The Sun. — London, England, 1854-04-01 00:00:00

14 ITN,& LoNnow, sATYTII,DAY EVNING, APRIL 1, 188.4. abolish. (Hear.) I remember that in the year 1841 Lord Stratford de Redcliffe asked for the abolition of some tax of that kind, and after a great deal of argument the pacha who was then Minister for Foreign Affairs gave way. Lord Stratford de Redcliffe was then going away, but the pacha stopped him, and said, " We have been asked to in terfere with your Government on the part of the poor People of England, who state they cannot eat their bread without paying a tax for it." (Laughter.) The document to which the pacha, referred was signed by various persons, and amongst them by the hon. member for the West Paling, and it asked for the intercession of the Sultan on behalf of the people of this country, requesting of him to use his influence with her Majesty's Government to abolish the tax upon bread. (Laughter.) I ask all those who have the interests of the Christians in Turkey at heart to let the Turkish Government have its way at present and they will got these concessions. (Hear, hear.) But do not, while you talk of defending Turkey and are making arrangements to defend her terrritory, be running after Reschid Pacha and bullying the poor man until you drive him to tears,asking these concessions. Is it, I ask, generous or politic to do so? I think we have been misled by our feelings with regard to Austria. She never can embark in the po licy we are embarked in. Her interests are su bstantially population. amongst same as R uss i an i n t eres t s . Sh e must have a ulation amongst whom she can intrigue. She may assist in getting back the status quo ante bellum, blit she will go no further. I cannot go, with respect to Austria, to a greater authority than the noble viscount before me (Viscount Palmerston), and I beg to refer you to what that noble lard said with respect to Austria in 1849. The noble viscount said : "It is not as the ancient ally of England during war—it is not as the means of resistance in the centre of Europe to any general disturbance of the balance of power—it is as the for mer(though I trust it is no longer so) —the former symbol of resistance to improvement, political and social—it is in that capacity that Austria has won the affections of some men in the conduct of public affairs. There are persons who see in the relations of countries nothing but the intercourse of Ca binets—who value a country not for its political weight, but for its political opinions—and who consider that the relations between countries are sufficiently intimate when the personal intercourse of their Governments is placed on a complimen tary footing. Sir, there are men who, having passed their whole lives in adoring the Government of Austria, because they deemed it the great symbol of the opinions they enter tained, at last became fickle in their attachment, and trans ferred their allegiance to the Government of France, because they thought that in that Government they saw an almost equal degree of leaning to the arbitrary principle, and be cause they, forsooth, suspected that Government of designs hostile to the interests of freedom. We have heard of persons of that sort making use of the expression ' old women.' Public men ought not to deal in egotism, and I will not apply to them the expression which has fallen from their own mouths. I will only say, that the conduct of such men is an example of antiquated imbecility." • If the description which the noble lord gave of it was given merely in reference to its juvenile days, or its days of indis cretion, we might hope that during the few years which have since elapsed it might have been improved ; but it is evi dent that Austria is labouring under an incurable malady, and that, instead of improving, it is only getting worse. (Hear, hear.) I could also quote the speech of the noble lord the member for London on the same subject, when he told us of the noble viscount being an English Minister and not being a French Minister, an Austrian Minister, or a Russian Minister. (Hear, hear.) These are vital questions to consider, and if any right hon. gentleman on the Treasury benches does not think that we are entering into this war tomaintain g,reat principles, let hi mretire at once. (Cheers.) This is not a case for sham. (Cheers.) If men enter into a war of this kind, they have a right to de it heart and soul. (Cheers.) The vessel of the State ie in danger, it is tossed to and fro by the waves, and if there be an unsteady hand at the helm, or some person who has mistaken his mission, or who is treacherous to the cause—(hear, hear) — I say, throw your Jonah overboard. (Loud cheers.) If you do not, your vessel will be wrecked. (Hear.) Let us know what you are going to do. I do not ask you to let me know what your plans of operations are. If you wished to answer me you could not, for I conscientiously believe you have no plans at all. (Laughter.) I do not think any man should ask to have the plan of operations disclosed to the:enemy, or that we should tell them what we are about to do, I do not want to know what boundaries you are goin g to make, or what treaties you are going to sign; the result of a war like this must be in the hands of God, and God alone can determine what will be the end of it. (Hear, hear.) But what I want the Government to say is, that if with the help of God, and with the help of strong hearts, We shall carry the war to such an issue as will prevent Russia hereafter from returning to its oppressions and from shaking the tranquillity of Europe, you will take care to keep h er w i thin limits beyond which she will not hereafter be able to go. (Hear, hear.) I think we are fairly entitled t .,° say to the Government that if they go to war merely to, cefend the territory of the Ottoman empire, and to restore old treaties an d th e status quo, it will not be a war well worthy of the occasion ; but it will be worthy of the occasion if the war shall be carried on with the inten tion of repressing for ever these dangerous aggressions. (Hear, hear.) This is not a little war. (Hear, hear.) It might have been made a short war if it had been taken up last year. (Hear, hear.) If, after the affair of Sinope you had sent your fleet into the Black Sea, and destroyed the Russian fleet, as you might have done, You might have made a peace at once. (Hear.) But now you have got into a great war. (Hear.) It is not easy to Meet the Russians in Turkey. You do not know what Turkey is, or what are the resources of the country for the Maint mance of an army. (Hear, hear.) The troops may become infected with the worst of fevers, and you do not know how many of those men who are now going to that country will return, unless you make some preparations More worthy of the occasion than you have done. (Hear.) I am told that this is not a period to bring on a discussion of this nature. I am not insensible of the resonsibility I have taken upon_myself. I have thought night and day upon the subject ; but I felt I had a duty to perform, and I would not flinch from performing that duty. (Cheers.) I ask, is it not better for us now to sutler ae affairs temporary e this country in convenience, but if possible to havet h in the hands of a strong Government, who will carry on this great war in a manner that will be worthy of the country. (Hear, hear.) Is it better to make a sacri fice, and have a united mind and feeling on the subject, or is it better to evade that inconvenience and allow the state of things at present to go on until, from divergence of opi nion, vacillation, and doubt, we shall be involved in disas ters from which we shall not be able to extricate ourselves I (Rear.) Shall we then say it is better to have a weak than a strong Government? (Hear.) So far from this country doubting of the propriety of going into this war, it has been able to force the Ministers into it. (Hear.) No Mi nister could oppose the popular seeling on the subject, and, with the exception of a small section in this house, we have one united feeling on the subject. (Cheers.) If compro raises should be proposed, that would be unworthy of the dignity and character of the country ; there is pnolic feel ing, and there is public opinion, and there are statesmen that are able to resist all those attempts, and carry the country triumphantly to the position in which it should be laced. (Cheers.) I know I ma y wea k e n m y own position ; !Put, however inexperienced a man be, yet if he undertakes ml.O discharge a conscientious duty, however humbly, and 44 ving credit f or b e i ng i n fl uenced b y no persona l or party Motives, or by the desire to impede the Government, or to Pat anything in the way of the great interests of the cOuntry, though he may have failed, or incurred any dis pleasure on the part of members of the house, he must be satisfi e d w i th his own conduct if he has, as have, the co nscienti ous f eeling that he has raised his voice on two easions against those calamiti e s which are, unfortunately, pending over this country. (Hear, hear.) • B RIGHT wished to free himself from the responsi _,_ 'V of the course w hi ch it was proposed to take. He nould not discuss the subject on peace principles, but on e e Principles which were generally-entertained as to the with the of war. Remarking that we were in alliance the power which had, though without guilt, begun of e Crel, he proceeded to insist upon the decaying state falli ere Nae „ 07 1.- " Y and the strength of Russia ; and said that, if in the position of the latter, next neighbour to a thin n k g Power we should interfere with her. He did not Mend ot1;1" Le.rd J. Russell had made out a case. The de than h e h it n n a ßei, a had been treated as much more formidable t hought • been able to find it. The Sultan had not , it so dangerous as Lord Stratford de Radcliffe, "". had done his utmost to prevent the Porte from acced ga," the smallest of the requisitions of the Czar, while monde. made made concessions in the character of her de t(t,_T• He condemned the occupation of the Principali •l did believed it was intended to daunt Turkey and r allies. After some sarcasms on the Vienna'note, tacit:dm believe that any other than a fair interpretation after the first' been put on it by Count Nesselrode, though, he alterations, he put another sense on it in order ,° get back t o his original position. At Olmutz the Ern er _r had assented to th e sense o f th e con f ere n c e, but la f anatical co unc il at Cons tantinople, at which the Chris- Vwere unrepre sen t e d , were afraid of losing their in tb;e.ne,E! by peace, and hastened to declare war. And for t , , , Y we were to advisingr blood and treasure. Our „te e b blunder was in the Turk not to concede any the and our second in supporting him on the subject of to have note. Th e course h e would have adapted was let the Porte make concessions to the last note of have prince Menchikoff, or to the Vienna note, or else he should gone into war alone, and France and England might to at l eas t stood aloof until the war threatened to over -0,4 the balance of power. No real injury would have •r:_"l.,l.loed Palmsey from concession, if she were, as stated