The Sun. — London, England, 1858-05-05 00:00:00

Mir 'or the r Eel to .t the ,alities Ira not ;att. Aus• y close ?rinci- nstant ou do set of to the settle; red to inte a con self- ecause mate- ime at nod or i to be icy on nee of a rare aided ror of in the ndiee watch d ways illione e that make ,nce of tended ler to t want arrier. breast pledge union. t them adable effect 13411 in ques- ropire. tether .uport g men usioa. -overo o each at the , ple to le who ,ddres .esaiog_ ;ion of [e tbst ritry iS ,derate y that rinci- terri stand- to the reak of of fo lot and liatory 7arkey eral in e pare f a no- ribu ts. ascribe ed the oly re lg. A n wain," soya- tion t• Ind in aty of is this, far as res in- main them. The e paid, ► Pcin overn• intaill tweell invite s been vow y own eason r do I L such minis make a vital 'arlike ithout their 3, and had a )vern• a any 1 that g able they unced Lice of The , ences nee of lapse that s sim- Dns of It is alone ill un- 'rinci- wever these the to it, og in r her ne of e any •f ap ourse said the question was vested with a particular solemnity ; that it wa. brought before the Congress of Paris, and that the representatives of the great European Powers were asked their opinions upon the subject, and gave their com • mon assent to it. But the right hon. gentleman forgot to add that this same Congress was to meet in a few da3 s, when all these questiaii - iff the commissioners would be decided. Now, it was at such a time as that heCalled on the house, not to give instructions to their own Govern ment or their own Minister in Paris, but to come to a vote which would be looked • upon as instructions to the repre . sentatives of the Powers of Europe. (Cheers.) The right hon. gentleman commenced by saying that the house should bear in mind that these Principalities were inde pendent. But for what did they go to war with Russia, or shed so much blood, and expend so much treasure, but to maintain the independence of the Turkish Empire? In the - very preamble to the treaty of peace, it was set forth as the cause of that war, and one of the most solemn declara tions of that treaty was that of the great Powers pledging theineelves to maintain that independence. To talk of the Principalities being independent under these circumstances was simply a mistake. Now, if that were so, let them con sider what would be the result of the right hen. gentle man's motion. He was one of the Ministers of the Crown when the war with Russia broke out, and when it. was de clared by him as one of the Government, that inasmuch as they formed an integral part of Turkey, they ought to theb e maintained, and therefore it was that the attempt by Rus sia to occupy them was r rsisted. But what did the right hon. gentleman do that night ? He asserted on present occasion that the Principalities were totally indep end ent. (Cries of " No.") The right hon. gentlemaen Principalitiescertainlen the clea r e s t manner p o ssible, stated that the Were independent states. Mr. GLADSTONE—I never said the words. Mr. S. FITZGERALD continued —W ell , the right hon. gentleman at least treated them as such. He asserted their independence when he refused to recognise the lights of Turkey. Then the right hon. gentleman asked them to agree to his motion on the ground that it was the express wish of the people of the Principalities that a union should take place. Now, on that he was at issue With him. They had unanimously an opinion for a union ; but it wan on the'express condition that they were to be placed under the government of a foreign prince. The right hon. gentleman put it before'' the house, first, that the people preferred a union with a foreign prince, but if that could not be obtained, they would agree to have a native. Now, if that were the case, there would be some ground for his motion, but it was the very reverse. In the first instance the five points were put to - the vote as one whole, and nothing done could lead 'any one to believe a wish was expressed in favour of such an opinion. The population, on the contrary, made an express declaration that if a union under a foreign prince were insisted on, they would acquiesce, but that a union under a native prince, or under an authority named by the Porte, would not only not alleviate their cvils, but add to them. So far from saying that, they expressed themselves clearly of opinion that any union, except under a foreign prince, Would be the last thing they would desire. (Hear, hear.) He held in his hand a copy of the report made by the com missioners who proceeded to the Principalities; and it is expressly declared that the rivalries and jealousies of the native princes were such as to make it impossible for any Government to exist, except under the control of a foreign prince connected with some of the royal houses of Europe. So that, as the right hon. gentleman would see, the last thing in the world they looked for was a union of the Prin cipalities under either a native prince, or a person deputed by the Porte. If that be the popular opinion in these Principalities, the right hon. gentleman, as an advocate for their wishes, was bound to support them.. But, in point of fact, a union under a foreign prince would make radically and totally independent and incompatible with those objects for which they went to war. If that took place, of what use would their army or fleets be ? For they could not get there. Diplomatic intervention would be impossible, moral influence also impossible— to England at least. It would be impossible, in such an event, to consider themselves in any position where they could raise up a barrier against the aggressive policy of Russia. Well, that was the s t a t e o f th e case . Th e peop l e o f th e Principalities had expressed a wish which was incompatible with the treaty ; and was the house to be called upon to suppo r t the people of the Principalities met ely because they expressed a wish for independence ? The right hon. gentleman was calling upon the house to adopt a course More dangerous than it had yet been called to enter upon. They might, he did not deny, give them their sympathy, . and even their moral support, when the proper time came, but at present they could only be called upon to fulfil those wishes according to the preponderating interests of ,Zirope. If th e ' house agreed to this resolution, it would be entering upon a most dangerous course, and so far from doing good to the people of the Principalities by a recogni tion of their independence from the conferences about to be held, it would be the last thing for their interests and for the interests of this country. It was upon these grounds that he called upon the house not to assent to this resolution, which invited us, in fact, to be parties to a dismemberment of 'the Turkish empire. (Cries of " No, no.") That he maintained was the tendency of the reso lution, and it was not for the interests of the very people whose interests it was the object of the right hon. gentle man to promote. (Hear, hear.) Mr. DEASY thought that the hon. gentleman who had just sat down had failed to give any answer to the case of the, right hon. gentleman (Mr. Gladstone). One complaint he made was as to the time when this resolution was brought forward, namely, just before the Conferences of Paris. But it was just because the question was to be Irrevocably decided by these conferences that the decision of this house should be asked upon it. If they waited till after the conferences it would be too late. The house was called upon to express an opinion for the purpose of in structing our own Minister as to the course he should pur sue'. The hon. gentleman said they were called up' ea t o , diamember the Turkish empire ; but these provinces never Were portions of the Turkish empire. The relation to that empire was that of treaty. The capitulation of 1460 ' defined the nature of that relationship, and by it the Wallachian nation was to have the free .enjoyment of their own liberties. That was the origin of the cm election between Turkey and Wallachia. The relation shi between the Turkish empi re an d th e prov i nce of Moldavia, originated in a similar way, and its effect was the same. It was true that these treaties might have been sub sequen tl y mo difi e d , and at the Treaty 'of P aris it was considered that all previous treaties were %I:mulled, but by that treaty th e y were d ec l are d en titl e d to the privileges of which they wore then in possession, and then came the arrangement- by which the Sultan agreed to convoke the Divans of the two Provinces, for the purpose of ascertaining the expression of the popular feeling as to the form. of Government the people would Prefer. The Conferences were about to assemble to consider that question. The French Minister had undertak e n t o Male the Danubian Provinces independent, and the Eng lish Minister had undertaken to support him, and when such intention was expressed, what said Ali Pacha ? Did he object that they were a portion of the Turkish Empire? No ; he only objected that they were about doing a thing contrary to the wishes of the people of the Principality and j ulee'n this it was agreed that no conclusion should be come to until the wishes of the people of the Principalities were I tseertained, and it was for. that reason that the Porte un dertook to convoke full and free assemblies of the repre- Bentatives of the people. These Conferences at Paris were abort to b e h e ld t o d etermine this question, and that was lacsetate of the case. In the House of Commons they ought .to give som e suppor t to the wishes of the people of the rrincipalities. Those wishes had been expressed in full and free Divans held for that purpose. In the Moldavian 4 8%91:ab1y 81 out of 81 voted for the union of the Princi palities, and only 2against it. In the Wallachian Assam- i bly 94 out of 100 voted for the union, and only 6 voted against it. Mr. Johnson, an English traveller then in the Principalities, bore testimony to the admirable manner in Which business was conducted in these assemblies. That, . therefore was the expression of the wishes of the Walla- Chian and Moldavia' people, and could we, after having made ourselves parties to the treaty of Paris, refuse to give effect ,to their wi s h es . Wh a t was i t for which they in- iideed those Conferences but that they should give autho rity to those w i s h es. B ut i t was now proposed to negative t horn. s wishes. Th ey s h ou l d b e careful how they acted, for e provinces they had a special interest. There they laige commercial interest. Upon them we depended fora considerable supply of food. They had, therefore; a solid interest in maintaining their independence, sad he bel ieved at that a na ti on num b er i ng five millions of people on ~ bank o f the Datiubevrould be the best barrier against 'a?! aggressions of Russia. He contended the house should tlee wishe s o f a peop l e hith er t o oppresse d, b u t h e h ope d De so no loager. If the Conferences decided against government they would be bound by force to establish a form of opposed to the express will of the people, and , gainst the adoption of that policy he protested. It had been tried before, after the former treaty of Paris, in