The Sun. — London, England, 1860-03-06 00:00:00

THE I 'SUN, I ,%ONDON, TUES DAY EVENING, MARCH 6, 1860. may bo necessary for giving effect," &c. The fact is we' have taken those steps. (" No, no ! The bills.") That is a formal affair; the decision of the house has been arrived at. In the case of 1787, when the address from which this is copied was moved,•not a single vote in the committee of customs had been taked, the mode of levying the duties had not been altered, and therefore there is a great difference be tween the two cases. However, that is a question on which I will not dwell now. I Ain extremely glad that the noble lord has taken the course which he has done, and I am sure he must see its propriety, because it was, I believe, past, midnight on Eriday when the notice was given. At that time a great number of gentlemen, including my right hon. friend the member for Droitw ich had left the house, and many of them left town on the follow:ng morning. With regard to the time for the consideration of this address, I should think Friday would be a more convenient day than Thursday, as it would interfere with no other arrange .ments, and I would therefore suggest to the noble lord that it would be more acceptable to the house if he would fix the later day instead of the earlier. Lord PALMERSTON was understood to say that this would lead to,inconvenience in case of the adjournment of the debate. Mr. HORSMAN called the attention of the house to the fact that during the present session they had given to the Government facilities for conducting business such as had been asked by no Government before. (Hear, hear.) Since the night when the I 'hancellor of the Exchequer introduced his budget the Government had been allowed to appropriate every notice day for the discussion of their financial resolu tions. No such' indulgence was given to Sir R. Peel in 1842 or 1845, nor was it asked by the present Chancellor in 1853, although on all those occasions the fiscal changes and the unsettlement of trade were greater than they had been on the present occasion. More than this, the Government, to facilitate the passing of the Customs' duties, had been al lowed to appropriate Thursday for the introduction of the Reform Bill. All this had been cheerfully conceded ; beet, he thought the house ought to put a limit upon these con cessions —(hear, hear)—which had in no previous session. been demanded by any Government. There had, of course, been occasions on which there had been adjourned debates upon the budget which had, to snit the general conve nience, taken precedence of notices of motion ; but to the present Government had been readily and cheerfully con ceded that which had never been asked before. He, there fore, submitted that the Government ought not to press the house too far, and that, instead of asking for next Thurs day evening, they ought to fix the consideration of this address for Friday. Sir J. PAKINGTON—I cannot allow this conversation to close without expressing my satisfaction that the Govern ment and the hon. gentleman epposite have thought it right to take the course which they have done, and my earnest hope that the extraordinary notice given on Friday night will not be drawn into a precedent, because I must say that since I have had the honour of a seat in this house I can remember no instance in which the conduct of the Govern ment had so much the appearance of an intention to take the house by surprise —(hear, hear)—and, if possible, to prevent or strangle the discussion upon a question of great interest and importance, as the notice which was given by the hon. member for Middlesex between 12 and 1 o'clock on Saturday morning. In my opinion, the course which was then taken by the Government and by the hon. member on their behalf was not only most unusual, but also most dis courteous to the house—( ' Oh, oh," and hear, hear)—and am very glad that the Government have seen fit to change their course. I entirely concur with my right hon. friend the member for Stroud in what he has said as to the prac flee of occupying Thursday nights with Government busi ness; and I hope that the Government will not persevere in their intention to bring on this motion on Thursday even ing. The noble viscount has intimated across the table that the reason for taking that course is the possibility of the debate being adjourned. In answer to that, I will say that the Government must take the chance which all Govern ments have on all occasions taken when bringing forward bills on Government nights ; and, therefore, hope that the house will not sanction this proposal. (Hear, hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I think the right hon. baronet, seeing there is no difference of opin ion as to the course which ought to be pursued, might have abstained from making the deliberate charge which he has thOught proper to prefer against the Government of endea vouring to stifle discussion upon the commercial treaty with France. (Hear, hear.) 1 do not think the Government have shown any desire to stifle' discussion. (Hear, hear.) We are perfectly satisfied by the results of the discussion which has taken place, and perhape it is some dissatisfaction with those results which has induced the right hon. baronet to make his unnecessary charge. (Hear, hear. But, however, that may be, 7 think my right hon. friend the member for Stroud is labouring under a misapprehension with respect both to principle and to fact. In the first place, with re gard to the acceleration of public business, I mrst, always! whether in or out of office, protest against the rssumption that it is a favour to the Government to allow them to pro , ceed with their measures on days that do not properly be long to them. It is not at all for the canvenience of the Government that they should be perrritted to take a larger share than usual of the time of the house. My right hon. friend must know that a rapid rate of proceeding brings an additional and a very inconvenient amount of labour upon the:Government. It is a regard to the general interests of the country and to the 'el" definite and press ing interests of the whole commercial and tra - ling, classes that makes us anxious to an ive at an early conclusion on the budget. (Hear.) But" I think likewise my right hon. friend is wrong in point of fact. lam not prepered to quote chapter and verse of the precedents at the present moment, but, unless toy recollection greatly deceives me, we did, upon many nights in 1842, proc2cd with the tariff when the Government had not regr ler precedence. Un doubtedly that we s not the only instance, for under all Governmente, *hen. the case has appeared to La of suffi cient urgency to justify it, a similar demand has been made and acceded to by the horse. Of course that is a question entirely in the discretion of the house ; and when ever the Government perceives the existence of a general ad verse disposition on the pal t of the house it will at once withdraw such a demand. But I think my noble friend has given on this occasion one vel j r special reason why it is eminently for the convenience of all parties that we should go or, as proposed on Thursday. If there is to be an adjourned debate we shall be able to carry it on after an interval of only a few hor-s, instead of one of three clays; and those gentlemen who may be detained in London will be liberat - 3at a, much earlier period. (A laugh.) But it so happens that if any one will take the trouble to turn to the notices which stand for Thursday he will see that it is a day eminently convenient for the motion of the hon. mem ber for Middlesex to be made. We are not endeavouring to bi ing Lrviard an order upon a notice night. The hon. mem ber for Middlesex !lives notice of a motion, and proposes to place it on the paper for Thursday. It may s: Ind very well upon its own merits as a notice which mill only compete with other notices, and which I! Ii not displace any without the fell consent of the movers. It seen - s to be forgotten that the Government have not, after all, received the favor - aof which we have heard so much. All we have been enabled to do by the aid and kindnc as of many hon. members has been to oecupy the later poraons of two or three evenings which otherwise might not have been occupied at all. On Thursday night, it is true, my noble friend the Secrete!' for Foreign Affairs was permitted to bring forward a vel e , important subject at an early hour; but on Tuesday night the hon. member for Bridgewater, in the exercise of his discretion, called the attention of the house to a question of which he had given notice, and although we were allowed to occupy the later portion of the evening no inconvenience was expe rienced by any one. It so happ ns, however, as I have al ready said, that the notices for Thursday next are not very numerous, and I believe they will be found to be either such as are not likely to lead to prolonged discussions, from the nature of the subjects, or ouch as cannot lead to pro longed discussion because they aro agreed to. The motion relating to dockyards has been agreed to, and the motion on our relations with the Neapolitan Government is, I un derstand, one that cannot be conveniently discussed in de tail in the - present state of affairs and the present state of the house as to information. I must say, therefore, it would be little better than a waste of time if we were not to take the convenient opportunity of proceeding es :th the impor tant motion of my hon. friend the member for Midellesex on Thursday, with the view of closing the discussion on Friday in case the house should wish for an adjourned debate. But that rests in the discretion of the house, only we are not disposed to take the opinion of two or three members for tho general wish of the house, as is sometimes done. My belief is, that the general inclination of the house, as far as we are able tee gather it, is in conformity with the notice given by the hon. member for Middlesex—viz., that he should pro ceed with his motion on Thursday. (Hear, hear.) Mr. S. ,FITZGERALD reminded the house that the Government had done no more than accede to the sugges tion of the hon. member for Sunderland, that the motion for an address on the subject of the French treaty should be postponed for a day or two. It seemed to him, however, that the question which had been raised by the hon. member for Bridgewater was one of still greater importance. It was not a question whether on Thursday or Friday