n"Ys,,-14 rd ston, a growing power, and, if she were bY.ay advantages given to the Christians, they would ▪ 71 elown in strength, and been able to supplant the Ot 111 n rule and establish th emse l ves as a Christian State t;o nstantinople which would h ave b een f ar b etter th an Withdrawn, Europe would have been at peace forthe present, and matters have gone on to their natural solution the suc cumbing of the Mahometan to the Christian wanted to know what was population. He kit. Burke denied that the`s the balance of power. In 1791 'l` the balance of power inururks h a d an ythi ng t o d o w i t h ilsiedestructive savages ; and A.l e s p . e, and tb h r e e denond them on from Europe wo u ld b ad saiti nce that their a a benefit to mank in d. H e al quoted Mr Fox on the same 1 d • if the the in 1328. Then, balance subject, and Lord Hol had beenpreserved, why uad we not gone t o war with France when she seized Turkish dominions of Al g i ers, and with the unite d States for their aggression in Ilexico? But t e Leil years of this infatuated struggle, and let America Whore a the same period of peace, and she would show us the balance of power lay, and whether England held retain her vaunted supremacy of industry a n d on SeaS s Re ridiculed the idea of the integrity and inde l'e,nodence of Turkey and said that there were statesmen Ziara believed that she would come out of this war n 0 o t „ When Power at all, and, for himself, he believed that to take was was signed there would be no Ottoman power there dvantage of it. Besidesßussia would always be , adv antage he r as always powerful and watchful, and let us reduce agere: e o ma y , she wi 1, as soon as recruited, recommence errant:eof It was n o b us i ness of ours to b e th e knight- En g l and, ,Ple human race. A s regar d e d the interests of of It 1 tue war h a d d ashed down Mr. Gladstone ' s h ope as th at 1 putation as a benefactor to the; but the hat would never consent to retrace s his steps, la n d wo rse tax would be the great source of revenue, and d -Land ow suffer most severely. He congratulated the n ers, every man with a Turk on his tack. The fu n d s was put off, trade would diminish, and the i• "PIU ti le Maw _ g ish I ,, es ays would suffer, and 10 or 20 thousand theof," ould be sacrificed, and the happiness of the tt r e v ine the E ngland destroyed, and all for the sake of pre pc„,tip. independence and integrity of Turkey As for fou n d v a ,,±`ritY of the war, ever and self h " v°cates in the y war was popular,, ar, e w as am a I press and elsewhere. But for him orrified at the se( at the policy of the Government, and with a e results it• atate in. which owin g piotur might produce. He concluded n. which th e of the happy prosperous, and moral gaged in e country kr a a wa. would have been, had we never chaster,• lI A•LL a h • that greed with the h aa lop , k not one 0 on. member for Man having "cell uraed f the grounds he had mentioned as 14or sots a 00 reasons for u 3 re a l "" ctry. ~r ndertaking the war was , e .jaatian'und k!U. • Ball) believed, however, that erinei (a Was t • pon which this -4-4 es . he nthantenan • or any other war could tagtitand ce in civilised society of the .141%Ce. n9t. society with the hon. member that selfishness should be the ruling principle of nations, any more than it should be the mo tive of individuals. He trusted that the Government would direct the war to the realisation of those ends of justice and right which alone the people contemplated in sanctioning the war. The Marquis of GRANBY much regretted the tone of disrespect and personal hostility which had characterised the language of members on the other side of the house to wards the Emperor of Russia, whose every word and every., action was treated as though it was of necessity false and nefarious. The Emperor accorded to those who opposed him full credit for integrity of intention ; why should similar credit not be given to the Emperor ? All that Russia had sought was the protectorate of the Greek church in the Ottoman dominions, an object which Eng land could have no ground for resisting. The real cause of the unfortunate position at which we had arrived was the division which existed in the Cabinet; it was the civil war that prevailed there which had occasioned the war with Russia. (" Oh, oh !" and laughter.) Lord D. STUART (who was received with cries of "oh!") said he should be sorry if anything that fell from him or any other hon. gentleman should have theeffect of prevent ing a unanimous answer from being returned to the most gracious message of her Majesty. He thought 'it was desirable that the House of Commons should show that unanimity which he believed existed throughout the whole country, in assuring her Majesty of their determi nation to assist her in carrying on the war, which had been forced upon this country by the unprincipled proceed ings of an aggressive and ambitious power. At the same time he could certainly have wished that they had from he ministers a more explicit declaration of their views with regard to the war, and particularly with regard to the course which they had proposed to themselves to pursue, in entering upon that war. Of course he was not so absurd as to ask her Majesty's Ministers to explain their military operations to the house ; and he could not help here ob serving that when the government had been asked to state their intentions, the right hon. gentlemen and noble lords on the Treasury bench, had invariably answered that they would be departing from their duty if they entered into any explanation—purposely misunderstanding the object of the querists. He (Lord 1). Stuart) did not ask what was to be the strategetical or naval operations of the war, but he did ask, as he had a right to ask, and the country had a right to be told in plain terms, what it was for which they were going to war ? (Hear, hear.) Were they going to war for the independence of the Turkish empire ? Did they mean to place Europe in such a state as should afford them some security that they would not soon again have to make the same sacrifices and bear the same burdens? He was greatly afraid that unless thegovernment entered upon the war with a great deal more vigour than had charac terised their preliminary negotiations, they would get the country into what might be called a state of chronic war. He hoped they would at any rate afford the house some information as to what the fleets had been doing, and what they were about in the Black Sea ; for, with every desire to give both the gallant admirals of both fleets duo credit, affairs there did at present wear a veryugly aspect. (Hear, hear.) It was said that the fleets had been ordered to go and sweep the Russian ships out of the Euxine so long as the Bth of October ; but they had certainly received orders to that effect ever since January. Yet those magnificent ships had remained ever since strongly at anchor in Beicos Bay. (Hear, hear.) It had been stated that the Russians had come out of Sebastopol, had gone to the coast of Circassia, and taken a large number of troops from thence back to Russia. Surely those troops ought never to have been al lowed to return to Russia, but they ought to have been captured by the combined fleets. It was true that Lord Clarendon had stated so lately as yesterday that no such information had reached him ; but, he did not say he had reason to know that nothing of the kind had taken place. The report had been republished in all the papers of that day, and it was also confirmed by private correspondence which he (Lord D. Stuart) had received from Constantino ple. When the news reached that city that the Russian fleet was again in the Black Sea, what did the combined fleets do ? Did they immediately go out ? By no means. One would have thought that the admirals would have been anxious to capture this audacious Russian fleet which had come out, as it were, to beard them ; but, instead of that, they merely sent out two steamers to see what had happened. The steamers accordingly did go out, and did see what had happened—namely, that the Russian troops had been removed from the littoral of Cir cassia. (Hear, hear.) No one would be more glad than himself to learn that there was no foundation for the opinion, that the commanders of the two fleets were not so ready as they might be expected to be to seek for the Russian enemy ; and, therefore, it was that he insisted so much upon information upon this point. (Hear, hear.) This war had been described as one of great importance. If properly conducted andidirected to proper ends, it might prove to be one of the most beneficial that had over taken place in our history. Still he thought too much was said about peace. He would yield to no one in his ap preciation of the blessings of peace ; but what he wanted was a war that should end in the establishment of a lasting peace. (Hear, hear.) He did not want a war for a mere status quo, and if the Government had any idea of that kind, , they might rest assured that the country would never be satisfied, but would deem that it was governed by men who had no proper appresiation of their position, and were unfit to direct the councils of a great nation. (Hear hear.) War was a state of transition ,• and its object was to bring about another state of things. It might be compared to a surgical operation. It might afford opportunities for the display of great skill, courage, and fortitude ; but it was not to be resorted to except in cases of the last necessity and for the sake -of placing the subject of it in a more healthy condition. He trusted the war would have the effect of placing Europe in a much better condition than she had been for some time. It'was their duty to seize the opportunity of doing this, or posterity would not pardon them. (Hear, hear.) They ought to expiate the partition of Poland, and take from the haughty Muscovite the possessions which he had only obtained by fraud or wrongful force. (Hear.) He trusted that Europe would be placed iu a position of safety for all time to come, and that the independence of Turkey would be preserved. He rejoiced to learn that no convention had been entered into affecting the internal concerns of Turkey. By all means let the Sultan be urged to make all necessary reforms, and give freedom to his Christian subjects; but let them not do the very thing they were taking up arms to prevent, by requiring from Turkey stipulations which were inconsistent with her independence. (Hear, hear.) We could not with any grace demand such stipulations of Turkey ; for she might ask if we placed other religions on the same footing as the Christian. We had no Mahomme dans here, but we had Jews, and so long as the odious dis tinctions were maintained in their case, we could not make such a demand of Turkey as had been referred to. (Hear.) The house ought to have an assurance that this war would not be concluded without the door being closed upon Rus sia, so that she should no longer be in a position wantonly to disturb the peace of Europe. (Cheers.) Lord PALMERSTON.