The Sun. — London, England, 1841-01-27 00:00:00

.:‘!ORNING lent nation—one that had done mucb for the civilization of Europe and the world—and he Gould not speak of such a nation without sincere esteem.— (Cheers. ) Nor could ho wonder when the Government of France appealed to their feelings of honour and interest, that it produced feelings of irritation and estrangement, because the people could not follow the traits of negotiation, but he old Wonder that the Government of France had been to reckless as thus to endanger the peace of the two countries. This naturally excited feelings of alarm and insecurity, and gave it to be understood t'ecre Were in England feelings of hostility and estrangerm to which never had existed.—(Cheers.) His Noble Friend had stated at the cod of last Session, in reply to the lion. Member for Kilkenny, that this Treaty was not intended against France. He believed such was, the rule they had laid down for themselves, and he could not conceive what grounds there were for a contrary statement. lie thought the dignity of France had b lowereby the course their Government had pursued. e — en (Cheers) What was the natural course to adopt in such a case? Why, to enter into an arrangement and to say to the Pacha, Such i' the drrangC trim, and you must accept it. Therefore in the present tr ansaction, he maintained that it was not the conduct of England which led to the separation which he l amented, but it was the unfortunate conduct of„ the F ren ch Government in transferring to Mehem e t An that attachment they had always professed towards the Sultan. With respect to the signing of the Treaty, he knew it had been said that a proposition would °gain be made to Mehemet Ali. Up to July they had ne gotiated in vain. The people of Syria had risen against Mehemet Ali. The Government of England knew that the opinion of the French Government seas decidedly a dverse to them, and if they had asked them to sign the treaties it would have led to proposals to negotiate, and thus the whole of the year 1840 would have been l est When he read the exposition given by the French Minister of Foreign Affairs, he could not doubt that If the consent of the French Government had been asked to those terms there would have been some cavil about the words of that Treaty, or about the entry of t he English fleet into the Dardanelles. The peace of Europe would have been still further endangered, and the security of that great object further off than erer. He h appened not ma k e an y remark with respect to wh a t h a d n aPeened sine the conclusion of the Treaty. His Noble Friends, who .had moved and seconded the Address, had expressed their sense of the valour of the navy of this coun try. and all that had been engaged in this eihtdttiwein especially of those who had been engaged at Acre, in those statements he fully concurred, and he 'trusted that ,the enterprise which had been shown vith`'eldthe effect of putting an end to ~.°3 e unfounded remarks. He ventured to say, when re inefficiency of the navy was stated to the House that 't was difficult in times of peace to prove that ships and teen were worthy of the name of the British navy, but he Would venture- to predict that if an occasion arose they Would maintain the glory of their country. He had no doubt but that the achievements in the East had been attended with danger, but he knew the course that had been adopted was that least likely to be attended with danger, and for his own part he saw no course that was likely to lead to so satisfactory a result. He thought they might hope it would release the Sultan from the dread of ea vassal, and give stability to his country and throne. If *this were the result of the course adopted by the Govern ment, he thought the people would have no cause to com plain of those in whose hands the Government had been placed.—( Hear.) Before he con&uded what he had to say with respect to their foreign affiirs, he would state to the lieuse that he saw in the course of the discussion in the French Chambers the name of a noble and honoured friend of his, lately deceased, had been mentioned. Ile felt that he could not stale prech . ely what his Noble Friend's views were en this subject, but this he must say that all his motives were connected with the general peace of the world, and that he never departed from them during the period of his life.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He would say further that whatever motives actuated him - ---whatever policy he supported, he did so with a high dense of honour and u nfli nc hi ng i ntegr i t y. H e ( L or d Russell) could, however, state, that he inherited the opinions as well as the name of Fox, and was the valued friend of a distinguished character of the day who fol lowed and represented the great principles entertained and advocated by Mr, F, x. The Hon. Member for Lon don had, in the latter part of his speech, hoped if there were to be no improvement at home—if finality prevailed 7, 4 7-We might be able to maintain peace in our provinces. pith regard to the general domestic policy, that lion. 'Gentleman was entirely mistaken. The Government were not in any sense enemies—on the contrary, with re gard to judicial affairs, matters of trade, and other do mestic matte's, they were of opinion that a gradual im- VoTement might amid ought to be made ; these were the Principles upon which they wished to stand. But they Were not willing to confound abuses with institutions— they would not defend abuses as institutions; and, on the other hand, t h ey would not destroy institutions as abuses. , 7a wished t o ma i nta i n an Established Church, an Here ditary Peerage, and Hereditary Monarchy, and if any proposition w ere ma d e to d estroy any o f them, he Would find it his duty to oppose it with all the tittw,erof the Goverreneht, thinking, as ho did, t neY would lead to convulsion, and would ni f t ;P:no, if k not destroy, all chance of our obtaining any sea loc r e}' improvement. He wished to see improvements hying tt all ways, and he would gladly co-operate in car- hula t 5 "ern into effect. Other occasions would offer for on e nZtlaih himself more at large ; he would therefore willing'JY saying that the Government were perfectly 4 whi ch ° ° take upon themselves all the res p ons ibilit y M attached to all they had done, and while they re sone- M inisters they would maintain those principles e Lo ud a they tho ug h t were f or t h e b ene fi t o f t h e country.— cheers.) MILNES then rose, but was not heard for some tt " t tv reimi e e nce tYet g igisadogvitWe hr wasi‘sig Mange in this country on foreign affairs, and he was glad at the N o bl e L or d h a d avowe d the responsibility of the Government for their acts; he would also hold them re sponsible f or t h e i r om i ss i ons . H e did not t hi n k t h e N o bl e "rd had answered the Hon. Member for London in a s atisfacto r y manner. He wished to impress on the House t hat the intervention which had taken place in consequence of the Treaty of July was a different thing from that moral L itl PPort which was given to the Ottoman empire °Y the ga ll ant fleet of the Five Powers. He thought There was a painful omission in the Speech of her Ma jesty, for he agreed that the very peculiar circumstances 4, which our foreign relations now stood, not only autho- Cit ed, but absolutely demanded some expressions of regret lit the rupture th at bad t a k en pace between this country Intl France. That expression of regret not having taken P l ace, he felt b oun d to p ro t es t aga i n st the assumption that the intention of the Treaty of July, namely the inte grity and independence of the Ottoman empire, had been eteured. He believed the angry feeling the French us- tion had attributed to us did not exist, and he hoped the ';‘loble Lord would state so this evening. England had no Immediate interest in this question. He did not accuse the intentionsof her Majesty's Ministers, but he did accuse them of shortsightedness, of ignorance of the character of the French people and of French history.— t Hear, hear.) Any person who had paid attention to French history would know that the French had al ways been engaged in active hostility or co-operation with ether Powers, and that they would keenly feel anything which in the least approximated to a slight on their alli ance. He did not wish to apologise for the over-sensitive ness of the French people, but it should have been taken into consideration before Ministers had risked the awful continency of a r u pt ure w i t h t h at nat i on . Th e N o bl e Lord had asked them whether if England bad been placed the position of France, she would have adopted the tame course which France had taken. He knew the apathy of the English people with respect to foreign affairs, and lie believed it would require great excitement to arouse `liens; but if France and Russia had bound themselves together to protect the East he believed this country would have risen to oppose it.—( Hear, hear.) The Present state of the country was greatly to be deplored ; tt was in a state of armed peace, and he was much afraid that state of armed peace would continue. In condo 'ion, he called upon her Majesty's Government most anxiously to consider the state of affairs between this coun try and France, and to do all in their power to heal the wound they had inflicted ; for until France became part of the coalition of Europe there would be no peace for England. Mr. HUME then rose to address the House. If he had not paid particular attention to this question he should have rested his opposition to the policy of her Majesty's Ministers on the speech of the Hon. Member for London ; but having brought this subject before the House last year, be felt bound to call their attention to the dangerous anus , don in which the Government had placed the country. He complained of the course which the Noble Lord had pursued. He had not been candid with the House, and had not laid before the House the negociations that were going on, fearful, no doubt, that the House would have interfered and have stopped that mad career which (sett i~laced there in their present unfortunate situation. The ouse had always been denied information. The treaty was conclnded in July, and the House did not separate till August ; yet the Noble Lord thought proper to withhold every paper nn the subject. It' the necessary information bad been laid before the House the Noble Lord would not have had a majority in the Cabinet in favour of his views. They had heard a great deal of what passed in the Cabinet --in fact everybody now knew what passed in the Cabinet. —( A laugh.) The channels of the Government commu nicated it to the public. If the Whig papers did not the. Tory papers did ; so that between the two there was no difficulty in knowing what the opinions of her Majesty's Ministers were.