The Sun. — London, England, 1855-06-06 00:00:00

tradition of the spirit which she then exhibited to animate , her patriotism, Russia would make a less stubborn resist ance to us than she did to Napoleon I. ? It was hi. belief that we had entered upon a task the greatest, the most ar duous and the most difficult that ever a nation undertook, and that we ahauld have to more than double our energies, the number of men engaged, and the money we had spent in a single year, before we should succeed in accomplishing our objecc. Ought not we to tell this to the people, amito subdue rather than excite their feelings ? Suppose we should snfler reverses, and have to contend not only with-intermittent fever, but with plague and cholera in addition? Ought not the House of Commons, instead of cheering the Minister when he told them that the conferences were closed, not to subdue the spirit of the country in a righteous cause, but to let it know fully and fairly what was before it ? What he blamed the Government for was, that they bad played falsely and treacherously with the people, and there would be a reckoning with them in the country. The noble lord at the head of the Government said in one of his harangues; that the people of England were his reserve force—what had he done to make that reserve available? The noble lord the member for the city of London said in December that we would have ISO,OOO or 200,000 Englishmen under arms, with foreign levies to aid them. Where were they? There had been the same child's play all through, from the be ginning up to the present moment. (Opposition cheers.) All he asked was, that they would deal candidly with the public. He had noticed that, whenever the mass of a people became cruel, revengeful, and unreasonable towards Governments, or towards their leaders, it was because they thought they had been betrayed ; and there was nothing by which the Government would so surely risk the loss of public favour, and reap public calamity, as by attempting to conceal from the people of this country the whole amount of the difficulties and dangers which were now hanging over them. It was on this account, and because he would not be responsible in the slightest degree for what might happen in this country, that he wished to speak out on this occasion ; and he warned hon. gentlemen that there were no institutions which might not be in danger from from the reaction that might take place from over-san guine confidence in the war we had now undertaken. He had seen public opinion Out of doors take sudden and strange freaks. He had seen the men who clamoured the loudest for war, after the first disasters meeting toge ther, not to denounce themselves, or to take to them selves the slightest demerit, but to denounce those who weee.jzighest in the land and most responsible. And when he saw what had been the course of proceeding in the face of what he must believe to be superior informa tion—when he saw the way in which in high places the passions of the people had been pandered to, and a mere momentary triumph sought at the risk of great future die aster—hemnst say that he thought many of these persons had deserved the retribution with which they had met. He would never so far truckle to the popular spirit as .to join in any cry which should divezt the mass of the peo ple from what he believed to be their first duty, viz., to consider how far they were responsible for what had fallen on the land and how far reform ought to begin at home. He had spoken as he had done, because •he believed that we were engaging in a war, the difficulties and dangers of which were understood by neither the Government nor the people. Were the Russians at Portsmouth he should have taken a different tone ; but it was to counsel s mode ration and caution that he had made this long, and per hapssomewhat tedious, appeal to the house. (Cheers.) Mr. COLLIER said the great value of the present de bate was that it had explained the causes of the misma nagement of the war. Those causes were now clearly seen to be the presence in the Cabinet of right hon. gentlemen who were determined that this country should not humble the enemy, and who seemed to consider them selves equally charged with the interests of Russia as of England. He inferred from the remarks of the right hon. baronet the member for Carlisle on Friday week, that that right hon. baronet meant to transfer his allegiance to the right hon, gentleman the member for Bucks, because that right hon. gentleman was more pacific than the present Government. He was thankful that the Russianising ele ment had now left the Cabinet, and in the improved con dition of the army they traced the effects of a firmer policy; and if the Prime Minister would continue the course he had adopted, he would carry With him the unanimous opinion of the country. He characterised the arguments of the hon. member for the West Riding as fallacious, and severely commented on the bad taste shown in the way he spoke of our recent successes in the Sea of Azoff, and the exultation with which ho anticipated the progress of fever in the Crimea. He condemn° i, also, the manner in which the hon. gentleman violated the con fidence imposed with respect to the private meeting of the Liberals in Downing-street, and concluded by expressing his opinion that the people of England would be glad to know that the conferences were terminated, and that peace must now be sought through the vigorous prosecution of the war. Lord H. VANE intimated his intention to support the amendment of Sir W. Heathcote. He admitted that the limitation of Russian power in the Black Sea was difficult, and he thought the Russian propositions were as well cal culated to secure that end as that proposed by the Govern. meat, and he believed that a peace concluded upon those terms would have been beneficial to Europe. Sir SINORTHCOTE opposed, and Major PEED supported, Mr. Lowe's amend atent. _ Mr. EWART, though a firm friend of peace, would sup port the vigorous prosecution of the war, believing that was the shortest road to peace. At the same time he was not for a war of nationalities, and he had no idea of crush ing Russia, but he would leave the terms of peace in the hands of Government, and could not therefore support Mr. Lowe's amendment. Mr. VANSITTART condemned the Government fer standing upon such a nice point of honour as their inter pretation of the third proposition, and lie was therefore in clined to support Sir Wm. Heathcote's amendment. He would not, however, press that, hut ho called upon the Government to lay down some definite course of policy, on attaining which they would conclude the war. Mr. F. SCULLY defended the conduct of Lord John Russell in the Vienna negotiations. Mr. CROSSLEY had been opposed to the war altogether at its commencement, but being once engaged in it he was for a vigorous prosecution of the war. Mr, J. G. PHILLINIORE severely censured the conduct of Mr. Gladstone, and urged a strenuous prosecution of the war. Sir J. GRA.HAM—I can assure you, sir, that I never rose in this house with feelings of greater embarrassment or of greater pain than those which I experience on the present occasion, and like my hon. friend the member for the West Riding. I shall appeal to the generosity of this house, inasmuch as I am well aware that the opinions which I am about to express are not in accordance with those entertained by a majority of the members of the house, and I shall make this appeal with confidence because, being in the minority in which I feel myself, I ant sure of a disposition on the part of the house to deal faicly with me. (Hear.) It is painful to un lorgo taunts such is those which last night and this evening have fallen from hon. gentlemen on the opposite side of the house, who accuse those who are anxious, even under present circumstances, to obtain a peace, which appears to them an honourable one, of being Russian ausi:iaries, or, or as other hon. members say, of being friends to Russia. Now, Sir, it is necessary to submit to taunts of that description, and the only consolation which is left to me is that wiser and better men than myself have had to undergo ebserva tions of a similar description. (Hear.) But I feel that in the present circumstances of this country I cannot fairly be called a friend to Russia because I take a course which, if I neglected to take, I should consider myself an enemy to my own country and a traitor to those whom I repsesent, and I should feel myself guilty of baseness if I hesitated manfully and fairly to express to this house and to the country what aro ray opinions with reference to the policy of the present war. My position with regard to this question is different from that hold by other hug. gentlemen who are of opinion that the late negotiations should have led to peace, and who have constantly and consistently objected to the war from its very commencement. I, on the contrary, have entertained the opinion, and I still entertain it, that the war declared against Russia was a just and necessary war. That opinion, I say, I have entertained, and I still adhere to it, but the real question now at issue, according to my humble judgment, is, have the real objects been ob tained for which the war was undertaken, or did the con ferences which had been held at Vienna establish a fair ground for believing that an opportunity was afforded, if improved, of bringing the war to a satisfactory termina tion ? Besides having entertained and expressed the opi nions to which I still adhere, that the war originally was a just and necessary war, it was my duty in the Govern ment of Lord Aberdeen to fill an important post connected with the conduct of the war ; and when the hon. members for Leominster and Plymouth have asserted that it is now quite plain what were the causes which led to failure, while I and those whe act with me, and who with me left the Government of the noble lord the member for Tiverton, occupied a position in the administration of affairs, I tell them, in reply, that, although it w ou ld ill become' me to speak of my own efforts or my own conduct, still this much I can say, that from the first moment when I went to the Admiralty I used my best exertions to prepare the naval forces of this country for any emergency which might ar i s e. (Hear.) My efforts were sincerely and constantly directed to that end long before the comm encemen t o f th e war, anchluring its progress I endeavoured to the best of my abilliry to provide ample means to meet the wants of the public service, and when I left office I hope, and I may say I think. that those means were not found deficient by my successor. (Hear.) Having made these observations, I shall now pass on to the observations which I conceive it to be my duty to submit for the consideration of the house. On a former evening, before the commencement of the re cess, I urged upon the Government the propriety of ad journing this debate, because I was of opinion that a sub ject of such magnitude and importance ought not to be hur riedly discussed, and it appeared to me impossible that in the short remains of one evening it could meet with suffi cient consideration, and I therefore pressed the adjourn ment of the debate. During the interval a very im portant change has taken place in the state of af fairs. The conferences at Vienna were then open ; they are now closed. It anpears that, since the conference of the 26th of Aeril, a proposition has been made by the Austri an Government to the Governments of England and_ Franc e w hi c h , i n t h e op i n i on of Austr i a oug ht t o h ave been submitted to the Russian envoys, and which afforded a hope at least of an adjustment of th e difference not being head of the iil we now hear f rom th e no bl e lord at the that Governmentproposition, that England and Francehave re jected and that th e con f erences are c l ose d. As matters nov fore the reces s that time stand, I think th a