the house should signify its assent to or disapproval of a commercial treaty, or whether that discussion should be deferred till another occasion. Neither was it a question whether the house should express its opinion on the contemplated an •nexation of Savoy and Nice to France. The question was whether the house should embrace the present (pportunity, . w h en /natters seriously affecting the relations of this coun try and the whole of Europe with France ware before 'the public, of signifying its assent t o a t reaty, by which, in the . words of the noble lord at the head of the Foreign-office, ,our relations with France were to be rendered closer and ni ,, , re intimate. (Hear, hoar.) The hon. member for Brid,: ew ater had well pointed out that th e question raised ' by him in his speech was of far greater impor tanco fi :a n the mere annexation of a small portion of territory. it only affectsd the independence and security c'f Switzerlawl, but, as the hon. baronet the membe r far Tainworth had stated, in forcible language, it had n. very important bearing upon the relations of France with OermallY• Tfear, hear.) It had also an important bearinv upon the relations of France with Italy, where in consege ,, ence of the proposed annexation France might ex ercise es el influence and power . far more formidable than had at any t ime been exercised by Austria. (Hear, the quell tion was one of still greater importance hear.) But which might possibly see in the project of annexation said to be entertained by the Emperor of the French a key to the claims and the future policy of France. There were passages in the speech of the Emperor eminently calculated to raise the suspicions and misgivings of Europe. His leta jesty spoke, for example, of what he called the "natural limits" of France. (Hear, hear.) The house would see, therefore, that the question was one of the greatest Euro pean importance, and one in which this country was deeply interested. What was the position of Europe at the pre sent moment ? There was not a single country in Europe that did not regard the policy of the extraordinary man who now wielded the destinies of France with anxiety and alarm. (Hear.) There was not a covntry in Europe the statesmen of which did not look to France with something like fear. Yet there was not a country in Europe that was prepared to take the initiative in such a matter. All the nations of Europe looked to Entiand, where there was a free Parliament, a free press, a free elpression of public opinion. (Hear.) They relied upon us to take the initia tive, and he believed that if we did so they would follow. What, however, was the position in which the Government wished to place this country ? Instead of using language, not such as the noble lord at the head of the Foreign-office had used, but language recording our earnest, emphatic, and unflinching protest against the annexation of Savoy and Nice, the Government proposed that, passing by the dis cussion to which the Foreign Minister had invited the house, Parliament should take into consideration the clauses of a commercial treaty with France at the very moment when the policy of France was creating distrust and alarm throughout Europe. (Hear, hear.) On Friday night the noble lord opposite declared that the question of the annexa tion of Savoy and Nice was one for the consideration, not of the Crown or of the Government, but of the people of England and the House of Commons, and yet he was now asking the house to parade itself before Europe in the act of drawing closer the bonds of alliance with France, as if there was an identity of policy and of interests between the two countries. (Hear, hear.) The present was not the time for such language as the Foreign Minister had held. He granted that the noble lord, as appeared from the re cently published correspondence, had remonstrated against the course pursued by France and against the project said to be entertained by the Emperor. But we wanted more than the mere language of remonstrance. We did not want the noble lord to write to Turin that the sur render of the cradle of his illustrious family would be " a blot on the escutcheon" of the King of Sardinia. That was mere rhetoric, rather than the earnest and vigorous protest which we desired. (Hear, hear.) We were bound by the faith of solemn treaties. (Hear, hear.) We had treaties with Austria, with Prussia, and with Russia, and what the country wanted to see from the Powers thus united was a solemn protest against a project which, he feared, was not only entertained, but in part accomplished, and which he believed to be dangerous alike to the interests and the tranquillity of Europe. (Cheers.) Under these circum stances he would suggest to the noble lord that the consi deration of the clauses of the commercial treaty should not take place until the house had the opportunity of clearly and decidedly expressing an opinion as to this annexation of Savoy and Nice. (Hear, hear.) He did not doubt that the opportunity would be found, either by the action of some independent member, or by some proposition on the part of the Government; to take the papers into consideration; and then, on Monday next, if the noble lord proceeded to the consideration of the clauses of the commercial treaty, a course would be adopted by which the public service would be greatly benefit. (Hear.) Mr. BRIGHT thought he might assume that the language of the hon. gentleman was the language of the right hon. member for Buckinghamshire and of Lord Derby, who, in another place, As the leader of the party to which the hon. gentleman belonged. (Hear, and a laugh.) The hon. gen tleman had not taken a very active part in the discussions of the house until within the last 12 months, when, from the official position in which he was placed, it was necessary for him to do so, and it must be admitted that the hon. gen tleman when in office conducted the business of his depart ment, as far as that house was concerned, in a satisfactory manner. (Hear, hear.) He therefore the more regretted to be obliged to say that he observed that a very remarkable change had taken place since the hon. gentleman quitted office; and he did not know that he had heard for a long time a speech in that house wb:ch had given him more astonishment and pain than that which the hon. gentleman had just delivered. He did not ask the hon. gentlemen to please him la the speeches which the hon. gentleman made and he certair ly in his speeches did not t.y to please hon. gentlemen opposite—(a laugh) ; but he did ask that when hon. gentlemen addressed the house they should well con sider the gartity of the question, and endeavour, as far as other countries were c .ncerned, not to import into the dis cussion any unnecessa - i irritation. From what had been observable du: :ng the last fol .right or three weeks, it was quite obvious that the commercial treaty was very unplea sant to hon. gentlemen opposite. (Hear, and oh, oh.) There were - many reasons why it should be so, some of which they were not likely to admit, and which it was not necessary for him to state; but he asked whether it was a manly course to modeavov^, when the commercial treaty was on the point of being concluded by the ratification of the house, and when throughout the covntry there was but one voice with re spect to it —(cries of " Oh," and " Hear, hear")—and when that house had r"cady shows itself most urnolstakeably in its favour—was it 1 - early, he asked, to associate the treatment of that particuler question, end of the Govern ment in respect to it, with another question which might or might not be importsnt, but which was liable to create initaiion here and elsewhere ? (Hear.) The hon. member for Bridgewater and many other hon. members had strong feelings on this question of Savoy. What course did they propose to take ? Did they propose to take out of the hands of the Crown or of the Government any management or control of the matter ? If they believed that there was any thing in the papers not creditable to the noble lord who had the management of the foreign affairs of the country or to the honour of the Crown of England, could they not pro pose a motion R ith respect to those papers on any night in this or next week to the effect that the conduct of the Go vernment was not creditable, and that the interests of the country heti not been duly regarded? Then the matter would be fairly discussed and battled out, and if the hon. gentlemen opposite could carry a vote of censure, then the great object of their ambition would be attained; the Go vernment would be turned.out, and hon. gentlemen opposite wovld sit on the Ministerial benches, and when they did they would, be presumed, from the force of circumstances, carry out precisely the same policy. (Cheers.) There were, not a few persons in this country who regretted the course taken by the right hon. member for Buckinghamshire on this question, for no doubt that right hon. gentleman prompted the virtuous indignation of the hon. member for Horsham. That course was one not void of some consider able peril. He had seen the course followed by the party opposite in 1853 and 1854. There was not an insinuation of any kind which was not resorted to at that time with the view of damaging Lord Aberdeen i s Government, and Lord Aberdeen especially, though such a course might occasion war, and did, no doubt, much to make the unfortunate war that ensued inevitable. (Oh, oh !). He did not ask hon. gentlemen opposite to agree with him; he was only telling them what a great number of people believed, and the opi nion was growing stronger every day that there were per sons occupying high positions before the public who would rather see a great alienation from France—even though it might lead to the terrific consequences of another war—than a growing friendship between England and France, which was likely to result from the commercial treaty. (Oh, oh ! and Hear, hear I) He agreed with the right hon. member for Buckinghamshire verrmuch in this, that Government could not very well be carried on in this country with out something that assumed the character of party, but still he had no great affection for party fights. At any rate, there were many subjects in the course of a session on which party fights might be taken, but in the name of all that was sensible, all that was humane and just to man kind, let them banish from their party discussions ques tions of irritation like that raised to-night—questions