—I might indeed have wished, upon an occasion of such importance as the present, when her Ma jesty has appealed to her Parliament for support in a great contest, the magnitude of which, and the importance of which it is impossible to deny, that questions arising out of detailed matters connected with the conduct of negotiations should be postponed to another and more appropriate occasion —(hear) —and that this house might have looked simply to the appeal which the Sovereign has made to it, and have responded unanimously, as I am sure it will, and not only unani mously, but without mixing up in the assurance of loyalty and devotion to the Crown any topics of a minor and subordinate description. (Hear, hear, hear.) At the same time, I know full well that it is the privilege of this house, when any questions are brought under its considera tion by the Government, to discuss freely and minutely any topics which they may think properly connected with the sub ject under debate. I shall, however, be excused, I trust, if, not folio wing the example of some of those who have gone before, I de not pursue the steps of my hon. friend the member for Aylesbury (Mr. Layard) in all the detailed examination which he has thought it right to enter into of the conduct of the Government in the course of the long negotiation, which has ended in the unhappy rupture that has now arrived. There* however, one topic to he which adverted • which I cannot allow to pass over in silence. My hon. friend has quoted divers passages from the Times newspaper—(hear) taking it as an unquestionable organ of the British Govern ment, contrasting the opinions expressed in certain leading articles of the Times, and opposing them to the deliberate course and the general principles which her Majesty's Go vernment have followed and established. Why, sir, I do not presume to inquire from what sources the newspapers of this country may take their inspiration; but, if any inference is to be drawn from the identity of opinion expressed in these articles and the opinions expressed by the Government of Russia, I should be disposed to draw a very different infer ence from that which the hon. member has thought fit to draw, and if I were to search out the origin of the inspira tion which dictates these articles, it is not, certainly to the English Government that I should go. (Cheers.) The ques tion which to-night is to be submitted to the house is whe ther her Majesty will receive the support of Parliament in the contest in which this country is about to be involved. Now, it is known, I think, to those who have given their attention to the affairs of Europe for a considerable time past, that the views of Russia upon Turkey are not of yesterday, or indeed of any recent date. (Hear.) It is known that for a great length of time it has been the standing and established po licy of Russia to endeavour to obtain possession of at least the European part of Turkey, and subsequently of Asiatic Turkey. This policy has been pursued with undeviating and systematic. perseverance. It has been ever kept in view. When opportunities have offered steps in advance have been made, and when checks have been experienced those steps have been withdrawn, but only for the purpose of taking ad vantage of the next opportunity which offers. (Hear.) Delay has been no element in mitigating or in inducing Russia to abandon its s.?hemes. Its policy has been to keep one object in view—not to hurry, not to lose its object by prematurely grasping at its possession, but to watch the course of the other Governments of Europe, and to take advantage of every opportunity which might present itself by which it could get even the slightest advance towards the ultimate object of its ambition. Now, sir, do I blame the Russian Government for entertaining such a policy ? A policy of aggrandisement pur sued by legitimate means is a policy which you may condemn as dangerous to yourselves, which you may oppose as destruc tive of the independence and the liberties of other States, but' which is not a reproach to the Government which pursues it, provided it be pursued by open, undisguised, and avowed means, without concealment, without subterfuge, and with out fraud. Now, the course which, I am sorry to say, the Russian Government has pursued in all these recent transac tions has not been that open and straightforward course which would justify it in avowing and in boldly declaring its policy. (Hear, hear.) But was it from ignorance that had frequent that policy was p ursue d ? Did th e R uss i an G overnmen t enter tain. any doubt whether its aggrandisement in the di rec ti on o f Vifr! ? eY would or w ou ld no t p er il it s re l a ti ons w ith o th er coun e tn t NoslloCcheasiniofenr,enwcheeon I rd h o e u l b d t existed.the seals (Hear, hear.) h F e g Foreign I D man e a p gti a us r t t ag lien to t, to with an eminent Russian diplo gEonvgelialinmdeenutte: pen the relations between the two countries, and his eafie rab g le ° . " ( rn fie m a think constitution:3s always this :—He said, " Russia and different views on general principles. You your notions, we naturally e li n . te Youat endeavour oeub endeavour awveo supportutih. t n: po a ru r ot b .p i a t o i g aw n n arbitrary But we have great European interests in common, and so long . as we do not come into conflict upon the affairs of Turkey— nas England and R ussia have no differences upon that most s°importantlo point, the affairs of Turkey so long" said he, " I tell my Government that there is nothing in , our opposite general principles of government whi c h w il l prevent England and Russia from acting amicably together in other matters in which they have a common European interest." Now what was it which made the Russian Government think the tho u I t t imagined recent occasion seized upo n b y it was a f avoura bl e one f or advancing its long-cherish ed vie ws Why, no doubt it spe culated upon differences — ir reconc i l able as it thought—be tween England and France. ( Cheers . ) there never could be a cordial union be tween these two great countries. (Hear.) It speculated upon differences between : t i t n h e e that England and Austria. (Hear.) gh t diffe rences of opinion which had prevailed between these two Go vernments, and to a certain degree between the two nations, would prevent any common action between them; and think ' inn, thorofors, QM then WAS disunion among the great /A. tions of Europe, and that it was impossible there could be any combination between them, the Russian Government thought it a favourable moment for making another great step in its progress of aggrandisement towards Turkey. (Cheers.) That step was made with all the ability and with all the sagacity which has ever characterised the policy of that able and am bitious Government. It sought no acquisition of territory, it t s i o o u n g s h t of o p Ee uropfor n ando th i n s o g w e c h i ! t c a h i u s l h y o u p l r d o am m e the ss great n It sought that which was more useful to its views than the ac quisition of any provinces of the Turkish empire—it sought by a concession from the Sultan to the Emperor of Russia to acquire a real sovereignty over the whole Christian popula tion of Turkey. (Hear.) We have been told to-night by the hon. member for Manchester (Mr. Bright) that he could not see what harm would have arisen from the Sultan accepting either the Menschikoff Note or the Vienna Note. Why, it is impossible for any man not to see that if, by a concession ifrom the Sultan, the Emperor had been made the arbiter of all the rights—general, civil, and political—of the whole Christian population of the Turkish empire, the sovereignty of the Sultan would have been held simply at the will and discretion of the Emperor of Russia. (Loud cheers.) And that was his object, and the greatest move it was that has for a long course of time been made towards the extinction and partition of the Turkish em -1 pire. (Hear, hear.) The Russian Government pursued the course marked out by it with a secrecy and silence which showed its certainty that that which it was demanding was -a thing which could not, and ought not, to be granted, if the Turkish Government acted upon a just sense of its own inte rests, and duly consulted the interest of its allies. (Hear.) In one of the memorandums- the last, 3 think it is, of the secret correspondence—what is the language which the Rus sian Government uses in regard to its policy towards Turkey, and in regard to the manner in which the European Govern ments should act towards Turkey ? Throughout the Emperor of Russia professes an anxious desire to maintain Turkey as it is. Apprehensions are entertained that that will not be long possible, but he says that the mode of doing it will be that the Powers of Europe should abstain from pressing imperious demands upon Turkey, supported by menace—(hear)--and that opinion is recorded at the - very moment when Prince Menschikoff was doing at Constantinople the very thing which the Russian Government said Europe should abstain from doing, so as to maintain the independence and integrity of Turkey. (Cheers.) I say, then, it is impossible for any man who has his eyes in his head, or who is capable of drawing conclusions, to doubt that there is a settled intention on the part of Russia to overrun and overthrow the Turkish empire, for the purpose of establishing in the territory of Turkey the ascendancy and domination of Russia. (Hear, hear.) Then it is said, " Well, but what about that ? Is it possible for us to maintain things as they are ?" The Turkish empire, says the hon. member for Manchester, (Mr. Bright), is in a state of rapid and progressive decay, and he declares that I am the only man in the world who is blind to that, and who thinks that the contrary is the fact. Why, I will appeal to the events of the last eight months as a proof of the truth and correctness of my opinion. Just compare the resistance which Turkey lits made within the last eight months to the armies of Russia —compare that with the military events of a former year, aril let any man say whether Turkey has not shown proofs of vitality and energy which few people imagined she could pos sibly have diSplayed under circumstances so embarrassing as those in which she was placed. (Hear.) Among the reasons which, I have no doubt in my own mind—and, in deed, it is avowed in this correspondence among the reasons which urged Russia to strike the blow at the present time was this :—The Russian Government saw that progress sive improvements in Turkey were tending highly to streng then the Turkish Government ; and it saw also that, by these improvements, and by the progressive wealth and comfort and wellbeing of the Christian and Greek population, these masses of Turkish subjects were gradually withdrawing their eyes from Russia as their supporter, and were looking for their well-being .to other sources. (Hear, hear.) The Rus sian Government saw that the Greek population was slipping out of its hands—(hear, hear)- and that the Turkish Go vernment were getting gradually too strewg to be easily over thrown, and therefore it was that they thought it would be inconvenient any longer to delay striking this blow. (Hear, hear.) But then some hon. gentlemen say, " Oh, you are supporting Mahomedanism against