, or was it the desire of her Majesty's Government to open fresh chan nels of communication with this country, or was this treaty merely a medium of according a sop to France to enable her to carry on, with undiminished vigour, her schemes of am bition and power ? He hoped the house would boldly say, and that the Government would avail themselves of the opportunity, that this commercial treaty had no reference whatever to the political condition of Italy, and that it did not bind this country to the future policy of France. (Hear, hear.) He had lately read the voluminous blue-book con . tainine• ' despatches on the state of Italy, and he hop e d h e might say that he thought they reflected upon the noble lord the Foreign Secretary the greatest credit; and they showed that he had conducted the affairs of the foreign de partment with a dignity worthy of the Government and the country. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord must recollect that with regard to the friendly assurances of France, his hon. friend had expressed great doubts on that point, end they had one notable instance of her sincerity. (Hear, hear.).He would mention one great proof of it, and that was this that at the time when France united with America in her strug gle against England she never made more strenuous pro fessions of her friendly relations with this country. (Hear, hear.) And at this time, when she made much of her friendly relations with England, she talked about correct ing her geographical frontier. (Hear, hear.) That was a great and importent matter, but who was to decide it ex cept the great Powers who hai put their seals upon the in strument which had existed since the last century ? The Government of France expressed the will end feelings ofthe Emperor ; and when they found an article in La Patric — which for its impertinence could not be exceeded—in favour of the annexation of Savoy, they must remember that no less than 19 newspapers in France had been suppressed for making assertions not in accordance with the wishes of the Government. He believed the people of Savoy were not desirous to be united to France. The hon. member then referred to the pacte de famille and the proclamation of the Emperor when he entered Milan in June, 1859, and said that he had no personal ambition to grat;fy in the acquisi tion of territory to France, and the hon. gentleman added that every one would be inclined to believe what the Eth peror then said if the pacte de fan "e was not in existence. But the Government should watch events narrowly, for these pactes de famille were generally framed against the liberties of the people whom they most concerned. A pact was signed in 1761, and in later days there was a similar one between Napoleon and his brothers. These family pacts prohibited all interference from other Powers, and if there were such a tone in existence it would require the greatest care and watchfulness from her Majesty's Government. But whence.had sprint this question of the annexation of Savoy ? It had arisen from the struggle which made Pied mont a great Italian power. Piedmont got a large accession of territory, and in consequence Savoy was threatened, and Switzerland was in danger of losing her ancient neutrality. The neutrality of Switzerland was guaranteed by eight Powers in 1815, when Prince Metternich himself declared that her neutrality was indispensable to her independence, and that could not be securea without the military frontier afforded by Chablais and Fancigny. By this treaty it was laid down that in case of war this territory, which abutted on the Lake of Geneva, should be occupied by Swiss troops. The very existence of the Helvetic Confederation was bound up in the neutrality of these provinces, and the moment that France took possession of them that indepen dence was at an end. There were 10,000 Frenchmen resident in Geneva, and it was said 10,000 Savoyards also. Sup posing Geneva to be surrounded by French territory, what would be its position with this garrison of 60,000 enemies within its walls ? (Hear, hear.) If this annexation were permitted, the next claim put forward would be that of Efer many for the passes of St. Gothard, to balance the acquire ment of the Simplon by France. (Hear.) Should Germany thus seize the passes of St. Gothard, he would leave the house to; imagine the general complications that would arise. (Hear, hear.) Perhaps if that were conceded they would next have a demand from some quarter of the Rhenish pro vinces. He would entreat the Government and Parlia ment to oppose some check to such a state of things. Let them remember that in 1792 France annexed Savoy, in 1798 she annexed Geneva, and in 1802 the cantons De Vana and De Valais. All this territory resuained integral parts of the republic and empire until 1814-15. The time was come when they should endeavour to check those aggresive ten dencies of France, and, if possible, maintain the indepen deuce of Savoy as guaranteed by the treaties of 1815. He hoped that the house woud raise its voice against any attempt to take away these pr ov i nces , w hi c h fairly belonged to Sardinia. He admitted that his voice was but weak and inefficient, but he had been asked to give expression to the wishes of the Swiss people—(hear, hear)—and in the ab sence of a more powerful advoc .te he had done so. (Loud cheers.) He had resided for some years in that country, through the kindness of the noble lord the member for Tiverton, and had had opportunities of knowing the senti ments of its leading statesmen, from one of whom he'had received a letter dated on the day the signature of the treaty was promulgated, and from that letter he would, with the permission of the house, read one paragraph His friend said :—" We have learned that a treaty has been negotiated for the annexation of Savoy to France, and that in it no exceptional mention has been made of the neutral provinces which join Switzerland. Moreover, if we are well informed, there are good reasons for appre hending that France intends repudiating the neu trality of these provinces, which was secured by the treaty of 1815, and all previous trestles with the House of Savoy. These treaties went even Carther than guaranteeing the neutrality of the provinces, for Sardinia engaged never to detach these provinces except for the pur pose of making them over to Switzerland, and we hoped that such a reservation would have been made in the pre sent treaty. These two provinces contain 150,000 souls, who in Vie event of any annexation of Savoy to France earnestly desire that they may be incorporated with Switzerland." (Hear, hear.) Besides this, the cry of the whole of the Swiss press was for the maintenance of the status quo, and if that were disturbed the incorporation of the neutral provinces. These provinces still maintained their ancient attachment to the House of Savoy, but if that house gave them up their only desire was for incorporation with the Swiss Confede ration. A declaration to that effect, signed by 950 of the principal inhabitants, had been circulated, and the feeling which inspired it was deserving of the highest credit. That address, in conclusion, said, " Dans le cas inattendu d'une separation de la Savoie, le Faucigny et le Chablais ne von draient pas etre Francais, mais toleraient plutot .leur an nexion :1 la Suisse." Surely it would not promote the joy of Italy at her own enfranchisement if it were thus pur chased at the expense of these small but brave and free communities. (Cheers.) He appealed to her Majesty's Government to bring their powerful influence to bear upon the question, and he peceidsed them that the House of Commons would support them in their efforts on the side of independence and nationality. (Loud cheers.) He appealed to them t act in accordance with the sentiments which had been so