—( Loud laughter.) It was well known that one nobitenan, whose loss the country deeply deplored, had been decidedly opposed to the policy which had been pursued by the Governeseet, arid he (Mr. Hume) believed that vexation at the course affairs were taken, bad hastened that nobleman's decease. The Commons House of Parliament had been treated with great disrespect by the Government, and he be tl_eved that a state o f a li enation had been created between France and England, which would be productive of most disastrous consequences to the welfare of this country, ' and perhaps at no distant period disturb the peace of Europe. He considered the policy of the Government, not only bad, as regarded the ConunerCe of the country, but wick e d as regarded the desolation and ruin which had beer, perpetrated upon an unoffending province. The Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies had declared that hit would assert the independence of the Sultan, and they had been told by the organs of the Government that i t was necessary to put down the grinding tyranny of Mehemet Ali. He was nat going to apologize for Mehemet Ali's conduct, but he would ask the Noble Lord by whom had the independence of the Ottoman em_ Aire beets threatened ? He denied that it had been threatened by Mehemet Ali. The real fact was this, that the Sultan, although under terms of treaty of peace with Mehemet Ali, in 1839, with the evident intention of everwhelining Mehemet Ali, without notice, and con trary to th e acknowleged pledge he had given, marched a large force ir.to Syi ia, and shacked the villages, and part of the army of Ibrahim Pacha. lie endeavoured to raise the People against Ibrahim Pacha, but Ibrahim Pacha almost anibilatqd his army. He stated this as a proof that if % ` // /~ Mehemet Ali had any intentions of destroying the Otto man empire, or of going to Constantinople, he would have done it a hen he was flushed with victory after the battle of Nezib, and two days after the death of the Sultan Malirnond. At that very instant, too, the Turkish fleet deserted. Again, he would ask . , what right had Russia to interfere with the affairs of Syria? Nicholas might just as well go to Ireland and say that he would settle the repeal question, and that the Government of England had nothing to do with it. He therefore contended that the priciple on which Russia and this country interfered with Syria, was most thischeiveus, and that the Noble Lord had failed to make out a case. The Noble Lord had not given an answer to the lion. Member for London. He had not stated why or upon what ground this country had interfered. Did any human being believe that Nicho las had any disFsition to maintain the integrity of the Ottoman Empire? If the British Government had been anxious to secure peace without any of the evils that had arisen, they had only to have allowed the Sultan and Me hemet Ali to make such terms as they might have thought proper. The last wish of the Sultan was that his son would make peace with Mehemet Ali.—(" No, no 1" from Lord Brabazon. ) The Noble Lord might say " No, no," but he (Mr. 11.) had heard that such was the fact. The Divan immediately applied itself to the subject, and sent a messenger to Alexandria, and received a favourable an swer. But there was a little difference with respect to Acre, which British influence might have adjusted. But instead of that, this country was now to be subjected to increased taxation, in consequence of the violation of the sacred principle of nun-intervention. This was the subject of his heavy complaint against the Ministers. He thought he could show that there was no grour.d for charging Mehemet Ali with treasonable de siges. He would refer to the character given of him by the Noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs. With great sorrow and regret he (Mr. Hume) saw the public organs of the Noble Lord—( A laugh)—he knew that the columns of the Morning Chronicle were open to the Noble Lord— (Laughter)—at least so the public said— (A laugh)_. these columns were quite open to receive all the trash that was sent to them, and goodness knew that plenty of it came,—(Laughter.) It was said that the Whig Minis ters were ju ,- tified in resetting Syria from the tyranny of Mehemet Ali, but the Ministers intended to relieve only one-half of Syria from that grinding tyranny. He had the Noble Lord's proposition to that effect, in his own despatch, in which doubt was expressed whether Acre should be thrown in or net. There never was a more vascitlating policy than the Noble Lord's. Indeed he could net say her khew what that policy was. The Speech said they were on the eve of completing their ob jects, but he did not know what those objects were. The Noble! Lord spoke of the grinding tyranny of iSlehemet Ali, and he (Mr. Hume) would not deny that there had been oppression, that the conscription was odious, and that money was raised by all possible means ; but he asked was there no oppression under the Ottoman rule, or why was the Noble Lord willing to leave all Egypt and part of Syria under the grinding tyranny of Mehemet ? The Noble Lord (Brabazan) said that the Government of the Pacha was spreading riot and anarchy throughout Syria, forgetting that the English Government was trying its hand at the same game, ths. the Noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs had his spies sprending disaffection throughout Syria. Mr. Wood, the agent of Lord Ponsonby, distributed arms and money amongst the people, and spread insurrection to afford a pretence for our interfe rence. One of the reasons given for interference was that the Pacha threatened to declare himself independent, but it was evident, from the correspondence of the British Consul (Colonel Campbell) with Lord Palmerston, in 1838, that whatever intentions the Pacha might have en tertained to that effect was reasoned out of him by the British and French Consuls. The Hon. Member then read from a despatch of Lord Palmerston a high eulogy upon the Pacha, his sense of justice, and his success in in troducing peace and order and respect for property in the provinces subject to his rule. He (Mr. H.) asked had not the Noble Lord substituted in Syria anarchy and in security for life and property, instead of the state of things which he eulogized in that dispatch ? He (Mr. H.) knew a person whose camel died in the Desert on the road to Suez, and he was obliged to leave his goods and trunks unguarded for several days, but on his return he found all were perfectly safe. He asked would so much respect for property be experienced on the road to Brent ford ? Fifty thousand stand of arms had been placed in the hands of the Druses, and he asked how was the Sul tan, under such circumstances, to maintain his autho rity ? Were we to keep up an army in Syria, and a fleet of twenty-two ships? The purposes of Russia could not be more t ffectually promoted than by the civil war in those parts of the Turkish dominions, at the same time that a rupture subsisted between this country and France. The proposition of the Pacha that he and the Porte should maintain an army of 50,000 men, to be prepared against the common enemy was wise and for the good of the Ottoman empire, and, if attended to, would have prevented the occurrences which had since taken place, and by which all Europe had been compelled to arm, at an expense of forty or fifty millions, in which, no doubt, England would have taken part. He regretted that there was not one word of conciliation offered towards France in the Speech. He was sorry to say that every thing that was bona fido connected with the real interests of the country had been neglected. There was no notice taken in the speech of that great and important question education, there was no intimation of any intention on the part of her Majesty's Government to follow out the education of the people, which was so much required and for which the Noble Lord had got so much credit last year ; no notice was taken with reference to the state of commercial improvements, of which the country stood so much in need ; in fact there was such an indifference shown to the real interests of the country as he had never before witnessed in a Speech from the Throne. He considered the Speech as far as it wpri. —.ot objectionable, as it took credit for an -act that Was a dir.crape to any Government. lie allti v ded to the convention entered into between tne o ers of Europe and this country to circumscribe the power of Mehemet Ali. On the whole, he felt bound to protest against the Speech, because it did not state what it ought to have done—it did not call the attention of the House to the condition of the people, or to home affairs ; the foreign policy, it appeared, occupied more the attention of the Government than the home did, the latter of which was so necessary to be attended to for the benefit of the country. He trusted, in conclusion, that her Majesty's Government would apply itself to remedy the evils under which the country laboured, and endeavour to put an end to them crc it was too late. He would now read to the House the amendment he proposed to the Addresa, whether or not he should take the sense of the House upon it he would not then say, but, at any rate he wished it to be put upon the Journals, as, probably, if he took the sense of the House upon it, be should stand alone. 1 • Mr. WARBURTON here intimated to the Hon. Member that he would second the amendment. Mr. HUME said that such being the ctire he would submit his amendment to the consideration of the The lion. Member then read his amendment which he proposed should be inserted after the first paragraph. It was to the following effect :—Thanking her Majesty fee calling them together, but regretting that her Majesty had not called their attention specially to thu finances of the country, and the condition of the working classes; stating that they regarded war is destructive to a civilized com munity, and that they could net but view with apprehen sion any interruption of the peace which had been so hap pily enjoyed for 30 great a number of years. Btatiiig that they viewed with special eneatinets the elite of the country with respect to Prance, and that they regarded with distrust the Convention formed between this country, Austria, Russia, and Prussia. Humbly stating to her Majesty that while they admitted her prerogative to declare war, they tensiaared it their duty to examine the exerciee b. , that prerogative ; and they therefore humbly requested her Majesty to command her 111444:era to lay before that House the grounds on which they had adopted their policy with rest:eat tO Egypt. To express to her Majesty tacie: tairiirise that her Majesty's advisers should has t recommended increased establishments, ccr!!'Arting the present state of the country, and regretting that liar Majesty had not directed their attention to the increased expenditure of the coantey, and the distress and discontent that exitted in it. This he (Mr. Hume) considered to be a fit