t, if it was i mpor t an t be should b e g i ven f or d i scussing th i s great question, the ci rcumstance to which I have adverted has greatly increased the theln first place, I s hould gr w a i T sVt of the present occasion. y stria and know what was the pre cise proposition made b pi,co an i deject,d by England and Franco t i and in the next should wish to be in formed whether it is tho opinion of her Majesty's Govern ment that the four points, which we have of so much about, ought to be maintained as the bases future nego tiation, or whether fresh terms have been fixed, upo n which alone England will cons ent to deal with upo n I cannot conceive any q uestion o f greater importance, or one which deserves on the p art of the Government s's more frank and immediate explanation, because I have observed in the progress of this debate in this popular as _ sembly with what rapidity an inclination has shown itself to raise the terms to be determined upon as a sic q ua nom before concluding a peace. I do not see th e b un. and learned member for Enniskillen (Mr. Whiteside) in hie place, bet before the recess he made a speech which the house will remember—a speech remarkable for its elo quence, its energy, and its ferce—a speech worthy of the occasion a n d eeetny of the high position held by the hon. and learned gentleman ;it the bar of Ireland ; but, re markable as that speech was for its eloquence, it lv :su as no less so f or the opinions expressed in it—opinions acted upon, would lead to interminable hostilities. (Hear.) It was, said the hon. and learned gentleman, no longer a question of terms ; Russia was a perfidious Power, who never observed the treaties into which she en tered ; and the argument of the hon. and learned gentleman went to show that we are now fighting, not for terms, but for the honour, glory, and supremacy of England throughout the world. Well, sir, that opened out an alarming prospect. Tnen, again, in the progress of the debate, the hon. member for the Mon ose barglie has declared his opinion that the time has now arrived when it is not safe to conclude a peace with R while that country holds a single ship, port, or fortress in the Black Sea. Then, again, I am at a loss to understand what is the precise and definite object for which this war is to be =gel It is a trite observation, yet it is one which on this particu lar occasion is not altogether inappropriate; that one point of a good minister is to avoid involving his country in a war, for experience shows us, an d hi s t or y t eac h es us by ex ample, that though it is always easy to involve a country in a war, it is very difficult to carry on that war with the full and cordial support of the people for any very great length of time. I will illustrate this position by reference to history, and since the great rebellion there have been wars that afford instances in support of what lhave stated. In 1739 Sir Robert Walpole was at the head of the Administration of this country. He was a popular and a most successful minister, but he most reluctantly declared war against Spain, in which the people of England entered most heartily at that time. Nothing, indeed, ever femme led the popularity of that war at its commencement. Every class of society rivalled each other in their efforts to carry on the operations of the war. The leading members of the Opposition took a most active part in it, and even a prince of the blood formed one of a procession when the war was declared, Sir R. Walpole was against the declaring that war, but he did so in deference to the will of the people ; but, within two years, he, from being the most popular Mi nister who over held power, was abandoned and left with out support from any quarter, anti, after his overthrow, the country became discontented with the whole operations of the war, which was suffered to drag its slow length along for some seven or eight years amid the execrations of the peo ple, and, to use the expression of a right hon. gentleman, an ignominious peace was the result. The conferences at Aix-la-Chapelle were kept open with the desire of delaying the progress of negotiations in the hope that for tune might turn in our favour. But fortune did not smile upon our arms; adversity followed instead of success, and after the negotiations had been protracted the war was at last terminated by a peace, in which, I believe, the only instance in history occurred of our actually sending two hostages to Paris—the Earl of Sussex and Lord Calthorpe. The Pretender, who was then in Paris, and had witnessed the arrival of those noble lords as hostages, exclaimed, " If ever the day should come when I shall haverecovered the throne of my ancestors, my first desire will be that hostages shall come from Paris to London, andnot gofrem London to Paris." Well, sir, this was the result of the war of Sir R. Walpole. Allusion has been made to the Ame rican war, and to the last and longest war, namely, that with France, but it should be remembered that in the case of both those wars there were palpable and direct British objects involved. The war with America was a struggle for empire. There were no less than 13 British colonies at stake, which the Sovereign of this country be lieved to be the glory and tne brightest jewel of his crown, and which he never would consent to have severed from this country. During that war we suffered many disas ters ; we had thousands of miles to traverse, and we strug gled in vain. The war finally ended in disaster, the effects of which are still regretted, and by many believed to be almost irreparable. But it was believed, notwithstanding, that terms might at the commencement have been possi ble. That, however, was a war in which England was fighting for an empire. Then, what was the case in regard to the war of the French revolution ? That was a struggle of another kind ; but still its object was direct and imme diate as touching the safety of our native land. I hear an expression of dissent from an hon. member below me, but I must beg to state what the cause of that war appears to me to have been. In this world of ours the pride of em pire has proved to be be the source of great commotion and productive of mighty effects ; but there is another passion of the human mind which has produced equally important consequences, I mean the inglorious passion of fear—" Pri mus in orbo dens est Timor.' Fear has subdued empires, fear has made wars, and it was the fear entertained of the dangerous principles that existed at the period of the French revolution which involved this country in war. What was the fear ? Was it a groundless fear ? I think that fear was rightly entertained, and the danger boldly met. There was a regicide, there was a blood-stained guillotine, there was the declaration of Jacquerie, there was the declaration of the Social Propaganda, there were all the horrors of the French revolution. Those appre hensions were not ill founded which led to the com mencement of the French war. In its progress it became an internecine war, and afterwards a struggle between the first Napoleon and the rest of the powers of Europe, the question, so far es this country is concerned, being whether England should be a free and independent nation or should become an appanage and mere domain of France ? Reference has been made to thevast cost of the war, and an earnest appeal has been addressed to the house on that subject— "o ! miaeras hominum mentos, 0 ! pectora cmca." It has been stated that no less a debt than 500,000,0001 has been incur] ed to maintain the Bourbons on the throne of France, which was rescued from the great conqueror Na poleon I. by the glorious successes of our arms, led on by (me of the greatest generals that the world has known for these 1800 years—a general equal at least to Ceeiar, and only in ferior, if inferior, to Napoleon himself. (Cheers.) But hav ing succeeded in establishing the royal throne of France, and having incurred at the grandsire's sore regret, From age to age an everlasting debt," it so happens that the very next heir of that great con qneror is now ou the throne of France; and not only on the throne of France, but is our powerful, cur cordial, and, I must add, our faithful ally. This surely deserves some pains why we should reflect, first of all, upon the facility with which war is waged in this conotry, and then •pro coed to consider what yon have for its object. You per ceive that the wars to which I have alluded have been national and direct wars in their object, but the was which we are now waging with Russia is one in which our interest is remote and contingent—aistant and not immediate. I have already said thst lam one of those who are responsible for the declaration of this war. I do not ragret it, but I think it ought to be always borne in mind what was the precise object of the war. Now, sir, I must take exception to some doctrines which I have heard al vanced. lam not one of those who believe that during the progress of a war it is perfectly legitimate to vary your terms according to the degree of success attending your operations. But, while I say I think your terms may vary, I am strongly of opinion that the object for which you embarked in a war should be kept steadily is view, and that that object should not vary', whatever may be the success of your arms. Now, the object for which we em barked iu this war was the maintenance of the indepen dence and the integrity of Turkey. That was the avowed object, and, I contend, the sole object, of the war. I con sider that the war was necessary and just, and that the rea sons for it were twofold. Fist, there wore the covert in tentions of Russia, which were concealed from the English Government, and which were followed why the overt act of the invasion of the Principalities. Now, sir, it'will be en= my duty shortly to refer to the negotiations which have taken place. I will n o t e n t er i n t o details as to the settlement of the first point in reference to the principali ties—the immediate object of the war ; for, though excep tioas could be taken to it with reference to certain par ticulars on which the hon. member for. the West Riding commented, yet in the main the settlement proposed did secure the perfect independence of the principalities, and, instead of placing them under the protectorate of Russia, placed them under that of the four contracting European Powers, and they stipulated that no negotiations should take place with reference to the principalities without the whole question being . laid before the four contracting Powers. The second point, with reference to the naviga tion of the Danube, I will not discuss at any length, b u t merely state that in the main the propositions of the noble lord were acceded to. It was agreed that the navigation should be placed under a European commission, in which England was to have a voice, and precautions were taken with respect to keeping cpen, not only the course of the river, but also its mouth, where impediments had arisen. The management of this was to be plactd under a local committee, to he created bya European commission, which could not be diss)lved except by the consent of the four contracting Powers. 