the !irie of Belgium and other countries; but the result was, that those Governments, so forced upon the people, were _terminated by forcible disruptioes. If they now forced !Iyon the Principalities a Government contrary to the wishes of th e ' people, it would be terminated by one of those revolutionary convulsions to which he had alluded, and establish a form of Government like that which they now asked to obtain, then be ? They would an d in what a position would they , s v e e h to resort to a Russian or an Austrian occupation , tornnit to have this treaty, to which they had assented, that s h before their faces. Ile trusted, for these reasons l , ll counter to the wishes of the people. Al e l y th w e ould not run counter establish on the banks of the Danube was Governme nta ywereas e which they had already instituted on the banks of the Nile—a course which, he maintained, would be for the benefit of the Turkish empire, and, he believed, also for the interests of humanity. (Hear, hear.) Lord IL CECIL had listened with attention to the argu 132_8:atm of his right hon. friend in support of his mo ti on , !!ille considered those arguments most forcible; while, n the othe r hand, he regarded those of th e h on . gentle man the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs were T i tle, and of a na t ure ca l cu l ated only to defend a bad e and bad cases. The hon. gentleman, for instance, stated that should the house assent to the motion of Mr. Gladstone, they would be abandoning all that they went to War for. Now, what did theygo to war for ? They went to War to maintain in all its expansion, integrity, and in iduespaesnideuenecfe,Rtule,,esisT;uhruktiswh4ririnpire against the designs and the Principalities, the didregard to the independence of In subjugating them to y te n otgo to war to aid any power ld suggest to the hon. gentle manm isn parallelion Turke y.ca s e. He eu Suppose, for instance, that any should seise upon one of the lonian islands, wee th e r gentlemen say that that was an invasion of the Briji n i; empire ? But in ,re scuing the Danubian P r i nc i palities f° Russis, it was not contempl a t e d to liatfnTthe aggressi n of themcey. Th e h on. over, as en slaved appendages to the rapacity of Foreignur Affairs, gentleman the Under Secr e t ary re ferred to certain papers, as ill us t rative of the upon which the Principalities we re t o remain Erurli3l:l.ciples Turk e y ; but those papers were n o t l a id on the table , ean t c c i the'h ouse , therefore, had no means of knowing the con tents of those papers. Ho (Lord R. Cecil) would, how ever, quote, from the resolutions of the Divan , certain as. sages whi c h s h owe d th e pr i nc ipl e s upon which ' Turkey pro posedp to bind the Principalities to her, and to give her complete dominion over them. The noble lord here read an abstract of the resolutions, which laid it down as a krinciple that the Danubian provinces shot,! be bound to f . ul iceY by a bond of union, binding them inseparably, afilnbjecting the provinces to entire Turkish dominion. r e °Need the motion of his right hon. friend would be tha t the to by the house, and he was satisfied, should it not,. pro Vhe effe c t of its rejection would be very serious on the nces. It was necessary for this house to interpose, jaungdairexperess the opinion of the British nation, respect heir tl i : h vr es arnV th eca f rom i in relation to the Principalities, as to save handed over to the rapacity of Turkey. hothouse, that in consulting the feelings and er European nations with regard to the tettitiicey! and 8 ' the were ursuing a uestionable as in the case of co their nduct very toqwards other traeubil„us hoped their course towards the people of the effe c t,. 1 reee provinces would not be professions without M r e ) „ l4 ,_ r hear.) foreigne-rrUCK said the interference of England with c auße ce_ t ies had seldom proved advantageous to the ,zee:,Zeth_se nations in whose behalf her interference was " 1 di and - Whose objects she endeavoured to support. THE SUN, R The government of England professed loudly on behalf of the principles of freedom, but was very weak in support of. them. New it appeared to him that they had at present a rare opportunity of establishing-a liberal government-in- Wallachia, which might never again occur, but Wens said by his right hon. friend the Un ter-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs that this house should not interfere. NoW what did that mean ? He .(Mr. Roebuck) wanted to know why / The House of Commons—the government of Eng land were about to see their representative in Patis again in the Congress of Europ: an Powers, and to see him supported in their name on behalf of England, and they were told they were not to express their opinion, and tell the other assembled Powerslhow they wished him to act. Now it appeared to him that it was the duty of the House of Commons to tell those who represented England how they ought to act, and what the house wished them to do—what principles they ought to advise and advocate, and how - they ought to exert their influence. And he would now tell the House of Commons to exert their in fluence, and to say to the representatives of European Po'wers that England was about to support a free people in an effort to govern themselves. (Hear, and cheers.) Upon what occat., were the European Powers to meet, andlupon what matt ? It appeared that, for some years past, the Emperor of Russia chose to make war upon Turkey, and in so doing the first thing he did was to transgress certain limits and to invade certain Principalities on the borders of the Danube, and in so doing the people of England felt that he broke through the rules, and England declared war against him. But in so doing what did England then do? She said that the Emperor of Russia should not dismember Turkey, and so long as the Principalities were connected with Turkey they thereby resisted Russia. But the Prin cipalities, as connected with Turkey were connected in a very peculiar way. They were connected with it ! by a treaty, which provided that, on theirunion to Turkey, they should maiatain their own independence. By that treaty Russia was confined within her dominions, Austria within hen's, and Turkey within her's; and then came the Mol davian people, and they said, " We are a people of the Western world, and we ask you, the European Powers, to maintain our undeniable rights." (Hear.) That was all that they said ; and on that account they were supported by France, on the one side, who said those people are a people who should have a free government. (Hear.) This was a free people, deriving their origin from a peculiar source -namely, from the old Roman empire, whose laws and order they long observed. They maintained their in dependence and the integrity of their dominions through out ages of tyranny and misrule. Eventually they sub mitted to the Turkish empire, which was then in the ascendant, iu accordance with a contract which was still in existence. They never submitted themselves by conquest to Turkey ; but by this free and independent contract They never lost sight gf their Western origin. They spoke a language nearly Roman—they had a religion of the Eastern Empire of Rome—they had the institutions of the Roman Empire—and to the present time they had maintained their individual existence as a Western and an independent people. When the Russian vv.r concluded, these people applied to the European powers to be de fended, as a Western people, against the encroachments of Turkey on their individual and political liberties. They , asked first for their independence as a people, and in order to insure that they thought they ought to have a king se lected from some one of the monarchies of Europe. They were doing just what the Italian republics did. They could not elect a person from amongs themselves to govern them, and they wished a foreign prince for the purpose. They demanded respresentative institutions, and wished to be governed according to the policy of Europe. But it was sail that this could not bedone, and why? Because it would throw the provinces into the arms of Russia ! But he wanted to know if a people, numbering five mil lions, ruled by a king who had been chosen by themselves, would net rather create a barrier against Russia— a barrier grester than we could create by annexing them either . to Austria or Turkey. They were a people who had the means of prosperity within themselves; their country was accessible b sea to England ; and united to this country by ties of commerce, they would oppose an effectual bar rier to the designs of Russia on Turkey, The case of these provinces was such as ought to arouse the feelings of every man ; an. i f England wished to take part in the business of Continental Europe in a way that she should, as expressive of her own dignity, and conducive to the interests and happiness of mankind ; she could only do so by aiding these people to become free. Mr. DUFF said the " sick man," to whom the Emperor of Russia referred, was now assuredly dying, and the duty of England was to act the part of the family solicitor and the family physician, and endeavour to secure his rich in heritance to his rightful heirs—the Christian population subject to his role, and in doing that they would only be following the natural course of events, What they ought to do was to place Wallachia and Moldavia in the position of Servia, and in the fullness of time they would have to do the same for Balgaria and the rest of the Turkish provinces. Lord PALMERSTON.