and proper Address to present to her Majesty in answer to the Speech, and be should theretero move it as an amendment to the one proposed by the Noble Lord. Mr, WARBURTON seconded the atteriiitnetit. Sir ROBERT PEEL then rase, and addressed the House as follows—a... Vie, there is one subject of such over powering importance connected with the peace of Europe and the general interest of mankind, and that to 'dom. pietely casts into the shade any other topic, lroweVer portant, that it is hardly necetsaty to !icititV! Omissions made in the Speech, er the lantaage In which those topics are introduced inte the speech. It is an old saying, that speeches feel's the Throne were always intended tta be as tanintelligible as possible, and I certainly must say, with respect to the Speech delivered by het' Majesty this day! I never recollect a Speech to k.tlcit:h thn appellation of being unintelligible email be better applied. It says as little as possible epee all the leading questions that have agitated the country, and, looking at it as the Speech Of her lqaicaty's Ministers, it might justly be said of it that it bad been given to titan , rOf the laiirtioia of concealing his thoughts. Itir, I *Oa - amused by the speeches of the MoVea atttl aceonder of the Address, for they did Oricl it so utterly impossible to eke out their slot:Mtn to a becoming decorous length, that they found it was absolutely incumbent upon them, at the risk of of fending the Government, to suggest all those topics that might have been introduced into the P,,ipeech ; namely, the state of Canada., th BoUndary question, the state of the country at horae, the state of Ireland, the state of the war on the north-west frontier, and so on. All these topics were introduced by the mover and settund6r, With reiections on her Majesty's Ciokiettnnent for not having introduced that thigh they would haVe inteodeted; bad they had to prepare the Speeth.LaOghter.) It was evident that the Mover and secondet ivere in possession of information which had not reached her Majesty's Minis ters—(Lattghter)—for in talking of China one of the gentlemen had indulged in a tone of trinmplii which I think those who prepared the flpeeeli did hot bantidet themselves entitled to ladttig•e 111, It was tied• that the edict of the Emperor of China, of which so mach had been said, was not genuine, if the ttAteiilents of one of the Honourable Members was to ho.`:t atly weight attached :a it. With respert to the Address itself, no man, I think, eprt refuse to assent to the cautious manner in which it has been drawn up.—( Hear, hear.) With re , spect to the military movements that have taken place, I cannot help feeling great regret that, after the lapse of 25 years of peace, it should become necessary again to resort to war. I had hoped that new interests had arisen which would have had the effect of putting an end to any necessity again to resort to it. With respect to France in alliance or in opposition, I never held but one opinion. I think a cor di a l goo d un d erstan di ng between England and Franco essential to the peace and welfare f Europe. e:(ejluul:ii, ! ag do not mean t o sa y th a t i n di v id ua l a lli ance of a whic n h i„ rr e : t betweenouffreenee to the thwi,sh other Powers rasnodf Europe, Fran c e iastiannecceesswaroyuld lan, b not prepared to say that such an berte4cial; bqt I consider that the S ~. ` ~~ ~~' :.~,. ,: Til E SUN. LONDON, WEDNR\DIY, JAN [LARY. 27, Is4t. ' maintenance cf cordial good will between this country and France is essential and necessary to the interest of Europe. I cannot entertain a doubt that the French nation have a false conception of the people of England ; I believe there is no wish on the part of the great community of England, which has been called the enemy of France—l do not be lieve there is the slightest wish on the part of the people of England that the power of France should be curtailed. And I believe that there would be no feelings of gladness on the part of the people of England at any thing that would deteriorate the interests of the people of France. At the same time, with that feeling, strongly in my mind, I am not prepared to say that the policy of attempt ing the settlement of the Eastern Question was necessary. I can see complications arising from the continuance of the Syrian question, in which any attempts at adjustment might have involved this country in war. It is true that the Turkish Empire has exhibited weakness, but still it existed, and every effort, in my opinion, should be made to prevent that conflict which would arise upon the dissolu tion of the Turkish Empire. It is clear that the condition of the Pacha had become inconsistent with the stability of the Turkish Empire. Looking at Russia, I have thought, and always have thought, that her natural position rendered her a subject of jealousy and suspicion, but I think the course that Russia has pursued ought to exempt her from some of the observations which have been made by the Honourable Member for Kilkenny. That. Hon. Gentle man had thought that what had taken place on the north-west frontier of England was attributable to Russia. It would be no easy matter for us to make the evacuation of Constantinople by Russia one of the conditions est peace with that country. I shall, therefore, suspend al together my opinion upon the policy of the intervention, until I receive that full explanation from her Majesty's Government, which I presume they are prepared to give. They may be enabled to show that the consequences of England's forbearance would have been the imnaed:ate intervention of Russia, or of Russia, Prussia, and Austria; they may possibly remind us that that event which did occur in the year 1833 would have occurred again in 1810. The Porte applied to us in 1833 to protect her against this very Pacha; we refused, and what was the conse quence ?—an application to Russia. Russia did step in, did protect the Porte, and obtained the signature of a treaty against which we were the first to protest. We were obliged to tell Russia, "We will not con sider that treaty as part of the law of Europe." We were driven almost to declare war in 1833 on account of that very treaty ; and seeing that the Porte was about to be spoiled, without a show of justice, by one of its own sub jects, who for that purpose abused the authority with which he had been entrusted, I do believe that Russia, 1 do believe that Austria, would have felt the necessity of intervention ; that they would again have been led to the same course which had been taken in. 1833; and depend upon it that Russia cannot taice protect Turkey, and twice save her from annihilation within a period of seven years, and be placed in any other relation to her than that of master ; and therefore she, though I am not prepared to concur in any address to the Throne approving of this policy, and would rather suspend my judgment, and should not be acting an honest part if I concurred in the Address in the absence of in fornietion implying censure on those who were parties to the Treaty of July. I say, therefore, Sir, that lam pre pared to admit the case, first that intervention was neces sary—advisable, perhaps, if you could have the co opera tion of France —nay, necessary, perhaps, even if the as sistance of France were ultimately positively refused. But then I must say this, that in proportion as the assistance of France was withheld—in proportion as her cordial co operation and concurrence were wantinea and in proportion as the loss of that co-operation and assistance greatly decreased the chances of success, you ought to have shown, and I trust }cu have shown, in the whole of these proceedings the utmost consideration for the not unnatural feelings with which France might view the revival of a former alliance. It is in vain to say that the principles of this alliance are diffe rent from those of 1815. lam perfectly ready to admit that ; but sometimes the coincidence of facts and circum stances is almost as unfortunate as tie coincidence of prin ciples. Nothing can be more dissimilar than the princi ple of this Quadruple Treaty and the principle of that Treaty which led to the occupation of Paris in 1814 ; but it should be remembered that France is a country which has always, and justly, set the highest value upon its military glory. I should be sorry to think that the people of that country view the events of 1814 and 1815 with any feeling of bitterness. They must view with regret the repulses to which they were subject ; but I am sure no impartial than, reading the his tories of the campaigns of 1814 and 1815, can fairly con template those campaigns, though unfortunate in the re sult to France, with any other feeling than that of admi ration fur the skill of the leader, and the valour of the army of France. But at the same time the events are too recent, the reverse too great, that France should not be exceedingly jealous of the nations to whom she was op posed. I entreat you, my Lord (addressing Lord Palmer ston) to take care that you do not excite and aggravate those jealousies; I do think that there is some danger of this. I attach the utmost importance to such a considera tion.—(hear.) I hope the Noble Lord will not taunt me by saying, " You do not find fault with the great object which we contemplate, but you select some minor point for the subject of your re marks." Ido attach the utmost importance to this point. If it wore necessary for you to act without France, I would exhaust every means of convincing Prance that you came to that resolution with the utmost reluctance, , and would have left, as I hope they have been left, distinctly upon record, the grounds upon which you felt bound to act without the concurrence of France. I trust you will be able to show that you exhausted every means of con ciliating the good feelings cf that nation.--4 Hear, hear, ) Now, I tell the Noble Lord that there is one point which, in reading the French debates, struck me very forcibly, in order that I may make the matter more clear. I will quote exactly ?gat t i lfl4i c blPrir h rht t alig l lgign l c i 4niliii*lAll Parties who wore concerned in the diecussion were speaking in perfect good faith, and describing the feelings which they really entertained. M. Guizot was making a speech, and he was stating he gave some general warning to the French Government that negotiations were pending which would possibly lead to the conclusion of the Treaty be tween the Powers, when he was interrupted by M. Thiera in this manner:—" M. Thiers (interrupting M. Guisot) --I will prove to M. Guizot that he told rtio on the 14th of July that we have still plenty of time be fore us, and that there was nothing to render urgency necessary." "M. Guizot—lt is true." " M. Tniers-e-The Bth, filth, and 14tn July, ydd wrOte triiat follows i--‘ The question is in.agitetion, and at a crisis, but nothing as yet decided.' This is what you wrote to me; an year letters contain the supposition that before signing any Treaty a proposition would be made to France." Now (continued the IYight flan. Paronet) ph at 'tar the accused" M. Guizot—.'tat is true, I believe. All the world knows that France was kept in the dark as to what was going on; the Treaty was concluded apart from us, and it was a proceeding against which we had a right to complain." Now, Ide not deny that Ferber ; from the general tenoer of the langEtagE held that 11J. Gui.ot rd`.glit have inferred that a treaty was about to be signed, but I must say, considering the character of the man, con sidering the friendly feelings expressed towards him by England, and considering the friendly feeling entertained by him to England, r: o cantet wonder thetl the Treaq of the filth of July tictrieei7 those Powers who were parties to the Treaties of 1814 and 1815, were signed, and it was kept from the Ambassador and representative of France that such a treaty was on the point of being signed, I must ea s y I am net sewriaed that there 7707 C etame !'eellitti, of inuigdatien.