'lt was erroneously stated on a former evening that the question of a naval force to be kept at, the mouth of the river constantly to watch tie faithful performance of these stipulations was negatived by Russia; it was not so, tee question was only reserved till after the settlement of the third point. I think I am authorized to state to the house the spirit in which the Russian envoy accepted the four points. On the 3d of December, immediately a ft er th e s i gna t ure o f the treaty by Austria, France, and England, the Rus sian envoy, in accepting the terms of negotiation as contained in the four points, distinctly announced that he accepted them, renouncing, on the part of his Go vernment, the spirit of the religious protectorate of Russia over the Christian subjects of Turkey, renoun cing the political protectorate of the principalities, con senting to the free navigation of the Danube, and also consenting to the revision of thestreaty of 1841. These were the declaration made by the Russian envoy who ac cepted these bases, and I consider it important that they should be borne in mind during thisdiscussion, because I think that it will be found, after a careful investigation of the negotiations. that the Russian envoy did agree in the main throughout these discussions to the concessions which he made at their commencement. He consented to that which was the most important of all the questions—viz., the religious protectorate claimed by Russilloyer the Chris tian subjects of the Turks, which, in point of fact, was the immediate origin of the war. I will not go back to the dis pnted question as to what took place with respect to the discussions as to the holy places—for it was stated by the noble lord the member for the city of Loudon ' who then held the seals of the Foreign Department, that, in the opinion of England, at the commencement of the quarrel the first threat of force did not proceed from Russia, but that Russia was in the right and France was in the wrong. The Emperor of the French, with.great magn am i nity, having the spirit of peace, which cannot be too highly commended, on consideration of the whole question and the conduct of his ambissador at Constantinople, receded from the claims of his ambassador, whose acts he disavowed, and he placed France in the right, which had originally beenin the wrong. )Hear.) Russia had a distinct and just cause of complaint against Turkey with reference to the transaction to which 1 have alluded, but I think the tone adopted by Prince Mens chikoff on his mission to the Porte was wholly iuconsis tent with the respect duo to an independent Power. This insolence—for I can call it by no other term—coupled with the invasion of the Principalities, rendered it a para mount duty on the part of the allies of Turkey—England and France—to come forward in its defence, and to secure its independence, which had been so violated. (Hear.) Will the house permit me now to state what in my opinion is the strongest part of the present case, and which deserves careful cowl !oration ? I agreed with the hon. member for Hertfordshire when he said it was not politic by force of arms, when engaged in war, to humble an a iversary ; but I think that discretion should be used in cases of the kind where insolence was followed by aggression, and that hu miliation by force of arms was a necessary part of the conduct of the war. But look at the result of the last war with Russia and contrast her claims at the commencement of the war with the terms on which she was willing to conclude peace at Vienna, and I think you will not find that the history of any war shows any greater alterations in tone and terms than those which have been obtained in the late conferences of Vienna from Russia, and obtained, as I contend, by force of arms. Before proceeding to investigate in detail tue demands and concessions of Russia, I must state that in my opi nion the test Ly which you ought to try negotiations of this kind was wisely and well laid down by the noble lord the British Plenipotentiary 'on that occasion, w m h en en ce m h . e ent"of ia n re e sound in wh ich theohtlo. d g that, in his opinion, at the com suited and duly a n t! o u n r s o f no th t e re a a d ty v e ma n f adversary peace c n o o i t tl d oo b n e . considered. (Hear, ) The noble lord then went te nt 0 o n n , taonmd %nether obsrvation, to which I call atten 6'kt:which I cordially and entirely subscribe. He said, with reference to this q'tiestion of honour, that THE Sun, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVEN 1:“3 JUNE 6 1855 the defence of Sebastopol, on the one hand, and the attack on the other, had covered the contending armies with equal glory, and that' the military honour of Russia, France; and England, was safe as affected by those opera tions. I will now recall in detail to the recollection of the house what were the demands and language of Russia at the commencement 'of the war, and what, after a year's fighting, were her submissions--for I can give them no other name—on which she was willing to conclude peace at Vienna. Her first pretension was, that no other Power shoild be permitted tointerfere in anynegotiation between Russia and the Sublime Porte. That pretension was as serted repeatedly in the most arrogant and offensive terms. Let , us contrast with it the result. All the negotiations for the last two years, by the forced consent of Russia, have been conducted by England, France, and Austria on behalf and in aid of the Sultan. (Hear.) Her next pre tension was, that the Turkish ambassador must sue for peape either at St. Petersburg or at the head-quarters of the, Russian army. A more arrogant pretension than this was never put forward ; but now, let us see, has it been abandoned ? Why, through the medium of Austria. If Russia did not ask, she, at all events, suggested the holding of the conferences at Vienna. Prince Menschikoff's head-quarters were no longer the only place where Turkey could sue for peace, for her plenipotentiaries met the Russian ambassador at the con ferences held in the capital of Austria. What was the next pretension ? Russia refused to meat the Turkish envoy at any conference upon equal terms, alleging that Turkey had not been admitted into the family of European States. Ask the noble lord who has just returned from Vienna, and who sat at the table where the conferences were held, whe ther the Russian ambassadors sitting at the same table did not discus; upon equal terms proposition after proposition with the Turkish envoy. That envoy met the ambassador of Russia, met the noble lord acting on the part of England, met M .Drouyn de l'Huys and the other plenipotentiaries at the same table on terms of perfect equality, and the mon strous pretensions of Russia were not only recalled but ne gatived in the most decisive manner. What was the next pretension? The principalities were occupied by Rus sia as a material guarantee. The conferences were opened at Vienna, the Russians are expelled the principalities, and those principalities are occupied by the Ally of England. Russia, not satisfied with occupying the princi palities, had passed the Danube and advanced into Bul garia. How was that met ? By a treaty of offensive and defensive alliance, that if Russia advanced to the Balkan a cases belli must arise, involving the necessity of other grtfat European Powers taking part in the war as well as France and England. But has there been no military success ? Has there been for the last nine months a single Russian on the right bank of the Danube? By the valour of the Turks themselves; by thegallant defence of Silistrir the Russians were expelled, not from the principalities by Austria, but from the Turkish territory by Turkish arms. Then the fleets congregate in the Black Sea. It has been the boast of Russia that the Black Sea was virtually her possession, that she had at her command a naval force which gave her complete dominion over it. Her boast also was that in the Baltic she had a fleet at all times, when the weather permitted the free naviga tion of the waters, amounting to 30 sail of the line. What hats become of her ships? By the suicidal hand of Russia herself, in fear of an attack, a large portion of them hai been destroyed. Talk of prestige ! The naval pres tige of Russia, whether in the East or in the Baltic, has vapished before the superiority of the allied Powers of France and England, and I do not think that we shall hear much more of Russia's naval supremacy either in the Baltic or•the Black Sea. Then, again, I ask what was the cha racter of the► works at Bomarsund ? They were works of the most alarming description, and erected in defiance of a treaty. Nothing could prove more clearly the justice of the war at its commencement than the very fact of the existence of that fortress. But where is it now? Razed to the ground by the attack of France and England ; and Russia has been taught a lesson not speedily to be for gotten even by such a. Power as she is. Now, let us pro ceed to the Danube. Under various ,pretences Russia has proctically, for the last three or fohr years, had the cam mend of the mouths of that river, and the lower portion of it; the most important in regard to the trade of the prin cipalities, was in her hands. That power she shamefully abused by various artifices; first, by the establishment of a line of quarantine, next, by the erection of powerful bat te'ries at the Salina mouth, by which both sidesof the river were commanded by Russia. What are the terms which the noble lord successfully negotiated with respect to the Danube? Russia consents to remove the line of quarantine, tal have no fortifications at the Salina month, and to place the navigation of the river under a European commission, in which England should have a voice. The fourth point to which I have already adverted is with respect to the rights privileges, and immunities of memb e rs of theortho dox Rinse-Greek faith within the dominions of the Turk, claimed as being placed under the peculiar protection of Russia ab antiquoin force of treaty engagements, and espe cially that of Kainardji, with Count Nesselrode's enforce ment of his demand, on rejection of the Turkish amendments of the Vienna note. It will be remembered, w ith respec t to this particular claim, it was alluded to in the terms in which I have read it to the house, when made by the Emperor Nicholas himself at an audience which Sir Hamilton Seymour, the British Ambas sa d or , h a d w ith th e Emperor, and reported by Colonel Rose to Lord Malmes hury as made at Constantinople so far back as 185'. I very much regret that the British and French Governments did not consent at the conference, pending the reference of the third point, to proceed to exhaust the fourth. I think if they had proceeded to discuss that point there is every reason to believe that no practical difficulty would have arisen in its adjustment. All doubt would have been removed with respect to the remaining points of difference between the contending parties, the ground would have been cleared, and a near approximation to peace would have been obtained. The Austrian Government was anxious that the point should be discussed. Russia was willing to discuss it. It was France and Eeglaud that interposed. Prince Gortschakoff then, on the part of Russia ' made an important declaration with refer ence to the fourth point. Ho - regretted the delay in discussing it, and said that he was ready to discuss it at once, and that ho attached no pr ac ti ca l i mpor t ance to it. Having ut the commencement of the negotiations declared that he accepted the bases, foreseeing the necessity of renouncing the exclusive protectorate of Russia, ho sad that nothing could give greater facility to the Sultan in governing his empire. Not only, then, ware the first and second points fully settled, but in this fourth point I con fidently believe there was no insuperable difficulty. On the third point the pretension of Russia was that the in dependence and integrity of Turkey was not guaranteed by any stipulation of the treaty of 1810; that it was assumed in tue preamble, but not ratified by any specific engage ment. On that part of the question a complete explanation took place in the presence of the noble lord. What was the result of that explanation? So far from holding that the de 'claret ion with respect to the independence and integrity of Turkey was not a subject of stipulation iu the treaty, Prince Gortschakoff consented that the independence and integrity of Turkey should be guaranteed by treaty. What was most remarkable was, that the terms of guarantee pro ,posed by Russia were varied by the Turkish envoy, and his