often expressed by the noble lord the member for Tiverton and the noble lord the member far London. He trusted that they would carryon their negotiations not only with conciliation but with power, for he believed that never was power more wanted. Tho eyes of Europe were anxi- ' ously turned towards this country, to sco what policy :die would pursue. Italy was bareting into freedom. As Byron beautifully said— '•ltaly I which 'lath wing'd thee with ten thousand rents Of thine imperial garment, shall deny, And bath denied, to every other sky, Spirits which soar from ruin. Thy decay Is still impregnate sith divinity, Which gilds it with revivifying ray." And the revivifying rays of that freedom would cast its bright illumination upon all the surrounding, countries. Ho asked the noble lord not to quench that light, but to /mulish and sustain it in undiminished vigour. (Cheers) He hoped that they would not throw the weight of English influence into the scale exclusivelywith Italian independence, but that they would also endeavour to secure the independence of that ancient republic, which had so long, amid the shock of em pires, stood the beacon light of constitutional liberty and the home of political exiles. (Loud cheers) If her Majes ty's 'Ministers did not follow a straightforward policy inthis matter they would not meet with the support of the House of Commons, but if they could show that their policy, while not officiously intermeddling with the affairs of other na tions, had brought the powerful influence of this country to bear on the side of liberty and of justice, they would secure not only the smpathy and gratitude of tens of thousands of people in Italy and Switzerland, but they might count on that best reward of any Government, the confidence and ap proval of every friend of civil and religious liberty. (Cheers.) Sir G. GREY said he did not rise for the purpose of ex pressing on the part of the Government any dissent from the opinions which had been expressed either by the mover or seconder of the motion,, whose observations he believed were in complete unison with the sentiments both of that house and of the country. (Cheers.) The question which had been raised was no doubt one of great European interest, and one which justly commanded a great share of public attention in this country; it was one which therefore might well en gage the attention of the House of Commons, and it was one upon which her Majesty's Government was free to admit they had a right to give the fullest and most complete in formation. (Hear.) To the motion, therefore, for the pro duction of all the correspondence, he was most ready to as sent, merely with the trifling addition of "or extracts" in tha wording of the motion. (Cheers.) However, he could not help thinking that a protracted discussion could be bet ter maintained after the house had been in possession of these papers, which would show the position of the question as regarded England, France, and Sardinia. .The house would then be able to judge fairly of the course which the Government had adopted. His hon. friend had expressed a hope that there might be an unanimous expre4sion of opin ion on this motion, and although there was no way by which it could formally be recorded, he (Sir G. Grey) was sure that no one who rose would offer any dissent to its general purport. Every one in that house must, he was sure, join in earnestly deprecating the annexation of Savoy—(loud cheers)—not only in the interest of that country itself, but in view of the complications which such annexation might entail on Europe. (Hear, hear.) He could not but think that his hon. friend who had seconded The motion would have adopted a different tone in addressing the Government had he read the papers which were about to be broduced. Ho would not have called upon them for any disclaimer of political views or subserviency to France in ratifying the commercial treaty, or of the fact that the treaty had the slightest connection whatever with the questions of Nice and Savoy. That disclaimer he (Sir G. Grey) was prepared to make in the fullest manner, and he could assure the house that the commercial treaty had not the slightest rela tion to those matters. (Hear.) Their hands were perfectly free, and they had expressed in clear and unambiguous terms their opinion of the annexation of Nice and Savoy. (Cheers.) One word as to the despatch of his noble friend near him, which had been treated by his hon. friend as avoluntary pro posal for the settlement of the affairs of Europe. His hon. friend said that they were departing from the neutrality of England in pressing the annexation of Tuscany to Piedmont and thus giving an excuse for the annexation of Savoy. When the whole correspondence was on the table the house would see that this charge was unfounded, and that his noble friend had volunteered no plan of his own, but merely im pressed upon the French, and other Governments, that to Italy herself should be left the settlement of her internal affairs. (Cheers.) The whole object of the English Go vernment was, that the settlement of the affairs of Italy should be left wholly to the people of that country. (Hear, hear.) He believed the policy of the Government would be found to have been in strict accordance with the feelings of the house and the country, and he trusted the influence which they had used in the matter would not be exerted in va in. Ile would only further express ahope that the house would not enter into a protracted debate on the present I occasion. Mr. DISRAELI—Sir, although this subject has been brought before the consideration of the house in a speech of singular ability by the hon. gentleman who introduced the motion, I this 4, on the whole, it will be more convenient that I should claim the privilege of refraining from giving any opinion on the subject generally until the correspond ence has been laid upon the table. At the same time lam not surprised the hon. member for Bridg eater (Mr. King lake) has made this motion ; because, although we find on the • part of the Government an extreme willingness and prompt readiness to afford the house all the information in their power, and even an apparent desire to produce papers, which certainly is a novel feature in her Majesty's Minis ters, I may be permitted to observe that if that feeling had been displayed at an earlier period of the session it would have been more satisfactory. It will be recollected that on the 2d of this month I made an inquiry of the Government with respest to these papers, when I received a very unsa tisfactory reply, and it was not until the chief Minister of the Crown in the other House of Parliament had made an admission which seemed afterwards to be regretted, that I Was enablei to learn there certainly hai been communica• tions between her Majesty's Government and the French Government on the subject of Savoy. But they were so far back as July last year, and the impression conveyed to the house by the Government was, that the whole question had died away; that it was not one of that r-gent and pressing nature which it is now uni versally recognised to be, and the house was consequently entirely thrown off its guard. Then came en inquiry by an hon. member who bad become possessed of certain information, and it was not until he had produced his in formation that we found the Government prepared to meet the house with frankness. However may feel it due to myself and ethers to press on an inquiry in this important matter, I shall at present scrupulouslrefrain from enter ing into the merits of the question. When the papers are in the possession of the house I am sure we shall all feel that no more important documents could be placed in our hands, and the time will come when we shall be able to give the subject our grave deliberation. (Hear.) Mr. M. MILNES