—( Hear, hear- I Con'ildeieing all circumstances, I think it would have been best to have apprised M. Guizot of what was intended, and to have slid to him, " Now, we tell you, in a friendly spi rit, that our first object is to unite with you; • but if yo" will not trite ,telth lie s ti•C p't . deee'd !dd." Jt is quite clear from the letters that were written from the French Ambassador to the French Minister that nothing of the kind was done. On the 9th, 10. h, and even up to the 14th of July, M. GUnot was placed in the humiliating condition of ilet being ilikäte of tilt tfeety which Ass about to be signed. The Noble Lord says that it vedttld have been a greater ground of offence to France to com municate the intention, than it was to sign the Treaty without be etineurtence. Why, no doubt there is a way of doing those Ihinitsh If yoU bad gone to franCe, And said " We aie going to sign a treaty, and see are utterly indifferent whether. you join tit tir iidt i stirtell year, whether you agree or tyot,e shill sigh it.'' ',know that would Ilion bah an ofensive mode of proceeding, but if Fen had gone id a perfectly conciliatory spirit, and told rance " this ik gaiha in be dale, dti net deedYe lent Goa verti.t.en't by hording out any hopes of its interruption," I cannot help thinking that there mould have been less offence in such a probeeding than iii thie errs sk - hiCh adtipted, namely, ths tignaidre of the Treaty without communica tion. tam sure that in private life and in the intercourse of society generally, the principle for which I amcon tetttliit is Most heneficially adopted. Now let site remind the Noble Lord of what took place at Verona. In the Congress of Verona the position of england very much resembled that of France at the present time, and in that 1 institute the tattle teat pursued which I think ought to I have. been plirsiiett with reference to France. — ( Hear.) All I contend for is, that a less unkind course might have been adopted.:--(Hear, hear.) Now I must enter my protest against Parliament not having the slightest intima tion, cm the eve of a rupture with that Power, the alliance of thigh we all felt to be of such importance.---( Bear. hear.) This was an etent that might affect the interests of the world. Parliament was sitting here on the 15th July. The Noble Lord told us he hoped for the co-opera tion of France, and quoted a speech of the King of France which left us under that impression. He also read a letter froth 1%1. Guitot to the like effect; and I must say, consi treeitik the ma(•,,nitude of the question, arid that the Bri tish Parliament was then Sitting, whatever may be your teebnical forms and ceremonies, not to hare called in the Assistance and advice of Parliament to prevent the se verance of the connection With Fiance does appear to me to have been a slight upon deliberative assemblies, which may not hare been intended, but which if drawn 'alto preCedent they tend greatly to undermine their powers. • ( ehcela.) answer I 'afro* ia, that the treaty was not ra , ified • but recollect the peculiar condition of the ques tion—( ' Cheets)—Recollect the special and extraordinary power:, set forth iti these treaties. So anxious were they for their immediate execution, that the parties to them con sented they should be put into immediate execution with out being rat:fied,—( Hear, hear.) Orders were given to your navy end army with regard to these treaties, that if other measures failed they should : carry fire and sword into the heart of Syria.--( Hear.) Now before ratification, it is not uncommon to carry into effect the provisions of a treaty, but should this have been done when the practical execution of the Treaty might endanger the union with France ?—( Hear, hear.) Sir, as I have said before, there aro many points in connexion with this subject on which, before I form a conclusive judgment, 1 must see the progress of the negotiations, and the founda tion of your alarm of Russia and other Powers. One thing I will say. Considering the position of M. Guizot when tic consented to accept otlice, nothing should have been done to add to his di ff iculties; but I th i n k the let ter I of the Noble Lord, of the 7th of November, might be s ~•a • r found fault with for its temper. I cannot help saying also, I share in the feelings of regret which have been ex pressed at the omission of the name of France in the Specch.—( Hear, hear.) It is difficult to over estimate the force of sympathy. Could there have been any difficulty in taking the words used by the Noble Lord in the first instance, and expressing i egret—main taMing your own ground, making no concession in point of argument—at the termination of an alliance so long continued ?—( Hear, hear.) In former speeches you have mentioned the existence of that alliance with exultation, as a security for the peace of the world, after the termina tion of it could there have been any difficulty, even if France were to blame, in expressing your regret at that circumstance ?a-4 Hear, hear. ) Remember, you take credit for the success that has attended your opera tions. Could there have been any more becoming addi tion than the expression of your anticipation and hope that a speedy and cordial understanding, would take place,— ( Hear, hear.) It might have been an argument directed against those who seize every opportunity of poisoning the public mind against us. Her Majesty's Speech says, " I have the satisfaction of receiving from Foreign Powers assurances of their friendly disposition, and earnest desire to maintain peace." Why, if France has conveyed to us the intimation of her friendly disposition, in what would it have been derogatory to your honour to have done so? —and if France has expres ed an earnest desire to maintain peace, what difficulty would there have been in adding an expression of your regret at its interruption. Again i the Speech alludes to objects that are or. the eve of cc complishment. What are those objects? The great ob ject contemplated by this country was the maintenance of the integrity and independence of the Ottoman empire, and thereby "to give security to Europe." Why, if you are on the eve of accomplishing this great object, why take exception to the insertion of such a clause as this? Sir, I still hope that the clouds which hang over the poli tical horizon will pass away, and that the reasonable part of Europe will exercise such forbearance as shall prevent a recurrence to the dreadful calamity of war.—(Cheers.) What has war done ! What a consumption it is of time and capital, uselessly and unprofitably—nay, not only so, if it were sunk to the bottom of the sea, there would be some limit to it, but you cannot make these preparations for war without reviving that fell spirit, and all those bad passions and animosities which belong to it; and how shall these be suppressed ?—(Cheers.) Every shilling devoted to these prepaiations is an additional tax and burden upon France, as well as upon us, withdraws so much capital, and promotes a spirit pregnant with the most obnoxious principles.—(Cheers.) I do hope that France will hear what is almost the unanimous voice of this House, and will henceforward disbelieve the false re ports which are originated to create animosity between the two nations.---(Hear, hear, bear.) I see several grounds for not being released from apprehanion, that the peace of Europe will not be affected. I look to Syria. You are perhaps determined to 1 mit the power of the Yachts nd to confine him to Egypt ; /i tut remember t • s, while F t nee remains in her insulated position, you will find, afte the present temporary settle ment, a thousand questions Arise you cannot satisfactorily settle without the co-operation of France. The relations between the Pacha and the Porte arc still to be settled. These may be framed entirely destructive of his power ; but from the relations of Turkey, and the peculiar situa tion of Turkey with respect to the Mediteraanean and the entrance to the Bosphorus, how important for our own ob jects to effect a general and amicable settlement, and that France should take part in it, not to extort from you a confession that you were wrong, but if possible, forgetting the past, to prevail on her to unite with you for mutual good. No man is more convinced then I am that you have no gua rantee for peace. I again say lam not prepared to con demn in the slightest degree many of your objects. Oace begun you have no alternative but to persevere. But you say that your measures have been attended with signal success. Now, it appears to me that this is an opportunity in which you may make—not unreasonable concessions, for that might only encourage the war party in France— but let me advise you, because you are strong, because you are successful, because vou have shown that years of peace have not abated the gallant spirit of your army and navy — now, I say, is the time to say to France, Enter into communion with the great Powers of Europe for the peke of peace ; we are all of us animated by an earnest desire to admit you again into the great family ; we entreat you now to enter into our councils. I trust France would accede to this request, and I formed that hope on the opinions expressed by the present Prime Minister of France with respect to the Porte, to which I trust he still ad heres. The Right Honourable Baronet then read 20113 C extracts from letters of Marshal Soult, but in so low a tone as to be quite inaudible in the gallery. If there was any man—if there were any two men, who would shrink from a conflict with England, it was the combination of these two men. It would be a sacrifice of opinion on my part if I did not give expression to it, and my belief is that these men acted from their honest con victions. I admire the honesty and manliness with wnich Marshal Soult came forward and stated that he bore a grateful recollection of the reception be had met with in this country.