Christianity." Now that has nothing to do with.the great question which Europe is about to settle. (Hear, hear.) In the first place, I contend —and the argument has been already used, I believe, by the hon. member for Aylesbury—that however you may wish that these vast fertile regions, the favoured portion almost of the earth, might, be ruled by a Christian Government and filled by a Christian population, in the present state of these countries the Mahomedan race is the only one which can keep that country together as one empire, and govern it as such. The Christian population, as every one who under stands the subject, is well aware, is divided into religious sects, into national divisions, into such minute fragments,— no one of them sufficiently powerful to rule over the whole, and no one of them _inclined to submit with tranquillity to the Government of another—that the Turkish Government affords the only method by which these great countries can be kept under one independent head. The real question, however, is not what you would wish to put in the place of the Turkish empire, but that which you are determined shall not be established there—(hear, hear) —not what might, but what, for the interest of all Europe, ought not to be. (Hear, hear.) That which = think ought not to be—that which I hope all Europe will take care shall not be—is the transfer of these countries to the sceptre of Russia. (Cheers.) That is what I trust the Powers of Europe have determined shall never take place. The hon. member for Manchester asks what are our interests in this war, and he requests me to explain to him the meaning of the expression, " the balance of power." Now the hon. member for Manchester and I differ so much upon almost every question involving great principles that I am afraid I shall be unable to gratify him by explaining, what is the meaning of the expression, because I think that any man of his unquestionable abilities, of his extensive knowledge, who has arrived at his time of life—(a laugh),—and has not by his intuitive perception acquired a correct understanding of what is meant by " the balance of power," is not likely to be greatly enlightened by my humble efforts. (Loud laughter.) Why, sir, call it the balance of power, or what you will, the idea is one familiar to the mind of man, and which has influenced the conduct of Xll mankind from the earliest ages. The balance of power means only this —that a number of weaker States combine together to pre vent one strong one from acquiring a power which shall be be dangerous to their liberties, their independence, and their freedom of action. (Hear, hear.) It is the doctrine of ooli preservation—(hear); it is the doctrine of self-defence, with this simple qualification—that it is combined with sagacity and with Eforesight,—that you endeavour to prevent an im minent danger before it comes thundering at your gates. (Cheers.) I know that the hon. member is so attached to his principles that he thinks peace is of all things the best, and war of all things the worst. I happen to be of opinion that there are things for which peace may be advantageously sacrificed, and that there are calamities which nations may endure still worse than war. (Hear, hear.) This has been the opinion of men of all ages, whose conduct has been ad mired by their contemporaries, and has obtained for them the approbation of posterity. (Cheers.) The hon. member for Manchester, however, always reduces everything to a question of pounds, shillings, and pence. (Loud cheers and laughter.) I verily believe that if this country were threat ened with an immediate invasion—likely to end in its 'con quest—the hon. member would sit down with a piece of paper before him, and put down on one side of the account the contributions which his Government would require from him for the defence of the liberties and independence of his country, and on the other side he would put down the probable contributions which the general of the in vading army might levy upon Manchester—(loud laughter) ; and if he found, on balancing that account, that it would be cheaper—(continued laughter)—to be conquered than to be laid under contribution for defence, he would give his vote against going to war for the liberties and independence of the country, rather than bear his share in the expenditure which it would entail. (Hear, and a laugh.) That may be the hon. gentleman's opinion, and he has, no doubt, a perfect right to it, but it is not the general feeling of the country. (Cheers.) Therefore I look with as much confidence for the vote of this house and for the support of the country in favour of a policy which the Government has by necessity been compelled to adopt as if the very eloquent—and very eloquent certainly it was—but somewhat hypothetical speech of the hon. gentle man had never been uttered. The real question, however, which we have to consider is, not whether Mussulman is bet ter or worse than Christian—it is not whether it is desirable to hasten more or less those internal reforms which must sooner or later tako place in the Turkish empire—not that we have proposed to Turkey a convention containing exactly the same dictations which we have urged her to reject in the case of Russia. Nothing of the sort has been done; the question is, not whether sooner or later these reforms shall take place in Turkey (for they must inevitably take place), but the question we have to consider is this—whether Europe is to lie pros trate at the feet of one great overwhelming power—(hear)— whether (me power is to bestride the globe, from north to south, from the Baltic to the Mediterranean, to dictate to Germany and to domineer over Turkey, to have the whole of the rest of Europe at its mercy, to deal with! it as it pleases— or whether that power shall be taught that there are limits to the ambition even of a Czar, to the conquests even of a mili tary empire of which one may say that the whole territory is one great camp, and the population one regimental depot ; that in spite of the power, which the Sovereign may bo able to sway, in spite of the military resources which he is able to command, there does exist in Europe a respect for the princi ple of national independence, that there does exist in the Powers of Europe a determination to resist overwhelming en croachments in any one power, be that power what it may, and that we are able, as we are willing, by arms—as resort to arms has become necessary—to maintain by land and by sea the liberties of Europe and the independence of nations. (Loud and continued cheering) Mr. DISRAELI—Having had the opportunity on a for mer occasion of making some reMarks on the papers laid on the table of the house, I should not have presumed to ad dress the house on the present occasion, but for two reasons. The principal one is that this being a motion for an Address to the Crown in answer to a message, I thought it would hardly be consistent with my duty if I had allowed the motion to pass without some observation on behalf of the gentlemen among whom I have the honour to sit. I rise to support the address which the noble lord has moved—(hear)—in the same spirit which I endeavoured to express, I believe, on the first night we met. (Hear, hear.) I look upon the power of de claring war to be a prerogative of the Crown—as a real pre rogative ; and, if her Majesty summons her Parliament and informs them that she has found it necessary to engage herself in war, it is not an occasion when we should enter on the policy or impolicy of the war. It is our duty, undec such circum stances, to rally round the throne and to take a proper subse quent and constitutional occasion of commenting on the po licy which may have led to the war. I know that the ex pression of this opinion has subjected gentlemen on this side of the house to considerable animadversion, and, to my great surprise, these objections have proceeded from the Treasury bench. We have been told that we are not open to support her Majesty, and at the same time to question the policy which has led to the war. This question has been argued before in this house ; when Mr. Canning was taunted in a similar manner by Mr. Sheridan, he refused to allow himself to be withheld from commenting on the counsels which had involved the national war, at the same time that he lent his support to the Government to carry on that war, and I think that is sufficient apology for the course which we have thought proper to pursue. There is also another reason why I have ventured to-night to trouble the house with any observations. Since I expressed my opinion on a former oc casion on the weighty document which detail the conduct of the Government with regard to the negotiations preceding the war which were laid on the table at the commencement of the session, other documents have been added for our consideration, and I cannot allow these documents to pass without some brief notice. They have been referred to in the course of the debate by several hon. members, and more particularly by the hon. member for Aylesbury, in a speech of eminent ability, which I thought might have attracted more attention, and a completer answer than it has as yet received from her Ma jesty's Ministers. No doubt there are many circumstances in these documents and in the observations of the hon. member which cannot ultimately be passed unnoticed by the Govern ment. The hon. gentleman referred without circumlocution to the fact that there was a discordancy of opinion in the pre sent Cabinet with respect to the important policy which now occupied our attention, and which has led to such vast re sults. I am the last person, I am sure, who would in this house fancifully assume any variance of opinion, in the Cabi net. I think there 15 no weapon of 'oPlmition more illogiti" mate and more unconstitutional than that—or if I might use the language of the Emperor of Russia—l would say more 'un gentlemanlike. (Laughter.) I remember some few years ago, when the present First Minister of the Crown, with the aid, as we are informed by the present leader of the House of Commons, who I am sure is a gentleman that would never make a statement without due authority, of foreign conspira tors, prevailed on the First Lord of the Admiralty, sitting opposite to me, to impeach, as it were, a Secretary of State, also sitting opposite to me. I remember I had occasion, both publicly and privately, to protest against a course which I thought so unjustified and uprecedented. It was my opi nion that there was not the slightest evidence of any diffe rence of opinion, so far as the Cabinet was concerned, between the noble lord the then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and his colleagues, and that nothing could be more unjust, unfair, and unparliamentary to make an attack against that noble lord, as distinct and isolated from his colleagues. No circumstance had ever transpired, which, for a moment, jus tified the belief that the foreign policy of the Government of the noble lord, the member for London, was not fully ap proved of by all the members of the then abinet; and though I highly disapproved of it, and especially of the insurrec tionary mission to