suggestions were adopted by the conference. I have vise through seriatim the pretensions of Russia at the c ,m -imencement of the war, and the conclusions arrived at after the conference. There remains only that portion of the third point which relates to the means by which the naval preponderance of Russia in the Black Sea should be dimi nished. When I was a member of Lord Aberdeen's Govern ment, I was a party to a proposition made to France with reference to the mode of giving effect to this third article, by a limitation of the Russian fleet. As being a party to that proposition, I am bound to state that it was never re garded by me as an ultimatum, that it was submitted to France, and was not accepted by her as au ultimatum, and that it was not proposed at Vienna either by France cr England as an ultimatum. It would be monstrous to begin a conference with an ultimatum. It would be utterly inconsistent with the whole proceedings of a negotiation to do so. If ever there was a negotiation clear froni such an absurdity it was the conferences at Vienna, because in good faith and in the very face of the stipulation with respect to the third point, it was stated that the parties proposing these terms should have the right to vary them in accordance with the events of the war. Clearly, therefore, the proposition was not an ulti matum, and not being an ultimatum, I come to consider whether, on the whole, this being the only ground of dif ference, it is prudent to insist en it. If I had had any doubt at all, I am bound to state that the result of the discussion in this house has convinced me that as an ulti matum it is not tunable. On this point the observations of the hon. member for the West Riding are so strong and so well founded that it would be impossible to overlook them. Steam has made an immense difference in this matter. If you allow Russia in the Black Sea four of the largest ships of the line, with all the advantages of the screw and with a proportionate number of smaller •veseels, I believe that even with the limitation you propose the whole object of Russia will be effected. You would mark your distrust of her without taking adequate means to check her. If Russia proves faithful—and for 40 years she has been your ally without any complaint on your part— no such stipulations are required. But if she proves per fidious, then no limitation such as you propose would be of any avail. Another observation to which I attach great importance, because it is well founded, is this—lf you ob tain that stipulation, are you prepared to go to war if Rus sia should have one ship or two ships more than the stipu; lated number? (Hear.) It is admitted on all hands that the interest of England in this matter is remote and indi rect, and that the interest of Austria is direct and imme diate. Austria has a far deeper interest in this matter than either France or England. Let me observe that the position of Austria at the abrupt conclusion of the negotiations was not at all that which it was at tho commencement of them. The observations of the hon. baronet the member for Herts last night with respect to Austria wore wise and judi cious. I think she has, under very trying circumstances, been the faithful friend of England. Her position is very peculiar. She stands, as it wore, on a narrow isthmus between the two g r ea t seas —th e barbarism of Russia on the one hand, and the military ambition of the Western powers on the other. She is in a position of enormous difficulty, and is entitled to our utmost forbearance. I hold that peace —a great blessing to all nations—is in a paramount degree the policy of England. (Hear, hear.) Peace also is the policy of Austria. She, therefore, is the natural ally and friend of England. We ought, seeing her position, to bear with her infirmities, but, above all, we ought not to quarrel or come to a hasty rupture with her. I think we are entitled to know the proposition which Austria made to England and France at the close of the conferences. I regret that the noble lord was not present at the conference when the Russian envoy made his last proposition. I quite agree with the noble lord that Eng land and France were justified in rejecting the proposal with regard to a ntlre apertunt. But I entertain quite another opinion of the proposition of the 26th of April, and regret that the noble lord was not nresent'when it was made. I think that that proposition was not to be re garded as an ultimatum, because Russia was not justified any more than England and France in beginning with an ultimatum. I think that that proposition, though not perfect in itself, did afford, as Count Buol and M. Drouyn de l'Huys said, the elements of an adjustment. M. Drouyn de l'Huys having heard the propositi on , an d h av i ng de clared that it afforded the elements of a settlement, pro ceeded to Paris, and the noble lord proceeded to London, but he had the advantage of discussing this question with the Russian envoy, and the still greater advantage of hear ing the opinion of Austria upon it. Rumour says that M. Drouyn de l'Huys way well satisfied with the last proposition as moulded by Austria; that he submitted it to his govern ment; that the Emperor of France was not unwilling to accept it; that he proposed to the English Government that they should accept it; and that its rejection took place in consequence of the influence of the English Government exercised through the noble lord. I speak from rumour merely, having no information on the point. I think we a p t ro proposition pos ion fr was.om Vienna—having M . Drouyn de finding it rejected, we are all bound to speak out on this occasion. I have retired l3llrklnol)liss et hfodeakoistmn brought auttnhtc that Government—and councils o f the French Emperor. Surely stated without reserve my own position and feeling with respect to this question. I am not a slavish admirer of Russia. I am not the auxiliary of Russia. I am not the friend of Rtissia, but I am the sincere friend and advocate of peace on honourable term. • I hope the go ld en opportn. nity will not be lost of obtaining the greatest of all bless ings without the sacrifice of national honour. I have heard it said that we are fighting for prestige. It is a most dangerous doctrine. Yon must adhere to a definite object in the war, though I admit your terms may vary with the view of giving effect to your object. There is something, I think, in the present balanced state of the sontest in the Crimea which makes the conjuncture favour able to a settlement. The honour of England is safe by the victories gained wherever we have come in contact with the enemy, and the advantages of those victories is perceptible in the lowered tone of the enemy, orig . nally so arrogant and insulting. Though not the friend of Russia, I think the honourof Russia should be considered ; but if you wish to push her to the wall in driving your terms, there is something passive in her resistance, and though vanquished she will not yield, and not yielding she will not make peace. I am by no means satisfied that if this opportunity be lost—even if our arms be victorious—that it will soon recur. (Hear, hear.) I wish to throw all taunts and party feelings aside. It is a great crisis—setr sum, cords. Let us elevate our minds and feelings to the interests of a great nation. The claims of humanity are at stake, and I am confident we will best serve Our coun try if we consider those interests, and those interests only. The greatest blessing 'we can confer on her, either as regards 'her internal prosperity or her foreign rela tions, is peace. The opportunity is favourable, and to the latest hour of my life I should regret if the opportu nity is lost. I do not think all the money spent or the losses sustained will be thrown away if peace be obtained. I think both England and France have been taught some useful lessons. I think Russia also has been taught that arrogance must be abated, and that herpretensions cannot be sustained. I do hope if peace is'restored that we shall not hastily reduce our establishments—certainly not our naval establishment—and our military force only in a small degree. I think it only consistent with our position among the great nations of the World that we should main tain both large naval and military establishments. If the object of this country in the prosecution of the war were the maintenance of the integrity of Turkey, then we must cast aside the hope that we should be able soon to return to a small naval or military force. It must be recollected that when once a weak state called into her aid the assist ance of a powerful., auxiliary, just in proportion is the length of time which the former depended upon the latter, i n the same proportion did she require its future support.: (Hear, hear.) Whether the principle of limitation or any ether expedient was adopted, he was still decidedly of opinion that to maintain the integrity of Turkey would be an object, the accomplishment of which would, day after day, be found to be more d.cult. The great test of statesmanship, he felt assured, 'would be found to be to make the necessary provisions for the fall of the Ottoman empire, and to take care that Constantinople did not be come the property of Russia, upon the one hand, or of the Western powers upon the other, and the policy which such a state of things rendered requisite could not be sus tained unless . the English Government were backed by an adequate force both by sea and land. (Hear, hear.) He had endeavoured to express his opinions upon the question before the house openly and dispassionately ; he had en deavoured to refrain,in giving expression to those opinions, from using a single word that could give offence to any awn. member, and he had only, in conclusion, to thank the house for the attention with which they had lis tened to the remarks which he had felt it to be his duty to make. (Hear, hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL—Sir, the observations which have been made in the courts of the debate on the negotiations at Vienna, and especially the observations made by the hon. gentleman the member for the West Riding (Mr. Cohen), render it incumbent upon me to make some expla nations and offer some remarks. In so doing I shall endea vour to imitate the calm spirit in which my right hon. friend the member for Carlisle (Sir J. Graham) has dis cussed this matter. As he has observed, we are not now considering any question of party triumph or party inte rests, we ere looking to the great question of the condi tions on which peace 'may be obtained, or the objects of the war which we have entered upon may be accomplished. It seems to me that these are the two great questions—if you are determined to have peace, on what conditions can you obtain it ?