—( Hear and cheers.) That reception was not so much the personal esteem in which the old warrior was held, as an indication that the old ungenerous national antipathies and animosities against France were extinct in this country, and that we took that opportunity of proving our kind feeling towards it.— (Cheers from both sides of the House.) Sir, I have risen at the risk of doing a disservice to Marshal Soult, by complimenting him in a British House of Commons, when I caprena my anxious hope that he and M. Guizot, aided by the enlightened King of - France, may be successful, and that, while maintaining the honour of France inviolate, they may have power enough, aided by the returning. good sense of that country, to rescue it and the rest of Europe from the miserable calamity of renewed hostilities.—(Loud cheering.) Mr. GROTE explained, He had not said that the C l ielitt alfse lor the war, but traiiiher& - was no ieFurily or much an occurrence from their interfering in the concerns of the Ottoman empire. Lord PAL Mk: RSTON—Sir I am not going to dis cuss the whole of the topics introduced in the speech of the Right Hon. Bart., or to find fault with him for find ing fault with some of the details of our conduct while approving of the main policy. The Right Hon. Baronet has a perfect right to maks these distinctions ; but I think that I shall be able to show that the objections he has made do not rest oh any solid formation. I hope, on ! the contrary, to show that in many thing! which have fallen l from the Right Hon. Baronet, and especially at the con eles4er ,of his sp eec h we do not entirely concur. -- s (Hear, urea?.) filir Ido concur in deeply lamenting that the course these discussi6hS he taken have for a time, and only, I trust, for a short tithe, interrupted that good and friendly feeling which has happily so to lass or at laasylering the last 10 years, subsisted between England and trance. I attire.. with the Right Hon. Baronet that it is of the greatest importane6 fstSt raerely to the welfare and prosperity of the two countries, taut t 5 tl‘e peace and tranquillity of Europe, that there should be a good .s..na charstaniing between England and France. Sir, I have gone surtlier do that rosat than the Right Hon. Baronet, for I have attached greater iinsidria'nte eO. aallie than himself to a closer connection between the two t fitmtri.c.s.— (hear, hear.) ftl;;;oftelibeeri my lot Co ;ianciin tti7 place here and to justify myself against the charge of at ttchirig too much , . importance to that connection. I al wayS Bair Said ; tihtn that topic: was brought up against me, that I understood the (aliened lieteen Prance and Eng land rested upon the interests of the two totrittiea ; and whenever their interests diverged the alliance would lid placed in the same antithesis. Sir, I should deeply la ment that the lmeteste of those two countries should di verge; and although it may be pi - eivr.reptuous in an Eng lishman to estimate the interests of I , rance differently from the French people themselves, I cannot help thinking that the real interests of France with regard to the terN,j'h tiattn'tin , sre identical with those of England, and that we ha 4 not ireett parsing any course which would justify the resentment or hostility o'f that country. I am persuaded that when the French nation earnt's tv a calmer temper and reflects more coolly upon our prinei. pies of action, end the ends we have endeavoured to main- taut, ttnd when they know and understand more fully that we have not acted In a spirit of jealousy or unfriendliness towards France, I cannot direst myself of the conviction that we shall find that the temper of the French nation as regards England will turn to that form which re most anxiously desire, and which we regret has been de fitted frotti.—Sir, I rejoice that the speech of the Right Hon, lihronet has shown that in the great interests of England both parties in th's House concur, and what ever party rivalsbips exist with regard to competition for power in this country, they do not stand in the way of unity of opinion when it is shown that the great interests of the country are at stake. lam glad also to tied by what has fallen from the Right Hon. Baronet, that, whatever may Have been said casually by individuals on former occasions, among the leading men on both sides there is a settled conviction and an earnest desire that the best understanding and the kindest feelings should exist between the two countries.—( Hear, hear.) I can assure the House and the Right Hon. Baronet, that as, on the one hand, no efforts on our part shall be omitted during the course of these negotiations to obtain and retain the co-operation of France; so, on the other hand, no proper efforts on our part shall be omitted to regain the good will of France, and to bring back our ancient friendly relations. Sir, lam perfectly ready to admit that, consid ering the great power of France, possesse d as she is of vest military and naval means,4'nd placed geographically in the cen t re o f Eu rope, she can not be excluded f rom th e great a ff a i rs o f Europe se ttlement of any o f i ts great a ff a i rs, nor can be complete or secure until France is brought to take a par t in their se tt l ement. I shall now dis pose of some o f the ob j ections of the Right Hon. Baronet ; viz., that we did not show sufficient courtesy to France, in not making her ac q uainted with the int e ntion of the Four th p e e y in any Powers to conclude the Treaty. Sir, I have on former occasions discus sed that p oint in this House , and it is toentirelya mistake to say that we allowed Parliament separate without giving it any intimation or a know ledge of the transaction. Sir, I need scarcely re mind the House that on two occasions it fell to rry lot, after the signing of the treaty, to enter into explana tions as to the course we had pursued. We had been for twelve months endeavouring to bring France to an understanding wife us. We failed in so doing, although we made several propositions to France, and made several concess i o ns of our own views. We made a last repre sentati°l s tating the utmost extent we should go in sacri ficingt we considered expedient to obtain her c o _ e p e . ration ; and now the Hon. Member for Kilkenny accuses us of inconsistency, in having gone so far, although at least it is a proof of our sincerity in wishing to make every possible sacrifice for the purpose of obtaining the co-opera tion of France in the transaction to which I allude. After the lapse of five or six weeks, we received a posi tive refusal on the part of France to concur in the arrange ment, and that refusal was grounded on the distant and broad principle that it could not be carried into effect with oat resorting tocoereive mea Aires against the Pacha, to which France would not be a party. Our Treaty was founded upon that very arrangement, with a proviso of having re ' course to coercive measures. Would it have been seemly or any thing but a mockery to France, to have gone to 'her and said, " You have refused to join us; we told you the ultimate extent of cur concessions, to which, if you did not agree, we should net without you; . and we now call upon you to be a party to those coercive measures which you declared on no consideration would you take a share in." So far from that heing a cause of quarrel with France, I think the Ambassador would have had just cause of quarrel, for it would have implied on our part that we thought them insincere, and that we had disbelieved France in ber former declaration. But then, Sir, to the point of e;:pe diency. It must be clear to every one, after the'% have read the debates in the French Chamber, that the only object of the French Government: was to gain time to prevent us from doing anything except by negotia tion ; and every one must know, that bad we made any communication, it must. have led to others on the part of the French Government, and time would have been lost which , considering the period when operations must cease en the coast of Syria, must have prevented Any ope rations altogether during that season. Had we taken that course, it would have shown the greatest imbecility, be cause the French Government would have found some means or other to cause delay, and all effective measures would have been rendered useless for & year. Then, Sir, again I am perfectly aw are th a t su ch a clurse wou ld h ave been inconsistent with usage, for I am not aware th a t th e Plenipotentiaries at this Court would have been justified in consenting to any modification, unless they knew that their own Courts would agree to and ratify them. An other objection taken by the Fight Hon. B2ronct was the secresy---... Sir R. PEEL—It was communicated. Lord PALMERSTON—Undoubtedly. The second day after the Treaty was signed I communicated to the Ambassador of France, not only the fact, but the substance of the Treaty ; but that, I apprehend, would not be enough. The French Government would have said, " You must give us the Treaty in extenso ;. we have already said we will not agree with }our proposition ; you must let us see the `Peaty itself in order to know whether any of the de tails will make amends to us for its sub=tance." Now, Sir, with regard to the communication to Parliament, the Right Hon. Bart. says it was unfitting for Government to allow Parliament to separate without making them aware of the nature of the engagements which had been entered into by the Crown of this country. Now, Sir, as to lay ing the Treaty itself on the table, the objection was insur mountable. We could not lay a Treaty on the table of the House without its having been ratified. That the Treaty was signed was a matter of notoriety in the House. Tne Treaty itself wns published in the nc:vspapers either a day or two before or after the separation of Parliament. Sir R. PEEL—Not till three weeks after. Lord PA LMERSTON—I will not lay any stress upon that fact. I am not quite aware of the circumstances, but the object of the treaty and the fact were matters of public notoriety, and the Hon. Member for Kilkenny had brought the - question two distinct times before the House ; therefore it was impossible but that Parliament was com pletely aware of the circumstance, and could not by possi bility be kept in ignorance of what had been done. The Rig ht Hon. Baronet said that although the treaty could not be laid before them unless ratified, still there was an accompanying protocol which ought to have been laid upon the table. It was true that there was such a document, but that protocol was founded upon the treaty, and there fore could not be laid before the House without the instru ment cut of which it arose, and although the Plenipotentia ries of the Four Powers determined that certain measures should be immediately carried into execution, still the proto col had to go to the various Courts, and they