Italy, I took the opportunity of stating in the most distinct manner, that my disapprobation was disapprobation of the policy, of the Cabinet and not of the policy of an individual. (Hear, hear.) I stated on that occasion that no circumstance had transpired authorising the belief that the then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and the other members of the Cabinet had any difference of opinion with respect to foreign policy. But is that the case at the present moment? The hon. member for Aylesbury has called attention to the strange contradiction in expression and conduct which prevails in the present Administration, and on another occasion I have myself alluded to it. We have a member of the Government who tells us that the indepen dence and integrity of Turkey are facts of the utmost impor tance • and we have also other members of the Government who declare that the independence and integrity of Turkey are not facts, but phantoms and phrases. (Hear, hear.) We have a Secretary of State in the other house of Parliament, and of the most important department, so far as the question of foreign policy is concerned, telling us that it is the interest and intention of England to secure for the Christian subjects of the Porte equal privileges with the Mussulmans ; and we have the noble lord opposite, the member for London, most judiciously informing this house to-night that the present Ad ministration has no intention to insist on such terms. (Hear, and laughter.) The war in one house is called a blessing, and in another place it is denounced as a curse. It is said in one place that we are about to embark in a war, the future of which to the most prescient must be involved in obscurity ; and yet we have the Foreign Minister of the country announc ing publicly in the Senate, or rather in a despatch read in the Senate, that we may succeed in crippling Russia, but that the irretrievable destruction of Turkey is the most probable of events. (Hear, and laughter.) I say, then, that it is a fact, that there has been a difference of opinion in the present Cabinet on the policy which we ought to pursue; nor is this weaderrul. There have always been two opinions on that im portant subject, which, in common phrase, is called the Eas tern question; and each has been maintained by statesmen of great eminence. There are statesmen who are of opinion that there is vitality in Turkey ; and that, so far from being exhaust ed, it is a country full of resources, which hitherto have been only imperfectly developed. There are statesmen, and the noble lord the member for London is one, who believe that it is a country not only capable of being independent, but absolutely capable of being progressive. Statesmen of this kind, holding these opinions, have been of opinion that, with wisdom and firmness Turkey might form a substantial real barrier to Rus sian aggression. (Hear, hear.) Well, there is the other school, who believe that there is no vitality in Turkey—that it is decrepit and decaying, that its resources, always imper fectly developed perhaps, are now virtually exhausted, and that it is totally impossible for Turkey long to exist as an in dependent, or quasi independent community. Those_ states men, not wishing to hand over this rich prey to its powerful neighbour, have been of opinion that by encouraging the en franchisement of the Christian subjects of the Sultan, and by advancing the civilisation and the rights of those classes, you might in time prepare a population in Turkey which would prevent that intermediate state of anarchy which would otherwise elapse between the fall of a great empire and the rise of a new Power. These are two opinions which may be conscientiously entertained by men of very great ability ; but it is a notorious fact that the present Prime Minister of this country has never concealed that he was the disciple, or rather the professor, in this country, of the second class of opinion. 'He never has pretended to believe in the vitality of Turkey, or that it could be an independent State, and of course he could not believe that it could be a progressive one. He has been called on in the course of his career as a public man to act when this great Eastern question, as it is called, has been placed before him for his solution or management. The year 1829 will not easily be foreotteu, and we have it on record that Lord Aberdeen, then Secretary of State for Fo reign Affairs, under the Duke of Wellington, agreed with the Russian Government that the Turkish ports of the Mediterra nean should be blockaded, and, if that blockade had been established, Turkey probably could not have maintained her. self during the first of her two campaigns. I may be told that the Duke of Wellington was Prime Minister, and respon sible; but the fact is known that he repudiated the agreement of Lord Aberdeen, his Secretary of State, who consented. to the blockade, and owing to the Duke of Wellington it was that the blockade was not carried out. I also heard it from the lips of a most illustrious statesman—and no doubt others in this house heard it likewise—that Prince Metternich never would have encouraged Turkey to make those two campaigns of 1829 if he had not had the moral conviction that the Bri tish fleet would have entered the Black Sea ; and wo know that Lord Aberdeen prevented that. I do not say he did not act from what he considered his sense of duty. He thought it no doubt, on the whole e much better to temporise and to patch up the existence of a state which he considered in a condition of rapid decay and ultimate dissolution. But if he be wrong, it must be recollected that he is the statesman who at the present moment presides over the fortunes of tho coun try, when there exists a still more trying exigency, and when the same materials are in question and the same result at issue. I must now call attention to that mysterious document, refer ring to the year 1844, which no one has hardly referred to, and which having been laid on the table without explanation has hardly attracted the attention it deserves. I can assure the house that it is one of the most important documents probable ever submitted to Parliament, and I venture to say that nothing but the unprecedented circumstances that have noonrrocl, unforeseen and unexpected, which must indeed have confounded any Cabinet when made known, could have brought this document under the consideration of the House of Commons. This document is dated 1844, and called " The Memorandum of Count Nesselrode." Ten years have elapsed before that is made known,to the House of Commons. The document, in the whole teuour of its expressions, alludes to an agreement, and is composed in a spirit which assumes that there is an agreement entered into between the then Govern ment of England and the Emperor of Russia, during his visit to this country. Now what are the points on which this agreement is founded ? The first point is neither more nor less than the proposition of the partition of the Turkish em pire made by the Emperor of Russia to the English Govern inept. It is not proposed to enter upon the partition to-day or to-morrow ; but the very fact that the suggestion is made, and the subject dwelt on, shows that the time is not consi dered far distant for the partition. The very first point of agreement is that there should be a partition, when it be came necessary, of the Turkish empire ; and how is that to be effected ? By Great Britain, Russia, and Austria alone. This document is an a,greement between Great Britain, Russia, and Austria, with the studied and expressly inten tional omission of France. The noble lord who has just addressed the house, speaking' on a subject of which he is a complete master, and giving the house all the reasons which have led to the present lamentable state of affairs, tells us that ho has no doubt that the catastrophe has been hastened by the circumstance of the Emperor of Russia having an idea that the good feeling which now exists between England and France would not be of long duration. When the present Government came into office, he knew that the noble lord at tho head of it had in 1844 entered i n t o an agreement for th e ul na ti v m e at y e ou part no it t i h o i n ns of e T l u se rk , ehyowweitvheoru:texthceepktnotwhils exclusion of edge of France. France ? You have another point intimately connected with the subject of the present discussion. What is the agreement of 1844? What does ;the Emperor of Russia propose, and what does the British Government agree to ? The Eineeror of Russia states that Turkey is not yet ready for partition, but that the Turkish Government have a habit of endeavour ing to escape from the performance of their engageme nt s under treaties, but that, if those Powers to whom they were under engagements endeavoured to compel a performance of them, there was always a degree of jealousy exhibited by the other Powers, and that, therefore, it would be wise to ag ree t hat, if any Power to which the Turkish Government were under engagements should insist upon their fulfilling tha t engage giana—that i s t o ment, no other Power should interfere. That is Weed to by my Lord Aberdeen, but is there nothing more The Em peror goes on to state that it is of importance to vindicate the rights of the Christian' subjects of the Porte. ,Well, sir, what does this amount to ? It amounts to this—that Russia has entered into an engagement with En say, with the present Prime Minister o f England—first, that when the proper time arrives there shall be a partition of Turkey, that partition to be effected by Englan d, R ussia, and Austria, without the interference of France ; sec ondly, that the Emperor of Russia may, at any time he think s fit, interfere with the Government of Turkey under p rete nce of engagements under treaties, and that no g reat P ower like England or Austria is to question bun as t o his proceedings ; and, thirdly, to give him a further Pretext the for interfering, he is to be allowed to vindica te right of the Christian subjects of the Porte. Then I°l2 are told that this document is not an agreement—tha t rt Is only a memorandum of Count Nesseirode's. This document, which was never heard of till the St. Petersburg Gazette mentioned it, is certainly not signed by Lord Aberdeen ; it is not a convention ; it is not a protocol ; it is, intact, merely an understanding between two gentlemen. (Hear , hear, and laughter) —and these two gentlemen arc old friends. (Hear, hear.) We have the sort of instrument the Emperor of Russia prefers employing, for we have had evidence on that subject; but let the house ask if there be any one with courage suffi cient to declare that this document was not an agreement be tween two gentlemen. What was the answer given when this memorandum was sent from St. Petersburg? The English Minister was waited upon by the Russian Ambassador, who gives him, with great pomp and ceremoney, this document, which is in effect an agreement between the present Prime Minister of England and the Russian Government. (H ear, hear.) I understand that we arc to be told that there was no agreement; but what are the facts of the case? A Minister of