—lf you mean to'carry]on the war, for what objects are you to wage that war? (Hear.) Now, sir, with respect to the first of these questions, let it be re membered, as my right hon. friend truly observed, that we have already in the very short period of hostilities gained very great objects from Russia, mho, beginning with say ing that she would , not negotiate except with Turkey alone, and with Turkey at no other place than St. Peters burg, or the head-quarters of the Russian army, after wards consented to sit down as an equal at the conferences with Turkey; that although Russia at the first maintained her ancient treaties , with Turkey must not be disturbed, was quite willing to consent to renounce that protecto rate which she had hitherto—whether rightly or wrongly I will not dispute—exercised over the principalities, and that she was ready in making a new treaty to renounce all the articles of those treaties which in the course of cen turies she had been able to effect by means of victories in the field and skill in the Cabinet. These concessions, and some othersofgreatimportance,Russia madeincensequence of the league formed against her and the successes we have gained in the war that we have carried on. Still I could not help feeling that we were iu this position, and. I stated it very soon after my arrival at Vienna to Count Buol as a rea son why I did not entertain any very sang uine hopes from the conferences—l said that the Wester n had met with successes sufficient to justify them in not making peace except on terms which should guarantee a full se curity to Tnrkey against future a g gression; but, at the same time, Russia had not had such reverses that we could expect her to make all those concessions which would give the securities which we were bound to demand. This was the position in which the negotiations began. It may he said, why begin negotiations at such a time ? That was a necessity imposed on us by the treaty with Austria. Our treaty with Austria on the 2d of December provided that in certain cases Austria should join with us to obtain the four points even by force of arms ; but Austria said natu rally, as I think, for her own interests, with full consider ation of the importance of enteiing into a war, that she must first ascertain that Russia was unwilling to make peace on terms which Ahstria should think sufficient. It was necessary to ascertain that course, and for that pur pose the conferences at Vienna took pl Ice. My right hon. friend who spoke last said truly that, with regard to the first point, we place the principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia under the protectorate of the Fire Power', in stead of their being placed under the solo protectorat6 of Russia according to former treaties. We provided—al though die hon. member for the West Riding (Mr. Cobden) is very ill-satisfied with those terms (hear, hear)—we pro- Tided for free legislation, for liberty of worship, and for the freedom of trade in the principalities. Every mem• bar of the conferences—the Russian Minister amongst ;the rest—was perfectly willing that the administration and legislation in these provinces should be entirely na tional, and not be interfered with by any other power. The honourable gentleman criticised some of the provisions of the protocol respecting these provinces, much in the same way that they were criticised on a former occasion. Let me say, in the first place, that I am entirely respon sible for having agreed to those terms. They do 'net fir plicate the Government to which I belong, and I am ready to take the whole of that responsibility, but I must say that those terms do not bear the sense which the hon. member for the West Riding has placed upon them. He says that the natives of those principalities are not to engage in matters dangerous to the tranquillity of their country, bat the real 'engagement is, they are not to enter into intrigues which shall be dangerous to the tranquillity of their country. These are the terms,' and I owe that I. consider the position of the principalities is a very critical one. They are in close proximity to Russia, and to Am •tria, and to Turkey, and it will be very difficult to main tain the independence of legislation and government is those principalities. rn the first place, neither Russia nor Austria will allow intrigues to be carried on in these prin cipalities against the security and tranquillity of theirown provinces. By the articles of this treaty . no Illussulman was to enter into the principalities, and if the Turkish armies (lid enter into them, it would be an interference with the power of self-government.• I hold it to be a diffi cult thing to - make a satisfactory arrangement on these points. The Turkish Minister at Vienna had no authority to make an arrangement on this subject, and it was agreed tthst, with - the consent of the ministers of Russia and Austria, that the future arrangements should be made at Constantinople, with the concurrence of all the Christian powers there. Some persons imagine that it would he better to make the principalities entirely independent. I believe that in that case they would fall immediately under the power of either Austria or Russia ; and that perhaps there would be a contention between those two powers as to which they should belong to, and that they certainly could not maintain their independence; . But in providing for the freedom of religion, of trade, and of legis lation, I thought we did much for the happiness and secu rity of those provinces. With respect to the Danube, it was said the other day that Russia only gave up the power of having a qrtarintine ; but it will be seen from the treaty, of Adrianople that Russia was also to have a number of for tifications on the banks of that river. s it should likewise be remembered that English and French commissioners were to exercise a general supervision there ; and by a proposal of mine that commission was only to be dissolved by the con sent of all the powers, so that the freedom of the navigatiQu of the Danube might be thoroughly secured. We come next to that great point which is called the third point ; and before I touch upon it I must allude to the reg ret expressed by my right hon. friend that the Governme nts of England and France did not permit and sanction the conference going into the question of the fourth point, and endeavour ing to settle it before discussing the third. Now, upon that I must remark that that point was far from being so easy of settlement as my right hon. friend supposes. (Hea r .) I had several conversations on the subject with the very intelligent ambassador of the Porte, who spoke to me very earnestly, and protested against any article being inserted in the treaty by which the Porte should renounce in any way its independence, and be made to depend up on the Christian pow ers w ith' regard to its own internal affairs. (Hear.) I thought that objection, or rather suggestion, with respect to the fourth point a very reasonable one; but at the same time I saw that the plenipotentiaries of Russia, and probably of Austria, would be very anxious to obtain such a settlement of the fourth point as would have enabled them in some way to control the legislation of the P orto as regards the Christians. In discussing the fourth point, therefore, we should have found ourselves in very consi derable difficulty, and I certainly could not have consented to any arrangement of that point which, on the one hand, did not provide for equal privileges to the Christians and Mahomedans, and which, on the other hand, would have enabled any of the powers to interfere with the internal affairs of Turkey. (Hear.) I come, therefore, to the third point, upon which there has been so much discussion, and upon which we bad the misfortune not to arrive at any conclusion. And here I think my right hon. friend rather takes advantage, as some others have done, of the mode ration displayed by the Western Powers in order to say, "As you were willing to concede so much—as your terms were so moderate—why did you not make them still more moderato and so secure their acceptance by Russia 1" (Hear, hear.) The proposal which was sug gested by the French Government, which does not appear as a proposition in the protocols, but which was more than once stated with great eloquence and ability by the French Minister, M. Drouyn do l'Huys, was that th ere ' , should be wh a t h e called a neutralisation of the Black Sea, estalblishments an li snfute a driNany t tp,btsao i lbie t risol ese s fnshi h shneam o ogo u eufs l nlo d ttr b a dtb e hei eaan. destroyed, e sea Wtsahtl rla f eo o layl r rß, est t laeh h an, caeaktelpsnwusdaar Sea adtoahsefeal except forts ttge o sphe f commerceetfarofnero drs: thhieemu Ipues ati 3 o ce n se afl purposesno mentioned the gonoudsspiarnopmosiintiiosnte,rbs att the moment they never could agree to any measure-which declared pu t i a t that w n en a d s entirely to their military forces in the Black Sea, and pre vented them having any force with which they could re sent the insults even of a small power on that sea. Now, it was in order to meet that objection, and to offer nothing that was not extremely moderate, that we pro posed that, with the view of putting an end to Russian preponderance in the Black Sea—the very terms to which all the powers, including Russia herself, had consented — her naval forces s h ou ld be limited, I ask, how else were you to obtain a cessation of Russian preponderance in the Black Sea? (Hear, hear.) I have heard manygentlemen say that this plan would be inefficient. Ido not believe that it would have been in practice inefficient, because I believe that immediately Russia offered —I will not say by one ship, but by two or three ships, or even by "a large force—to continue her course of aggression, the suspicions of Europe would have been roused, and that what doesnut seem at first sight a perfect security, would have turned out in practice to have been a security for Turkey, and consequently a security for the peace of Europe. Bat, sup posing that plan was not to be insisted upon, in what man ner was this term to be carried out ? I presume no person will maintain that it was my business, as representing the Government of her Majesty, to give up that which we thought perhaps the most essential of all the propositions in the four points, with a, view to put an end to the pre ponderance and to the aggressive ambition of Russia. Well how was this to be done ? My right hon. friend says with great truth that it would not have done to have accepted the first proposition of Russia and to have allowed Russian fleets to pass from the Bosphorus to tha Dardanelles, and from the Dardanelles; to the Bosphorus at their pleasure. It is ob vious that if we had consented to those terms that not only the fleets of Russia would have passed through the Dar da nelles, and thus have increased to a very large amount the Black Sea fleet, but the latter would have come out from time to time, and, passing close by the Sultan's palace, would have paraded the waters of Greece with a view to raise discontent and dijaffection among the subjects of the Porte. Add to this the facility of means, whenever the Czar of Russia might think proper to send his fleet to Con stantinople in order to enforce some unjust demand. I think, therefore, that the first Russian proposition would not have been sufficient. Let me here observe, that the notion which the hon. member for the West Riding has, that these great ships could be built in America and sent into the Black Sea, has no foundation to rest upon, because that plan could not be carried into effect so long as we closed the Dardanelles against Russia ; and unless we admit the opening of the Dardanelles it is impossible that ships-of war built in America could pass into the Back Sea, or could furnish the great fleet to which the hon. member has alluded. We now come to the second proposition of Rus sia, made on the 26th of April. My right hon. friend and others think that was a good proposition to accept ; but it is impossible to see in that proposition any real difference between the preponderance of Russia as it stood before the war, and the preponderance of Russia as it would have re mained if the proposition had been accepted. The only dif ference is, that in case of men acethe Sultan might call up the fleets of his allies from the Mediterranean ; but in ordinary circumstances there would have b een no difference whatever ; the same preponderance would have existed; and how, was I to say, or how was Lord Westmoreland to say after I left Vienna, that we insisted upon the cessation of the Russian preponderance in the Black Sea, and at the same time we consented to replace Russia in exactly the same position in which she stood before the war? (Hear.) But my right hon. friend thinks that Count Buol was satisfied with this proposition ; but I beg, though it is a rather long passage, to read to the house what Count Buol act ually did say. He said that— " The project developed by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of