agreed in the prudence of deferring this discussion, but at the same time he wished to make one observation. Me trusted, in the absence of all authentic information, the house world not allow itself to be led away by mere i amours, or to give implicit credit to assertions which, although made in the best possible faith, could be nothing but assertions. Mr. BOWYEIt expressed a strong feeling as to the de gradation of the King of Sardinia if he parted with Savoy, and taunted the Government with truckling to France be cause she was strong, while they treated with contempt such weaker powers as Naples and Popedom. Mr. IVarre, Mr. B. Cochrane, and Mr. Kinnaird having spoken, Lord J. RUSSELL said—l can assure the hon. gentle man that the papers will be produced as soon as possible. They are now printing, and in one or two days from this date I hope they will be laid before the house. The right hon. gentleman opposite seems to think that I showed re luctance in giving information to the house. Mr. DISRAELI=In refusing the papers— Lord J. RD SSELL—The fact is that when a question was asked on a previous occasion by the right hon. gentle man on this subject, I answered him according to the state of factS as they existed at that time. But when the question was raised in another place, I placed in the hands of my n3ble friend tho President of the Council a despatch which I had received that morning, in order that he might be in a position to explain the circumstances that took place. I could not give the right hon. gentleman the contents of a despatch which had not been received. With regard to the production of despatches the rule to be observed, I think, is this : That when in correspondence with a foreign govern ment youhave stated the views of her Majesty's Govern ment, you should not produce that despatch till that foreign 'government has had time to receive it, and if they should dank proper, to answer it. I wrote a despatch to Lurd Cow ley, to be by him laid before M. Thouvenel, who had a week or more to reply to it. I have no objection to produce that despatch, because if he thought it desirable he could have given ananswer before that time. But it would be unfair to a foreign government to present a despatch, complaining perhaps, inquiring perhaps, with regard to the conduct of that government, without giving time to that foreign go vernment to reply. (Hear, hear.) I listened with admira • tion, as I am sure the whole house did, to the speeches of my two hon. friends who moved and seconded this motion; but at the same time, with regard to that family pact of which they have spoken, I can only say that her Majesty's Government have no diplomatic information of the fact. The fact of such a treaty having been entered into previous to the war has been, and up to the present time, repeatedly denied by the governments of France and of Sardinia. (Hear, hear.) That that matter has been, and is still, in agitation, I cannot deny. The hon. baronet has said, and said truly, that the powers of 'Europe had guaranteed Chablais and Faucigny as neutral territory, and that if it passed into the possession of France that neutrality would be affected. If the question was confined to those parts of Savoy which border on the Lake of Geneva, I think it would not be diffi cult to obtain from France a part of those places for Switzer land, but we did not look to that object, we looked to pre serve the whole of Savoy—(hear, hear)—and we have not discussed that particular question to Ehich my hon. friend alluded, and to which Switzerland naturally looks with the greatest anxiety. Another matter to which the ho nourable baronet referred was the fourth point of the proposition which her Majesty's Government made for the settlement of the affairs of Italy. I beg of him to con sider what was the state of affairs immediately previous to the proposal of a congress. The Austrian Government de clared that if a single Sardinian soldier went into Central Italy, she, on the other hand, would march her army to oppose that entry of the Sardinian troops. On the other hand, the Emperor of the French declared to the Austrian ambassador in Paris that the moment an Austrian soldier marched across the Po the French troops would march to oppose them. Conceive how critical this position was, and how dangerous to the peace of Europe. (Hear.) The remedy for this state of things was to be the congress. This ex tremely critical situation of affairs could net last much lon ger, because it was thought the congress was about to meet, and would find a remedy for this disorder. But it was an nounced by France in consequence of a communication from' Austria that the conference was indefinitely postponed. At the same time none of these declarations were withdrawn-- there was the same danger of collision. 'Was it not natural then fora Governmentanxious for peace to make aproposition with a view to preserve that peace, and to prevent the calamity of war from occurring? Accordingly her Majesty's Government made propositions with this riew. The first was, that neither Austria nor Franca should interfere in the affairs of Italy without the general assent of Europe. We did not get the assent of Austria to that proposition. We did, howeVer,.ob tails a declaration both at Vienna and at London that Austria meant not to interfere beyond her own frontier; although she would not give up any of her own rights nor those treaties which bound her to maintain the rights of certiiii sivereigns, vet that it was not her intention to at tempt by force of arms to maintain those treaties. This was of i►e•eif a great gain and security for the peace of Europe. (Hear, hear.) Then her Majesty's Government went fur ther in the fourth proposition, which says that if the pro vinces of Central Italy were determined upon governing themselves, or it' they chose to annex to Sardinia, we would object to any force bein4used to subvert such government, and in the other case would not object to Sardinia taking formal possession. This is in conformity with what we de clared to be our pelicy from June to January that the Italian people should themselves decide as to the form of govern ment they w!shed Pr themselves. The hon. member for Dundalk had been able to speak his mind. (Laughter.) It must have been painful to him, with the whole responsi bility of the sentiments of Pope and cardinals resting' on him, not to be able to express them before. (Laughter.) We have now heard those opinions expressed, and what the hon. ( gentleman , has to say of certain manife s t a ti ons w hi c h t oo k J place. To be sure there are manifestations that are not of much value—manifestations that are caused by bad govern ment, and that are apt to be symptoms of revolution. The hon. gentleman might have heard of a great manifestation on Hounslow Heath. The adviser of the sovereign of that day was asked by the King what that meant ? He (the adviser) somewhat like the hon. gentleman himself, said, " Nothing; it is only the soldiers shouting for the acquittal of the seven bishops." The King knew what that manifestation meant, and saw the danger which threatened his th rone on t h a t occasion. It was dangerous for sovereigns to rely on such advisers as the hon. gentleman. Was discontent to be ap peased—was revolution to be prevented by saying that you would never reform a bad system of Government ? We have heard of princes who, like the Grand Duke of Tuscany, violated the fundamental compact by which they sat on the throne by withdrawing from the country, and the results, both in this country and in Tuscany, were very similar. (Hear, hear.) With regard to this immediate question I cannot but think that although in some violent newspapers a great deal of excited opinion has been manifested in favour of the annexation of Savoy to France, that is a course which