might object to the steps proposed to be taken, and might have stopped their execution before the orders given could have been acted upon. Now, Sir, with legaru to my despatch of the 2d of November, I should certainly have wished that it had been communicated before the change of the Government in France, but circumstances prevented me from sending it sooner, and I did not think that the change was any reason by they should allow matters to be recognised in which they could not concur. With respect to the general policy it would certainly be the duty of the Government to lay be fore the House such documents arid information as would put lion. Members in possession of better grounds on which to form a conclusive opinion upon these matters. The Noble Lord ( Lord J. Russell) stated in so masterly a manner the general outlines upon which our policy rests, that it is only necessary to refer to that Speech for a full and satisfactory answer to all that has been advanced, and I may fairly say that the lion. Members for Kilkenny and Lc I don are the only Members who, upon general grounds, would be disposed to vote any objections to the cause which Government has pursued. The state of affairs in the Levant for many years past has been pregnant with danger to the people of Europe. The Sultan was threatened by a powerful vassal ,upon whose for bearance no reliance could be placed, nay, who was about to carry his aggressions further. The Sultan felt obliged to throw himself upon the pro tection of some Power in Europe, and it was neces sary that we should either form a combination, or leave him, as in 1832, to the support of one Power, which Power would have acquired undue preponderance in the affairs of Europe. The intention of the Treaty was to avert events which might have involved the Great Powers of Europe in great difficulties, if not in actual hostilities. Then it is said we ought not to have engaged in this po licy, knowing the objection of France ; because, by so doing, we incurred the danger of war. In the first place, I will say that, according to all the diplomatic transac tions of France, they were entitled to assume that, without an entire departure from her own professions, she could not take up arms in support of the Pacha, and against the Sultan, and then if not, it was clear no war could ensue ; it was said that:the interference would be beset with difficulties, and that the means would not be sufficient. The result has proved that that information and those opinions were based upon wrong calculations, because we have not only succeeded, but we may say that our success has been more rapid than it was possible to have anticipated. It appears to me that the very reason fia t 's' lie ai"fritiffe" a" .11117ProY 4 'flinffy - 1 , rem d the Member for Kilkenny—namely, that we were assisting a willing people to emancipate themselves from a tyranny which they felt to be intolerable, and that we were aiding them to give effect to their own wishes with regard to their allegiance to their own sovereign ; for if the people had not been anxious to return to the direct autho rity of the Sultan, and to get rid of the rule of Egypt, it is clear that the Turkish force and our squadron of marines on the coast, would not have been sufficient to accomplish that great and rapid result which we had the good fortune to realise. Therefore I say we have had good grounds in the first place in thinking that what we were about would Pot disturb the peace of Europe ; and, secondly, in being of opinion that we were not undertaking an object which we had not means to accomplish. And though undoubtedly great irritation has been created in France by the course which the Four Powers have pursued, yet I feel bound to say that if the same pains had been taken to enlighten and lawn public opinion in France as to the nature of those transsctions—Hear)—and as to the spirit in which they were conceived, which have been taken to mislead the people of that country, to excite unfounded jealousies and grovuadless animosities, I anveonvinced that the interrup ton which has unfortunately for a moment taken place between, the tae countries would either rot have existed at all, or, if it had existed at all, would have been of an infinitely more trifling and snore transient nature. — I will not, on the present occasion, go into the details of the minor points, to which my Hon. 1; riend, the Member for Kilkenny, has adverted. Many of those points he will find explained when the papers are laid be fore him ; and I will then be ready when the House is in possession of full information on the subject—l will be ready to go into more detailed explanatione, which will be more easily understood by the House than they could be at present. I shall now cnly say, that if my Hon. Friend presses the amendment he has introduced, it affords me great satisfaction to think that he will not find a large ntie,r_77 of supporters. If I were inclined to criticize his Address oil the came principle on which be has criticized ours, I thick I might pUiai out almost as many omissions in his address of the matters v4uleh ought to be touched on, as he alleges he has found in our speech and the Address moeed to-night. I will not further detain the House; I can only spin repeat, that if we did not advise the Crown to introduce into the Speech from the Throne any capres. sion of regret that France has not been a party to the transactions, it was not because we did not feel that regret, or because we thought that the House would not respond to such an expression, but I apprehend it would have been unusual—it would have been inconsistent with the ordi nary principles on which Speeches from the Throne are framed, to express regret at an interruption of good under standing which had not been marked by any diplomatic event. If either country had formally expressed its dissa tisfaction—if there had been an interruption of diplomatic relations, then there would undoubtedly have been an act of which the Crown might have taken notice in its speech. But for the Crown merely to have taken notice of that irrita tion. which in various ways has been unfortunately manifest in France, would not, I think, have been consistent with the ordinary course of proceedings in regard to documents of that nature. But if the Right Hon. Baronet thinks that the omission implies any want of regret on the part of her Majesty's advisers on the subject, I can assure him —and I am satisfied that every one of my colleagues would equally assure him—that the regret he has expressed is sin cerely shared in by us ; and I have a confident hope that be fore any length of time shall have elapsed, we will find that the present irritation in France has subsided, and that France will revert to her natural and proper position in Europe, and that that understanding which is essential to the fundamental interests of the two countries, will be found to have returned to its former condition. The Address was then put and agreed to. It was or derred to be referred to a Committee and reported to morrow, and the House adjourned at Half-past Eleven o'Clock. Mits. GORE'S NEW NOVEL, " GREVILLE; OR, A SEASON IN PARIS."—This new work (observes a Contemporary) exhibits Mrs. Gore's well-known charac teristics of easy, buoyant, and pointed composition ; a feli citous skill in depicting manners, and a smart, rather than bitter, satire, directed against vice in all its forms. By laying the scene of her story for the most part on the Con tinent, she has been enabled to vary hey--subjects, substi tuting French for English mauners---,the fashionable quar ters of Paris for those of London.--='-and the Court of the Tuilleries for that of James's‘r There aro many clever scenes in the work, many bold and energetic sketches of figures, and it exhibits a In6st intimate knowledge of so ciety and the habits of the French capital. The piquancy of observation display,ed by Mrs. Gore in " Greville," is, perhaps, even pre striking than many of her former works; and so are her portraits. Greville, the hero, is well painted, as a young, high born, and 'Argil bred Eng lishman. Young Massingberd, the dandy rival, of mode rate means, whose method of advancement is impudence and extravagance, is capital ; and the French Marquis is not only life-like, hut new. Greville is likely to be one Sf Mrs. Gore's most popular productions, for there are few English visitants to Paris who will not desire to peruse her sparkling sketches of society in that lively ructrepoli.. It is rumoured that amongst the honours which will be dispeised by her Majesty immediately upon the christening of the Princess, Viscount Melbourne will be created a Marquis, and that an English With= will be ' e conferred upon Lord Palmerston. IREL AND. MEETING IN ULSTER. BELFAST, Tnueseav, JAN. 21. The grand demonstration of Protestant feeling in Ulster t )ok place to-day, in Belfast, in the Circus. The aLsem wage was immense, composed of some of the most distin guished and influential men of Ulster. Upon the platform I observed the Marquis of Downshire, Lord Hillshoroogb, Lord Viscount Nowry and Marne, Mr. Emerson "ferment, M. P., Sir Robert Bateson, M. P., Lord Loftus, eldest son of the Marquis of Ely, Dr. Cooke, and several other dis tinguished laymen and divines. The Marquis of Downshire was called to the chair. GEORGE ROBERT DAWSON, Esq.. proposed an address of congratulation to her Majesty and Prince Albert upon the birth of the Princess Royal. He alluded to the recent events which occurred in Belfast. He said he could not express one-twentieth part of the indignation he felt at that "ruffian" O'Connell coming down to Belfast on his buca neering crusade, to oblige country gentlemen to come from their peaceful homes in order to prevent, by a counter-de monstration, the impression going abroad that Belfast was deceived by the impostor.—( Cheers.) Mr. Steele, his satellite, had sworn, in an information before a Magistrate, that he was afraid an Orange mob would molest him. All England would resound with plaudits of the bravery of the men who turned O'Connell out of Ulster.—(Cheers.) Lord ALGERNON CIIICIIESTER seconded the motion. Col. VERNEIi, M. P., proposed the adoption of the Ad dress, and the presentation of it to the Queen by the Mar quis of Downahire. S. ARMS TRONG, Esq., High Sheriff of Fermanagh, se conded the resolution. Sir Robert Bateson, M. P., Lord Loftus, and Mr. Bates addressed the meeting, expressing a hope that they would forward a petition to Parliament worthy of the North, in favour of a measure which, in spite of every opposition, would, he was certain, shortly become the law of the land. —( Loud cheers.) E. TENNENT, Esq., seconded the resolution. He com municated to Lord Stanley the feeling which pervaded Ulster with regard to his Bill ; he also availed himself of the opportunity to forward to his Lordship the report of the Ulster Association. To this letter he received an al most instant reply, the substance of which he would place before the meeting. With regard to the re-introduction of the Bill, he (Mr. Emmerson Tennent) was happy to tell them, that he had Lord Stanley's own authority for stating that he was perfectly prepared to go on with it.