France and declined by the Plenipotentiaries of Russia, contained a complete and efficacious system ; that he could not say as much of the propositions put forward this day : that Russia, in attaching to the mutual guarantee the value only of an engagement not to encroach on the independence and territorial integrity of the Ottoman empire, reduces it, in fact, to an obligation which may be said to be self-evident; that the arrangement proposed to act as an application of the principle of the cessation of Russian preponderance in the Black Sea, limits itself to the power reserved to the Sultan of calling foreign fleets to his aid whenever the preponderance of the Russian fleet should become threatening to him, which, in fact, would only tend to augmesit the chances of a mis understanding; that, to sum up, the Russian propositions eould only be considered as including principles of a nature to be introduced into a general and complete system." That was the opinion which the Austrian Plenipotentiary gave of this Russian proposal. How then, if we meant to insist upon the cessation of the Russian preponderance in the Black Sea, could we agree to the Russian proposal ? (Hear.) I have now stated why I think we could not accept the conditions of peace as proposed by Russia. Of.course, if Russia chose to consider that she was not sufficiently de feated in the war to agree to our terms, she had a right to refuse them. I have been much criticised for having alluded to the somewhat analogous case of the treaty of Utrecht, when the fortifications of Dunkirk were destroyed; but I have gained thereby what was a virtual admission on the part of Prince Gortschakoff, that it is not a question of honour, but a question more or less of defeat and of inferiority in the war. Because no man maintains that Louis XIV., in making the treaty of Utrecht, signed a peace inconsistent with his honour on the contrary, it was a peace very cre ditable, almost glorious, to that monarch; but in agreeing to the terms of that treaty he agreed to that which was the consequence of his defeats ; and therefore the Russian plenipotentiaries admitted that a similar treaty might be accepted now, provided only that Russia were more de ' feated, and received more checks in the course of the war. I believe that it is not at all a question of the honour of Russia. I believe, on the contrary, it is that Russia sees that she has no reason as the war at present stands to re nounce in any 'way those aggressive projects which she sedulously entertains which she intermits, which she lays by for a time, but which Catherine entertained, which the Emperor Nicholas, at the latter end of his life entertained, and which the present Emperor has almost openlyavowed, and is now endeavouring to carry into effect. (Hear.) That I believe is the reason, and not a question of insulted dig nity and offended honour, which induced Russia to refuse, the propositions of the Western Powers. I now come to a very serious question, upon which I must decline to give that definite answer which an hon. gentleman opposite asked for, namely, "If you are forced to continue the Tsar, and if you find that the only terms which you can propose for giving real security to Turkey are refused, what will be your object in the war?" My answer must be a very general one. It is, that our object will continue to be, as it has hi therto been, the security of Turkey against Russia, and therefore a security for the peace of Europe. I cannot believe that if Russia were allowed, uncontrolled, to work her own way towards the capital of the Turkish empire, making per haps small progress in 1855, the greater progress ten years hence, and still further advance twenty years hence, that the independence of Europe would be secure. (Hear, hear.) Every ono has ssen—the incident has appeared lately iu one of the public journals—in a history written by an au thor of great genius, that when Napoleon was engaged with the Emperor Alexander in considering this great question he asked for a map, put his finger on Constanti nople, and, after some moments of meditation, exclaimed, "Constantinople —no, it is the empire of the world." I cannot remember upon what occasion it happened, but I recollect hearing the Duke of Wellington saying that an addition to the forces of Russia in the Baltic and the pos- Session of Constantinople, and consequently an entrance into the Mediterranean, would make her too strong for the rest of the world. (Hear, hear.) I believe it is not only the recognised opinion oigreat men, but the general per vading sense of this country, that we should not allow Russia to effect, either b 7 a simulated peace or by open war, the conquest of Constantinople. (Hear, hear.) You may say that the terms we proposed were not effectual for that object; but if you say so you will blame us, not for oar ambition certainly, because we asked nothing of Rus sia—not for our harshness towards Russia, but for our rnoderati in, because we did hot ask for stronger terms and more powerful Guarantees. There are no doubt other guarantees besides this of the limitation of her fleet, and it has been said that the practical mode of carrying out the basis of the third point must depend on the events of the war, and could not bo determined beforehand ; but we wore compelled, when we agreed to negotiate at all, to specify the practical security which we meant to have. That negotiation is over, and we must consider, according to the events of the war, what security is necessary foe the protection of Turkey. (Cheers.) My right hon. friend said the other day to my surprise, though I ssm glad he has not repeated it after my denial, that I meant to make this a war of nationalities. I never uttered a word which could bear any such interpretation. (Hear.) That I men tioned the name of Poland in my description of the power of Russia is quite true, but my object - in doing so was to show how necessary it was to obtain some security against thefurther aggression of that great empire; and if any infe rence were to bo drawn from my observations, it would be that the case of Poland was now so utterly hopeless, that it would be madness in England and France , t o take any part in promoting resistance in that country. (Hear.) But be that as it may, never intending any war of na tionalities, and never having said anything of the kind, I still do think it will be necessary to obtain some material guarantee against the aggression of Russia. So fares these four points provided a security for Europe, I think we should make them our object. It is an advantage that Russia should be compelled not to renew again those treaties with Turkey which bind Turkey in chains from which it is de . sirable she should be freed. It is of importance that the navigation of the Danube should be free--it is of "inport ance that the Sultan should give privileges to his subjects, so that his Christian subjects may be attached to him and may be ready to defend the Turkish empire against an enemy. My right hon. friend has said that it was the care of statesmen to provide for the security of Turkey. Now it has been the view of English and French statesmen, and it was certainly the view of the Austrian statesmen who presided at the councils of the Emperor of Austria and who have presided at them, that there is no reason why Turkey should not be maintained, and why her independ ence and integrity should not contine to exist. That is the language I heard from Prince Metternich and from Count Bee). They both repudiated the doctrine of the Emperor Nicholas that Turkey must fall, and that some provision should be made for the succession. Austria, -in these negotiations, has been sincerely endeavouring to pro vide with us security against the aggressive designs of Russia. Everything I saw at Vienna induced me to be lieve that, averse as Austria was to war, she was at the same time most sincerely desirous with us to obtain the objects which we desired, (Cheers.) The position of Austria, having so many enemies in Germany, is very cri tical, and much as I wish the present war to be brought to a speedy conclusion—much as I desire Austria to take part with the Allies—l should sincerely lament anything being done to weaken the power of Austria in the great European system. Belonging to the centre of Europe, hav ing frequently taken part in great wars with the view of maintaining the balance of power in Europe, I believe that her existence is of the greatest value to Europe, and that other powers, ourselves among the rest, are hampered by the policy of Austria, who wishes to maintain peace and assist in the balance of power in Europe. Our object, there fore, in continuing this war will be to maintain the same views. The means mustvary according to the events of the war, and I think it would be idle, and ridiculous, and pre sumptuous, to point out now what are the terms of peace which the English Government, in conjunction with her ally, would think it necessary to demand.. But this point, I think, has been secured, even by these abortive negotiations—that from this time forward Turkey will be considered one of the powers of Europe, forming part of the system of the balance of power ; that her internal regulations will be allowed to her; that her independence uud integrity will be recognised ; and that thereby, partly from events of the war, and partly by negotiations,i• we have really at the present moment already attained very great and material advantages. That we have not obtained those advantages which should make Turkey se cure I am forced to admit, 'and I do not thick we are likely to make peace until we have obtained terms of peace that will be safe to Turkey. Be it remembered always that we are seek ing for no object of our own—that when this peace is con cluded we shall not have obtained an acre of territory the more, or any advantage whatever for ourselves. It is for Tur key and for the general system of Europe that we are endea vouring to obtain security. And now a few words with respect to the particular state of this question. We seem tome, having begun the debate on the motion of the right hon. gentleman opposite, because the Whitsuntide holidays were coming and the confe' ences were not• closed, to have arrived at a period when, theWhitsuntide holidays being over and the conferences being closed, these motions and amendments are not befitting the present state of affairs. I think it would be far more regu lar if, when the Ministers of the Crown are able to bring down the final closs of the conferences—those proposals which my right hon. friend is so anxious to see, together with the de clarations made by her. Majesty's plenipotentiary—l think we should be proceeding in a far more regular course if, having her Majesty's communication on the table, we were to addreo her Majesty on the subject of the vigorous prosecution of the war. (Hear, hear.) If other gentlemeA, taking a different view should like to move an amendment to that motion, with the view of forcing the Government to an immediate re renewal of negotiations, of course it will rest with them to do so. But, having spoken to my noble friend on the subject, I know he is of opinion that such a course would be far more regular, and more befitting the proceedings of the house, than the discussion of such motions as are now before it. Of course, should the house choose to go on with with the discussion, it is out of our power to prevent the house from taking that . course ; but it seems to us that the course I have suggested' would be more regular, and would lead the house to decide aye or no whether it will continue to support the Government in the course they are pursuing. (Cheers.) 