—Sir, I never heard a debate in which, if I may be permitted to say AO, those who have taken a part seemed to understand so little of the facts of the case. From what has passed • this evening it might be supposed that the question at issue was whet er these Principalities were to be subjected to the tyrannical and oppressive government of a Turkish pacha, or whether they *ere to have self-government and be ruled by chiefs belonging to themselves, and have representative govern ment. That seems to be the alternative which the hon. and learned member for Sheffield appeared to consider to be the matter at issue; and the hon. and learned member for Cork (Sergeant Deasy) seemed to think that the ques tion was, whether we should comply with the wishes of the Danubian Principalities, by placing them in the same rela tion to Turkey in which Egypt stands, or whether we should make them in A greater and more strict degree sub ject to Turkey. But none of these questions are really the questions at issue. The real question at issue is, that which has been so well stated by the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, viz., whether we should take a course which would infallibly be the first step towards the separation of those two states from the Turkish empire, and thus commence the dismemberment of that empire. The right hon. gentleman the member for Oxford has en deavoured to refine and draw a distinction between a pro vince and a country ruled by a sovereign, If I understand his argument it was that, inasmuch as these provinces were only under the suz,rainte of Turkey, that meant nothing at all, and that they were free and independent, though forming a portion of the Turkish empire. The hon. and learned member for Cork read a treaty, by which it ap peared that in 1460 these provinces acknowledged the Sultan should have supremacy over the sovereign of their country that seems to be something like " sovereignty," and that sovereignty was a part of the dominions of the supreme authority. If these provinces were not a part , of the Turkish empire, how came my right hon. friend the member for Oxford to be a party to a war which would only stand justified upon the ground that they were a part of the Turkish empire ? Can it be supposed that the Go vernment of that day would have called upon England ? Can it be supposed that the Emperor of the French would hove called upon France, and that the other Powers of Europe would , have united to protect the population of Moldavia and Wallachia from Russian aggression, if these provinces had been a separate and independent ate ? Much as we might all have re gretted the invasion of their territory, and the annihilation of their rights, I do not think that the nations of Europe would have taken up arms and made that sacrifice of blood and treasure which they did make for the purpose of saving these provinces from the aggression of Russia. It was because of an encroachment upon the territories and independence of Turkey, the integrity of which was con sidered essential to the balance of power in Ear oee,—it was on that ground, and on that ground alone, that the Government of that day called on the people of England to take up arms, and to resist that invasion. Well then, I say that, if we look to the ancient history of these pro vinces, I believe I may say that from the time they ceased to be a part of the Roman Empire down to the present period they always have been two separate states ; and, therefore, that which we are now called upon to sanc ti on is something totally different from anything which has ever existed before in regard to these Principalities. But has their connexion with Turkey been a state of oppression ? On the contrary, if these two nations have suffered, it has been from foreign aggression, from military occupation— first by Russia and then by Austria, though for a different purpose and with different views. It is the occupation of these provinces by foreign troops which has been the cause of grievance and complaint, suffering and impoverishment, and not their relations to the Tnrkish empire. The con dition of their connexion with Turkey was that the should be self-governed, that there should be no Turkish troops within their limits, that they should be ruled by native chiefs, and have such an internal organisation as they thought fit. Secondly, it was agreed that they should ac knowledge supremacy on the part of the Sultan, make a payment of tribute, and render military assistance in case of foreign aggression. I say, therefore, sir, that it is a fallacy to argue that what we are now called upon to de cide is whether these nations should or should not be free. Free they are, free they have been, and free we intend them to be. The question is, not whether their internal freedom shall be taken fr om them, and they shall be sub jected to the tyranny of a Turkish paella. The ques •tion is, What shall be the conditions of that free. dom which the Towers of Europe are pledged by the treaty of Paris to secure to them ? It is said that we are called upon by the national honour and by national en gagements to yield to the motion of my right hon. friend the member for Oxford University. I deny that the Treaty of Paris made any engagement of that sort. In the conferenc.s which took place opinions were expressed by the French and by the English Plenipotentiaries that such an arrangement might be desirable; but no decision was come, and further deliberations were arranged to take place. The question which was to be referred, under the anicle of the Treaty of Paris, was not simply the question of union or of separation, but a question of internal orga nisation. It was a misrepresentation, when we were re ferred to the Reglement Organique as an expression of the feelings of the people in foreshadowing and suggesting the union of the two provinces. Who were its authors ? It was a Russian document. (Hear, hear.) If it anticipated a union of the two provinces it was a Russian view of the matter, and not a Moldavian, Wallachian, or Turkish. It is quite true that this question of union was one of the matters which the Divans were not precluded from con sidering as a part of their organisation. We are told that faith has been broken with these peeple—that the condi tions of the treaty of Paris have not been fulfilled. Why, they have been fulfilled ! (Hear, hear.) Divans for the purpose--Divan ad hoc as they were called—were con voked. It is said that they were elected with great regu larity, and it is said that their proceedings were well con edenecdtienclgie o b f u a t the hous e ma y we ll i mag i ne th e e l ec t ora l pro t o agitated their debates b y fore i gn people l haa u gv n i et n a h e t e eo d ar art heard oa t r h caeo particularus y n u s t e w m o i o f hp e l u e dr c op t o i o ne n eo. , t and eAne. i n p e d n learnedsubtleltis memberwelin t rigues.l t a irely tally with' the lett er w hi c h h as b een rea d by th e h on . n e e that feet ;nsoe f wt or Cork. It is said that there were cause of th ese excitements were wh a i t c h lieypre fore i gnv a i agencyl prevailed e l tsubtl e, regardw a s b theut to this question of un i o n and separation. The Divans did because the Moldavian un doubtedly, pet; tie fora union, not in the first instance, union. D A iv d a , n an w t a H s ge kn w o a w e n te t k o en be of a about its business, and b e the question of cl i v rr e e r g se ui t a o . which were pare denied ; that Divan was -sent irregula rities which could not another was elected under influ encess,union i the trodWerhan2t remount, and it joined the other in voting for union. • stated byWhy a union which, as S. Fitzgerald) would place the for Foreign Affairs (Mr. prince. It was on that conditioe provinces under a foreign and not under any other cireumn sta a n t they were for a union, they be ? For obvious reeve ces : And why should DR Moldavi a sub mit to Wallachia, not Wall ac hi a w ould never to Moldavia either of them submit No b e ru l e d b • • Nor w ou ld y a prince sent by the Sultan. They want of >zeign prince, and who foreign prince be ? Why, they ar e a ll o f the Givreeeeti trhat gion, and would they take a Catholic ? I doubt h theli w e er a Catholic prince would be permitted by the five powers to rule over the country. Russia woul 1 raise objections to placing any but a Greek prince r n that throne, and where will they find the Greek prince? lii the Russian royal family, to be sure. (Hear;hear.) Lit the hou se b e assured that union under a foreign prince means union under a prints of the Russian family. How is a Catholic prince to LONDON, r maintain himself against all the Greek influences whioh • will be brought to bear upon him F Why, by leaning -- for support on that power which Would sway those Greek in --efluences. But,-whethee the-prince were Catholic or Greek, he would be equally obliged to become a vassal of Russia, in order to'secure the gcod wiil of the Greeks. I say, there fore, that the appointment of a foreign prince would be necessarily the first step towards a separation. Would any prince, fit to govern a country of four or five millions, long submit to be the vassal of the Sultan ? No. He would aspire to independence, and independence he would soon obtain. Here, then, would be a small country of four or five million people, surrounded by Russia, Austria, and Turkey, with large populations. How weld that little State maintain its independence? It would necessarily be come subservient either to one or to the other, or follow the fate of Poland. Don't tell sue that such a State could be any barrier against Russia. To say that a country with four or million of people would be a military barrier against co lossal Russia is an absurdity. Thus the end of their foreign princes would be that they would establish a scene of in trigue between Austria and Russia detrimental to the peace and well-being of the country, or follow the fate of Poland, and be absorbed by Russia, or divided between Russia and Austria. Would such a result benefit the people of Wal lachia and Moldavia. Far from it. It is a short-sighted policy even towards the Wallachians and btoldavians themselves, to wish for that which the right hon. gentle man urges upon the Government to support and to assist in establishing. But we are told that we ought not to deny them representative institntious. Why, by the Organic Statutes they ought to have them, but Russia pre vented them from meeting, or so arranged that the meet ings were merely sham. The Congress of Paris recorded its opinion that they should have representative assemblies, and it was to ascertain their views and wishes that these Divans were held ; but these unhappy Divans, carried away by the agitation and intrigues of those who bad other interests to serve, refuse to go into all their real points, and confined themselves to the unattainable object, as I will call it, the separation from Turkey under the rule of a foreign sovereign. I say, therefore, it is not for the inte rest of the Principalities themselves, or in accordance with the engagement of the treaty of Paris, that the address which the right hon. gentleman proposes should be acceded to. We are dealing with this matter as if we were met in congress at Vienna in 181.5, when the map of Europe was spread out, to be divided according to the wishes of the parties immediately concerned. But it should be remem bered that we made waragainst Russia for the maintenance and integrity of the Turkish empire We concluded the treaty of Paris for that purpose, and now we are called upon, as the result of that successful war waged to main tain the independence of Turkey, and in accordance with that treaty, agreed to for the same purpose, to take a step which the Turkish Government, and which I should hope ,every reasonable person would think would be the first ' step towards the dismemberment of the Turkish empire. Such a course of proceeding would, in my opinion, be tan tamount to stultifying ourselves, and would be in opposi tion to the great interests of the country. I hope, therefore, the house will not be led away by the eloquence of the right hon. gentleman, and accede to the motion, which is adverse to the fundamental policy of the country; ad verse to the engagements of the country, as entered into by the Treaty of Paris ; which cannot be of advan tage to the inhabitants of the Principalities them selves; which may lead to European dissension, if not to European war; which can be of no benefit to the Principalities, as they would have the same advan tages of trade, commerce, military arrangements, and laws, separate as if united. While separate they would continue to have the additional security which their con nexion with Turkey would give them ; whereas, if they were left amiddespoticand military states, their fate would be sealed, their representative assemblies would