the Crown received a document; he left that document to his successor invested with every circumstance which might cause it to be considered one of the great State secrets. That Minister does not consider himself bound by that document now; but I ask him, did he at that time consider himself bound to answer it ? Did that minister write and s a y , have received a memorandum which affects to be an agree ment into which I have entered, and which refers to certain conversations which are alleged to have taken place. I have entered into no agreement of any such character, and no such converstations have ever taken place, and on a point of such magnitude as the the partition of an empire there ought to be no mistake, and therefore I send this m emorandum to state that no such conversations as are referred to in thememoran dum sent to me ever took place ?" If this document be only a memorandum, where, I ask, is the answer to Count Nes selrodc ? As I iave never heard of any answer, I am bound to believe that no answer was ever sent, but I am forced to believe that this document was accepted in the same spirit in which it was offered, and I look upon it as an agreement be tween the two Governments in the year 1844. This agreement was, as I have already stated, an agreement which provided for the ultimate partition of Turkey, which tended to render justifiable interference in the affairs of Turkey, which allowed unchallenged, unquestioned interference, either on a pretence of engagement under treaty or of vindicating the rights of the Christian subjects with the prerogative of the Sultan. Let us now consider whether this document of 1844 is not mate rially affecting the present position of affairs ; but first I should wish to notice the observations of the noble lord, who, I thought, put the, whole question as regarded the p ersona l intentions of the Emperor of Russia very fairly, and also as regarded the policy of his country, and I think that conside rable misapprehension exists upon that subject. I think that nothing could be more extravagant than that England should go to war because the people are taught to think that any foreign potentate has not behaved with sufficient open ness to this country, or because the policy of any foreign Power may show a spirit of aggression ; these are not causes for which the country should be called upon to stake the blood end treasure which we are now called • upon to stake. With reference to the personal conduct of the Emperor, I can only say that, having read these secret and confidential deSpitches, I feel it my duty to state that I entirely acquit the Emperor of anything like duplicity. The Emperor in ' forms us not only of his future plans, but also of his present intentions, and, indeed, I should say that a very remarkable frankness is the characteristic of his correspondence. When letters are published IA this manner, there may, .of course, be details calculated to convey an unfavourable opinion of the writer, aud I do not think that any gentleman in this house would like his confidential correspondence to be suddenly published and his character gauged and ascertained by the expressions which might appear in such correspondence. With regard to the desire of aggrandizement on the part of Russia, there exists a little too much prejudice against Russia on that account, and it is pretended that Russia is animated by an extraordinary and immoral propensity for increase of territory. I don't think that it becomes any great European Power to bring any such charge against Russia. I don't understand how France can come into court with a clear conscience and bring such a charge that Russia from a desire for territorial aggrandizement has seized two provinces of the Turkish empire, when France herself has seized the most considerable province of Turkey—Algiers. I don't think that England, remembering the Indian wars, and the recent occurrences in Burmah, can bring such a charge ; nor would it even become the United Statee of America to bring such a charge, considering that they have recently absorbed Texas. Why we oppose the policy of Russia is because we believe that, if Russia obtained possession of Con stantinople, she would exercise such a preponderance over European politics as to be fatal to the civilization of Europe and injurious to the interests of this country. The class of politieians represented by the noble lord, who believe that there is still more vitality in Turkey, can reasonably talk of the independeneb and integrity of Turkey ; but that other class of politicians represented by the Minister to whom the hon. member for Aylesbury has referred, and whose position I have illustrated by the document of 1844,—that is a class of politicians of whom I cannot conceive how any one of them can with any confidence come forward and ask us to support them in a struggle to maintain the independence of a country which they believe incapable of remaining independent. You are placed in the position you now Occupy by a divided Cabi- • net representing discordant opinions. We know the opinions of that portion of the Cabinet which Lord Aberdeen represents by his Servian policy in 1842. We have it, too in this docu ment of 1844. And now I ask the house to consider how that notorious policy of the Prime Minister has acted upon the present position of the, country. I am bound to say, that after the fall of Sir Robert Peel, when the noble lord the mem ber for London was Prime Minister, there' was no trouble about any. plans for the partition of Turkey. (Hear, hear.) When Lord Derby acceded to office no plans for the partition of Turkey were suggested, although there were some conver sations upon other matters. which were received in a manner which prevented any repetition of the subject. It was so notorious that it was the determination of the Late .Govern ment, as I hope it is of the present, to maintain a cordial un derstanding with France, that these schemes of partition slept. (Hear, hear.) It was settled in 1844 that the Minis try then in power would be of 20 years' duration, and the Emperor of Russia believed the policy of Catherine was about to be fulfilled. That Ministry fell sooner than was antici pated, and there appeared no prospect of the fulfilment of that policy. Within 48 hours of the retirement of Lord Derby news was unexpectedly received that Lord Aberdeen was Prime Minister. The Emperor, with unbefitting haste and undignified restlessness, immediately sent for the British Ambassador and referred to the position which he had occu pied in 1844. (Hear, hear.[ The circumstances under which Lord Aberdeen acceded to office were rather remarkable. The Ministry of Lord Derby was of short duration, for there was a patriotic feeling among different sections of the house, and men' ' who had sympathy together and no party feeling came to the determination to secure peace, and measures of Parliamentary reform, and other blessings of that character. (Laughter.) No time was to be lost, and it was perfectly clear that by turning us out and making Lord Aberdeen Prime Minister large measures upon those subjects alone could be procured and peace alone could be maintained. (Cheers from the Opposition.) The Emperor of Russia then reverted to his old plans. (Hear, hear.) It is said that the Emperor has been guilty of dupli city, and exception is taken on the subject of the mission of ' Prince Menschikoff; but what do I find in the secret de spatches on that shbject—in those despatches which range ' over barely the first three months of the year ? In the first ' place, propositions are made for the partition of Turkey in the same spirit as the memorandum of 1844; but with regard to the mission of Prince Menschikoff, the Emperor stated that he was at Constantinople to obtain the consent of the Turkish Government to certain proposals, and that, if the Porte con tinued to refuSe its consent, he was determined to employ foree. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for Aylesbury has given the house so accurate a narrative of all that has taken place that I need only refer to those strange events to com plete 'my argu t, not to fill up my picture. A communi cation on the sun ect was made to the noble lord the member for the City, at t at time Secretary for Foreign Affairs. The noble lord is one of those who have faith in the vitality of Turkey—that is to say, he is a professor of British, not Rus sian politics; but the noble lord took the seals of office with out any serious intention of long retaining them. The noble lord, however, wrote a despatch upon the subject, some por tions of which I am bound to say I should hate thought would have been referred to by the noble lord in his opening statement this evening. This is what may be called an his torical despatch. In it the noble lord refers to the Succession War and the decease of the dynasty of Medici. I dare say the Emperor of Russia had heard of the Succession War, but of the last of the Medici it was probable he would derive his knowledge only from those poetic historians whom the noble lord once figured among. (A. laugh.) But when the noble , lord referred to tho Succession War, as ho often does, and always with vigour and accuracy, and when he adorned his despatch with the felicitous recollection of the last of the Medici, I could not help wonderi ng w hy, as th e no ble l or d wished to make an impression on the mind of the Emperor of Russia, he did not resort to an illustration which would have been far more apposite and instructive. The two instance to which he referred have no analogy to the parti tion of Turkey. They arc both cases of the'possiblo dismem berment of an empire contingent on the extinction of a dy nasty. This is not the case here. The Sultan is alive; he is a young man, and has a great many wives and a great many children. (Laughter.) Suppose the noble lord had said, " There is one case of an instructive - character to which I will venture to refer at this perplexing moment. If your Majesty recollects what has occurred to England, to Europe, and even to Russia in particidar, from the partition 'of Poland, you may perhaps see cause to hesitate before you embark in an undertaking of a similar nature." But of Poland the noble lord said not a word. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord said in the same despatch that there was not suffi cient evidence to prove that the Sultan was not able to govern his dominions; but the noble lord's successors soon took especial care that, as far as depended upon the iistruc tions which he sent to our ambassador at Constantinople, the Sultan should not be able to govern his dominions. There was, however, one passage in the noble lord's despatch to Sir H. Seymour, which excited my astonishment. The passage to which I allude is this,— " The more the Turkish Government adopts the rules of impartial law and equal administration, the less will the Emperor of Russia find it necessary to apply that exceptional protection which his Imperial Majesty has found so burden some and inconvenient, though no doubt prescribed by duty and sanctioned by treaty." . These are remarkable words. (Hear, hear.) The Emperor is told that he has not only a right but a duty to perform. (Hear.) A man may hesitate to enforce a right. Some men have a right of free-warren ; but no wise man in the present day would exercise it. • A duty, however, a man is bound to perform. And it is stated to be a duty beyond doubt. (Hear, hear.) This is a remarkable admission. (Hear, hoar.) I want to knoW where the treaties are 'which sanc tion the right and prescribe the duty ? The noble lord is a dexterous hand at a schedule. No .statesman has ever placed more schedules on the table of the house than he has, and if he would only add more to his perform ances in that way by a giving us a schedule of the treaties which prescribe the Emperor of Russia's duty, and sanction his right to a protectorate over the sultan's Christian subjects, I think it would be ono of the most in, structive diplomatic documents which could be submitted to our consideration. I read to-day, in one of those organs that sometimes do an injury to statesmen by vindicating their con duct and defending their characters (laughter), that the pro tectorate referred to by the noble lord was applicable only to Moldavia and. Wallachia. Unfortunately for this argument, the noble lord's observation was an answer to one made by the Emperor of Russia. The Emperor said : " In that empire (Turkey) there are several millions of Christians whose interests I am called upon to watch over (surveiller), while the right of doing so is secured to me by treaty. I may truly say that I made a moderate and sparing use of my right, and I will freely confess that it is one which is attended with obligations occasionally very inconvenient ; but I cannot recede from the discharge of a distinct duty. Our religion, as established in this country, came to us from the East, and there are feelings, as well as obligations, which never must be lost sight of." This is what we are going to war about. We are not going to war to insure the evacuation of the principalities ; for the Emperor had declared twenty times over that he was ready to evacuate them if Turkey would only give him the protecto rate he required over her Christian subjects, When we aro told that every modification of falsehood had been exhausted by Russia —when the passions of the people are excited in be half of a war, the cause of which is still obscure, and its cod even darker, I must ask whether there is any foundation for these statements ? What did the charge of fraud apply to ? You cannot say that the Emperor of Russia is guilty of fraud when he pretends to be the protector of the Christian popu lation in Turkey. I am of opinion that the Emperor has not the least right to assume such a protectorate under the treaty of Kainardji or any other; and, on a former occasion, I en deavoured to satisfy the house that a more monstrous claim could not be set up. But what does the Emperor of Russia care for my opinion ? He has the opinion in his favour of the noble lord —a Minister of the Crown, with whom he holds secret and confidential correspondence, and on whose advice the Queen of England declares war against All the Russias. (Cheers and laughter.) The Emperor has your despatch, in which you 'tell him that to exercise a protectorate over millions of the Christian subjects of the Porte is his right and his duty, and therefore I do not wonder that his Majesty felt a little nettled when he found the very Minister who made this frank and complete admission was the first person in the British House of Commons to denounce his claim as fraudu lent. (Cheers.) Notwithstanding this unfortunate paragraph in the noble lord's despatch, I agree with the hon. member for Aylesbury in thinking that the tone in which that document was written contrasts favourably with that employed by his succee:sor. It is evident that there has been in the Cabinet a conflict between British sentiment and Russian sentiment, and that this has brought us into the position iu which we now are placed. I say that the despatches show that the question of the partition of Turkey was entirely set aside by the Emperor himself at an early period of the negotiations. Now, having pointed out to you the agreement of 1844, and having shown you how the 'Emperor of Russia constantly referred to this agreement withUn almost fatal frankness, I ask the Government how they acted with regard to the views and policy of the Emperor? In doing so, I entirely acquit the noble lord the member for London of agreeing with or intending to countenance the political and territorial aggres sion of Russia, but I do not in the same way hold harmless the successor of the noble lord, by whom, I consider, a to tally different line of policy was pursued. If the proper line of policy had been pursued in these negotiations and cor respondence with Russia, in the face of all these despatches now before the house, I fearlessly ask, whether this war might not have been prevented ? (Hear, hear.) There are, in fact, Sir, two systems of policy,' which seem to have been adopted advocatedob of which Ci tvern maymb y e Government in reference to the Eastern ytheef ona s q lo.c u batr e hlle s lep t ee iedrocaeni earl et: ; :t t ßhto h efei the first shL fi sa neoi r aan s dnd t . t b h e e .n called ob le lord ' British th the pol i member c policy," Lon don and the noble lord the Secretary of State for the Home Department, and which embody the opinion that Turkey. , should be independent and should be supported in her resist ancepo policy," y t o , , , as Russia; ad vo c theate advocated and econ supported system pport e may d b of her Majesty's Government, and which always presupposes that Turkey, as a nation, is exhausted, and which contem plates with serenity the occupation of that country by the Russians. (" No, no !" and cheers.) I repeat again, that the First Minister of the Crown has, by all his actions, proved him self a supporter of this Russian policy. He proved it in 1844, and he has proved it ever since, showing in every way that i he could that he was favourable to a limited partition of the Ottoman empire, and the immediate interference of Russia ' with that country. (Hear.) Why did not the Emperor of Russia endeavour to press his views upon the English Minis. • try when Lard Derby was head of the Administration? Be cause he dare not. Why did he lose not a moment in doing so, when Lord Aberdeen came into office 7 Simply because he knew that Lord Aberdeen was favourable to his views, and would lend himself to carry out the proposal of 1844, which he has done, and thus eventually conducted this country to the present war. (Cheers.) Now, I ask what ought to have been the conduct of the Ministry ; and, in considering this question, I would remind the house that it is quite evident the Emperor of Russia placed all his hope on a quarrel between this country and France. and expressly stated, in this secret correspondence, that 'the partition of the Otto man empire was to take place without the concurrence or consent of France. Between Lord Derby's Administration and France the Emperor of Russia well knew that the most cordial understanding existed, and therefore, that while Lord Derby was in office, his (the Emperor of Russia) machinations would be useless ; but the moment Lord Aberdeen came in, the Emperor sent at once for Sir Hamilton Seymour, finding that in the First Minister of the Crown he had got hold of the very man who had previously and constantly agreed to the partition of Turkey. (Hear.) But we are told that the Em peror of Russia thought there was a change of views in the two countries ' - and unhappily there was so upon the retire ment of Lord Derby and the accession of Lord Aberdeen. (Hear, and a laugh.) The policy that the Government ought to have adopted was to have distinctly told the Emperor of Russia that we would not be trifled with - that we knew of his plan, matured with great judgment and great skill ; that we knew he counted on the differences which might arise between this country and France, as he him self told Sir Hamilton Seymour; that there had been great changes, however, since the year 1844 ; that therq was a great alteration of opinion with reference to Turkey; that we could not sanction his plans in connexion with that em pire ; and that he must dismiss his favourite notions regard ing the same, which we could not in any way countenance or submit to. (Hear.) We ought to have told him more, and clearly to have placed before him the relation which subsisted between England and France, which was not merely dynas tic or familiar, but based upon mutual understanding and good faith ; ,and that, in a matter of this kind, the first Power we should call to our consultation would be France, in her character of our neighbour and ally. (Cheers.) Could any one doubt for a moment that, if we had done this, our country and Europe would now be in the position that it was? (Hear, hear.) No, it would not; and I firmly, truly, and conscientiously believe that this war has been brought about by one man, and that man holding the respon sible position of the First Minister of the Crown, by whose vacillation and by whose policy, feeble and irresolute as it has been, this dreadful calamity has been forced upon us. (Loud Opposition cheers.) This, sir, is my opinion, and I feel little doubt that before long it will be the g enera l and unanimous opinion os all England. (Cheers.) Lord J. RUSSELL—I do not intend to occupy much of the time of the house in rising to reply to some of the ob servations of the right hon. gentleman who has last spoken, and with whose speech I must confess myself to be some what surprised—not at the cleverness with which it is dis tinguished, or the bitterness with which it is disfigured— (hear, hear)—but at the peculiar character of the objections which the right hon. gentlemen had raised. I cannot imagine upon what principle it is that the right hon. gentleman, who for so long a time has been ac customed to take so great an interest in the welfare of Turkey, and so much trouble to prevent that country being undermined by Russian influence, should, upon an occasion when the house is asked whether they will render an active, earnest, and effectual support to Turkey, go out of his way to leave the question for the purpose of attack ing the Ministry. (Hear, hear.) The first part of the right hon. gentleman's speech chiefly referred to The Times news paper of last year, and the right hon. gentleman attempted to show that the writers in The Times encouraged by their advocacy the policy of Russia, with which, according to the right hon. gentleman, they seemed to agree. If the right gentleman had shown that the Times newspaper agreed with the Government in these matters, it might have been pre sumed that the right hon. gentleman meant to affirm that there was some understanding between the Government and that paper ; but, as he has stated it, he has merely made out a case to show that the Times newspaper advocated, in his opinion, the policy of Russia, which policy, according to his own admission, he gives me the full credit of having opposed (cheers and laughter); and upon these premises he arrives at the somewhat illogical conclusion that the Times