11Ir. RO EBUCK then moved the adjournment of the debate until Thursday. Lord PALMERSTON—Sir, I agree with my noble friend, that, under the altered circumstances in which we at present stand—that, seeing that the conferences have been finally closed, and that negotiations are at an end—that the course which was suggested by the right hon. gentleman under diffe : rent circumstances, when the negotiations had not terminated, and when the conferences were not concluded, would now be the simplest and plainest course. We are at present discuss ing a series of amendments, and many hon. gentlemen have great difficulty in coming to a conclusion upon them. The question which the house has a right to consider is, how the Government has conducted these negotiations, and whether the house, under the circumstances in which the country is placed, is willing to give to her Majesty that assurance of sup port in the prosecution of the war which I think the house will be disposed, by a great majority, to affirm. The course, therefore, I propose would be to agree to the adjournment proposed by the hon. and learned gentleman. We shall, in the course of a day or two, receive the protocol of that Con ference which took place yesterday. We shall then be in a condition to advise her Majesty to submit to Parliament those papers which will show the course of negotiation up to the last moment, and then Parliament will be in a condition to judge of the course which ought to be pursued. (Cheers) Mr. DISRAELI—Sir, the suggestion of the noble lord appears to me to be very unsatisfactory. Moro than three weeks ago I made a suggestion to the noble lord, he having, by command of. her Majesty, placed papers upon the table, that he should follow the usual coarse of Minis, ers in his po sition, and move an address to the Crown on the subject, so that the house might have the opportunity of expressing an opinion on the manner in which the affairs of the country had been transacted, and also of expressing their determination to support her Majesty in the prosecution of the war, if she should think it necessary to carry it on. But hOw did the noble lord receive the suggestion ? First, in silence, and then, when he broke through his taciturnity, in a spirit of jocula rity and in a tone of levity. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord has given no reason why the debate should not proceed. If the noble lord had placed these papers on the table—which he ought not to have done if the negotiations had not been con cluded—if he had said, while placing the papers on the table, negotiations are going on, and it will probably be my duty to place other papers on the table—nobody would have urged the noble lord to take the step which I suggested, and I should not have made the motion which I thought it my duty to submit to the house. But the noble lord placed the papers on the table, and it was legitimate and necessary for the house to express its opinion on the conduct of the ne gotiations, and all that has occurred has occurred in conse quence of the conduct of the noble lord. (Hear, hear.) There has been an attempt made to distinguish between the Mini sterial question and what has been called the other question. I do not understand how the distinction is established. If we discuss the policy of ti e Government, that is as much a Mi nisterial question as the one in which we proposed to visit the conduct of the Administration with censure. Now, what is the position in which the house is placed ? We have be fore us an amendment of an honourable member which the noble lord has publicly said he shall support. That motion introduces the main• question of the negotiations that have proved abortive at the conference, and whether we adopt the first or second amendment, or both, the sense is the same. If you only accept the first amendment, to which the noble lord has pledged himself, and oppose the second, which I gather it is the intention of the Government to do, the only deduction that can be drawn is that, in consequence of Russia rejecting the prin ciple of the diminution of her naval force in the Black Sea, we feel it our duty to announce to her Majesty that we are ready to support her in the vi g orous prosecution of the war, the only inference being that all means of negotiation are exhausted ; or whether we accept the second amendment, the deduction is the same and the inference is inevitable. The question having been discussed for two nights, whether the House of Commons will sanction as a sine qua non the propo sitions made by the noble lord in his character of plenipo tentiary, it is trifling with the house to say that the debate is not to be brought td its legitimate conclusion, and that the opinion of the house is not to be taken on this legitimate question. No papers which the noble lord can place upon the table can affect the importance, or touch the paramount interest of the question raised-by the amendment of the hon. 'member for Kidderminster, and I trust the house would not stultify itself after the debate which had been carried on for two nights, and after some of the most eminent members of the house had given their opinion on the subject, and after the minister had accepted the amendment of the hon. mem ber for Kidderminster, upon which the whole question of the conduct of the negotiations could be raised, by making the debate a tabula rasa, merely because in a few days the noble lord could lay on the tab'e one more paper to complete the history of negotiations admitted to have been abortive. I trust the house will feel it due to its character to express a distinct opinion whether the limitation with respect to the naval force of Russia in the B ack Sea shall be a sine qua non in a peace between the two countries. Mr. BRIGHT quite agreed in the observations of the right hon. gentleman. The proposal made by the noble lord cer tainly seemed to him the most extraordinary he ever heard even from the Ministerial bench, and that was saying a great deal. (Laughter.) They had for the last two nights been discussing, in overflowing houses, the question whether the Government had acted for the true interests of the coun try in laying it down at Vienna, as a sine qua non of peace, that there should be a limitation of the naval force of Russia in the Black ea. That question was of ten thousand times more importance than the convenience of a Ministry or the existence of a Cabinet, and it was certainly a most extraordi nary proposition that now, because the Government had get into a sort of hocus pocus, into which it invited the house to plunge itself—(laughter)—theyl were to give up its further discussion merely because the noble lord at the head of the Government always fertile in expedients, he might say eva sions—told them that at some futur,; time he might lay on the table some farther papers, and move an address. The opinion of the house must be pronounced upon the proposi tion of the hon. member for Kidderminster. He hoped that whatever might be the opinion of members with respect to that proposition—whether they were for ruining the country by prolonged hostilities—(" Oh, oh") —or for saving it by peace—each would stand by his own opinions, and face out his own convictions. The question was one which should have the fullest and freest discussion of which a question was capable. Mr. LABOUCHERE supported ;,he motion for the adjourn ment of the debate, believing after what had fallen from the noble lord with respect to the production of papers, that on Thursday next the house would have the whole circumstances of the case more fully before them, and would thus be better able to give to the country that clear expression of their opinion which it w,s desirable should emanate froin them. Mr. LOWE said that if the hon. member for Manchester was in danger of being bullied, as he seemed to apprehend, he (Mr. Lowe) feared that' e was in some danger of being cir cumvented. The noble lord having expressed an opinion in favoul of the first part of his proposition, he certainly felt so much encouraged thereby that he felt disposed to persevere in pressing it upon the attention of the house. He was advised by the noble lord to withdraw his amendment that he might move an address in favour of the vigorous prosecution of the war; in other words, that the noble lord might get rid of it. (Hear.) He could not consent to do so as the matter then stood. He believed that the proceedings of the conference at Vienna were a fitting subject fur discussion, in the house, and unless he had an assurance from the Government, that in the address they intended to move that que'stion should be raised so that it might be debated, he should press -his amendment. (Question, question.) It w,as then agreed that the debate should be adjourned to Thursday nest. JURISDICTION OF THE STANNARY COURT AMENDMENT BILL. This bill passed through committee. REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS,. &c. (SCOTLAND) BILL. The Lords' amendments to this bill were considered, and agreed to. EXCISE ACTS The house went into committee upon these acts. The 'CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved resolu tions on which to found a bill, the principal provision of which would be to enable distillers to distil from sugar and molasses in bowl. An additional duty of 2d. would be charged upon spirits so distilled, in consequenie of the mode of levying the duty. After a short and desultory discussion, the resolutions were agreed to. STAMP DUTIES. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER obtained leave to introduce a bill to repeal the stamp duties payable nu ma triculation at the University of Oxford. • Colonel DUNNE appealed to the right hon. gentleman to extend the provisions of the act to the University of Dublin. Mr. NAPIER urged the same appeal, and supported it by quotations from the report of the commission. _ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought it de sirable that this class of duties should, as far as possible, be revised. Ho could not give any distinct pledge that the Uni versity of Dublin should have the benefit of this exemption, but he would promise that the subject would receive full con sideration. The house adjourned at ono o'clock. A RUSSIAN FUNERAL.--On Monday week the fune ral of a - Russian gentleman, who died a few days pre viously at. the Fleece Hotel, took place in this town. The name of the deceased was Nicholas Karakin, aged 23, and he was the son of Paul Karakiu, a wealthy mer chant of St. Petersburg. He came to England from Germany to finish his studies, and make himself master of the language. When the war broke out he obtained permission to continue in this country, and during the past few months he has been engaged on a mission of benevolence in visiting such of his 'countrymen as have been brought to England as prisoners of war. He came to Cheltenham a short time ago, being at that time in delicate health and put up at the Fleece, where he con tinued up to his death, which took place on Wednesday week. The deceased being a member of the Greek Church, it became necessary that a clergyman of that Church should conduct his obsequie, and a Russian clergyman, the Rev. Ugen Popoff, attended from Lln don. The body of the deceased was deposited, with much ceremony, in an oaken coffin, dressed and orna mtpted as is usual among the Greek Christians--a cross and an image of the Virgin Mary was placed upon the breast. It was conveyed to the Protestant cemetery, where, after reading of the burial service of the Church of Englaml by the officiating curate, the Russian cere monyioswiteedd himto the duringhisby of interment was go ne throu g h by the Russian clergyman. The deceased wwashfoolvl several of his countrym en, illness.—Gloucestershire Chronicle. EXTRAORDINARY MOUNTAIN ASOENTS.