be quashed, neighbouring military and arbitrary powers would come down upon them, and they would become the tool of Russia, or be partitioned, like Poland, between Austria and Russia. (Cheers.) Lord J, RUSSELL—Sir, the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs asks us how it is that the house should be called upon to interfere in this matter of the Danubian Principalities, and has found fault with my.right hon. friend the member for Oxford University as if he were pro posing that the house should dictate to the powers of Eu rope in conference assembled. To the first of these clues. Lions I answer that here is a question to which the good faith of England is pledged—(hear, hear)—and I ask , can it be a matter of indifference to the House of Commons that the good faith of England should under any circum stances be called in question ? I hold that whether our character for good faith stands high or is impaired is a matter that the House of Commons must necessarily feel some interest in ; it is not one that they can afford to pass by as if it did not concern them. (Hear, hear.) But with regard to the hon. gentleman's second question, I should say that my right hon. friend (as I understand his motion) does not propose to say what the powers of Europe should give as their opinions in the conferences of Paris, but merely says what in the opinion of the House of Commons should be the language of our plenipotentiary. (Hear, hear.) It is not my right hon. friend's wish to say what should be the language of the other powers of Europe. Bat if we are informed correctly, I believe I am right in saying that the language of Great Britain in these conferences has not been confined to expressing her own views, but has been used to influence other powers. (Hear.) Coming, however, to the question itself. I look upon it as one of great magni tude, and as one that mnst cause considerable anxiety, (Hear.) I agree with the Under Secretary of State, that we ought not to set up any power in the Principalities that should be in any way a rival to that power whose integrity and independence we are bound by the treaty, in common with the other powers to that treaty, to maintain. We are bound in good faith not only &hotly to protect the inte grity of which we guaranteed, and for the sake of which we went to war with Russia, but we.should not make any arrangement by which that integrity would be impaired and the independence of that power diminished. So far, I agree with the hon. gentleman. But let us see what the condition of the Principalities is, and what is that we have undertaken. In the 15th century certain stipulations were made between the Sultan and the rulers of these Principa lities, by which a certain tribute was to be paid to the Sultan, but in which the largest powers of self-govern ment were reserved to the rulers of these Principalities— porters extending even to the making of treaties and to the making of war. These regulations, it is true, were not very strictly observed; .the Sultan frequently violated them, and Russia found an opportunity during the reign of Catherine of interfering, and of asserting a power of in terference and a power of meddling with that portion of the Turkish empire by treaties she made after successful ware. Those powers of interference had been carried so far by various treaties, that at length there was hardly any transaction in any part of the internal government of the Principalities with which Russia did not claim the rightof interfering. That being the case, when the war between Russia and France and Great Britain broke out, those Principalities, according to their organic statutes, had complete power of self-government. They could make their own laws as to religion, their own laws for regulating commerce and trade, and their own laws respecting the administration of justice. In short their whole internal government, so far as the Porte was concerned, was inde pendent. But the interference of Russia, as I have said, was frequently employed in intriguing with respect to the internal affairs of those provinces, and againat the influence of the Porte. Well, sir, when we had settled what should be the terms of peace, if the first object was' that Russia should no longer have the power of control rand perpetual interference which she had formerly exercised, the ques tion naturally arose what was to be the state of the Princi palities themselves. That was a question of great difficulty, because, when the powers of Europe were ready to place themselves in the position in which Russia bad previously ' stood, so far as guaranteeing the privileges of these Princip alities as against Turkey, it led to a discussion of what those privileges should be, and besides being the duty, it was the interest of the great powers to make those privileges as safe with regard to their internal position and their internal peace, in order to prevent the necessity of the interference of any other powers, as in their wisdom they could do. Those powers, especially England and France, might have• taken one of two courses. They might have said we will consider what is best for the Principalities—we will re view this organic statute which contains many excellent provisions, and we will guarantee the statute so revised and altered—leaving the Principalities with all the privi leges they have hitherto enjoyed, and with such improve ments as they may make. No doubt the Principalities would have submitted to that arrangement if it had really been one that would have contributed to their happiness and to the safety of their internal organisation. Or we might have taken another course—we might have said we will consult the people of the Principalities themselves — we will go to the people of Wallachia and Moldavia and ask them to elect representatives—let them say what they will have, and then grant their wishes so far as they ac cord with the treaty we have concluded. Neither of these courses did we take. Bat we took a third course the most unwise and irritating that could by any possibility have been adopted. We assembled the Divan—the representa tives of the Principalities—and when they had deliberated and expressed their feelings, and agreed almost unani mously what their wishes were—then you turn round upon them and say you are a disorderly set—you don'tknow what yon are about—you have been acted upon by external and by private influences—you have acted • under excitement and in ignorance of your own interests, and therefore we will cast to the winds all that you propose and entirely neglect your wishes and requests, Now, that appears to me to be the most unwise course that could have been taken. (Hear.) There has been a great deal of talk hers--my right hon. friend, my noble friend, and every member who has spoken in this debate, has talked about the power and in fluence which Russia will have if these Principalities are united as they desire. Why, sir, it seems to me that we have paved the way for Russia—we have opened the road for her. Last year I stated that it was quite obvious that without your interference the influence of Russia in the Principalities was secured. For if you set up a prince over Moldavia he would naturally look to Russia to increase his power by uniting the two provinces. He would know that the other great powers could not forward his views. He would be dissatisfied, and the whole of the inhabi tants of the province would become discontented be cause Great Britain and France had refused their desires, and they would turn to Russia as the only power you that havecould o a ssit them contrived s it attaining tn that whether her their yo object. e r e a t S u . t or So ha t refuset the wishes of the Principalities, you increase the influence of Russia. The only way, as it appears to me, to get rent of this dilemma is the course proposed by my right hon. friend. (Hear, hear.) The Under-Secretary for Fo reign Affairs tells ua (and he road a paper to the house upon the subject which I bad never heard of before) that Wallachia will not hear of this union unless she has a fo reign prince to rule over her. Is that to be understood as the formal declaration of the two provinces ? Have they come to any formal resolution to that effect ? And if so, what has been said to them ? Have we no commissioner there? believe that we have employed there one of the ablest men in our whole diplomacy. Have you said to them, will you take the union without the foreign prince, or will you accept a prince from some part of the Turkith empire ? Has that question ever been put to them ? Have they ever been asked, and if so, have they ever re fused? For unless they have it is most unfair fora Secre tary of State to come down here and say that if we grant four-fifths of their demand they will not be content unless we grant the other fifth. That appears to me to be a pro posal that might be made. I believe it is a proposal they would accept—viz., to have a union of the Principalities, but with some person to rule over them not connected with either of the great Powers of Europe—one that should not be a Prussian prince or a member of any of the great families of Europe, but one who is acquainted with their habits, manners, and customs. I think the hon. gentle man said they would not like to have a prince who would be liable to be deposed, and it is no doubt the constant de- Position of their hospodars that has been the great cause of the discord and difficulties of there Principalities. The Sultan reserved to himself the right of deposing, and there WEDNESDAY EVENING, MAY 5, , was in consequence always a number of families intriguing againstethe reigning hospodar, wise would - get up com plaints, and carry them t o th e Sultan, in order to get him deposed. In- OA way the state of these provinces was constantly disturbed, iu consequence of the intrigues of the nobility against the reigning family. Then they say, and I think very reasonably, let ua have a prince who is not subject to these influences —let us have a foreign I prince. Let us imagine what would be the state of , things then. They would have that self-govern ment which, but for the interference of,l Russia, they would have enjoyed very many years, and they would in crease iu wealth and prosperity. But, says my noble friend, that would be no barrier against the designs of Russia. It appears, on the contrary, that a people enjoy ing the benefit of self-government, increasing in wealth and prosperity--a people in theenjoymeut of liberty—that such a people form the best barrier against foreign aggres sion and foreign conquests that can be devised—(hear, hear)—a barrier far better and more effective than any treaty. That has been the result in other parts of Europe. In the division of Europe in 1815 those wise persons by whom that arrangement was finally made, it is well known, departed from the plan of Mr. Pitt, with regard to uniting Belgium with Prussia —in that final arrangement Belgium was joined to Holland, and what was the result? Every body knows that Belgium speedily became discontented and demanded a separation. The Dutch, though they governed themselves very well, had not the art to govern the Belgians, whose language, religion, aid habits