which grew by this sort of discussion, and, sometimes in a very short time, till they got beyond the control of those who first raised them. (Cheers.) If they could conceive themselves for a moment to be sitting in France, instead of in England, and hearing this kind of discussion—if they could suppose England and France to change places on the question of Savoy, and England to desire annexation, - could not hon. gentlemen then perceive that the sort of tone in which the matter was taken up, and the sort of menace which the hon. gentleman offered, was precisely the kind of thing which made—if such a thing were possible—war absolutely inevitable ? The hon. gen tleman proposed, in effect, that the house should not pro ceed with the commercialtrea+y until the question of Sav o y should be settled. (Cheers and counter cheers.) Did he misunderstand the hon. gentleman ? [Mr. S. Fitzgerald intimated that he had not said so.) Then he retracted the statement; but he was quite sure that the tone of the hon. gentleman's observations led to that conclusion. (Cheers ) Besides, he should ask, what was the object of tying the two things up together, unless one was to be made dependent on the other? (Hear.) He ventured to say that no words that could be put into a resolution would more decidedly cause a rupture between France and England than words declaring that the house would not consider the commercial treaty until the question of the annexation of Savoy was settled. (Hear, hear.) Now, he was not going to discuss that question; but a great deal might be said for it on the part of France, and against it on the part of England. It appeared to him one of those questions which had better not be stirred, but which, being stirred, concerned the peo ple of France, of Sardinia, and of Savoy much snore than the people of England. As a matter of material interest it did not concern England at all, but only as a matter of sen timent, as all were desirous here that nobody should destroy he old landmarks of Europe. It was impossible, hos.; ever, for any person in the position of the government of a great country to have stated his case, his wishes and intentions, in more fair and open language than that read by the hon. member for Brid g e w at e r. The hon. member, indeed, ad mitted that if the words he read were the only words in the matter he would take the same view of them ; but those were the only words which referred to the action of the Emperor, the other words referring solely to the Emperor's wishes and rights. If, however, any hon. gentleman felt aggrieved on the subject, let him bring forward'a specific resolution, and then the noble lord the member for London would be enabled -r- d Prol4 Uit3 course ou this question; but he imploil 301 the house not to let it appear that it preferred a party e m barrassment—a party victory if it might be—or the If breaking up the friendly relati ons b e t ween thi s Id France, to the a cc e pt ance o f th a t great treaty, on which t 1 'le people of England believed their fut ure com counpte: mercial lute, "eats t') a very considerable extent depended. (Hear.) He `tad 'not risen to defend the Government, but when a question c f tlr:s sort was made a ground of attack from night to nir sht, he believed he placed !these attacks imperilling peace with France, and therefore with Europe, on the real grour 41 when he stated that they were made for a party object, for , a 'hich a great party ought to be ashamed. (Cheers.) Mr. LIDDELL said the hon. gentlemen on his side of the house were not . prepared to regard the annexation of Savoy with a pusillanimous indifference. (Hear, hear.) It was very convenient fi:lr the hon. member (Mr. Bright) to evade the main point of this question, but the fact was that England stood pledg vd to maintain the independence of Switzerland, and that in ..dependence was seriously endan gered by the proposed anne nation. (Hear, hear.) With re spect to the treaty, he hopeul the hon. member for Sunder land (Mr. Lindsay) would nOt accept the courteous offer of the noble Premier. The hon. member had long since given notice of an amendment upon the third article of the treaty ; and if the noble lord's proposal were accepted, the House of Commons might find itself in the position of the man who locked the stable door when. the steed was gone. (Hear, and a laugh.) They wished to urge the Government to press upon France the impolicy of' continuing those un just restrictions in favour of French shipping provided for in the third article ; but their chances of success would be very much lessened if the amendment were deferred as the noble lord desired. (Hear.) Mr. WHITESIDE—The hon. member (Mr. Bright) has imputed to gentlemen on this side of the House that for a party object they are desirous of catching at this question of Savoy in order to expel the Ministry from their places. Now, I think he will see upon reflection that that imputa tion is not one which he ought to have made. (Hear, hear.) Has this difficulty been created by any act of those around me ? By no means. The person who jeopardises the peace of Europe is he who does net respect the faith of treaties — who says thatgeographically he is entitled to one country, and that logically he is entitled to another. (Hear.) That is the argument in reference to Savoy and Nice. Does any imputation rest on the Foreign Secretary ? No. I have only looked into these despatches; but as far as I have read them I think that they reflect honour upon the noble lord, and that he has•asserted the interests of peace, the interests of his country, and the interests of Europe. (Cheers.) But our object is, in accordance with the noble lord's own speech the other evening, to strengthen the hands of the Ministry by expressing clearly and distinctly the opinion of Parliament, not as the hon. member (Mr. Bright) supposes, upon the internal affairs of France, but upon an intended encroachment by one Power on the terri tories of another country, guaranteed to that other country by the faith of treaties. (Hear, hear.) The effect of such an expression of opinion by Parliament, as I ,believe, will be not to create war, but to prevent it ; and the hon. gen tleman wholly mistook what my hon. friend said, because when he expressed a hope that Parliament would protest against annexation, the hon. gentleman should recollect that a protest is not a war, but a substitute for war. (Hear, hear.) For example, when the French army marched into Switzerland Lord Malmesbury protested, but we did not go to war. And I venture to say that if a distinct and manly protest be made by England and the other great Powers of Europe against this attempt to violate the treaties which guarantee the peace of Europe, that protest will be attended with better results than even the manful despatches of the Foreign Secretary. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member (Mr. Bright) was therefore rash in his imputation upon my hon. friend and the gentlemen near me, who are desirous to maintain peace, but at the same time desire to preserve the - faith of treaties and the honour of their country. (Cheers.) Mr. B. OSBORNE—I will not attempt to impugn the motives of the hon. member (Mr. S. Fitzgerald). His mo tives may be pure and honourable, but I do take upon myself to question the discretion of his speech. (Hear.) When an hon. gentleman who has occupied the position of Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs makes such a speech respect ing the Emperor of the French, I must say that I think it highly indiscreet and very much to be deprecated. (Hear.) What must be the effec: - , produced on the highly inflammatory susceptibilities of the French people when they hear of such observations made, amid the cheers of his party, by a gen tleman who has held so high a position ? I do not believe the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) inspired him with that speech, for the right hon. gentleman is far too sensible of the value of the French alliance ; and the right lion. gentlemea who has just spoken also sees so fully the indis cretion of the speech that he has ende tvoured to explain it away to the satisfaction of this house and of our neighbours across the water. (A laugh.) But if we are every night to be making this an opportunity for discussing the affairs of the French Government and of Sardinia, what is to come of it ? (Hear, hear.) Are we to lay hold of this commer cial treaty, which is meant to be one of amity, and turn it instead into a source of war ? (Hear, hear.) By the course you are pursuing I firmly believe that you are laying the foundations of enmity between the two countries - . (Cheers.) As to the policy of annexation, I don't agree with the views of the hon. member (Mr. Bright). I think he made that speech under some momentaryirritation, and I am sure that after consideration has led him to repent of many of those sentiments. (A. laugh,) If, however, the question may be regarded from another point of view, let us, when the proper time arrives for doing so, give it a calm, candid, and open discussion; but do not let us, night after night, upon the mere withdrawal of a motion, utter such irritat ing sentiments. (Cheers.) I heard with great pleasure he speech made the other night by the hon. baronet (Sir R. Peel). It was a speech distinguished by great eloquence, and I trust that we shall often hear the hon. baronet again, but I also hope that to eloquence he will join discretion, and will not on every possible occasion make Savoy the staple of debate in this house. (Hear.) I have confidence in the noble lord the Foreign Secretary. From the re marks of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Whiteside) it would seem that we all agree that the noble lord is conducting these very difficult affairs with judgment and moderation. Let us, then, assist him in the best way we are able—namely, by so debating the subject in this house as not to embarrass him, but to strengthen his Lands in negotiating. (Hear, hear.) Without impugning the motives of hon. gentlemen epposite, I ask the House not to be led away by any anti-Gallican feeling, and not to mix up this Savoy question with the commercial treaty, which he have a fair prospect of debating on Thursday evening. (Hear, hear.) Mr. ROE BUCK.