— He would read the letter itself, with the permission of the meeting. The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to read extracts from the following letter from Lord Stanley " As to the time and manner of the introduction of the Bill, lam in the hands of our friends, lam ready, at any hour that may be most desirable with a view to success. " As to modifications, you know—no one better—that the task of introducing the Bill was not of my seeking; that, having undertaken it, I most carefully considered its provisions, and with the concurrence cf our friends, put it into a shape in which we thought it both a just and an effective measure. I see no reason to alter the view which we then took from anything that has since passed in Par liament or elsewhere; but lam net only ready—l shall be thankful—to receive and consider with respect the sugges tions of those who have more practical experience than myself, and too happy to adopt them; if, on the one hand, I am satisfied of their justice, and if, on the other, they will not throw additional obstacles in the way of passing the Bill. No doubt there are some of Its provisions more essential than others ; and I do not think that I can more conveniently, though I may more shortly, answer your questions, than by going through the manifesto which em bodies the views of the Ulster Association, so far as they relate to registration. I hail with satisfaction their admission (p. 30) that, in order successfully to oppose any future attempt to carry a Bill similar to Lord Stanley's, it is necessary to be pre pared to propose such amendments of the present law as are imperatively required to remedy its many objection able provisions and glaring defects; and I rejoice to find also, that in many of the leading provisions of my Biil, and some of which were the most decried, they are com pelled to concur. " In speaking of the annual registration—the Associa tion take no notice of the great additional facilities given to all parties, whether claimants or objectors, by the pro visions of my Bill, which multiplied the places of holding Registration Courts, and assigned a district to each, as in England—a facility which could not be given with a quar terly registration. " NOTICES—Sec. 2.—We both agree that the claimant should give notice of his claim ; and I concur with them that the description given shculd be of such a nature only as is necessary far the identification of the claimants, and such general description of the property as will prevent fraudulent registration. Perhaps I should add, and they might admit, u will enable the property to be identified. Adopting this principle, the necessary forms are matter of detail and fair subject for discussion. So also as to the publication of the notices of claims. 66 NOTICE OF OBJECTIONS.—The Association would admit any person to object, but limit the objections to those of which specific notice had been served on the party, and on some public officer, as in Scotland. " I restrict the right cf objecting, as in England, to voters or claimants, or their agents, but require no notice (except as against persons already on the registry) nor any specification of objections. Indeed if, as they admit, the claimant is in the first instance to prove his title, he must be prepared to prove it against any and every objection that can be raised. The Association are umpelled to admit that the sys tem pursued in Scotland, of requiring specific objections, is liable to abuse, as it contains no provision against au ob jector including in his notice every possible objection, and the remedy they propose is to compel the registering barris ter to saddle the objector with the cost and expenses fo t r,Fygy TstßSobjection not gone into, or not requiring reu i i rieetee Cm the o 6 b3 c ? the o b ,e_yery objection stated mustkg t onc . very first, on pain of being visited with costs to be paid to the rejected claimant, and a penalty is imposed on an ob ector, though it be distinctly admitted that at the time of giving the notice he had every reason to believe his objec tion well founded. I propose to authorise the Assistant Barrister to give costs where he shall judge the objection frivolous, which is the most rational and most practical course. " Sec. B,—OCCUPATION AND POSSESSION.—The Asso ciation purpose that claimants shall, in all cases, be allowed to register at the first sessions after coming into possession, and of voting at the expiration of the same period, which would entitle the English voters, of the same class, to put in their claims. " In England, freeholders and copyliclders, with some exceptions which extend to Ireland, must have been in possession six months previous to the last day of July before the annual registration ; and all other claimants, welve months—that is, eight months, or fourteen months, at least, before registry, My Bill proposed to give in Ire land the right of being registered at the end of six months. " What ground can there be for a still greater difference in favour of Ireland? " POLLING.—Upon this subject I will only say, that if, as I understand, you agree with the Association in desir ing an assimilation to the English law as to the multipli cation of polling places, and the duration of elections, strongly recommend that that question should be kept se parate from registration, and be made the subject of a distinct Bill. If Irish Members, without distinction of party, are generally of opinion that the adoption of the English law in this respect will tend to diminish expense, and will also provide effectually for the peaceable and im partial exercise of the franchise—l think I may say with confidence that they will meet with no opposition on the part of the Representatives of England and Scotland. " ReetstoN.—We agree that the Irish law should be adhered to, which requires the claimant to prove his title in the first instance ; but the Association require that he should then be protected from any future infringement of his right to vote, except on account of some circumstance occurring subsequently to his having been placed on the register, arid not previously adjudicated upon. " I admit that a. voter once on the register should be protected against vexatious re-investigations ; my Bill re quires that the objector in such case should prove his ob jection (not shore a prima facie cause but prove it) before the voter is ever called on for a defence—that he should prove it, subject to costs for a frivolous objection ; but we contend that the extent of protection demanddd by the As sociation will tend to keep on the register fraudulent votes, provided they can afterwards be proved to have been frau dulent when first put on : further, that in the difference which unfortunately prevails in the decision of different barristers, a claimant successively rejected by a dozen bar risters, and having put the objectors to the expense of sub stantiating their objections a dozen times consecutively, if he can at last succeed in persuading one barrister to re verse the decisions of the other twelve, is irrevocably placed on the register. Again, a claimant having been placed on the register by the over-ruling, on appeal, of the objection on which he was first rejected, is protected against objec tions wlich might have been urged at his first claim, and which could have been urged had they not been rendered unnecessary by his rejection on other grounds. I might multiply cases, but I think these will be sufficient to show that protection to this extent passes the legitimate bounds, and tends to the introduction for life of fraudulent votes. " APPEAL.—(Quotation from the report of the Ulster Association.) "' Your Committee consider it an object of the first im portance, that an appeal to a Committee of the House of Commons, on the right of voters, should be rendered, as far as possible, unnecessary. They cannot, therefore, ap prove of the English system, because it gives no means of redress, either to a claimant or to an objector, against an erroneous decision of a registering barrister, except by a reference to such a Committee ; nor of the Irish system, because it confines the right of appeal to the claimant; your Committee would therefore recommend that the right of appeal on all points of law (the final decision on ques tions of fact having been already provided for in sec. 4) should be conferred both on the claimant and on the ob jector ; and that a court of appeal should be constituted before which appellants might have suc h points decided.' (p. 10). " I am happy to have the assent of the Ulster Ist—'That it Associa tion to the three main principles of my Bill. it would be of great advantage to obviate the necessity of appeals to the House of Commons. 2d—That fur this purpose a Court of Appeal is necessary. 3d—That the right of appeal should be conferred both on the c l a i mant and on the objector. In fact, these, together with the no tice to be given by claimants (to which the Association assent), the abolition of certificates and affidavits (which they also recommend), and the annual revision (and they propose a quarterly revision) constituted the essence of the Bill which was so acrimoniously opposed last Session. I think it doubtful how far questions of law and of fact can be separated in the appeal as proposed by the Associa tion. They do not suggest any new constitution of the Court of Appeal. I found the Judge of Assize already the authority referred to on the one-sided appeal, and I preserved the same authority when the appeal was extended to the objector. If any other tribunal can be established of as high legal attainments, as far removed from tempta tion, and as free from the suspicion of partiality, I see no reason for insisting that the appeal shall be to the Judge of Assize. " The substitution of the authority of a Judge fyr that MORNING EDITION. of a jury, in cases of value, was suggested by the L Lord Clements, sanctioned by the present Gosernmei and adopted by the House of Commons. The Association think that here again the object should be subject to:costs, in every case where his objc., tions are not sustained ; the claimant to none in any whatever. I was of opinion that both parties should liAble to eats, if there were no legititoate grounds 1' bringhlg the appeal, or defending the vote. The couit recommended by the Association appears one-sided unjust ; and, if I understand rightly, gives costs agab ti the objector whenever unsuccessful, and relieves t t claimant where be frivolously puts the objector to eXPet , in substantiating an objection &ready affirmed by t Barrister. " I have nothing to say to the remaining seetio which support the