-000 day last week two spirited ladies from the neighbourhood of Windermere, accompanied by a gentleman from Ke=- wick,, commenced a tour frbm the latter place at 2 o'clock a.m., and, under a strong north-east wind, attained the summit of Skiddaw to witness the rising of the sun. Here snow was observed 6 feet deep. After taking a little refreshment, they descended on the east side, pass ing Skiddaw Hawse, through the forest ; thence into the Earl of Lonsdale's liberties, and so forward to Fowl cragg. Thence they ascended.to the summit of Saddle back, and down Scales Fell to Scales. There they rested about 4 hours, and then, proceeded to High Row ; after wards to Brundholm Wood, - passed Greta Bank, and back to Keswick. We have seldom heard of robust foot tourists visiting both Skiddaw and Saudleback in one day; but, on the part of the gentler sex we think the eat unparalloled.—DencentWater ROCord, COUNTRY ILABKETS., • LIVERPOOL— - JuNe 5. At to-day's market there was a fair attendance, snaal moderate business was done in wheat, at an advance of to 2d per 'Nibs on best qualities of fresh Baltic and spa:, nish. Floor with a slow sale ; however the declin9 Friday was generally recovered for prime Spanish. Pr'°).,: kiln-dried oats, suitable for e4por ordinaryustralia, On scaree, and id per 451bs dearer; qualitiesift7 oatmeal saleable at fully late rates. Egyptian beans► t, od demand, must be noted 6d to ls par quarter do Barley a nd Pens supported late rates. Indian corn vrssailli fair request, and an advance of 6d per qr. ou Yell °w mixed, and is on white was geuerally established. --- IPSWICH—JuNE 5. The market did not open so well as was elpect43ol3,ll3teb°. chants asked growers being beyond what th ui ~ and were poseddi to wive ; but little business res steo4 d the trade all through wanted tone. What Ira; bar . realised last week's fall rates. Scarcely s sanaP le °' 'y a. ley at market. Extreme prices would have been V Beans and peas very firm. rss 4°1155_4 PER QUARTER. .--8 t t t tDitto Wheat,Ditto, , iTeewd white) (01d)... 74s to 7tisßarley, grinding -• 45g 42s t ° to 435 (new) F 8: to t —s Beans 413 o 0 0 ° Ditto (old) .., ...... —sto —s Ditto (white) ..... Oda o igs Barley, mafting ... 32s to 35s)Flour, per sack : ilve AVRRAGRB FOR TUB WEER ENDING June 2, 1855. Wheat _....s 0i O a t s " 00s Od ~ P eas , B ears , f B ar l e y - 1-e 4ccl an T d h: a r r e m w er a s s ow q n u ed e e n ks t ts l i y llp i r r eoe i rs t a e a . ed li em , advance o TmofiohdiroutemenrtrdeaUitiwonnslTTßatstnonhopyen2ptlhsi, : : t o i f eif it or a 5 E n . ai e n t o f ; c l ib i ban:to:pin:ooi ; a lg a oto ifvdst fe : o c r :o re u e l lis j g aps e - E tion would have sold • well, but 53 lbs w t h h e ell a t c t o t l e cl r hi, ittauv a s was at a discount. Barley has improved 23 to 35;06fIlittla been .m depressed, with more inquiry and °ill's octeci t° i booo p : ro g v r e e m at e . nt T in ho price. Beans a dull sale, but ° 3 l) • Joy ce protracted or abr g we ( e l i erer. For peas Indian corn, and dari priceon't"h boa g wh om e l a d t, em E a n n ei d sh fo; cakes .Y. The arrivals of linseed daring the 13 ' sli d o n 0 w.a m niah o i o t d ne d an d H present amruepdt high 8 o:P. value t seem h :: . ° A de lti n n d e 5 :1 1 0 11 0 a D r o i e t m t i o e n t b termination of s ide, 3 • No ra eseed on P emand. Bones unaltered in solo' E. s. s 8 I 80 to 82 Lintegdr,Siacit s ea 6b 63 t° 66 Dantzic and Konigs- Da b ia e i r a g h , H olstein, and 78 to 84 D D iittttoo PReilitgel:::::(1d0:111:011. fitr°oll: P - Russian and Odessa burghs 4 to 6 ° Memel ...... . .... ** r e T ° Danish, Friesland 6B to 74 ,6d. to 0 1 „ 1 , 8 Oats, English Ditto Danish Ditto Friesland Beans ,r Ditto Russian 29 to 31 Rape cakee,•_-, P' 0 white and yel. Barley, malting 0 0 te 5s Ditto grind' mg 3O to 32 Rapeseed.. ... o ;.`..' s „ilj , to O t 1 : 4 "4" 4 l 'ola ... tolV 32 to 351 Ditto fool' not Os 81 i f. Od Ditto foreign - a P 43 to 47 Bones ........... 44 44 to to 448:guyaeumo.e.a 1 .. •' ..- ...... 0. ... .-''. 0 ----------= SEABORNE MAILS. rest #e , (N signifies that the malls are sent ft"' 'lb : ) 11'... te • ay the night—and Mby the mornina — d e 'P a 'l i silo . v oitt do: if: yro:A _. . a pa , f07.' .0 . EL' ......, visa 0 ;---, -- 1T :'"" ,--• r ' ita i v erpc°' •' . 1 6 , JO ixiyerP° ° ' 1 COUNTRIES, Daywhen in General Post- Office, LO3dOn. Imerica(byßrit.pa.ck)N `Americo. (by United Sta. packet) N America (by U. States packet) Australia (via South-, ampton) M Ditto (via Marseilles) N Ditto (via Cape of ‘ioed Hops) Africa (West Coast) N Alexandria N Alexandria Bahamas ......... Belgium Brazil M Thienos Ayres .. Cape of Good Hoe° N Cape of Good Hope N Cape de Verde N Ceylon (see India) Ceylon N Channel Isles .... . China ... . Constantinople . , Constantinople Cont. of Europe M N Egypt (see India) France ........ M Ya N Gibraltar Greece (sae Ihdia) Greytown .. M Hamburgh ..........N (lava:man flolland . • 111 aondura4 ....LI India CviaSouthampt.)lll India (via Marsoilles)M lonian Isles (see India) Ireland N Li5b0n..............M Madeira Madeira Malta (see India) !Salta • • • . Mauritius (see India) Slainl tins 14th of the month Mexico .. ..M 2nd of the month.. Naples. N sthlsth2sthofmort.! New Granada .... M2d ffc 17th of month; New Zea1ani.......... By private skip ..! Papal States .. , 'Ali 1 sth2.ithoiluon. , Peninsula .. rtli i th27tho (Mon.! Peru „ *ld It - 27th of mon.! Port Natal ........ ..N 13y private ship...l Sicily • . N sth! Stb2s thorium,' Tuscany ...,........N stlll.so2sthoiMon.i Venezuela 2d & L7th Ofaiontl; Van Dionson's Land (vet Australia) W est Indies '4 tdiel7tholmouth Eve y FridaY • • ..... I 1 . 2.3 d of the mom' , -1 a t 24 8; 30 otol. Mir, • 4th &9. , )th of 17th of the nwutll Soutuopt 02 , Jan ~ou thila tc" vo_ec tsl B ry in_ ••• lag ninth I .. .. 1 Dog er a ;lptAj s o w+. .01.1 Sou tl°' " DOV er olg° r j goath-- •voi Sou th ,Zt ts pato— O I soutbstaPtc° Daily...• •• •• " - - 9 th of the month • • 9th of the mouth•• 9th of the month ~Nred.,S;Fri l • tt, 17th of MOllt Once a month . • • • 8,13,18, 23 ,& •26 on it!). 20til of m. Twice daily .. • • • • atal° Rout- h , a ptol Siouth— 1 6 01 16 ;P ile 15 ..**. Pol et ll3p P' Ro atll 3 Dov er .• Twice daily • • • • • • 4,7, 17, 20, 27 °fah ~• ver .• • xor Da. op , . goal' 2nd & 17th of mon : I Tuesday & 2nd of the Ihmit-'1 Daily.. •••• • • • • 1 17th of the month., 4th? 20th of :non. 9th&2sth of month 7, 17, & 27 of Mc" Twice daily .. • • • • 7,9, 17, & 27 of rn. 9th of the month ,23d of month • • • • 18, tB, &28 of mon , 00r tD , I ,don So°n.ttllangt.,.l.l Vover Soin" ' rro' l D over Dove n r;,, , . so i , J . l top tov c ol ." 10 6 * ,Dollt ro , T l ' .° Ito oc o 1 ~Pli 0 1 'PO 1 1)4'11 JO Pe 4 ..101e I ire Of 16 ,I l jo lo 1 6 jtoo 10 04°° 1:L 11 ; ; 1; !11 Dovt r ,;,ll%t °l l'eorittl'port 4 l vsrial . "" Do% 0) 01 ' 1 ,J110 7r 18outn i o cet' tjti ]Pile l de 1 11, fli When any of these dates fall o 1 a tri ti e e rl ij oi e Tp e ate 44 apatched on the following with the e 1, 1 7.01 be Soutpampton), and the Malta, both of wide , ' preceding day. E v Al . ' AmsterdCsOmU..R..B.3.3..7.EXll ICS74AGNibarrrits.--r.•-•';;,;;:.:..:: 15Y1.1 1/E 6l° • ( 1 0 ittn D tw itt e o r , p th . r . e . e .. m . :7l . .... 2 1 5 1 4 19 5 N , 3.,:itigiatrierli..,..... 1 : , R0 r t u5 te 5 r e d 15 am ... ....................... 1 2 1 5 4 19 5 3 4 i :1,c01ni0i:"............ ,4.4014., Den11ai5tnia;,..t.hr.:..cn;.0...n...th.....5....! 1iambargh'..........,,, 13 7i; Naples '•• • ••••• • :.•• '• 0 4 A l p.ri thna ••..•• • . .6 .... ; .... , palerwe ':.••', ... 53 4 2 2 5 5 3 1 5 5 marseilles „ , „ „ „ „ ~ 2 5 3 716. °port° • 1; ‘ ,.. •••', • .. • • ..- 18'0 Jape o res.• ';esigh t •,' Frankfort-on ler. Maine .... 11814 Du elloi,s, 60 43 •' . .• • . 1 : 0 ok e Tr1e5te............*:': 12 31 rl deSs la in 0 0 0 Petersburg ...... ' • • - I Foreign T o o C° lll . 1 0 0 ( 7 i 12-36 I P-Nlicilwsd'lPl'ol3 eCllo.9lcr''X3lol 0 Madrid ....... •••• •• 49 ,, , For n ° .• ..; 0 6 1, Cadiz .. ~. - •• •... - ' v eep I/ ...• ` 0 • 49 % 1 3t(' pollso ~. Barcelona „ _ „ .... . 1 Ne w D . • ' of Seville.. ..., .....:. , P ° o r, Pk' V/ d I Liao • ::.:': •......: :: :: ~,,, that t he 0 Pr ° 0 0 ' , The Voss Gazette of Berlin states b ,il b ,tr ies pg . Austria has ordered that the aryl tw o A il e ot fill with new muskets, the invention ° 001, if .0(f cers, and which are considered to be ' 0 001 0 10 otr i l e. l 10 rior, to the French Minie rifles. memos ~ de, jo g, [ADVERTISEMENTj-Among the 111,1 VI 0107glit., cures without medicine effected by sod, the rt h p t,i:; Health-Restoring Revalenta Arabi°. f i o llso d 'o,cl oc i not the least remarkable :---Maastriebt, boo c lot r et: 1854.-My daughter Virginia had lon . g in Jall t , oor, 0 0 with diarrhoea and night sweats, and w ii 3 s 6 tioe , lil t , 0•ii,,,0 , P . te such a state of prostration and elfbraecovel leceocOlo cal men agreed there was no hope 0 -..... tbo r t , 1, ils, ~0 0 - 0 1 i e r she could not survive many daYs. ~ Rev' illsv, o t 't tion of a friend, we tried Du Bar r Y ' co sed A P':,0•11':, which, to the astonishment of all, After ti tii40.1:,, change for the better in the s yMptel l ? s ',ig die „ ,tit, i' c p: meals she felt less miserable, and 0 1 . P _ d str"l,o9_, siili and eight sweats had left her. She g , i ' e l: t l 3 , s oli volcre;. ally, and in two months time Was per ~.n er3l ll ico st „vist , lent remedy deserves to be wore Fi , 5 ___4, ?„. Pe, I consider I • am only discharglif;rsrs, s :-', P r vipt s r4 duty in recommending it to al l ,: . 151b., 11 , o ' rd e ;t ir In canisters; 11b. 2s. 9d • 2W. 4s• v u ',-; 4 -oPri c- A l.4° e l) : "•receipt of x°' d 0; 1 • , „.eot , The 121 b., carriage free, on j,oo ° 4.' ' a' gt Du Barry & Co., 77, Regent-,treet,,.oo, 0 1 soter)-a 1 ii , Piccadilly; 60, Gracechurch-streot ; ;'' 4, gist, I' s , P u t , 55, Charing-cross; 54, Upper 4, Cheapside ; 60 and 68, Cornhill; '*,..streetvllo; 1 ,4, T t f ,t o ie Dak,:dow° cet ; o Cou' l l. Oxford-street ; 89, High-street, C 00 0str . 3 0, a, comb-street ; 13, King mall; 7, Pall-mall East ; 132, New CM str ee°,,ra• street; 21, Cockspur-street ; 9, ree f' poctlO Paurs Churchyard; 6, Edward -street, - - Aft' BIRT II. of ' Wi lt' or A SON . Ole liers. to re, (1, On the sth inst., at 7, Her eford.scl ...0 , o°' 0 Alfred Burton Cowden. Oar 0 William-s_,llooo, too e , On the 4th inst., at 15, Percy - P lac 04 0 ' _ no , F. J. Wood. la' , „ s t, SPr - cooler On the 2(1 inst., at 12, IsTeiv Bll- ff fr• 0, Milne. , ,„„ n clon„ ;0( 1 On the Ist inst., the wife of' "Y or i-pai." Esq., F.S.A., of 18, St. John's-vt. , pel-street. C, ,i. vailTS• sol' .OF A DA , ' -- r of . 1 ' 0 On the Ist inst. , a t Paris, t he Wl.° hlei , 0 Marriott. Vill o e-P i On the 2d instat Torrington-Pa r - ' fl‘ ' -) Ol a 0 1) 0 G. Hunt. terrOe' d S On the 4th inst., at Glocoster- le wi f e _ wife of John Renville flulber t ',-, e rby, t 1 On the 4th inst., at Mill-hil', - 1 -' C. Hankinson l'c l s T D . • (91 0 P Yr MAg B . I , 310,,ipolW r • s b clinr ° ' of "ii, of Si' On the 6th inst., at the P51,3.,d Dishc).go3lo',. shire, by the Right Rev. t . „.1 10 - 11 : 0 ' n oall, y so ghl P cs o• shire, to S. H. Lille Ferrnng, ward Hailstone, Esq., of .teror.t, 0o if biro , ) fr. iot te y o rks,,,,pel , ,bAr Ferrand, Esq., of Harden Gra n ...street (:::; ,0, t" ~pe On the 4th inst., atGreat Que:."-%.gallor, 1 •ler ih Trenchard Cox, to Mrs. .Enitu ,isry.„o„ %, f St''"o l '' s street, Fitzroy-squar e. : . b o burc.° o e ors. tk On the sth inst., at the " Pareldest son 01 liter 01 John Keith Rennie, Esq. , -,. y d 3" 1 ., 1 / 4 John Campbell Dick, Esq. 1 , Lr 0 "0 , " *gs 9- 'l l4 1) , Esq., of Whitehall -place, to XO O , D 1 E 9410 lobo - tivc, t oo a the r tef " f l i la () . On the 4th inst., at Chaise , recto r o lie 0 ir of St. John's College. incumbent of t Peor ° Hampden, Bucks, and Wail. . A g. A. . ,.. 1 O rr ' lio lt°" Chelsea, aged 86. vdcound Laoonvsci., so () A n t B th a e th ith th i e u Crown-square, Southwark, a 4 t __ fof; _.___-- . i tr it DO pip, Li • ------ , A , Iby A o fice , . 0 0r isr's-ain LONDON: Printed and Ptinle , ' at rii , s t in ... the ea of No. 112, Stra,nd, Printer), _ wolf I ' l Stand, in the Precinct of U_l°6, io Middlesex, "tirednesdPi• Jauu uelapeic,r6cy: J-J ____7„, • _ _ -~ _1 .......''