the Emperor in his wisdom NA :11 long hesitate before he adopts. (Hear, hear.) I c aunt but see what every man may see, that it would product; distrust for two reasons. One reason is that such a policy would be in contradiction with that proclamation—that magnificent proclamation I must say at the risk even of being accused of flattering the Emperor—which he issued. (Hear.) There is another reason why such a course would create distrust. Former encroach ments of France originated in small beginnings only on one side of a country, and yet afterwards they were the precur sors of conquests and the disturbers of Europe. (Hear.) I am afraid if Savoy were annexed, even though a meeting at Charnbery was held in its favour, and even though the powers of Europe gave their reluctant assent, it would be the precursor of a long period of distrust and apprehension. I believe, finally, it would not Lend to the strength of France itself. (Hear, hear.) A country like France, in habited by a race so warlike, and at the same time possess ing in itself such resources, with such wealth and union, does not depend for its security, its independence, or even its power, on the question whether the frontier is advanced nearer to the Alps or the Rhine, but on its own resources, the spirit of. its people, that unconquerable spirit of inde pendence which rules amongst its people, those warlike qualities which have been displayed at all times, but which never more than in the last war have excited the admiration of the world. (Hear, hear.) Such is the security of France. We know what has happened to France in our own day. In 1792, before she acquired Savoy—when her people were in a state of disorder and apparent anarchy—she was at tacked by a formidable league, which extended from Turin on the one side to Berlin on the other. She was, however, able, by her own innate strength, and by the careful mili tary disposition of her forces, to rel,el those invaders and to conquer the very territories from which she had been invaded. (Hear.) The tide of conquest rolled on, until at length her frontier extended from Hamburg in the north to Rome in the south. Was she then more secure ? On the contrary; three years after these frontiers had been so ex tended her enemies entered the capital of the empire. _(Wear.) Therefore I say it is not the right or the secure policy of Franco to attempt to extend her frontier. Her present ruler, without attaining to those brilliant conquests of his • uncle, had perhaps more sagacity and prudence. (Hear, hear.) I have watched that character, and I cannot believe that—seeing the distrust likely to be created—see ing the apprehensions and feeling of hostility which might arise in Europe by the pursuance of such a prospect—l cannot but hope that it will be abandoned in deference to the general sense of Europe. (Cheers.) The motion was then agreed to. THE SERPENTINE.' Mr. CO WPER obtainel leave to nominate a select com mittee to inquire into the best means of cleansing the Ser pentine. Mr. DISRAELI asked, before the house went into com mittee on the Customs Acts, if the Chancellor of the Exche quer would explain, according to custom, an additional article in the commercial treaty with France, which had been added by the Government. MINES REGULATION AND INSPECTION BILL. This bill was read a second time. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS MORTGAGES BILL. This bill passed through committee pro forma. CUSTOMS' ACTS (WINE DUTIES) REPORT. Mr. MASSEY brought up the report on the Customs' Acts agreed to on the previous evening relative to the wine duties, which was agreed to. CUSTOMS' ACTS.—PROGRESS. The house having gone into committee on the Customs Acts, Mr. MASSEY in the chair, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he wished in the first instance to make an explanation respect ing the additional article of the treaty, as was very properly asked by the right hon. gentleman the member for Buck inghamshire. The object of that article was very simple, and was fully explained in the article itself. It proceeded upon the principle that where a commodity would be liable to excise duty in England, the same article if imported from abroad shall be liable to a customs duty equal to the excise duty of it was produced at home; it would be likewise liable for any money charges according to the excise regulations. Upon a strict investigation it appeared that the differential duty of 2d. between colonial and home made spirits, the allowance by way of compensation to the British distiller, did not amount to a full compensation. On that account it became necessary to make some regulation to put the British distillers upon an equality at nearly as they could with the distillers abroad, more especially as they would now be subject to a general and sharp competition with other countries. Her Majesty's Government having made this fact known 'co the Government of France, they were met in a spirit of the greatest liberality. The change made in the scale of duties upon spirits he should explain more particuiarly when they came to vote upon that article. He would now move resolution No. 4in the printed paper, which referred to the application of customs duties upon certain articles therein stated. Mr. NEWDEGATE wished to be informed whether this article of the treaty was applicable to the produce of France only, or the produce of the whole world. He could not see the necessity for a trehty at all. This treaty bound us under an obligatiod to France to admit the produce of the whole world, which was a manifest absurdity. The French Go ve.mment would be iu a position to say to the Zollverlen, to Spain, Austria, and Portugal, if Parliament consented to this treaty—to say to them, England was bound by treaty obligations to France, and therefore they need not trouble themselves if they were to exclude euery article of British manufacture from their ports. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the hon. member had raised a question as to the construction of the treaty, and had given an opinion that by the first words of the sth article the Queen contracted an engagement with France to abolish duties on certain articles, not only im ported from that country but from all parts of the world; so that if goods came from Japan we should be bound to admit them on the same terms. It was true the words of the sth article were general, and did not say expressly, !‘ being the produce of the empire of France." If the treaty in express words stated this, we should admit those articles irrespective of their origin, and then articles from Japan would come under the same head. But the words were general, and did not contain any express covenant as to any particular country. This was the view the Government _took, and wero advised to take, of this article ; but of course it,was open to the hon. member, if he ,thought fit, to raise a question upon it. Mr. NE WDEGATE reiterated his objection to the articles of the treaty as they stood, and expressed a hope that the Attorney-General would assist the committee with the weight of his authority, as he could assure them the opinions he expressed had been entertained by a high legal authority. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL referred generally to the provisions of the Ist, sth, and 11th articles of the treaty, as well as to the general construction to be put upon the treaty itself. This was a contract between two nations'. France did not contract on behalf of all the nations of Eu rope, neither did Great Britain bind any ether nation in Europe, but France alone. It wou ld b e a great absurdity for France to contract on behalf of the great Powers of Europe, or for Great Britain to contract with France, without any engagement with them to do so. The result was that the treaty as a contract could not bind any other power in Europe ; its obligations rested with them alone. The treaty was between two parties—they were the domini—they could alone release, alt. r, or discharge, that contract. The motive for or key of the treaty was plainly enough de scribed in the preamble, in which the motive which animated the two high contracting parties was declared to be to promote the mutual interests of the two countries and draw closer the ties of friendship between them. Mr: BLACKBURN wished to , know whether a deputa tion had not arrived in London from Manchester for the purpose of pointing out that the duty on Manchester goods imported into France would be 45 per cent., instead of 30 per cent., as provided by the treaty. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that no such deputation had been to him, nor did he know any thing of the matter. The rates of duties would be fixed by both Governments, and not by one only. Mr. TURNER said the prosperity of Manchester had been great for some time past, but not to the exaggerated extent stated by the hon. gentleman. He thought the esti- mate of value calculated on the prices of the last six months would be erroneous for the purpose of fixing the duties. Mr. BLACKBURN said it appeared he was not so very wrong after all in describing the prosperity of Manchester, even if it had not been so great as he had stated. If it were true, however, that the prosperity of Manchester had been so very recent as the hon. member described, the Manchester manufacturers would gain no advantage at all, for the me dium price during the last six months was to be taken as the ad valorem duty. Mr. HALIBURTON asked whether it was to be under stood that goods direct fermi Algeria were to be admitted into England, whilst goods from the British colonies were not to have the same privilege of admission into France ? The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that whereas we stipulated for the productions of the United Kingdom generally, France stipulated for those of France, and also, by a separate article, for those of Algeria also. To that extent Algeria was a favoured colony. Lord J. MANNERS inquired why it was that Algeria_ was favoured by France, whe reas no men ti on was made of the British colonies ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER explained that France was in a condition with respect to Algeria very different from that in which we were t)wards our colonies. England could not deal with her colonies as France could deal with Algeria. Canada had been raising her duties lately upon imported goods, which had been considered by some persons a kind of protective measure against British manufactures. But the exclusion of the British colonies was a proof of the political liberty which they enjoyed. (Hear, hear.) Mr, HALIBURTON said he understood then that the house had no power to grant privileges to a colony. (Mur • niurs.) The privileges of a colony were not to be considered, because they could not deal with a colony. (Murmurs of dissent.) Mr. BL ACK BURN asked whether, if goods were shipped froinreylon to Britain, and thence to France, they would conic under the same regulations as the produce of England itself? •• The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he must answer that question with sonic hesitation and reserve, as the question was not. approached by the treaty. Mr. )3 LACKBURN said that admis , zion proved that the words in Article I. respecting "British manufactures im. ported from the United Kingdom into France" did.not re late to the British colonies. (Hear.) Mr. DANBY SEYNIOUR observed if that were so then there would be need of a supplementary treaty. The following articles, to be made free of duty (wider the trea°y), were then agreed to—agates or camelians, &c. Upon the a tide of apples, Mr. BENTINCK rose (amidst somehughter) and said he thought the inexplicable Gordian knot of this treaty would have to be unravelled some day or other with the sword. He thought the question of apples was one of considerable im portance. (A laugh.) It seemed to him that free tralers whether of the old original school, as the hon. member for Birmingham, or the Chauoellor of the Exchequer, his grett recommended uoodnus gen tlemen le con vert, of late yours ignored altogether the existe nce o f t h e a ru p r p al shi districts , of this country. He was no himself—(laughter)-but hter) —but he who represented the rural difitricts, or rather UN rural districts themselves, to fight their own battles, or they I would very likely be called upon to bear the whole burden of taxation. (A laugh.) Hon. gentlemen might laugh who ' were not apple growers any more than himself, but he would ask, was it worth while, as he had not heard of any agita tion for the repeal of the apple laws—(laughter)—and there fore the proposal was wholly gratuitous—to interfere with a description of article the losses upon which would chiefly affect small proprietors ? Mr. RIDLEY said he supposed the hon. member was an advocate for the Norfolk biffins. He thought, instead of the treaty, as the hon. gentleman seemed to suppose, being solved by the sword, if war was to be avoided at all, it would be in consequence of the treaty. Mr. EWART said he was the member of a commission which had discussed the questson of removing the duty on anpleis, and it was then shown that it would be largely for the benefit of the poor. (Hear, hear.) The articles of arms, brass manufactures, brol o a de, bronze, canes, caoutchouc manufactures, and raw ciferries, were. agreed to. The portion of the resolution referring to porcelain was also agreed to. Mr. T% DUNCOMBE moved to omit " corks made and squared for rounding." He complained that this clause would destroy an important branch of English trade unless carp were taken to secure a constant supply of the raw mate rial from Spain. He also objected to the rate to be levied on the bales of raw cork as packages. • The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was wil ling that there should be an immediate remission of the duty, and considered that we were entitled to ask favourable conditions of exportation from Spain. In 1842 the hon. gentleman was one of the strongest advocates of what might be called the monopoly of the English cork-cutters, for the duty levied on foreign corks was equivalent to a prohibi tion. No doubt theirs was a strong case ; but the question was whether the house would attempt by legislation to re tain in this country a trade which would not naturally be found here. If so, hon. members must be prepared to un-, learn all the lessons which had been taught them by the experience . of past years. But he found that there had been no substantial difference between the case of the cork-cut ters and that of other trades under free trade, and that whereas under monopOly th e y h a d on l y a limited, they now had a more extended trade. In the years 1841-3 the average import of cork was 2,606 tons, but in the years 1856-8, it was 5,114 tons, or nearly double, and in 1859 it was 6,579 tons, or nearly treble what it was before the alteration. Even the export trade had been enlarged, for while in 1841 it amounted to 92,0001b5., in 1857-8 it amounted. to 163,0001b5. Ho (the right honourable gentle man) certainly could not see the justice of plac ing an import duty upon cork from France or Morocco, be ' cense Spain chose to place an export duty on the cork pro duced by one of her provinces, Catalonia. France, be it remembered, supplied us with three-fourths of the total quantity of our raw material. All that he (the right hon. gentleman) could do for the meritorious persons whose cause his hon. friend had advocated was to follow the pre cedent which had been set in cases where the immediate re peal of a duty would too sharply affect a particular interest, that