differed from theirs. There was geeer .1 discontent; and at last, in 1832, Belgium was erected into an independent king dom under King Leopold. That was an arrangement made by say noble friend the member for Tiverton, who was then Foreign Secretary ; and ever, since then there had been a strong national s, irit in Belgium. They hare enjoyed their own constitution, their representative cham bers, and their free press. They value those institutions, and I believe nothing would be so irksome to them, or so likely to create resistance, as any attempt to extend French or any other foreign influence in that country. These are matters which those who negotiate diplomatic treaties sometimes neglect to take into consideration. But they ought to remember, in making those arrangements, that the content of a people, the love of a people for their insti tutions, form a barrier against foreign foes more success ful than the most skilfully drown treaties. These, then, are my opinions as to the arrangements which ought to he made. I think the house ought to feel indebted to my right hon. friend (hear) for bringing forward the subject I feel that the Governments which at Paris made an engagement to consult the Principalities, did, to a certain extent, commit the faith of this country. (Hear, hear.) I feel also the justice of the statement made by the noble lord opposite, that we are too often accused of giving encouragement to nations to assert their liberties and to proclaim their independence, and then calmly and coldly deserting their cause. (Cheers.) Pudet et base opprobria nobis Et did potuisse et non potuisse refelli." It is painful in such a case as this, coming forward at the time when the case of Sar•tilde is exciting attention, to find that after giving encouragement, we are about to with draw from the Principalities the support of this country. It will give rise not only to disappointment, bat the com plaint of want of faith. I think that her Majesty's pleni potentiary should have instructions not to support the placing of a foreign prince over the Principalities, whose aim it would be to extend his dominion into Bulgaria, but that they should have a united government —a united legis lature. If they have this I believe that they will give security to the future peace of Europe. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Sir, the noble lord who has just sat down thinks that it is only by adopting the address moved for by the right hon, gentleman the member for Oxford that we can extricate ourselves from a dilemma. It appears to me that if we adopt that motion of the right hon. gentleman, we shall find ourselves in a dilemma. The right hon. gentleman has in that eloquent speech produced an effect on the house which his eloquence was calculated to bring forth, for his address was conceived in a generous spirit— its object was a generous one. Now, at this present moment, on this subject, there is, between the Government of her Majesty and that cf France, a perfect unanimity of sentiment, of views,and of policy, in its widest and truest sense; and in a few days the representatives of these two governments will be prepared to maintain, to re commend, and to enforce that policy. Now, how it will facilitate that policy that at this moment the House of Commons should come forward, on the eve of the com mencement of negotiations, and carry an address like this to the Crown, embarrassing the English representative without in any way embarrassing the French representa tive, I do not see. On the contrary, 'thi n k that that will place us in a dilemma. (Hear) And, sir, the noble lord who has just addressed us has told us that the honour of this house of Parliament and of the c oun t ry is involved in this question, and that we are taking a course which is not in accordance with the engagements into which we have entered. That, sir, is a very serious charge. We are all guardians of the honour of this country in this house. But before we come to a vote which may have an influence upon the course of events which few, perhaps, in this house are prepared to anticipate, we ought to have a clear idea of the engagements into which this country has really entered on this subject. (Hear.) Therefore, I must refer to the articles of the treaty. They are brief, but if they were long I should not apologise on readingthein when so grave a statement has been made. Now, tare are the articles. I find in article 22 of the Treaty of Paris, " The Princi palities of Wallachia a nd Moldavia shall continue to en joy, under the suzerainty of the Porte and the guarantee of the contracting powers, the privileges and immunities of which they were in possession. No exclusive protec tion shall be exercised over them by any of the contracting powers, and there shall be no separate right of inter ference in their internal affairs." (Hear.) Who, then, is prepared to assert that anyone who has been cr is Minister of this country is trying to recede from this en gagement ? There is another article to which I will refer. " His Majesty the Sultan promises to convoke in each of the provinces a Divan ad hoc chosen in such a manner as to represent all interests. These Divans shall be called upon to express the wishes of the people in regard to the organisation of the Principalities." Who desires that any expression by this Divan with regard to the interior orga nisation of the Princip,lities smuli' not be respected? Wo have just heard from the noble- -J-:hot a joint legis lature is most desirable. But no engagement exists on the part of this country for the establishment of a joint legis lature. In dealing with this subject we must have re ference to the engagements of treaties and to the rights of powers. You cannot settle a question of this kind by a brilliant oration—turning this house into a divan ad hoc. (A laugh.) You must look to the rights and obligations of the parties—that, at least, was the opinion of the noble lord (J. Russell) when h e was the representative of his Sovereign at Vienna. N o thi ng could be more statesmanlike than the expressions o f th e noble lord styie_n Vienna when he ob served—" Though i n th e discussion of the first point of the negotiation I hav e no t touched on several questions, such as the union of the two Principalities, it was not that their importance had escaped ins, but it seemed to me that the consideration of a proposition of this kind belonged to the sovereign Porte." (Cheers and laughter.) But we do not now seem to have from the noble lord that consideration for the views o f the Oteornan Government which the n o bl e lord expressed when atVienna. At that time the noble lord went deeply into the consideration of this quo. tion, not taking it up merely t zs a topic of debate, but wielding to him as a plenipotentiary r t es which attached responsibility in affairs having for their object the settlerlent ak o i f n tu P lo s Pe. The noble lord, in his despatches at that time, expressed himself like statesman, whi c h indeed, when' hewrites despatches, he always does. (Laughter.) The noblelord then thus ex pressed hims e lf :—" With regard to the other point, as to establishment of a power in the Principalities, such power would scarcely long o the Porte remain a vassal t " • (Cheers.) But we have heard s to-night scmethine of the Pacha of Egypt ; let u s e what the noble lord has in former times said o f the Pa e cha of Egypt. The noble lord said that the Pacha of Egypt was througe religious feelin gs likely to remain a vassal of the Porte, tot that a Christian prince would be, for all P " practical purposes, independent. (Hear.) And, s a id the noble lord,With regard to the free institutions —alluding to an independent or quasi i n d e must be pendent state --i trem a rked than the sover e i gns o f Austria and Russia would never toleratem the neighbour• hood of Poland an d Hungary and rebellions promoters of disturbances amongst their subjects.' (Cheers and laughter.) I r ecur to these important documents, be cause, when we are told thatavernsi9nt and parlia ment of England are about to be ° . false the engagements which they have entered tbe h o p of iieep importance that we should, by treaties to and of docu ments applying an interpretation them see what these engagements really are, and see, moreover, the po sition in which these treaties place English honour English interests. (near ' h • and az e - a / re But the noble lord w h en p l en ipotentiary took especial t toexbaust the subject. d ni (Hear, hear.) Speaking of th e u • provinces, he said, " The freedom of discussion and th e e liberty of th e p ress wou ld scarcely be suffered to exist to any large extent. Disturbances would occur, eud an armed intervention follow, and it would be difficult to interfere with prudence and with effect It is therefore worthy of consideration we ation how we shou ld p romo te institutio ns which hereaftere should be unable to protect." (Loud che e rs and laughter.) That is the whole question. Nothin g in the world is so easy as to forward and make representations such as we have heard to-night, which, When you examine them, vanish like a fairy dream. These descendants of the ancient Darians— (laughter)--ea free, brave, prosperous, with whom every generous heart must sympathise, to ac complish whose destiny every man would be willing to make some sacrifice, are picturesquely and eloquently placed before us ; but when we ask ourselves a perfectrselveswh t a s tis th reality, what is the security that ate of society can bas brought into eatst such mace, and kept existing, every practical man feels in a moment that the entire consequences which y, one, too, mere urage d p c w t u o r u e l d o f suet e i n u e r o e o u e s theory isif encouraged, which, would afford a painful, nay, an awful contrast to the dreAsi ia which for a moment we might have indulged. (Cheer v. ) We ought to consider It he po s iti on of the limited population scattered over a soes i ( lei•able region. No doubt there is great undeveloped wealth and re sources in the provinces, but the people, as com pared with the territ or y are not that mult itude Which gives strength to a state. (Hear, bear.) eve ought to remember that these f our or five millions of b e i ngs are surrounded by powerful militar y states, h aving all th e or ganisation of despotic governments. now are we to aid them, hew to support them , what can We d o to maint a i n them? ' It is not by speeches in the House of Commons— (cheers)—it is not by votes even of the Hou se o f Commons that you can maintain a factitious independence like this. (Cheers.) We must therefore consider this q uest i on in as practical a manner as possibl e. What are the engagements into which this country has entered? I have read them to the house ? I have read them to the house. Those ex. gaeements we ought to fulfil, not only to the letter but to the spirit ; we ought to exercise all our power and all the influence w hi c h se e justly possess to obtain for these provinces good government and self-government. (Cheers.) We ought to obtain that—and I believe that wecan obtain that—with the cordial co-operation of the French Govern ment. Doing that we not only fulfil all our engagements. but