—Not being of any party whatever— (laughter)—l think I may reply to the question, why we mix up the two subjects of the commercial treaty and Savoy. For the treaty of commerce no man is more anxious than I am ; but at the same time I have my own opinion about the annexation of Savoy. (Hear, hear.) I will tell the hon. gentleman, then, why we connect the two. With the internal affairs of France we have nothing to do. The French place whom they please at the head of their Government. They present him to the world, and with him we negotiate. It is, therefore, the duty of England to negotiate with the present Emperor of the French. We do not ask how he came to the throne. , We do not ask what is his character. We do not, when negotiating with him ex press what we think of the man. All these questions must enter into our minds; but we negotiate with him candidly, freely, honestly, though we have our own opinion as to the _ _ result of that negotiation. Now being, as I said, of no party, ; and not being a Government official, I think it my duty on the present occasion, simply as a representative of the people of England to state what I accept as the result of the conemer eiAl treaty, supposing it had passed. With the people of France I have the moat earnest desire to maintain the most friendly relations. I believe it is for the happiness of mankind that these two great nations shouldbe upon relations of amity. (Hear, hear. As the French nation has chosen its governor, with him I am quite prepared to deal, but I cannot help form ing my own conclusion as to the result of this negotiation. The result of this negotiation will, I believe, very much de pend upon the character of the man with whom we have to deal. Now, what does that man do? Upon this occasion I am not simply to consider what the hon. member for Birmingham calls the danger of the question. (Hear, hear.) I have to consider the honour of England. (Cheers.) I say that if at this time we did not speak our minds we should be truckling to the Emperor of the French. (Cheers.) We should not be the England which I believe we are. (Con tinued cheers.) I say that this man who is now entering into friendly relatians with us is breaking all the treaties we have made; and is casting dishonour upon England by snak ing it appear that we are his friends, while he is doing a dis graceful and dishonourable act. (Hear, hear, and Oh.) I do not mince my language. I don't fear that man, but I have a fear lest England be thought to truckle to him: (Hear, hear.) What is he doing ? lie invites ns to enter into friendly intercourse. To that invitation I willingly accede. I think he has done boldly by so doing. I think he has acted doubly boldly, wh.n, having quarrelled with his priests, he ventures to quarrel with his Prohibitionists at the same time. But he has done a bolder act. At the same time that he invites England to be his friend he seeks to break the treaties which England has made. He talks of acquiring the versants des Alpes. If I understand what that means he will go still further. (Hear, hear.) The man who talks of geographical reasons for wishing to ap• proach the Alps may for the same reasons desire to approach the Rhine. (Cheers) And so, if we now stand by with " bated breath" while he approaches the Alps, we shall by and by see hint acquire the Rhenish provinces of Prussia. and crush Belgium in his grasp. (Cheers.) What shall we do then ? We shall be driven to do that which we ought to do now, and proclaim boldly that we think it would be dishonourable to do that which he is about to do. I do not ask for war—(hear, hear, and a laugh) ;—I know there is pugnacity at the bottom of all the hen. member for Bir mingham does. (Laughter.) When I say Ido not wish to fight ho laughs at me. (Renewed laughter.) But, sir, there is something in the grave and solemn declaration of a great people like England—(hear, hear)—even with the Emperor of the French. (Hear, hear.) I have known the time when a declaration of this house stopped him short in his career. I recollect the time when this house was solicited to alter the legislation of England to please him. This house re fused to consent to 'that. (Hear, hear.) We stopped him short in his career then and what has been his Course since then ? During the Italian war and after it the Emperor of the French did all he could to make friends with the despots of Europe, and all he could to throw off the English alliance. (Hear, hear, and oh l) Why do I say that ? I take the ex pression of opinion in the press of France to be the expres sion of the Emperor's opinions. (Hear, hear.) Having felled to win the friendship of the despots of Europe, he fell back upon his old ally, and then he silenced by one blow the press of France. (Oh, and cheers.) Is that not true ? (Hear.) Did he not issus his fiat, and did not all the insolence and all the impertinence against England at once cease ? (Oh, and cheers.) I have faith in the English House of Com mons, although some may be base enough to truckle to an Emperor—(hear, hear)—and I am sure this House of Com mons will maintain the character, the dignity, and the hon our of England. (Cheers.) To ge back to what I was say ing :—the - Emperor of the French turned round, and again cultivated the friendship of his old ally. We were sworn friends again, but I can't forget what that phase of that man's life disclosed. (" Question I" and cheers.) You may not like what I say, but I am sure it is the question for us to consider. I say, what are we to do ? Are we at once, and without consideration, to accede to this treaty? I am most anxious at once to close with this treaty of commerce if we can. (Hear.) But I would not close with it in such a way as to appear to sanction the proceedings of the Emperor of the French in the annexation of Savoy. (Hear.) There fore, I say the consideration of this question ought to be de ferred until the house has had an opportunity of declaring its opinion as to the annexation of Savoy. (Hear, hear.) I am quite sure a large majority of the house would at once adopt the languagd of the noble lord the member for Lon don, and declare itself hostile to that annexation. And here I must say, if the noble lord will permit me, that I think the honour of England is quite safe in his hands—that his language has been in accordance with the views of the people, and that nothing could be better than the man ner in which he has declared his honest feelings upon this matter. (Hear, hear.) I call upon the House of Commons to, say what the noble lord has said, and to declare its opi nion upon this matter before we say that we are willing to enter into a treaty of commerce between the two nations. I only ask the house to do that, and that when it has declared the annexation of Savoy to be against the honour and dignity of England to say to France, " If you will enter into negotiations, we wish to have peace and content between the two countries, and we will even sacrifice our feelings to gain that end, (near, hear.) Mr. CONINGHAM was not at all disposed to truckle to the Emperor of the French, but felt bound to protest against the use of such language as they had just listened to as ap plied to the ruler of a friendly nation. (Hear.) He knew that the language applied in that house to the Emperor was in France considered to be the expression of the sentiments of that house towards the French nation. (Hear, heer.) Nothing could be more injurious to the interests of both nations, more injurious to the interests of cis aization. (Hear, hear.) Hon. gentlemen opposite professed now great sympathy for Savoy, but when Poland was divided, when Cracow was absorbed, when the Russians marched into Hungary, he did not remember there were any protests on the part of the great Conservativeparty. (Hear, hear.) The annexation of Savoy was a question in which England had an interest, but if the districts contiguous to Switzerland were to be given to that republic he thought that arrange ment would much modify the views which would otherwise be entertained of the proposed transaction. Lord J. RUSSELL.—If any hon. gentleman in this hotise thought it necessary to propose to _consider the whole question of Savoy, to find fault with the mode in which that question has been treated by her Majesty's Government, or to take the matter entirely out of the harms of the pre sent Government, that would be a useful and intelligible course. (Hear, hear.) It might be that we had spoken too tamely upon the subject, that men of higher abilities and more animated spirit might be able to deter the Govern ment of France from proceeding in any way with the an nexation of Savoy. Those who could succeed in persuading the house to adopt that view might take the place of those who have hitherto conducted the negotiations and proceed to put their views in practice. But there is one course which is neither consistent with constitutional proceedings in. this house, nor consistent with the ordinary confidence reposed in the Government— (hear, hear)—and which, above all, is not consistent with the maintenance of amicable feelings between this country and France. (Hear.) That course is the renewal day after day of irritating discussions— (cheers)—putting forward particular points and incidents, asking for no decisive vote, proposing no definite resolution —(cheers)—but always pointing out the person whom the French by immense majorities have chosen to rule over them as a ruler whom we must distrust, against whom we ought to be perpetually prepared. That course must tend to alienate the two countries, and to bring about a total rupture of amicable relations. (Hear, hear.) Now, lam sorry to say that that is a course which some gentlemen think it convenient to take, and I must on this occasion ask them really to come to some definite resolution as to what they themselves propose by their speeches on this question. (Cheers.). What has happened is this,—l must again state it,--It appears that when there was a discus sion between France and Sardinia—when there was a measure of concert arranged betwen them with respect to the defence of Sardinia against Austria—some question was raised, er some conversation passed, on the subject of annexing Savoy to France. The war began ; the war ended with the annexation of Lombardy to Sardinia, and 'i with no further conquest on the part of France. It was understood that, according to thepreliminary treaty of Vil lafranca and the subsequent treaty of Zurich, the Grand Dukes of Tuscany and Modena were to return to their do minions that the Popo was again tohave possession of the Romagna; and that Lombardy alone was to be the prize of the King of Sardinia. The Emperor