vote by ballot, the shortening of t duration of Parliament (in the practical adoption , which principle, at the present moment, I apprchei, they will meet with but little countenance on the pr, of her Majesty's Ministers), the qualification of represe tives, or the proportion which ought to be established b, tween the number of representatives from Ireland and fra • the rest of the empire ; but, after all that has been se upon the subject of the comparative franchise in the thr countries, I must say a few words on the 12th section—t, franchise. The table furnished in this section as a col , partitive view of the franchise is a most useful docurne and I gladly avail myself of it—first, as proving that Ir land has not been unjustly dealt with ; and, second, as ft nishing, together with the comments, a strong argumq in favour of our interpretation of the existing franchise. " The table of the Association shows that, in two stances as compared svith England, and one as compar' with Scotland, the Irish freehold franchise is more r' stricted ; while, as relates to the leasehold franchise, r, only does Ireland possess, to an equal extent, every fra'. chise enjoyed by either country, with the exception of t 501. tenancy at will (which is repudiated by the Associ, tion), but, in almost every instance, a less term of yea , and a lower amount of value will qualify in Ireland, th* either in England or Scotland. " First, as to the restriction. In England, a frecho.: of inheritance in any case, and freehold not of inheritane provided the party occupy to the amount of 405., entith to vote ; whereas, in Scotland and in Ireland, the amour is 101., and in Ireland for a freehold below 201., occap. tion is superadded as a condition. For the amount, it needless to advert to the grounds which led to the abel tion of the Irish 40s. franchise. At the period of the Refor • Bill the Legislature found the 40s. franchise existing England, and did not abolish, though it restricted it, a 1 where the restrictions applied, it fixed the minimum 101. In Scotland it found no such franchise, and did e introduce it, but fixed the minimum at 101. In Irela # it had been recently abolished, the Legislature did n 4 restore it, but found the minimum fixed at 101. and 1, k it so. Indeed, the Reform Bill did not, in any ws deal with the freehold franchise of the counties of Ir land—it conferred no new ono.—it altered no s one, but it added the leasehold to the previou' existing freeholds, and in so doing, confers the right more extensively on Ireland than cith England or Scotland. On the same ground the law r sluicing occupation remained unaltered ; and it may well for the " Liberal " Association, who select this poi of comparison with Scotland as a grievance, to bear ." mind, that so far from extending popular rights, the ve.‘ want of this restriction in Scotland was found practical to give so much power to large landowners to grant " fi titious"freeholds, that the Select Committee on Scot( fictitious votes, presided over by Mr. Horsman, recent mended that in Scotland occupation should be required ‘.O the smaller freeholders, and that two successive Lords A. 'locate, with the sanction of the present Government, ha' . gone so far as to advise that residence should be cnforct f as a condition. " And now let us turn to the leaseholds, and, adopt': k the plan of the Association, place side by side the fra, chisespos4essed respectively by the three countries, leavii a blank in each case where no corresponding franchi exists," Leasehold Franchises in England. Scotland. Irelar Original lessee or assignee of a term of 60 years (57 in Scotland Original lessee or assignee of a term of 20 years Ditto, ditto, 19 years Ditto, ditto, 14 years Franchises requiring Occupation. Sub-lessee or assignee of a term of 60 years (57 in Scotland Original lessee or assignee of a term of 20 years Ditto, ditto, 19 years... . Ditto, ditto, 14 years X £ X 10 10 10 50 50 20 - 50 20 - - 20 Tenant at will, liable to a 10 10 10 50 50 10 50 10 20 rent of 5O 50 " But the table is valuable in another point of view; 1 cause for the purposes of comparison, it sets side by si A the 10/., 201., and 501. franchises enjoyed by Englai Scotland, and Ireland, respectively, as being co-extcns with each other ; and either the Association act most dis , o genuous.ly in instituting a comparison between simi s amonnts with different meanings, or else, the several fra chises, though in each country conveyed in different tern.:_ are in reality (as we contend they are) the same in su, stance in each. I close with them on the more credital assumption, and it will be a great point gained in the cc troversy if we can concur in this view, because in th case the interpretation given to the law in one count* ought to influence the interpretation of the correspondi words in the other. It is right, however, that we shot. sec what the words really are, which, with reference to 1, Scotch Act, the Committee of the Association incorrec quote. You are well aware that the Irish county fre A lidclex, votes under the terms, not of the Irish Ref° ;t nr.e upon him, ]. of the 10th Geo. e. e s. 0 • and that the oath wh he is required uy the 'iteroern freeholder, Sec., and that I have a freehold therein, of t!, clear yearly value of 10/. over and above,' &c. The El lish Act borrows its phraseology from the.. preceding Act, and provides that the freehold shall be of a the el, • yearly value of 101.,' words identical with the qualify] words of the Irish freeholder, and with the words of oath. Can it be contended that their construction is c-‘ ferent ? " The Scotch words relating to owners (and to own only, not tenants) are, that the subject on winch he chi shall be of the yearly value of la, and shall actually yie or be capable of yielding that value to the claimant, of reducing feu-duty, ground annual, &c.' The words marlin in italics have been omitted by the Association ; in quot.r the franchise, which they do with approbation. " The leasehold qualification in England is conferiP on the lessee, &c., of any term originally for a period , not less than - years,' of the clear yearly value of pounds ; in Ireland, on a lessee ' having a beneficial ' 6 terest therein of the clear yearly value of not less ti, - pounds.' In Scotland, where the clear yearly va 6 of such tenant's interest, after paying the rent, and . 6 other considerations due by him for his said interest is t loss than pounds. And it is worth remarking, that in Scotland leasehold qualification applies to a franchise which in 1 , . land would be called a freehold—viz., a lease for life cf a tenant. 1 know not how the difference of :) pression arose between the English and the Sec` Acts ; I do not know that the words of the Eng' and Irish Bills, as introduced, were identical ; and reasons of the change, which was made publicly, and I which the grounds ,were publicly assigned, are knolisn all. lam confident the franchises were intended to be ► same in principle ; I believe they are the same in effes and I do not believe that any English or Scotch lair3s have placed on the English or Scotch franchise the inn pretation which is sought to be attached to the word., the Irish Act. But I have neither time nor inclina4 to argue this question at length, still less to consider , propositions made by the Association for the alteraip of the franchise. I will just direct your attention - 1, proposal (page 19,) while they repudiate the 50/. ten t at will, as unduly dependent on his landlord, to place the register all persons rated for twelve months, upci holding rated not higher than 101., whatever be his ra without any reference to his beneficial interest in tenement ; and to another passage in the same pa t where, in speaking of a franchise depending on the , cess of annual rated value above his rent, such excess correctly enough called the tenants' beneficial intcres. Ono other argument, however, I must borrow( from Association in favour of our construction, too remarks', to be omitted. They quote, with approbation, p. ;„ p. 18, a Scotch franchise given to a tenant having f, a sum of 3001. for the interest, whatever his rent may A very little reflection shows the ground for this. tenant who has paid 3001. for his lease, subject to a ri • has given 30 years purchase of a profit rent of 10,' whatever his rent-charge may be, he could dispose of ' farm for 101. per annum more than he pays.. His leas( him, in the words of the English Act, is' of the yearly value of 10/.' In those of the Scotch, 'his h rest, after paying his rent, is not less than fo/." of the Irish, ' he has a beneficial interest therein of less than 10/;' and, lastly, in the words of that pa s t the Irish oath, now abrogate d, a solvent tenant c , ' fairly, and without collusion, afford to pay him 101.' ,e and above the'rent to which he ikes is subj me ect. The argun is new to me, but I own str as both sound forcible. " I am ashamed of the length to which my letter run. It has been written in haste, but as you well lu. I sin tolerably familiar with the subject, and as I am aware of having stated anything erroneously or unfa you are perfectly at liberty to make what use of it thi,Dn,kjr: EmersonfisTE‘.kT t.l ‘ h ß a Tve,nienenthnaeinnngt, abletisci." to conceal eonceal or disguise.—Bel's me , m y dear Sir, very sincer e ly y ours , D r p . et c it o io o n KE to Parliament. v, " STANLE", speech proposed the ado} s of a as received with the most enthusi shouts of reiterated applause. He read some extracts a report respecting O'Connell's visit to the North, concluded a long and rambling speech, by moving folio wing resolution :—" That looking to the num , and solid advantages which have accrued to halal) particular, and the Empire at large, from the effe( the Legislative Union between the two countrles, have seen with indignation and alarm the recent]' newed efforts to effect its repeal."—Passed u nanimot.4 The Rev. H. SMITH COMING, Vicar of Ballyn moved the next resolution, which was as follows :—" we heartily rejoice in the deep and universal ins sion that pervades not only all denominations of testants in the Kingdom, but a respectable porth the Roman Catholic population, that repeal is but other name for rebellion, and a flimsy cover for contemplated dismemberment of the empire, and we are determined most cordially to co-operate in ; trating the mischievous and destructive project, an preserving that settlement of property which repeal it t h reate ns and endangers, and that civil and religion 1 berty which it would ultimately and infallibly destroy.' The following resolutions were also agreed t' " That we have seen with sincere satisfaction a rem' pression by the Lord Lieutenant, of his official disai l bation of this renewed agitation of repeal, and than deeply regret that any circumstances should have VCIIWCi dip Eacclisacy (NM fulluwiug up that, cleclat L----' th/S a nd is o ne • lie there .I the :bold j fi NI