we ob ain all that is practicabl • to desire for the wel fare of these Principalities. But if wo take any other course—if on the one hand we entirely neglect thorn_ e, should indee cause a stain upon oar h ono ur; if, on " the other, we encourage asy fantastic settlement, we cast the seeds forth of inevitable ruin; we encourage intervention —the armed intervention of the noble lord— and inter ference on the part of the great military powers ; we en courage hopes which we shall then bo bound in honour to support, and we may be drawls into a war—a European war —the end of which eo man can foresee, the cost and ruin of which no man can foretsl. (Cheers.) It is impossible to cc nseive a course more impolitic than that which has been recommended to us to-night. You have undergone great sacrifices in blood and in treasure in the course of the last war ; are you prepared to take a course to-night which wi 1 bind you to a policy the consequences of which will be to involve you in another ? Ara you prepared to entangle yourself in difficulties to be followed by fresh complica tions, offering another theme at some future period to the rhetori Aan of the day ? I must pay that I think the i 0193 of the noble lord the member for Stamford, although put forth with - considerable confidence, are not the ',pinions of one who haegiverisufficient thought to the subject on which be has spoken to-night. But that those opinions should be in any degree sanctioned by the right hon. gentleman the member for Oxford is to 'me a matter, indeed, of astonish ment. On the ground of that policy I would -deprecate the house sanctioning the carrying of this resolution. I can as sure the house that at this moment it will be impossible for the House of Commons to take a step more embarras sing to the conduct of the Government of this country— (hear, hear)—a conduct carried on in entire accordance with the policy which the general view of this country has eo long sanctioned. No moment would be more incon venient— I am not putting it upon that basis which is so often justly rieliculed, that it is always inconvenient to give an opinion after an event, but I sa y th a t if i n d ee d thi s strong feeling had been entertained by the right hon. gentleman, it is deeply to be regretted that so great a delay has taken place in bringing forward this subject for the consideration of Parliament. At this very moment, when there exists between the two Governments of England and France the most complete identity of opinion on this subject, that an address of this kind should be offered to the house I shall ever deplore. But, not taking that large view of the question, but adopt ing a view which must touch the feelings of every gentle man, no matter on which side of the house he may happen to sit —namely, the condition of the Principalities them selves—l equally lament and deprecate this motion. I equally lament and deprecate this motion. I think that there is at this moment a prospect, and somethi ng more than a prospect, not of rising up in the Danubian coun tries a fantastic kingdom or a phantom of independence, but of raising that!country to the enjoyment of a gre a t er share of civil rights, and even of political liberty, than bas ever been enjoyed by any population on that great stream. And believing, as I do, that there is a prospect, and more than a prospect, of attaining so great and desirable an end, I entreat the house, on every ground connected with the future prosperity of those countries not to sanction an address which if carried would lead to consequences of the most fearful character to this country and to Europe. (" Hear, hear," and cheers.) Mr. GLADSTONE said be would detain the house but a few minutes; yet, having heard the speech of the right hon. gentleman he thought it necessary to remind the house of the nature of the question before it. The right hon. gentleman had been most liberal to him and others of his commendations and eulogies on eloquence which had been displayed, and which seemed to have made a strong impression on his mind ; and he had lavished his compliments on what he called the rhetorician of the day. He (Mr. Gladstone) would not be guilty of the affectation of modesty in order to pretend that he did not understand that that designat;on was intended for himself — The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (jumping up from his seat)—l beg your pardon ; I really did not mean that. (Loud and long-continued laughter.) Mr. GLA.DSTONE said the right hon. gentleman had entirely satisfied his (Mr. Gladatone's) mind. The right hon. gentleman had drawn largely on his own powers of oratory. What were the sesquipedalian words he employed in the long catalogue of horrors which he had presented to the house ? "Do not," said he, " let us have your phan tastio interference. If you do, the consequence will be confusion, anarchy, armed intervention, European war ;" and then he relieved the dark side of the picture by words from which a single grain of meaning could not be ex tracted. He intimated that if the English Government were only let alone, they would shower down blessings on the Principalitie3 with a more liberal hand than had ever been opened for their advantage. He (Mr. Gladstone) did not ask for any interference, fantastic or °them ise. The house was not called upon to decide anything now, or to express an opinion on anything which was original, or which had been introduced for the first time. They were not asked to bind the hands of the Paris Conference, or to place the Principalities under a foreign prince. (Hear.) He only asked the house to maintain the principle laid down in 1856 by the Paris Conference, namely, that the Principalities should be united. The noble lord (the member for Tiverton) and the Earl of Clarendon had in 1856 sanctioned that principle; and if it were not, the fruits of the late war would be sacrificed. The question now was, whether we were going to abandon the policy which had been declared, and the pledges held out to the population of the Principalities. (Hear, hear.) The house then divided, The numbers were— For the motion Against it Majority against the motion ..... -178 THE CAGLIARI. On the SPEAKER calling upon Mr. Kinglake, who had a motion on the papt'r with reference to the Cagliari, Mr. KINGLARE said that at that lat 3 hour he could not feel justified in proceeding with his motion, but he should like to ask a question with reference to the liberation of the Sardinian crew. Mr. S FITZGERALD said the continual postponements of this important question was much to be regretted. He had hoped that the explanation made by a noble lord in another place would have been as satisfactory to the hon gentleman as it had been to the public ; but, though not satisfactory to the hon. member, it had been so to the Mini ster of Sardinia, and be had that afternoon received a de spatch from Count Cavour, stating that he was satisfied with the explanation, and that ho would act in the spirit of that despatch, and in the spirit of the protocol of the 14th of April, last year, in Paris. He was not able to give the hon. gentleman the information he required with reference to the liberation of the Sardinian prisoners ; but he was sure that the harmony of action which had been established betw en the Government of this country and Sardinia must lead to such consequences as they all must desire. (Hear.) PARLIAMENTARY DIVISION. , s 1 1 HOU•iE OF_CO A_MONS—NAT 4 I DANUBIAN PRINCIPALITEI33. Motion ma• • ' de, and Question put, "That an humble ad dress be prasented to her Majesty, to submit to her Ma- jesty that this house, bearing in mind the obligations imposed by the Treaty of Paris, so far as they affect the Danubian Principalities, has observed with satisfaction the general tenor awl spirit of the Declaration recorded by her Majesty's Chief Plenipotentiary at the Confer ences of 1856, concerning the future organisation of those territories : &nd humbly convey to her Majesty the earnest hope of this house, that, in the further prosecu tion, of this important subject, just weight may be given to those wishes of the people of Wallachia and Moldavia which, through their representatives elected in con. forniity with the said treaty, they have recently ex pressed." The house divided—Ayes, 111; Noes, 29'. LYES-114. ' Baring, Sir F. Ewing, Crum North, F. Barnard, Thomas Fagan, W. O'Brien, P. Bass, M. Fortescue, Hon. F. O'Donoghoe. The Baxter, W. Fox, W. J. Ogilvy, Sir J. Beaumont, W. • Gavin, Major Paget,, Lord C. Biggs, John Gibson, Milner . Paxton, Sir J Black, Adam Glyn, G. Perry, Sir E. Bland, L. H. Goderich, Viscount Pilkington, J. Bowyer, G. Graham, Sir J. Pinney, Col. Bramston, T. W Greene, John Potter, Sir J. Briscoe, John Greer, Samuel . Raynham, Viscount Browne, Lord John Grenfell, Charles W. Roebuck, J. A. Bruce, 11. A. Griffith, C. RoutNll, W. Butt, I; Hadfield. George Russell, LordJ. • Buxton C. Hamilton, Capt. Russell, H. Byng, G. H.C. Hardcastie, Joseph Salisbury, Enoch Caird, j. Hartington. Marquis Schneider, Henry Caicottj M. Heathcoate, Sir W. Scholefield, W. Cecil, Lord .R. Hodgson, K. •-• • Sheridan, H. B. Collier, R. P. Holland, E. Smith, J. A. Collins, T. Hope, Alexander Smith, J. B. ''Conyngham, Lord F. Jermyn. Rt. Hn, Ealr Somerville, Sir W. . Cox, W. Johnstone. Sir J. Stapleton, John Craufurd, E. H. J. K ershaw, J. Sykes, Colonel Crawford, R. W. King, L. Thompson, General Crook, J. Kinglake, J. ' Tits, W. ' ' Dalglish, R. Knatchbull-Huguessen Turner, J. A. Davey,.R. Levinge, Sir R. Waldron, Laurence Denison, W. H. Lindsay, , W, 3r., . White, James Dent, John - I ocke, Join Williams. W. Deverehx, J. Lockhart, A. E. Willyams, E.. Dillwyn, L. L. Macarthy, Alex, Wingfield, It. Divett,l E. MacEvoy, E. • Wise, J. Duff, M. Mackinnon, W. Wood, W. Dunlop. A. Maguire, J. F. Woods, Henry Dunne. M. Mills, T. Wyld, James Ebrington, Viscount Morris, D. . TELLEZI. r Elton. Sir A. H. Napier, -Sir C. Gladstone, W. ' Ennis, John Nicoll, D. Deasy, R. 1 NOES-292. • Agnew; Sir A. Foley, J. H. Nisbet, R. P. ' Akroyd, E. Foley, H. W. Noel, G. Alcock, T. Foljambe, FrancLs Norreys, Sir D. Alexander, J. Forde, Colonel North, Col. J. Annesley, Hon. Hugh Forester, Col. Packe, C. Ayrtoni A. Freestun, Colonel Paget, C. Bagwell, John Gard. R.. Pakington, Sir J. Bailey, e. Garnett, William Palk, L, Battik, IL Gaskell, J. Palmer, R. Baines. Rt. Hon. M.. Greaves, E. Palmerston, Visconni Ball, E. Greenall, Gilbert Paull, Henry Baring, A. Greenwood, John Pease, Henry Baring, H. . Gregory, W. Pechell, Sir G. Baring, T. G. Grenfell, C. P. Peel, Sir R. Bernard, T. Gray, Captain Peel, Gen. Bathurst, A.'A. Grey, R. Pennant, Cot. E. • Beach, W. Grogan. Edward Pevensey, Viscount Bective, Earl Gordon, Brampton Philips, R. Beecroft, G. Hall, Sir Benjamin Philipps, J. Bennet, Capt. P. Hamilton, Lord Claud Powell, Francis Bentinek, G. Hamilton, U. A. Power. N. Berkeley, F. Hanbury, Robert Pritchard, J. Boldero, Col. H. G. Hankey, T. Proby, G. Botfield, B. Harcourt, G. G. Pugh, D. Bouverie. Hon. P. Hardy, G. Puller, Christopher Bovill, W. Harris, J. D. Ramsden, SI r J. Boyd, J. Hatchell, John Rawlinson, Sir H. Brady, J. Hay, Lord John Rebow, J. Bramley-Moore, J. Hayes, Sir K. Repton, G. Bridges, Sir B. Hay ter, W.