of France was the man who promoted that arrangement, and did all he could to bring it to a successful result; and it was fully under stood that in that case there would be Ito question of the annexation of Savoy. Well, that arrangement did not please the Italian people; the Emperor of France said he would not use force to coerce their inclinations ; and those incli nations were evidently in favour of their living under the rule of the King of Sardinia. The Emperor of France said, when it was clear that such would be the probable result, it was desirable for the security of France that she should have the side of the Alps that lay towards France and that she should have her frontier strengthened. On that ques tion her Majesty's Government differed with the Emperor of France ; but I must say I never for a moment concealed our opinions uponit from the Emperorof France. (Cheers.) I was not wanting in telling him, frankly and plainly, what our opinions were of that annexation, and ;hat were the consequences which might follow in Europe from care Tying it into practical effect. But other Powers have to take their part. The Emperor of the French took his part so far that he declared to her Majesty's Govern ment, both through his Ambassador and through his Minister fur Foreign Affairs, that he would not proceed to that annexation without consulting the groat powers of Eu rope. It might be feared that by a sudden military occupa tion he might seize the capital of Savoy and the passes of the Alps; but he has declared in the face of all Europe that he will not so proceed. (Hear.) Those other powers to which he has referred have to be consulted. We have told him frankly our sentiments on the subject, and I do not know that we can say more. But the question remains still to be decided in what way the other powers will be consulted. Her Majesty's Government have spoken out on the subject as has also the British Parliament ; and the British public and I may say all Europe, will soon know the manner in which we have spoken. But the other Powers have not yet spoken ; I cannot presume to say what the opinion of those Powers will be on the subject in question; but is it at such a moment, let me ask, and on such a subject, thatthe House of Commons will consent, day after day, to listen to vague discussions founded on no definite resolution ? (Cheers.) is my persuasion—l may be totally mistaken on that point, because other circumstances may occur to disappoint any such prophecy—but my persuasion is that if the language of disapproval is held in Berlin, is held in Vienna, and held in St. Petersburg, that this project of annexation will not be persevered in. (Loud cheers.) I have said we don't as yet know in what language those great Powers will express themselves. Nay, more—the very Power which is most in terested in this question—the Government of Sardinia itself —has not spoken on the subject. (Hear.) The members of this house, and the public, may have seen two despatches which have appeared in the Moniteur, and have since been reproduced in the newspapers here, which contain a project for the settlement of Italy, suggested-by France, and one of which despatches ends by stating that in case that project were adopted it would still be necessary, for securing the frontiers of France, to add Savoy. That question concerns Sardinia more than any other Power in the world. (Hear.) It is naturally the part of his dominions of which the King of Sardinia must be the most proud ; it is the country in, which his house arose; - and in the course of time it has numbered among its people many of the most gall an t an d skilful of officers and many of the bravest of men whose deeds have adorned the page of history. The Government of the King of Sardinia have answered at great length, and with much detail no far as relates to Italy, but with regard to Savoy, Count Cavour has said that he reserves that as a separate despatch, and that he will treat it very soon in that separate despatch, which he will communicate to the Government of France. Then, 1 - say again, when the Power most of all interested in this question has not yet de cided in what way it will act, that this is not the moment in which we should come to a precipitate conclusion, (Oheers.) But this I will say, that whatever may be said with respect to Savoy, my opinion is that the treaty of com merce with France is destined, if it obtains the approbation of the Parliament of this country, to strengthen the ties of friendship between the two nations, to increase the wealth and stimulate the industry of both, and that by thus giving a greater number of the people of France an interest in the blessings of peace we shall delay, perhaps prevent that calamity of war which, I think, it is the business of every European si atesman to use his utmost efforts to avert. (Loud cheers.) With these convictions I shall be ready, without entering into this question of Savoy, to give my earnest support to the motion of my hon. friend the member for Middlesex (Mr. Lyng) when ever he may bring that motion forward ; and when he does so, I trust the house will consider the question of the treaty of commerce as the main subject of our deliberations. (Cheers.) Is there anything, I ask, connected with this question of Savoy to prevent our strengthening our rolu- .0 tions with France by ties of commerce? I believe there is not, for my part. I cannot understand the part which the bon. member for Sheffield takes in this matter. I cannot imagine any thing more pernicious than to indulge in invec tive on such a subject, without any definite object. (Cheers.) If we have to bring forward at a future time the question of Savoy, after having disposed of coals and other matters of commerce, do not let gentlemen confine themselves to those general terms of solemn protest. The hon. member for Hor sham says we are to make a solemn protest. What is the meaning of that ? I can understand the rest of the great Powers telling the Emperor of France, in a manner per • fectly friendly, but, at the same time, in a manner perfectly firm, that this annexation would alarm Europe, and that the additional territory he would gain would be as nothing to the consequences it might entail upon him. I can under derstand that bring said by the Powers of Europe in terms which would give it due force. But I can understand nothing by " a solem protest" but this—" We offer our re solution ; accept it, and we will remain on friendly terms with you ; refuse it, and we shall go to war I" It does not appear to me, therefore, that that is a course likely to lead to peace, or one calculated to prevent the Emperor of France carrying out the object he has in view. It does not appear that when the hon. member (Mr. S. Fitzgerald) was in office any great concern was felt on this subject. (Hear. hear,) Lord Malmesbury was informed at the time that there was a story going about-said to rest on authority— of an agreement between France and Sardinia for the ces sion of Savoy. When I was told of It I said to my infor • want he should go to Lord Malmesbury. It did appear that Malmesbury directed Lord Cowley to make inqury on the subject, but in doing so he mixed it up with several other matters. Lord Cowley replied that he had asked Count Walewski, about these several matters, and that Count Walewski did not make any observation with regard to the territorial question. If Lord Malmesbury had been very serious on this subject, he would have written again to Lord Cowley, and would not have been content with Lord Cowley saying that Count Walewski had made no observa tion on the territorial question. He would have asked of Lord Cowley, "Do they deny what is alleged with respect to Savoy? or, if they ever entertained it, have they given it up!" If I had been office and Lord Cowley had written to me that he had received an unsatisfactory answer, I should certainly have aeked 'him to put the question again. (Hear, hear.) But this extreme zeal which we now see on the subject—a zeal which goes be yond the mark, because it tends to endanger the peaceful relations that exist between the two countries—is a newborn zeal, which the hon. gentleman did not exhibit when he was in office. (Hear, hear.) I wish to makntain the honour and dignity of the Queen and the hodour and dignity of Parliament, but it does not seem to me that irritating discussions and imputations cast upon the French Government can in any way contribute to that object. (Hear, hear.) There was a discussion, the news papers told us, some evenings ago in the other Rouse of Parliament on this subject. I read with great pleasure the various speeches said to have been made on that occasion by the members of different parties. It appears to me that they expressed in a grave and solemn way their opinions upon this question, and, if the House of Commons comes to give its opinion on the same question, I trust it will do so in the same spirit. (Hear.) , The hon. member for Tarn worth delighted the house the other night with his elo quence, and the language he employed wss such as became the gravity of the subject; but I am sure that the use of exciting and, irritating language and casting imputations on foreign Governments will add nothing to the dignity of this house, and nothing to the security of the peace of Europe. (Hear.) Lord J. MANNERS said the noble lord had, uninten tionally he was sure, done injustice to his 'predecessors in office. The noble lord informed the house that Lord Malmesbury instructed Lord Cowley to demand an explana tion from the Government of France as to the rumoured annexation of Savoy ; that Lord Cowley informed him that Count Walewski gave no answer whatever to his applica tion; and that Lord Malmesbury allowed the matter to rest there. Now, the noble lord, speaking from memory, had forgotten the state of the facts, and had—unintentionally, no doubt—misstated them. The late Government did not allow the matter to drop, in the way stated by the noble lord, but obtained from the French Government a positive contradiction of the rumour that Lord Cowley had been in structed to bring before them. (Hear, hear.) He hoped, therefore, that the noble lord would take the earliest oppor tunity of unsaying what, from momentary forgetfulness, he had stated to the house on this subject. (Hear, hear.) Re ferring to the question immediately before the house, he could not reconcile the tone of the noble lord's speech that night with the one which he delivered on Friday evening. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord on Friday invited the co-ope ration of Parliament in the protest he was making against the proposed annexation of Savoy ; but on the present occa sion he understood him to deprecate discussion in that house, though he seemed to approve the discussion which took place in the other House of Parliament. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord objected to what he called a precipitate judgment on the part -of that house ; but those who, like the hon. member for Sheffield and himself, held that the commercial treaty ought not to receive the final sanction of Parliament till some deliberate expression of its opinion was given on this most momentous of all the questions of the day, found that the noble lord himself had laid the founda tion for the view they took in the first despatch he wrote on the subject of the commercial treaty. (Hear, hear.) in that despatch the noble lord gave special prominence to the im portance of the commercial treaty in a European and politi cal sense, though now he wished them to look at it simply on commercial grounds. (Hear.) The noble lord said : " Its general tendency would be to lay broad and deep foundations in common interest and in friendly intercourse for the confirmation of the amicable relations that so hap pily exist between the two countries ; and, while thus mak ing a provision for the future,-"which would progressively become more and more solid and efficacious, its significance at the present moment, when the condition of setae parts of the continent is critical, would be at once understood, and would powerfully reassure the public mind in the various countries of Europe." After this announcement on the part of the noble lord, how could he ask Parliament to dissever, in their conside ration on this question, the commercial treaty and the " cri tical condition of some pai is of the Continent of Enroper Would he deny that the condition of some parts of Europe was at this moment " critical ?" (Hesr.) And was the noble lord entitled to ask them to refrain from giving an opinion on the causes that led to this critical condition of certain portions of Europe before their assent was given to' the treaty which the noble lord said would enable France and England to lay deep the foundation of a common in terest and a friendly intercourse ? (Hear, hear.) The noble lord objected to what he seemed to think were tease ing repetitions of the debate on the subject of Savoy. Everybody would agree with the noble lord that they ought to discuss the question in a fair and legitimate manner, but he and those around him thought that that discussion should take precedence of the one in reference to the treaty. (Hear. hear.) , Lord H. VANE thought they would hardly accomplish the object they all had in view, viz., to deprecate this an nexation of-Savoy to France, if they coupled that subject with the commercial treaty. (Hear.) Their object was to prevent the accomplishmeni; of that annexation, and he agreed with the noble lord in thinking that much value was to be attached to an expression of the opinion of Parliament on the subject ; but he could not countenance the idea that any advantage would attend the use or violent and vitupe rative language towards the head of the French Govern ment. (Hear, hear.) He agreed with the noble lord the Foreign Secretary in thinking that if this annexation was to be prevented it must be done by the united action of Europe, and not by a single protest of our own. The people of this country were unanimous in deprecating that annexation, and he trusted it would not be permitted. (Hear, hear.) Mr. NE WDE GATE, as an independent member, wished to point out to the Government that they ought to alter the course they had pursued. They had not adopted the line taken in 1787, because they had omitted to bring in the pre _ _ _ liminary resolutions which had enabled the House of Com mons of that day to consider the political bearings of that treaty, independently of the commercial and financial ques tions involved. The Government had, on the contrary, plunged into a Committee of Ways and Means, and the house had consequently no fair means of expressing an opinion upon the political bearings of the treaty. The bon. member for Birmingham said, " Perish Savoy I" But we were about to enter into commercial transactions with France affecting £1,000,000 of our revenue, and did the Government intend to offer whatever advantage that sacrifice of revenue entailed as a subsidy to France for the purposes now announced ? He thought the house had a right to demand a fair opportunity of stating that I if we were about to make financial sacrifices, and to confer great commercial advantages upon France, it was nit to subsidise France to crush the liberties of Savoy. (Hear, hear.) He had been delighted to hear the speech of the hon. and learned member for Sheffield. Some of his ex pressions were too severe to the Emperor of the French, but he rejoiced to hear an independent member vindicate the right of the British House of Commons to put its ,own interpretation upon its own language and its own acts. (Hear, hear.) Mr. BENTINCK only differed from his hon. friend who had just spoken uponone point. He went all lengths in the opinion that the house ought to have ample time for consi dering this question of Savoy before they accepted the treaty with Franco. He would oven go further, and say that the worst thing that could happen for the honour and happiness of England was that the treaty should ever be ratified at all. He deprecated, however, the use of personal and coarse in vective. (Hear, hear.) Ho believed that such language only recoiled on those who uttered it, and was alike discreditable to the house and to the country it represented. (Cheers.) The Government complained that discussions of this kind were extrenitlf inconvenient, but they had only themselves to blame for them. He contended that the Government had attempted- to stifle discussion, and he could not admit the representations of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that the general interests of the country required that there should be no delay in passing these resolutions. The party represented by the hon. member for Birmingham might have a positive and pecuniary object in hurrying the treaty to a conclusion, and it was not therefore surprising that the Government should lend itself to this view. But he had very little doubt the commercial interests of the country were opposed to the measures or the Government. (Cries of "Oil • • - „) oh 1") There was a general belief that the Government had some object in precipitating matters, and that an apprehension was felt that, if certain negotiations were not explained satisfactorily, some obstacles might arise to the completion of the pending arrangement. I ow, he confessed he should be too glad to see any obstacles interposed;to the success of the proposed treaty. He believed that almost every interest in England was opposed to this treaty. (" Oh 1" and a laugh.) Hon. members might laugh ; but let them com pare the number of hon. gentlemen representing commer cial interests who had spoken favourably of this treaty with the number whe had spoken against it. (Hear,) The rea son why the Government had carried their resolutions was that those whb opposed the treaty, instead of wisely uniting for a common purpose, had been cut to pieces in detail. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman (Mr. Bright) had charged those who sat upon the Opposition benches with not pursuing a manly course in regard to this treaty. But was it manly to sacrifice the honour and interests of England merely for the sake of the benefits resulting from a commer cial treaty ? There was nothing the hon. gentleman was not prrepared to sacrifice to the beneficial results of this treaty. If that was the hon. member's opinion of what constituted a manly course it differed very cbnsiderably from his. The hon. gentleman had taken occasion to ob serve that they were sitting in the English House of Com mons and not in the Parliament of France ; but many speeches of the hon. gentleman had given him the impres sion that they ought rather to be addressed to the Congress of the United States, to the proceedings of which it was the avowed object of the hon. gentleman to assimilate their debates. Mr. B. COCHRANE inquired whether the motion with respect to an address to her Majesty regarding the commer cial treaty with France would be brought forward on Thurs day or Friday ? Lord J. RUSSELL—On Thursday. Mr. STIRLING said some very important papers had been published that morning in the newspapers, which formed no part of the correspondence that had been laid on the table of the house. The noble lord likewise had stated that a very important despatch might be expected from Count Cavour in reply to that addressed to him by the French Government. As it was natural to suppose that the Sardinian Government would wish the greatest publicity to be given to their opinions, he had no doubt copies of both documents would bo forwarded to this country. He wished, therefore, to inquire whether these papers would be laid on the table before the debate was taken on the address to the Crown—(hear, hear)—respecting the commercial treaty with France. He put this question because, like many emi nent members of the house, he felt unable to separate the question of Savoy from the other matters involved in the treaty. By this instrument they were about to enter inso new and unnatural engagements with the Emperor of the French—engagements which last July the noble lord on the Treasury bench had several times declared ought not to Le" entered into with any Power whatever. As an independent member of Parliament, before he gave his assent to engage ments with a foreign Power he.had a right to ask how the Sovereign of that State observed older and more important engagements with other free States of Europe. (Hear.) He had a right to know how far the rights guaranteed by treaty to Switzerland would be respected. On this subject the papers on the table of the house gave no satisfaction what ever, save that the representative of Switzerland in Paris was utterly unable to obtain information, and seemed to be haunting the British Embassy for the sake of the intelli gence which might be gained in that quarter. It was, there fore, but reasonable that members, by the production of those papers, should be afforded an opportanity of making up their minds before they were called on to vote an address to the Crown. (Hear, hear.) Mr. COLLIER said an appeal had been made by the noble lord the member for Tiverton to his hon. friend the member for Sunderland to withdraw his motion, which proposed that further negotiations should be entered into for the purpose of inducing the French. Government to enter into a supple mentary treaty of navigation, and to relax their laws in favour of British shipping. He understood the noble lord to make this appeal chiefly on the ground that to propose an addition of this kind to the address would be very incon venient; but he understood him at the same time to say that if the motion was brought forward in a substantive form, a day would be given for the purpose, and he also collected that the noble lord would not be disposed to give any opposition to the principle of the motion. On the ques tion of navigation he considered the commercial treaty to be defective, and the country, he thought, had reason to cofnplain of the stringency of the French regulations, while our restrictions had all been abolished. He ventured to ask whether he had correctly understood the statement of the noble lord ? Sir H. IVILLOUGHBY said the noble lord the Secre tary for Foreign Affairs gave an assurance last year that the Emperor of the French had abstained from all intention of annexing Savoy. Lord J. RUSSELL—At that time he did, as will appear by the despatch of Count Walewski. Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said the despatch of Count Walewski did state a possible event in which the Emperor of the French, even at that time, considered the annexation of Savoy indispensable ; which was, in case any addition was made to Piedmont on the side of the Duchies or the Legations. He wished to know whether the noble lord had any objection to produce the correspondence in which that eventuality was described, because it was quite clear that so far back as July, 1859, the Emperor of the French and his Government, in some way or other, declared to Lord Cowley that the annexation of Savoy should follow the occurrence of certain contingencies with regard to Sardinia. It was quite clear that if such a distinct declaration had been made, the Emperor of the French had a right to say that her Majesty's Government received full warning. Lord J. RUSSELL—In answer to the question of the hon. member for Perthshire with respect to certain de spatches relating to France and Savoy, I have to sate that no such despatch has yet arrived, and I do not know if it , has yet been written. As soon as the reply of the Sar dinian Government has been communicated I shall be ready to lay it on the table of the house, but it is impossible for me to say when that may occur, or to what further corre spondence it may give rise. The despatches of M. Thouve nel have appeared in all the newspapers, but if the house wish for copies they will of course be laid on the table. Respecting the discussion of the question of annexation in 1859, there is no public despatch whatever on the subject. Lord Cowley from time to time in his private letters said Count Walewski agreed that the annexation of Tuscany to Sardinia was impossible, but if such a case should ever by possibility occur, it would then be for France to consider whether her frontiers would be safe without the annexation of Savoy. But Lord Cowley, who has acted throughout with great discretion, did not think proper to introduce loose conversations or casual intimations into his official correspondence. Lord PALMERSTON—I wish to explain a matter which is not clearly understood by the hon. member for Plymouth. What I did state to the member for Sunderland was, that if he would suffer us to discuss the proposition of the ad dress to her Majesty, to which he proposed to make the ad dition contained in his motion, the Government could have no possible objection to the opinions which it embodied being expressedto the house; and they night even think that such an expression would assist them in any negotia tion which might be made officially with France. The motion for postponing the orders of the day was then withdrawn. CUSTOMS ACTS. The house again resolved into committee on the Customs Acts. The list of articles to be made free of duty (not under the treaty) was then agreed to. On. " Wood and timber, hewn, and lathwood" (on which Is. per load is to be levied), Colonel SYKES asked whether any drawback would be allowed for the duty paid on stocks in hand ? Mr. LAING said the payment of drawbacks, unless un der special arrangements, had been discontinued.Onthtiomse ber no drawback was intended to be given. The resolution was then agreed to, as were also those fixing a duty of Is. a load on wood for shipbuilding purposes, and one of LI ss. per quarter on malt. The resolution relating to hops was postponed, and continuing the present rates on tea and sugar'passed. The Chairman was then ordered to report the resolutions and the house resumed. EXPORTED BRITISH SPIRITS. - The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved a Nuys and Means, In Committee of Way drawback of 2d a g anufactured, allon on raw spirits, and 3d. on rectified spirits, British m resolution allowing a entered for exportation. Sir 11. WILLOUGHBY said it was usual to print reso lUtions of this kind, in order that those who took an interest in such matters might at the discussion of themhave an opportunity of bei ng p resen t The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the substance of the resolution had been printed, and had been in that thful handsn otice of had been members some four or fi ve days ago; so l The resolution was then gi agreed everybody interested. t. • SAVINGS BANKS AND FRIENDLY SOCIETIES INVESTMENT BILL. On the motion for the second reading of this bill, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER pro ceeded to explain the objects of the bill. The law authorised savings banks, under voluntary and independent manage ment, to receive money from depositofs, with conditions as to interest and other matters; and itprovided that the managers should forward the deposits to an institution in London, whence they passed into the immediate custody of govern ment. The savings bank, then, was intermediatebetween the government an d the depositors, and divided the whole sub ject into two departments. With the first of these the present bill had nothing whatever to de. The subject was one of great importance, and he regretted that the recent con • mitten on savings banks entirely ignored that part of the subject. It was with the government management of the funds that the bill proposed to deal. The first principle of the bill was the substitution of a real and Loran fide statement of this portion of the national debt for the present unsatisfac- , tory, because untrue, statement that was ennually made. At present the a sets of the savings bank commissioners did not quite equal their liabilities, and a difference of opinion existed as to the cause of this. Some thought it mainly owing to the nature of the terms on which the money was received. A fi xe d rate of interest was allowed to depositor s i t n savings banks. It followed that when the funds were high, and the rate of interest generally was low, the re was a great disposition to invest in savings banks, because the fixed rate of interest was something better than they were likely to obtain elsewhere ; but when the funds were low the case was reversed, and there was an inducement to call i n money from the savings banks, and sales were necessary In order to procure the cash. Therefore l the normal state of these saving banks commissioners was to buy when the market was high and sell when Ihe market was low. Dut whether or net this was the cause of the discrepancy in h. aec O unts, We amount between the deposits and th e asset 4 was £2,000,000, There wag ;t doAbt that the 4spottos had, if not altogether a legal, yet in every case an equitable claim for every farthing the Government had received, and this bill would give them their full legal title. It was pro posed to open a book in which should be written all the sums which the Government had received. Instead of holding this amount of stock with its varying and fluctuat tin,g value, the Government should cancel a great amount of the stock, and in lieu of it enter into a book which was to contain the State deposits, carry forward the capital from time to time, and so to balance the capital as to render as much as possible the real amount of the obligations of the State to the savings banks. That was the explanation of the Ist and 2d clauses of the bill. The 3d clause had been framed upon the principle of maintaining the annual charge at somewhere where it now was. The principle was exactly analogous to the principle which now regu lated by law the unpaid dividends of the national debt. The commissioners were to retain in - their hands such a sum as might be sufficient to meet any probable amount of calls. The possibility of calls extending beyond the limit was provided for by the bill, which gave power to the commissioners to change the stock into marketable se curities. The general rule would be that about three-fourths of those liabilities would henceforward be represented in the sums described in the state deposit account. In the sth clause was provided another and most important limitation of the powers of the executive government. It was there provided that deficiency bills, if Exchequer Bills, might not be funded by the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt. By means of that power, whenever there was a deficiency in the public revenue, or in the sum appli cable to meet the Consolidated Fund charges for the coming quarter, it was in the power of the executive to supply that deficiency by means not of therevenue of the year, nor of ti • funds of Parliament, but by means of monies obtained from the savings banks or friendly societies. Even in cases when the revenue of the year was sufficient for the year, yet still, from the peculiar arrangements of the Consolidated Fund, it was in the power of the executive to meet the charge by deficiency bills, and subsequently through the Commis sioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, without consulting Parliament; and thus a large permanent addition to the public debt of the country could be made without the knowledge or consent of Parliament. That power would be entirely