was, postpone the operation of the law for a certain time; which in this case he could not fix at a later date than the Ist of April, 1862. Lord J. MANNERS said that the cork-cutters were likely to find that though they had free import they had by no means free trade. He should certainly have no scruples in following the venerable lead of the hon. member for Finsbury (Mr. Duncombe), who had been a consistent free-trader long before the right hon. gentleman, and should vote for the retention of an innocuous duty, that yielded £7,000 or £B,ooo—a sum which he (the noble lord) did not pretend to despise. Sir F. BARING said the cork-cutters, who were a very fair and intelligent body, did not object to free trade ; on the contrary, free trade was exactly what they wanted. (Hear, hear.) What they said was, "We are quite ready to meet the foreign manufacturer if you will put us on the same footing ; only don't take off the duty on the foreign manu factured article while the foreigner prohibits the export of his raw material. That is not free trade—it is protection to the foreigner." (Hear, hear.) He did not wish to inter fere with countries from which the raw material was fairly exported, but would the Government allow the duty to be taken off from manufactured cork the produce of countries where there was a prohibition for the exportation of cork ? Mr. H. BENTINCK said it appeared to him the right hon. gentleman who had just sat clown had put the case in so clear a manner that it did away with the necessity of arguing the subject in any other light. What the Govern ment proposed to do would be neither more nor less than this—they would, without any apparent object, except that object which the Chancellor of the Exchequer seemed to follow at all hazards and all risks, for the sake of carrying out what was falsely called free trade, reduce to a state of positive starvation so many thousands of their fellow-sub jects. Sir E. GROGAN said that if the cork-cutters were not protected in any way whatever in carrying on their trade, it was obvious their trade must sink. Mr. M. GIBSON said the proposal they were !going to vote upon was whether they should put a high duty on ma nufactured cork coming, not from Catalonia, but from where it might. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE begged to say thrt it was his in tention to withdraw his amendment, and propose the in troduction of the words " the produce of any country from which the export of cork was free." The CHAIRMAN having put this question, Mr. M. GIBSON said this proposition rather altered the question. One object he had in rising was to remind hon. gentlemen that the Government were about to give a very great encouragement to the manufacturers of cork by in creasing the consumption of wine. (Laughter.) The amendment of the hon. member was something so new that it required consideration. He should like to know how such a proposition would be reconcilable under the obliga tions sof the favoured nations' clause. Sir H. CAIRNS said the argument of the hon. gentle man was that the cork trade would be extended in conse quence of the increased consumption of wine. He thought that was exactly the reason why we should endeavour to procure the raw material. (Hear, hear.) He certainly should support the amendment of the hon. member for Finsbury, and simply for that reason. Mr. BO UVERIE asked whether the export of cork wood from Spain was free or not ? It was free from Catalonia. Was it free from Andalusia ? But another objection to the amendment was that it would perpetuate what were called certificates of origin. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he did not understand it to be the desire of the hon. member for Finsbury to prevent her Majesty fulfilling her engagements with the government of France with regard to the article of corks. He wished to point out that so far as France was concerned the amendment as it stood was not satisfactory. He believed the export of cork wood frora France was prac tically free. They had entered into an engagement with France to admit corks, being the product of France. In the motion before the committee they had gone a great deal fur ther because, acting on the general principle which they believed to be sound, they had not stopped at their engage ment as it stood in the treaty, but they had proposed that universally the import duty should be free irrespective of their engagement with France. Our manufacturers com plained that in certain cases there was a prohibition on the expert of cork wood to this country. The question whether we ought to take notice of the law of other countries in fix ing the regulations of our own tariff was a question of the deepest and most vital importance, and he hoped the com mittee would come to no hasty conclusion upon it, - and that they would not come to a conclusion with reference to the 'article of cork without having considered where the prin ciple was to lead them, because, as he understood it, the pre position was that they must inquire into the legislation of every foreigncountry, and unless they were satisfied with the terms of that legislation, they werenot to give that nation the benefit of introducing the article. That was the doctrine at issue, but that was a doctrine of a reach the range of which went so far not only into the proposition of the Government, but into the whole of the proceedings of the British Parlia ment for the last 18 years, that it was essenti a lly necessary that they should have full opportunity of considering its effects, both as a principle of commercial legislation, and otherwise with reference to the present state of our national engagements. He was under the impression that great en tanglement and embarrassment, such as could not be de scribed, would arise from their attempts to apply that prin.. ciple, not to this treaty only, but to the treaties they had formed with alniest every foreign country. Government were ready to give the opportunity of raileing that question, but it could not be raised on the present occasion. Nothing could be more inoonvenient than that the fulfilling of her Majesty's engagements with the Government of France should be mixed up with another question—whether they should object to the introduction of corks from Spain becaui: in one of the provinces of Spainth e e x p or tation of cork w ood was prohibited. Wh a t h e p ro p ose d was that he shoulda satisfy the terms of' the resolution so as to enable them t ado thus:— s:— their engagements with France. It would was s ad t n h o a t t , that ' _ " Corks, ready made and squared for rounding,reo read o f after imported th n e 3 lst March, 1862, the produce or manufactu fra should F ran c eh be put A t l a g s i er s. the " original What h m e ot p io ro n p . ose H d o however, the smallest intention of shrinking fro the other question, but he would raise it fairly , and h is hon. friend could then move his amendment and beat the Government, it he pleased, and could induce the house to follow him with out involving the consequence—which his hon. friend did not wish —of preventing their fulfilling their engagements with France. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said ho could not withdraw his motion. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said his hon. friend did not understand the case. Ilis hon. friend altered his amendment, and it was in his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) power to prevent him, but he made no ob jection. He now requested the same permission which he gave to his hon. friend, so to alter the motion as not to in terfere with their engagements with France, Mr. DUNCOMBE said the course taken by the rig ht hon. gentleman raise.' an important constitutional question, were to u t s h el i e s s , when he urged that this amend ment should not be pressed o b o e n ca d us hi e on i s t ofwtohuoldtreprevent tthheatGohoiverti: et er f o u t l o fil h li o ng tak th en e then allOpposition } the . d i i v s c a u s s i s t i ions come s (Cheers from the s tl at the resolutions of Parliament were to be made t subservient to the French treaty ? He maintai ne d the con he pressed his amendment. Tohn rary, and ,with th a t v i ew about to do an i n j us ti ce to a eright hon. gentleman was valuable class of artisans, by taking off the protective duty Without giving them the raw material to carry on their trade; for Spain would be e na bl e d to send in her rea d y made corksu it' and k back the raw ma terial ; and if this resolution were agreed - to, theywould not be able to b r i ng the Government of Spain to book. He therefore urged that the words by the • suggested right hon. member for Portsmouth should be put in, and then France might put a pressure on Spain, to induce her to let Eng land material without any more bother. have th e raw Sir H _ • CAIRNS remarked that the course whi c h th e r i g ht hon. gentleman was ready vote_ to re duce the duti es on French produce only, e xc l u di ng the same articles of produce from other countries, was the very course which he had before said he could not take, for he said the other day that no difference could be made be tween France and the rest of the world. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER admitted the hon. and learned gentleman's accusation, which showed the reasonableness of the original proposition of the Govern ment. They had made certain engagements with France, and they hal to consider how they should ask the House of Commons to ratify those engagements. They had thought it would be paying the greatest respect to the house to as sume that those engagements might be ratified in the shape which the house had fir a long period thought fit to adopt, recognising no distinction between produce of the same kind with reference to the country from which it came. In tak ing that course the Government came to a right determina tion • but they were met now With a peculiar doctrine, one which had not been known to the House of Commons of late Years--,namely, that it was their duty to take cognisanas of the state of the commercial law of other countries, in fixing the customs duty for our own. But as there was in this case no application of that doctrine to France, he had now proposed for the convenience of the committee to sepa rate the two questions, and he was willing first to submit the resolution answering the engagement with France, and after that he would make another motion, upon which Ike hon. member for Finsbury could raise the question he wished to enforee with referencc c 9 Spain. Intended to make precisely the same procosal as before, only two parts, so as to separate what related to France, under the treaty, from our general legislation But if the hon. member for Finsbury would not permit thie to be done for the conve nience of the committee, he (Mr. Gladstone must divide against him. In answer to Mr. FITZGZRALD, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he proposed to add to the resolution the words " the produce or manufacture of, or imported from France or Algeria," which was no more than sufficient to accomplish the object of the treaty. Sir H. CAIRNS observed, that under that amendment all Spain would have to do would be to send cork to a French port, and then it might become cork "imported from France." (Hear, hear.) Lord P ALM ER ST 0 N thought that the objection applied with greater force to the amendment of the hon. member for Finsbury than to the preposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Take the words of the former, and he would defy any fiscal regulations to prevent the evasion of the re strictions he proposed. How would he prevent corks made in Spain and passing through France being imported into England ? He proposed not to allow the importation free of duty of corks coining from any country the legislation of which prevented the exportation of the raw material. Sup posing Spain did or intended to prohibit the exportation of the raw material, even with his resolution, nothing would be more easy than for Spain to send her cork manufactures through France. They would then be subject to the re striction of his resolution, and the purpose ho had in view would be entirely and completely defeated. (Hear, hear.) No one had alleged that there was any prohi bition in France against the importation of the raw mate rial ; and, therefore, there could be no reason why we should not permit the free importation of manufactured corks from France. Having once agreed that in accordance with the treaty with France corks coming from France should be admitted duty free, the house could enter into the consideration of the question whether it was expedient, consistent with our legislation, practicable, or consistent with our fiscal regulations, to adopt the proposal of the hon. member for Finsbury, and to say with regard to Spain or any other country, "unless you allow the free exportation of the raw material we will not allow the manufactured article to come in duty free." If they did that, every man would see that when the cargo of cork arrived in port they would not know whether it should pay a duty or not until they had ascertained whether it had come from Catalonia. or Andalusia, and whether there existed at the time a pro hibition upon the exportation of the raw material. All these complications and difficulties would check and baffle the ingenuity of any custom. house oticer, and lead to the utmost confusion in all mercantile transactions, so far as the article of cork was concerned. (Hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL' said that the words proposed by his right hon. friend were consistent with the French treaty, but those of the hon. gentleman were not. Mr. DUNCOMBE said that the Government bad only to enter into fresh negotiations on the subject. The Emperor of the French was too sensible, too wise, and too just a man not to accede to the alteration. The committee then divided-- For Mr. Duncombe's amendment Against it Majority 73 The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEUQER said that though he was not bound by a convention to which his hon. friend had not agreed, he thought the fairest course he could take was to move the words he had read to the house. (No, no.) He therefore proposed to add the following words=— "the produce or manufacture of or imported from France or Algeria." The right hon. gentleman added that it would be impracticable at that period of the evening (a quarter past 12), to proceed further. Th e mos t cons i stent course would be to propose that all corks, otherthan the pro due,' imported from France, should be dealt with after theY had concluded what related to France. (Hear, hear.) - Sir J. PAKINGTON asked how far this committee was free to deal with anyof the items in this schedule. It seemed to him to raise a most important question. It would be al idle waste of time for them to be passing item by item if they were not free to discu s s th em , or if they should think fit to reject any of them. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought the right hon, baronet must tee this was an inquiry which turned upon and involved. the largest constitutional princt plea, and it was the duty of every member of th a t hou s e to answer that question for himself. The Ministers of the Crown had an absolute power to negotiate a treaty, but that must be subject to applying to Parliament where legislation was required. That was a question where legislation was required, and until that treaty was sanctioned by the vote of both Houses of Parliament it could not take effect. Lord J. MANNERS said the explanation of the right hon. gentleman was highly satisfactory ; but he trusted that when they came to discuss the other items of the treaty they should have a thoroughly English debate. Mr. BALL moved that the chairman do report progress, Lord J. RUSSELL said Parliament had a complete right to begin with the wine duties, and reject that and every other article of the treaty if they saw fit. It was only ' question for the discretion of Parliament. Sir W. FARQUHAR trusted that on other occasions when those different articles were to be considered the housi would be permitted to ge freely into the question and reject such articles as they thought proper. Mr. NE WDEGATE wished to know if articles of cloth; ing made up were to be included in the treaty ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER relied that they were. He trusted the hon. member for Cambridgi would withdraw his motion. • , Mr. BALL said he thought the right hon. gentleman, after answering questions all night, must be physically in capable of proceeding furtb er at that hour. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he could not accept the favour which the bon. gentleman offered him. The ;greatest favour the hon. member could confer upon him would be to allow him to go on with the resolu tions. They might have a chance of taking these resolue tions to-morrow, but probably that would not suit the con venience of members. He trusted there would be a dispo sition on other days, except in cases where business of a very urgent nature was involved, to proceed with these resolu tions. He trusted to be able to bring on these resolutions at some period on Thursday evening, provided he could do so at a reasonable hour. He wished to take the sense of the cammitteo of ways and means to-morrow as to the duty of Bs. ld. on British spirits, as it was desirable for the conve nience of the revenue that effect should be given to that vote immediately after it was delivered. Sir J. PAKINGTON said if he rightly understood the sight hon. gentleman with regard to the order of proceeding . on Thursday, it amounted to this, that as soon as any dis cussion that might arise on the Reform Bill was concluded,. the right hon. gentleman should proceed with his resolutions and, as far as members on that (the opposition) side of the house was concerned, there would be no objection to that course. (Hear, hear.) Mr. MACAULAY wished to know how far the house was free to discuss the propositions of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Part of the resolutions now before the com mittee stated that the Queen had recommended Parliament, to do so and so, and he wished the Government to state haw' far the house would be free to discuss these propositions. Lord J. RUSSELL said the Queen could not comply with a treaty by barely recommending the consideration of certain proposals to Parliament. That, - in plain language, meant unless all thos e engagements which required the assent of Parliament received that sanction. It would therefore be perfectly competent far the Emperor of the French, if Parliament dissented from any of the articles of the treaty, to refuse to ratify the remainder, or to propose a new treaty. Sir J. PAKINGTON said that the answers of the Go. vernment were evasive. The question referred, not to:the rejection of an entire article, but of some particular item— artificial flowers, for instance—of which there were many comprised in one article. Was the house free to reject any item which it thought impolitic withtut making it necea. nary to re -open negotiations with Prance Lord J. RUSSELL said that the right hon. gentlereanwee as competent to answer that question as the Government was. It was a matter for the discretion not only of Na il .: ment, but of the Emperor of the French. It was not very, likely that the Emperor would throw aside the treaty on account of the rejection of such an item as artificial flowers. But, supposing' the feeling to be very stron g in France that England was getting the best of the treaty, and that France was made the slave of England in the matter—(hear,'hear) —it might be d esirable to adopt th e provisions of the treaty with as little aon as possible. (Hear, hear.) After a few words from Dlr. WHITESIDE, the chairman reported progress, and th e h ouse resumed. The Oxford Uni vers i ty Bill, Poisons Bill pas se d through committee. The house adj ourned at half-past 12 o'clock. - and the e h Administering of [ADVERTISEME Lewes and Mor-to-nNTh.a3v—iNn:jtjueset.— co l ni n m co en n o s: d qu l e sdo nce wi o t f h H op e rto ss s rs i. . tion similar t o th at which they previously advanced, and wish ing to do th ose gentlemen every justice, Mr. Thorley is induced to e nlarge his comi ng pamp hl et, making it 61 pages instead of 32-- s howing beyond doubt that their ob serva ti ons on the so-called "Concentrated Cattle Food," and so-called "feeding statistics," are without foundation; that the Rothamsted experiment was not made with his food, and consequently that this complete failure must either be through mismanage-. ment or from buying the Condiment at the wrong shop. Tho first impression of One Hundred Thousand Copies will be . ready about the first day of March, and may be had post free on receipt of Three Stamps, on application to Joseph Thorley, the Inventor and sole Proprietor of " Thorley's Food for Cattle," 77, Newgate-street, London ; 21, Broadway, New York. United States; Mr. J. W. Thorley, Melbourne; Vic toria; Mr. Alfred Burt, Sydney, New South Wales; and of all his agents throughout the United Kingdom.—Feb. 2.1860. [ADVERTISEMENT.] Holloway's Pills.—Liver COM plaints.—Tho virtues of these incomparable pills are • fully appreciated in every part of the civilised world. As they act on the general system through the circulation, there are few diseases which they cannot cure, but they are espe cially efficacious in all the disorders of the liver. For these they are an indubitable specific. They - possess unrivalled potency for good, while they cannot clo harm. A child might physic itself with these pills, and without the slightest danger, except from such excess as would make the most wholesome aliment in the world an evil. By re ducing the superfluous bile, regulating its due secretion, and giving tone to the stomach, they effect a- perfect and per manent cure. BIRTHS. LANDON.—On the 27th inst., at Ledsham Vicarage, York shire, the wife of the Rev. James T. B. Landon, of a son. MACPHERSON.—On the 28th inst., at 3, Radnor-plauf Hyde-park, the wife of William Maephersox, Esq., bar rister-at-law, of a daughter. Wkun.—On the 27th inst., at Blackheath-park, Mrs. Ward, of a son. MARRIAGES. ARCHER—STEVENSON.—On the 28th inst., at St. Pancras Church, Reuben Archer, Esq„ of Birmingham, to Jane Amelia. eldest daughter of J. W. Stevenson. TuLtocn—MOßTON.—On the 21st January last, at St. Thomas's Church, near Madras, Lieut. Hector Tulloch t Madras Engineers, t o Ada, eldest daughter of Edward Morton, Esq., of 3, Kensington -gate, Hyde-park.* DEATHS. ABBEY.—On the 24th inst., at Broxbourne, Herts, James Abbey, Esq., aged 75. AUSTIN.—On the 27th inst., at 6, Oakley-square, Chelsea, Mr. Wm. Fred. Austin, aged 65. FOIVRE.—On the 25th inst., at Springfield, Lowesby, Lei cestershire, Lawrence woolaston, youngest son of the late Sir Frederick Fowko, Bart., aged 32. STRANGWAYS.—On the 25th inst., at Rewo, Devonshire, tho Rev. Henry Fo x St rangways , rec t or of Hews, aged 6 4 . YELVERTON.—On the 26th inst., at Ennismore House, Kingstown, the Hon. George Frederic Wm. Yelverton, eldest son of Viscount Avonmore, aged 41. L0241)01 , 1: Printed and Published by 'MORD° YOUNG, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at Ms Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the county of Middleee; Wednesday, Febrilary 29, 1860. = - 4. , ,*._~, ~, ~~. ~. ~i