-- --,> -Itleartio, 0. Brocklehurst, J. Heard, J. Richardson, J. Brown, W. Heneage, Geo. F. Ridley, George Brace, Major Henley, J. Robertson, P. Bruen, H. Hornby, W. Holt, J. Buchanan, Walter Horsfall, T. Rust:mat, Capt. G. Bailer, t3irJ. Hallam, Lord Russell, A. Buller, J. W. Howard, C. Rust, James Banbury, W. B. Hudson, G. Sandon, Viscount Burghley, Lord Hume, W. &later, George Burke, Sir T. Hunt, G. W. Scott, Major Buxton, Sir E. N. Hutt, W . Seysner, H. Cairns, 11. Ingham, R. Shelley, Sir J. Campbell, It. Inglis, John Bibthorp, Major :larden, Sir R. W. Jervoise, Sir J. Smith, V. Cartwright, H. Johnstone, H. B. Smyth, Col. Cavendish, W. Jolliffe, li. Smaliett, A. Cayley, E. S. Kelly, Sir F. Somerset, Colonel Child, Smith Kendall, N. Spooner, R. Christy, Samuel Ker, Richard Stanhope, J. Churchill, Lord A. Kinglake, A. Stanley, Lord Clark, J. Kingscote, Capt. R. Steel, John Clay, James . . Kinnaird, A, Steuart, A. Clifford, C. C. Knatchbull, W. Stuart, Lord J. Clifford, Lt.-Col. H. M, Knight, F. Stuart, Colonel Chive, George Knightley, IL Start, H. ' Clive, R. Labouchere,Rt.llon.ll Sullivan, Michael Close, M. Langston, J. H. Talbot, C. Cobbett, J. M. Langton, W. G. Tancred, H. Codrington, Sir C. W. Langton, li. G. Taylor, S. Cole, H. A. Laslett, W. Tempest, Lord A. V. Colvile, C. R. Lennox, Lord A. F. Thornhill, W, Coningham, W. Lennox, Lord H. G. Tonlemache J. Conolly, T. Lisburne. Earl Tottenham, C. CoAe, Sir C. H. Locke. J. TreCusis, C. Corry, H. T. L. Lopes, Sir M. Trollope, Sir J. Cowan, C. Lovaine, Lord Vane, Lord H. Cross, R. A. Lowe, H. Vausittart, G. Cubitt, W Lowther, Col. H. C. Vantattart, W. Dalkeinh, Earl Lowther, Capt. Verney, Sir 11. Davison, R. Luce, T. Villiers, C. Deedes, William Lyall, tleorge Vivian, H. 11. De Vere, S. E. Lygon, Hon. F. Walcott, Admiral. Disraeli, B. Lytton, Sir E. Walpole. S. Dobbs, W. C. Macartney, George Walsh, Sir J. Duff, L. Macaulay, Kenneth Warre, John Duke, Sir J. Mackie, J. Warren, S. Dunbar, Sir W. Mainwaring, T. Wegnelin, T. Duncan, Viscount Malins, Richard Welby, W. Dundai, F. Mangles, R. D.' Western, S. Du Pre, C. Manners, Lord J. Westhead, Joshua Dutton', Hon. R. H. March, Earl of Whatman, J. Edwards, Henry Marjoribanks, D. Whitbread, S. Egerton, Sir P. Marsh, M. Whiteside, J. Elliott, J. E. Marshall, William Wickham, It. Elphinstone, Sir J. Martin, C. Williams, B. Esmonde, J. Massey, W. Williams, Sir W. Estcourt.T. Maxwell, J. Wilson, J. Evans, T. W'. Mellor, John Winnington, Sir T. Ewart, W. Miles, W. Wortley, Major Ewart, J. ' Miller, Taverner Wyndham, General Farquhar, Sir M. Miller, Stearn Wynn, Col. Fellowes, E. Moncreiff, J. Wynne, J. A. Fenwnck, H. MOnsell, W. Wyvill, M. Fergus, John Montgomery, Sir G. Young, A. Ferguson, Colonel Mowbray, J. K. Ferguson, Sir Robert Naas. Lord T ELLE as. Fitzgerald, W. It. S. Neeld, John Fitzgerald, J. Newark, Viscount Jolliffe, Sir W. Fitzroy, Henry Newport, Viscount Taylor, Colonel METROPOLITAN WORKHOUSES. Viscount RAYNHAM moved for a select committee to in. quire into the condition and administration of the Metro. politan Workhouses, and into the general arrangements made and carried out by the parochial authorities of the metropolis for giving relief to the poor. Mr. S. ESTCOURT said if the committee moved for were granted, it would rather retard than forward the object the noble lord had in view. But he had been unable to gather from what the noble lord had stated what were the grounds for his motion. He could not expect the motion to be ac ceded to without giving instances to satisfy the house that such a committee was rendered necessary by seine miscon duct in the condition and administration of the workhouses in the metropolis. Every assistance would be afforded to the noble lord by the Poor-law Board. He hoped the noble lord would not press his motion, as he had not laid sufficient grounds for his motion. The motion was negatived without a division. On the motion of Mr. WALPOLE, leave was given for the Sworn Deputy Corn Meters, the Sworn Deputy Fruit Meters and the Fellowship Porters of the City of London, to be beard by counsel before the Select Committee on the London Corporation Regulation Bill, with reference to the 66th clause of the said bill. _ _ Mr. WALPOLE brought in a bill to ameld the act of the fifth and sixth years of Queen Victoria, for enabling eccle siastical corporations, aggregate and solo, to grant leases for long terms of years. Sir W. lIEATHCOTE obtained leave to bring in a bill to enlarge the powers of the Universities of Oxford and Cam bridge, and of the colleges thereof, for the sale, exchange, and leasing of lauds. PROPERTY QUALIFICATION BILL. Mr. L. KING moved that it be read a second time. Mr. MILES thought that at that late hour they should postpone it, and ho would counsel the hon. gentleman to postpone it. It was accordingly postponed to Thursday. The Galway Disfranchisement Bill was postponed. The Exchequer Bonds, 2,000.0001., went into committee. The other orders were then disposed of, and the house ad journed at a quarter past 12 o'clock. NAVAL AND MILITARY INTELLIGENCE. The East India Company's troop-ship Eastern Monarch, 1,700 tons burden, Commander H. Mor ris, arrived at Gravesend on Monday afternoon from Bombay, having on board nearly 200 sick and wounded troops belonging to various regiments serving in India. During the voyage 11 deaths occurred on board. On the disembarkation of the troops at Gravesend on Monday evening they were conveyed to Fort Pitt, Chatham, where they were medically inspected. The next vessel expected to aizive at Gravesend with sick and wounded troops from India is the large steamer Himalaya, having several hundred invalids on board. _ Lord Lovaine, Fifth Lord of the Admiralty, yes terday went down to Woolwich and conferred with Colonel Brown, commandant of the Royal Marines, on the expe,liency of enlarging the school accom modation of that establishment. Admiral the Marquis de Lisboa and a number of Brazilian officers in full naval uniform, belong ing to the fleet of small war steamers, in course of construction at Me•zsrs. Green's, Blackwall, and Messrs. Pitcher's, Northfleet, yesterday paid a visit of ceremony to Commodore Shepherd, Superinten dent of Woolwich dockyard. Duke of Wellington, 131, screw, Captain Harry Eyers, C. 8., has pointed topgallautmasts, cross topgallant and lower yards, and has shifted her position to the outer corner of the steam basin at Portsmouth dockyard, preparatory to going out the next spring tides. The Marlborough, 131, screw, Capt. Lord Fred. Kerr (flag of Vice Admiral Arthur Fanshawe), has nearly completed her outside painting, and looks exceedingly handsome. She will go out of Ports mou h harbour the next spring tides, provided her screw is ready, to enable her to test her speed at the measured mile in Stokes Bay. She is yet 400 short of her complement, but if necessary can easily be made up by drafts from the guard ships. Ths Victory, 104, Capt. G. H. Seymour, C. 8., Aide-de-Camp to the Queen, has resumed her old position off the Hard, Portsea, and yesterday re took the flag of Admiral Sir George Seymour, K.C.8., the Commander-in-Chief. The noble cld ship looks better now in every respect than she ever did. She is most handsomely refitted. The Arrogant, 47, Captain L. G. Heath, C. 8., weighed from Spithead yesterday afternoon, and made a trial of her speed at the measured mile in Stokes Bay, prior to leaving for Southampton Water. She will moor off the great military hos pital at Netley. The Ready, Thrush, and Flirt steam gunboats were added to the colliers at th. , Portsmouth depot on Monday. They were towed thither by the Gorgon and Adder steAmvessels, the former of which, after casting them off, proceeded to Ply mouth to join the Agameninen, and the latter to the eastward with supernumeraries. Her Majesty's steam store transport 'nada nianthus, Master-Commander Sturdee, laden with boilers and steam gear for the Lion and Orlando; yesterday sailed from Woolwich for Portsmouth. /TEw BooKs.—Amcmg the literary announcements for the ensuing sea'on of Messrs. Hurst and Blackett, are " Henry 111., King of France, his Court and Times," by Miss Freer ; " Memo rs of Mdlle. Rachel," "Novels and Novelists, from Elizabeth to Victoria," by Mr. Jeaffreson ; " The Oxonian in Thelemarken," by the Rev. P. Metcalfe ; ‘• lleckington," a new novel by Mrs. Gore ; " The Light of Other Days, by John Edmund Read ; " Rumour," by the author of "Charles Auches ter," and new works of fiction by Mr. Thornbury, Miss Jewsbuiy, and the author of "Margaret Maitland," &c. MARRIAGE LAW AMENDMENT. The following is the bill to legalise marriage with a deceased wife's sister, which will be introduced by Viscount Bury this evening in the House of Commons : _ _ _ Whereas it is expedient to amend the law as to marriage with a deceased wife's sister :—Be it therefore enacted by the Queen's most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice' and consent of the Lords spiritual. and temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows So much of any act or acts of Parliament as render void or voidable any marriage celebratel between a man and his deceased wife's sister is hereby repealed. 11. NA marriage which has bean or hereafter shall be celebrated at any time or place what ever, within this realm or without, between a man and his dece sed wife's sister, shall be deemed t• have been nor shall be void or void able by reason only of the affinity of the parties thereto, or by reason of any canonical or other oh j,ction or impediment, founded only on such affi nity, to the validity of such marriages or to the celebration thereof, or to the validity of any license or certificate under which the same may have been celebrated. 111. Provided, that nothing herein contained shall invalidate or affect any right to any dignity or title of honour, or any estate, right, title, or interest, legal, or equitable, iu or to any lauds, hereditaments, chattels, or effects vested in any person before the passing of this act, nor any con tingent estate or interest, legal or equitable, in any lands, hereditatnents, or chattel real, created by or derived from any settlement, grant, conveyance to uses, release, appointment, or other instrument bona fide executed before the pissing of this act, or by or from any devise or will which shall have become operative by the death of the devisor or testat before the passing of this act, which estate or inte rest would or might but for the passing of this act hereafter become vested in, or be enjoyed by, or held for the use or benefit of any person, but in each and every of the cases af oresa id suc h estate, right, title, and interest respectively shall remain to all intents the same as if this act had nut been pass,d._ _ _ Id. Provided also, that nothing herein contained shall invalidate, alter, or affect any act or thing done before the passing of this act under the autho rity of any court, or in the administration of any , estate or effects, real or personal, or in the execu tion of any will, or in the performance of any trust. V. Provided also, that no clergyman in holy orders of the United Church of England and Ireland shall be compelled to solemnize the marriage of a man with his deceased wife's sister, or shall be liable to any suit, penalty, or censure for soletnnis ing or refusing to solem n such marriage. VI. This act shall Rot extend o marriages here after contracted in Scotland. MARRIAGE IN AUSTRALIA WITS A DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER. The following is the bill recently passed unani mously by both Legislatures in South Australia, and now waiting the approval of her Majesty in Conned.