done away with by the fifth clause. They now came to a set of provisions, in which it was provid e d th a t the commissioners should have a larger liberty for the in-, vestment of those funds than they had hitherto possessed. Heretofore the power of the commissioners, as far as invest ments were concerned, was limited to Exchequer Bills and Exchequer Bonds. Now, he thought that a greater latitude ought to be given to the commissioners for the investment of those funds, provided that the f ur th er li m i ts o f suc h investments should be distinctly defined. He proposed to give them power to invest in other stocks issued by the authority of Parliament, sach as the proprietary stock of the East India Co m p any, i n respect to which a certain amount of guarantee was given by the legislature. And there were other more recent stocks also issued on the authority of Parliament to which the same liberty would extend. The commissioners were also em powered to exchange the securities under certain circum stances, which he thought it would ba better to explain when the bill was in committee. The Bth and the 9th clauses provided for the bolancing the accounts on the Bth November in each year, so as to show the real amount of the liability of the state to the depositing parties. The 11th clause provided the anode by which an absolute title would be given to the friendly societies and savings banks. It gave them in all cases an absolute claim on the securities of the state. The general effect of this measure would be to create a considerable public economy in the management of those funds. It was impossible for him at that moment ac curately to estimate the extent to which that economy would go, but recollecting that the com m i ss i oners had in their hands about £40,000,000, they would be empowered to cancel £31,000,000 out Of that amount. By the law as it was at present fixed a certain sum per million was payable to the Bank of England for the management of every mil lion of that money passing through the hands of the Com missioners for the Reduction of the National Debt. When that arrangement was made it never was contemplated that the state should become possessor of those vast sums, nearly the whole of which remained without any transfer. There would thus be it saving of £3OO on every million, which would amount, in the whole, to a saving of about £9,000 or £lO,OOO a year, under the proposed arrangement. Over and above that the commissioners would realise a better income upon funds guaranteed by Parliament, although not of the nature of Parliamentary stocks nor securities of the United Kingdom. Ho thought probably in the course of two or three years the effect would be to sale permanently to the country about £40,000 or £50,000 a year. Power was given to the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, over and above the forms of investment he had mentioned, to invest for the purposes of the Exchequer Loan Fund. He did not intend to ask the house at that time to agree to that part of the bill, but he thought it was worthy of considers. Lion whether the Government ought to become lenders of money, for even the most - useful purposes, at a time when they were already in debt, when they had a fund open to them for that purpose. He believed the Exchequer Loan. Fund to be of a most useful character, and one that had worked extremely well; nevertheless, he thought that the power to which he had just referred might be exercised with the greatest advantage. He had no further explana tions to offer, and would conclude by the. expression of a. hope that the details of the bill would secure the best atten tion of the house. (Hear.) Mr. HENLEY did not rise to offer any opposition to the second reading of the bill, or to discuss whether the mode in which the Government proposed to carry out the object in view, was the best or not. The object was an important one, and much of its efficiency must depend upon details which could only be fully and properly considered in com mittee. Those were the only observations he had to make on the subject, and as it was one on which both sides of the house could have but one interest—that of putting it on a satisfactory footing—he hoped an opportunity would be al lowed for discussing it deliberately in all its details. Mr. AYRTON trusted that, in committee, the interest, of the depositors would be properly secured. The bill was then read a second time. VALUATION OF RATEABLE PROPERTY (IRELAND) BILL. This bill as amended was considered and ordered to be read a third time. PACKET SERVICE (TRANSFER OF CONTRACTS) BILL. The bill passed through committee and was reported. MEDICAL ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. The house went into committee on this bill. The several clauses of the bill were agreed to, and the bill passed through committee. SETTLED ESTATES ACTS (1856) AMENDMENT BILL. Mr. WHITESIDE moved the second reading of this bill. Mr. BYNG moved that the bill be read a second time that day six months. The hon. gentleman said that there was no new question. It was first introduced into Parlia ment in 1829, and the object was to give to the promoters of the measure power to build houses on Hampstead-heath. That bill was, however, rejected, ae were also several other bills ha"ing a similar object. Believing that this measure was calculated to affect the rights and privileges of his con stuents, he must oppose it. Mr. WHITESIDE said he did not understand how any man who respected the rights of property could object to this bill. Some persons, however, objected to the measure on the ground that it would give Sir Thomas Wilson power to apply to the Court of Chancery to enable him to build houses on Hampstead-heath. It was suggested that if a clause were inserted in the bill expressly preventing Sir Thomas Wilson from applying to the Court of Chancery to build houses on Hampstead-heath, that that would get rid of the objection entertained against the bill by the hon. members for the metropolis. Well, a clause of the kind was inserted in the bill, but now it was said that this clause would not prevent Sir Thomas Wilson from erecting houses in sight of Hampstead-heath, and it was upon this ground it was still objected to. He did, not, however, think the house would assent to the amendment which was in oppo. University; sition to the right s o f p roper t y. Mr. E. JAMES sa id th a t if an English member had brought in a bill to enc l ose a heath used by the people of Dublin for healthful enjoyment, there would b e no more eloquent opponent of the measure than the ri g ht h on. and th Du ni bl ea in.. is The bill would give the promoter of it the power to build a wall round Hemp learned gentleman s th te e s m dh m e b at ehr.forThis was the el sure that had been brought into th a t h ouse on this subject, It had also been reported against four times by the judges. The other m theasuresam s had been r e j ected by that house, and he trusted e e res Ult would occur in this that had taken place on former cases. Mr. ALCOCK expressed his determination to support the am endment proposed b y the hon. member for Middlesex.' Mr. ROUVERIE suppo r t e d t h e second reading of the bill. Lord FERMOY thought there could be no hesitation as to what was the intention of the testator, who had devised three estates, in respect to two of which he gave ample leasing and building powers, and in respectto the third of which he abstained from doing so. It was fair to presume therefore, that on the two estates he intended that his heir should build, and on the third that he should not. The promoters of this measure took credit for not encroaching upon the actual Heath; to which he replied, " Thank you for nothing ; you could not do so, inasmuch as the Heath itself belongs to the copyholiers, and you dare not inter fere." He objected to their even building round the Heath, as they would very much cut it up by carting their mate rials overt; to build a wall right round it. As to what had been said about the metropolitan members, they had naturally an interest in all that could contribute to the health, recrea tion, and enjoyment of their constituents. The promoters of this bill endeavoured by a sidewind, by bringing in as a public bill what they knew they could not pass as a private bill, to defeat the objects of the testator. There was, how - ever, no chance of the attempt succeeding. Mr. GEORGE supported the bill, because he saw no reason why this should be made an exceptional case. Mr. ROBERT HAN BURY said this was a question on which he need say but very little. The metropolitan mem bers represented people to whom fresh air and recreation were of the utmost importanca. This was a poor man's question, and those who supported the motion opposed the poor man's interests. The house then divided— Ayes Noes B6 Majority against The snnoundement was received with loud cheering. REPEAL OF THE PAPER DUTIES. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER obtained leave to bring in a bill to repeal the paper duties, which was read a first time. ROSCOMMON. A new writ was ordered for this county, and the house adjourned at 25 minutes past 11. BIRT us. EIZON.—On. the 4th inst., at Erith, the wife of Henry Elton, ' of a d 4 a t u h n g i ht s e t r .: n the at Southfield, Wand swor th, the wife of Charles Kinl oc h , E sq., of a daughter. MARRIAGES. • MITCHELL—BEECROPT.—On the 3d inst., at St. Mary's, Islington, William henry Mitchell, Esq., of her Majes ty's Customs, Lo n d on, to Sarah, sister of the late Thos. Beecroft, Esq., of Milk-i•treet, city, and Richmond Villas, Larnsbury. DEATHS. BAILKER.---011 the 3d inst., at Broadwater, near Worthing, John Barker, Esq., aged Si. WORTLEY.—On the 3d inst., at Overton House, Wake field, Amy Cicely, infant daughter of the Hon. Francis and Mrs. Stuart Wortley. WRIGHT.—On the 11 inst., in Path, Stephen Amand Wright, Esc! , late at the head of the Ordnlnce Depar4- ment, Tower of London, and of West-hill, 'Wandsworth, aged 71. • LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the onati of Middle/oz, Tuesday, March 6, 1860. The of the 1 to the! G-' At/in I I Ente PAW print past missi Ti This eleaa: With EVE W. 3 appro Past Di hove reasi n the end Price CAN] are of aeript JUR Per lb finest- BU thrts Digeai lion iF thrini MrGl' s ! 'Wert' alike Pre and 1 r t IMP( Sin zonge 1110;e able t be Tel --....___ duet blst gYsi al e ' 1 CRTIs Why • they tor-,et fecti( liY Medi tree boob Fon Cori to ai ebr f dingy bili D lan(