— Whereas doubts have risen as to the validity . in this province of the marriag e of a man with the sister of his deceased wife, and it is expedient tore move such doubts. Bo it therefore enacted, by he Governor-in-Chief of the Province of South Aus tralia, with the advice and consent of the LegiAa tive Council and House of assembly of the said pro vince in this present Parliament assembled : I. That all marriages which have been heretofore, r or which shall be hereafter duly solemnised, within the said province between any person and ' ll . In ceased wife's stster, shall be deemed audffareishedree: by declared valid and of full force and are hereby declared valid and of fullefoeruct: and not with effect,. any law and custom to the contrary standing. Provided always that i shalt not be compulsory for any officiating minister to celebrate such marriage% MARRIACIR LAW. DE-Pl3-ILkTION--TO-44R D - DE ft B Y. • Yesterday affeiboon,a -laiges ,atel ,influen t ial de putation wa.itoi upon: the P" ne/Werlarqt': lais c)f4 . ' l resident:el In ,Downiug•street, - to reprelent ,ter lordship the great social 3.t11 meral e eq,s resulting from the pseeent state of tl,e law `r4,eiding the in validity of .marriage with a deceased wife's sister, and to 'impress upon his lordship the necsss:ty for an alteration of the exievirtglaw. ,;.Tina deputation was introduced to the e Premier by. Viscount Bury, who had brolight , in the - bill now berere - Parliament for legelisieg these marriages. Viscpeint Busy .said . there. was. .a considerable differsnce between the legislation now endeavoured to be brought about and the enec •ing of an entirely new law. The prohibition of these marriages WAS founded on the act of Lerd Lyndhurst, tut the words of:prohibition in that act are, that marriages only voi table previ us to that act are subrequsroly to be abs iluttily void. , There is no Act of Parlia ment which states in terms whet those voidebhe marriages were. The law court, however, have ~ de cided that " voidable Marriages i nclude marriage with a deceased wife's sister. The first cue in which that was so decided, was Sherwood v. Ray, in which Mr. Baron Parke gave the decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, and be fonndsd his - ()pinion on an act of the 25th Henry VIII., which act was repealed in thereign of Mary, and lerefore he (Viscount Bury) not being a lawyer did not know upon what Mr. Baron Parke founded his judgnierit. ,The next was the Queen v. Chadwick, which was decided on a different ground. The judgment in that case desist that •es the‘words "prohibited degreera" in ord •Lyndhuret'e act seemed to giVe a sort of implied sanction to Arch bishop Parker's table of prohibited degrees, and as marriage with a deceased wife's sister was included in that table, it was consequently voisle Of course these dec sions of our courts of law would effec tually prevent a lawyer re-opening the suli?.ct, be cause a lawyer beginning to argue that point, would be at once met with the decisions Le (Lord Bury) had quoted, and it would be impossible for a lawyer to attempt to subvert thosa decisions. What his lordship wanted to impress uprin ale Premier was, that these decisions were a sort of side•wind, and rested upon a sort of implied sanction by an Act of Parliament which has been repealed, and that they should not be set against the opinions several times expressed in the House of Commons, ;lough threes opinions had not yet been adopted in the House of Lords. He begged to say, that the lately decided case of Brook v. Brook had excited a greil deal of interest, and the representatives of some Of the parties in that case were then present. The decision in Brook v. Brook did not enter into . the question Whether marriage with a deceased wife'sl sister was lawful if contracted in England, but whether it was valid if celebrated abroad, it being t aket, for granted that such a marriage would be invalid if contracted iu Eugland. Under these circunistancss, he (Lord Bury) earnestly hoped that the Premier would lend his powerful-assist ance in obtaining a revision of the law on this sub ject as it at Ares , ut stands. Virentit GODERICH foreibly supported the views of the deputation, as did also Mr. AKROYD, M.P. Mr. FREEMAN called his lordship's attention to the fact that these marriages were much more dis creetly formed than marriages contracted Or the first time, for there was more mature consideration and jeldicions thought by those persons who con tract marriage a a..cond time than by those who contract it for the first time. In his own neigh bourhood there was a strong feeling on the subject, and the attention of the people-had been called to it by the decision in Bio ik v. Brook. Mr. Brook, whose children were the subject of the hardship in flicted upon them by that decision, was a deputy lieutenant of the county and a magistrate, and very highly respected. He, after having taken the ad vice of some of the leading members of -the . bar, who advised him that this was a territorial law only, and did not entail a personal disability, and that lie would be quite safe iii contracting the mar riage, did, under such advice, contract it. But now, ,in consequence of the decision of the Vice- Chancellor Stuart, that marriage is declared null and void. He would say that the people of his neighbourhood earnestly hoped his lordship would lend his powerful influence to stop the spread of an evil which affected the peace and well-being of in numerable families, for there was an equally strong feeling on this subject among the lower classes as there:was in the higher._ Mr. M. GIBSON, M.P., could truly sty, after having represented large constituencies as well as smaller ones, that he had never received a request from anybody to oppose the legalisation of these mart iagts, but he had received numerous applica - tions to support it. • _ Mr. MoNcKrox MILNES, M.P., represented the necessity of al ering the present law. Mr. SCHNEIDER, M. P. , referred to what had taken place in South Australia last year with refer ence to this subject. A bill had passed through both houses of the Legislative Assembly in that e)lony legalising these marriages, and which would have been passed into law at once but for the exer cise of the sound discretion of the governor, upon which he determined to withhold it from the public until her Majesty's assent had been obtained. He (Mr. Schneider) lia.l given notice of his intention to put a que,tion to the noble lord the Secretary for the Colonies as to whether the Government had received the act, and what course they proposed to ado Mr. CONINOHAM, M.P., supported the views of the last speaker. The MAYOR of LEEDS said he knew that mar riages were commonly contracted among the work ing classes with a deceased wife's sister, and there were social evils arising from the law in its present state. The people of Leeds had taken a great in terest in this question, and a petition would be presented costaining upwards of 5,000 signatures, 3,500 of which were from the town of Leeds itself, which were obtained by merely going from door to door. The MAYOR of SHEFFIELD corroborated what had been s tid by a previous speaker, and added testimony that the feeling upon the subject was mo , t deep and intense among the inhabitants of all the large manufacturing towns in Yorkshire. A petition was presented a fortnight ago to the :House of Commons, signed by above 6,000 of the adult inhabitants of Sheffieli. That petition contains the names of nearly the whole of the town council lors and aldermen, and a large majority of the bench of magistrates, two deputy lieutenants, and newly ()wry dissenting minister in the town of every denomination. Mr. Blass, M.P., said he presented a petition from the town council and all the leadino• inhabi tants of Li icester. The Earl of DERBY said the deputation would not expect him to discuss a question of this kind on the present occasion. He had listened with very great attention to the arguments in favour of an alteration of the law which had been brought forward—brought f award, he must say, very fully, very fairly, and very ably. He regr, tted to say that his own judgment and opinion, although no doubt there were very strong feelings in many quart(-re in favour of the alteration of the law, wag that upon the balance of the difficulties and posai Me advantages and evils, the inclination of his own mind was not in accordance with the views which had been impressed upon him by the depu tation. At the same time this question mast be if decided by the progress of public opinion, dmeut of the public opinion in favour of an g a e lli n e eral as the the law was as strong and deputation teemed to think effect upon Lc opinion would be sure to 01 ultimately, upon the House of Commons, an H is a v i t s e 7 - t a p that pub own opinion the House of Lords.a it foourg hisht t own o b be , t )n t . hi t was i a question of no he candidly stated was that nilk w ei,t hatever over political party, part, 1 in either house in opposition to taken as a G o ve a rn nd me lj n e t d q i t d res iri a single individual, in would not exert any . influence d hitherto been in opposition but he h ld iteration of the law, s our consider to the a far as the Government was concerned, a per fectly open question, both in the House of Com-. mons and in the House of Lords. _ The deputation thanked his lordship for his kind reception of them, and then withdrew. THE SHREWSBURY PEERAGE. —Sir R Bethell has opened the arguments in support of tile claims of Lord Edward Howard, t 3 the Shrewsbury peerage. When the knoty print Zvi 1 be settled no one can tell. Mr J. Payne, the senior barrister at the Middlese* Sessions, has been appointed assistant-judge of the court. Pates OF GOLD.—T, • price of gold at Paris is about t per rnille, and the short exchange on London is 55.05 per pound sterling. On comparing these rates with the Enj•sh Mint price of 3/. 17s. lOid. per. ounce for standard gold, it appears that gold is about 4-10ths per cent. dearer in Paris than in London. By advices from Hamburg the price of gold is 425 per mark, an 4. short Exchange on London is 13.51 per pound sterling. Standard gold at the English Mint price is Eng land rather more tha n 1-10th per cen t, d earer i n LQ c_lE in Hamb urg . Th e course o f exc h ange a t Ne London r ills at 60 days' sight is about 1 09 per cent., which, when compa r ed with the Mint par betwean the t , co countries, shows that the exchange is against New York on r land ; and, after making allowances for c harges of trans port and difference of interest, the present ra te leaves uo profit on the transmission of gold e the two countries, Dither way betwen 9 i;() ,~ ~~.~ ~ i 7;:l; ~ t I.* ' •nff& ibroil a and than lig in louse meat :)asoa the do is 13 of now ords