and the Government were leagued and agreed together. (Hear, hear.) I really cannot think what the right hon. gentleman can mean, unless it be to extend those inquiries of which we have had some experience lately, for the purpose of en deavouring, and certainly not uniformly with success, to ascertain from editors and managers of newspapers upon what materials they form their opinions—(hear, hear),—and the names of the writers who contribute to their columns. (Cheers and laughter.) The right hon. gentleman has asserted that my noble friend the Secretary for Foreign Affairs has differed from me upon the question of Russian policy ; but I can assure the right hon. gentleman that he is mistaken in his supposition, inasmuch as, however different the means may have been by which we have arrived at our conclusions, such conclusions have been precisely the same—namely, by every fair and honourable means to repel the aggressions of the Emperor of Russia. (Loud cheers.) The right hon. gentle man seems much distressed that the understanding between the Emperor of Russia and some of her Majesty's advisers has not been carried on in so gentlemanlike a manner as the right honourable gentleman approved of. (Laughter.) And he then proceeds with painful detail and very length ened statements—(laughter)—to speak of things which he says existed in the Administration of 1829 between the Duke of Wellington and Lord Aberdeen, and ho proceeds to point out differences of a similar kind which he believes to exist among members of the present Administration and endea vours to charge. on the head of that Admini s t ra ti on faults for which his colleagues are responsible equally with himself. Now, all I shall say is, that the theory of the right hon. gen tleman certainly differs very widely from his practice. (Laughter.) The right hon. gentleman has made a criticism with respect to the memorandum of 1844, and with respect to the secret correspondence which has lately been laid before the house, and in making that criticism he has not only taken parts of sentences, totally separating them from other parts of the sentences, but he misstates the whole foundation of that memorandum, and of the correspondence ; because the proposal of the Emperer of Russia is not to this effect : " Turkey is a weak Power ; she cannot maintain herself ; let us ask her to give up her provinces ; I will insist on having Bulgaria—do you insist on Egypt, and we will share those ter ritories between us." That was the manner of the partition of Poland—the combined Powers insisted on making demands on Poland that destroyed her territory and subverted her independence; but the proposal of the Emperor of Russia was not of that kind ; therefore any reference on my part to the partition of Poland would have been a gratuitous imper tinence, and would have been considered by the Emperor of Russia and his 'Government as having no application whatever to the proposel he had made. (Hear.) I think it is fair, at least, to suppose that the Emperor of Russia might well ima gine, as many persons, not in Russia alone, but in various countries in Europe did, that Turkey is a Power that cannot very well maintain itself, and that the hour of its dissolution may be near at hand. (Hear, hear.) I may suppose that the Emperor of Russia may think that it would be very injurious to his empire, and very injurious to his policy, if, while he is respecting the•independence and integrity of Turkey, Eng land and France should agree on what is to be the ultimate fate of the Turkish territories. -If he could take that suppo sition—a natural supposition enough—he would then arrive easily at the conviction stated in the first sentence of the memorandum of 1843. The right hon. gentleman says that memorandum has for it whole object the partition of Turkey, and shows that this is a ruling idea in the Emperor's mind. Now, what is the first sentence of that memorandum ? " Russia and England are mutually penetrated with the conviction that it is for their common interest that the Otto man Porte should maintain itself in the state of independence and of territorial possession which at present constitute that empire, as that political combination is the one which is most compatible with the general interest of the maintenance of peace." That is the first sentence of the memorandum which I have been obliged to read, because the right hon. gentleman has endeavoured to convey to the house a false notion of its contents. (Hear, hear.) The memorandum goes on to say that it is desirable, lest the dissolution of Turkey should come suddenly, that there should be an agreement on the subject, and the Emperor proposes that England and Russia should so far understand each other as to recognise the general measures to be adopted. (Hear.) Now, was Lord Aberdeen satisfied with accepting that memorandum ? My belief is, that Lord Aberdeen lost no time in communicating the substance of the Emperor's communication to the Government of France. (Hear, hear.) And, so far from being on bad terms with the Government of France, that was the period when the term " a cordial understanding" with France was first employed— the entente cordiale which afterwards marked the relations that existed between the Government of Sir R. Peel and the Government of France. (Hear.) So far does the right hon. gentleman wander from the facts of the case as they actually exist. (Hear.) Then the right hon. gentleman speaks of the correspondence that took place in a despatch from myself. He says it was evidently my object, in not agreeing to the proposition which was made, that I should give occupation to'tho Emperor of Russia—that I should point out to him an employment in which he should spend his time in future, and that employment was to be the protection of the Greek sub jects of the Sultan. (Hear.) Now, the right hon. gentleman made that representation by dint of leaving out part of a sen tence. The sentence which I used, after stating that the Sul tan should be advised to treat his , Christian subjects in con- formity with the principles of equity and religious free dom, was—" The more the Turkish Government adopts the rules of impartial law and equal administration, the less will the Emperor of Russia find it necessary to apply that exceptional protection which his Imperial Majesty has found so burdensome and inconvenient." So that my object was not that the Emperor should interfere more, but that he should find occasion to interfere less. (Hear.) Then, the right hon. gentleman finds great fault with the end of this sentence as contained in these words, " though no doubt prescribed by duty and sanctioned by treaty." Now, I supposed that every one agreed that the treaty of Kaivardji imposed certain obli gations on the Sultan, and, at the same time, imposed r im w p h o y se i d s recip rocal th a t obligations ou the Emperor of Russia , the hon. member for Aylesbury and his friends wish to get rid of the obligations of the treaty of Kaivardji? It is be cause by that treaty there are stipulations on the part of the Sultan given to the Emperor of Russia by which he is to give exceptional protection to the Greek subjects of the Sultan. Would any one believe that it would be consistent with the conduct of the Emperor of Russia to hear of Christian vill ages being destroyed by the irregular troops o f th e S u l tan, b eing, as I have shown, authorized by the Sultan himself by treaty, and not think himself bound to remonstrate with the Sultan with respect to such things being allowed ? (Hear, hear.) Therefore, I will say no more than that it was always under- ; stood that by the treaty of Kaivardji, in exceptional cases, exceptional protection was given by the Emperor. (Hear, hear.) With resiiect to the general observations of the right hon. gentleman as to the policy that has been pursued, I will only say that, whatever differences of opinion there may be as to Turkish institutions, and the administration of law in Turkey with respect to Russia, there is no difference of opinion at all, and that we are determined to allow no weakness on the part of Turkey to contribute to the aggrandisement of Russia—(hear, hear)—and that is the essential point of this question. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman seems to find fault with the progress of the negotiations. Far be it from me to blame him or any member of this house for exer cising the right which they have to find fault with any part of the conduct of Government. I believe, however, that this country, in general, would have blamed us if we had at the commencement of these transac tions declared that there was no resource but wa . (Hear, hear.) If we had entered into war before we ha d exhausted all the means of negotiation, I believe this count ry would have blamed us for such conduct. (Hear, hear.) Ike member saying last year that I thought we ought not to make war till we had exhausted every endeavour to maintain peace —that the only preparation for war by which we could main tain the rights and immunities of the people of this country would be to show that we had made every endeavour—pro tracted and long-continued as it might be—to come to a pacific conclusion. (Hear, hear.) The Government ma y meet with the criticism of ie right hon. gentleman—they may meet with the censure of the hon. member for Aylesbury ; but they believe this, that if either the right hon. gentleman or the hen, member for Aylesbury will produce a resolution r • owswrimosPei . W ; ; N • 1 1 e-; to the effect that we did not -go to war sufficiently e that we did not use that language to the Emperor of Ru as which the right honourable gentleman would have put in • • w our mouths—l believe the country would disapprove of any such resolution. (Hear, bear.) lam quite sure that the lan guage which the right honourable gentleman would have bad us use to the Emperor of Russia would have been totally unsuited to the case. If we bad said to the Emperor of Russia, " You have proposed to us the partition of Turkey, but no such proposition will be allowed," he would have re plied that he had proposed no such thing ; he had only sug gested that there should be made some arrangement in the case of the downfall of the Turkish empire. To such an an swer we could not have made any statement, as it would have been in accordance with the proposal he had made. I therefore again submit to this house that we ask them to agree to this vote on the ground, not that we have taken the first opportunity of making war, but that we have exhausted every endeavour to avoid war—(hear)—that we have came before this house with the wish to restore peace as soon as peace can be made consistently with the character and the interests of this country—that we have weighed the great power of Russia in any contest that we may maintain with her—that it has been with reluctance that we have engaged in this contest, but that, having engaged in it, we feel our selves bound to give to Turkey every assistance in our power, and that we will rely on the support of the nation in the struggle in which we are engaged. (Cheers.) Colonel SIBTHORP wanted to know who were to be our allies in this war, as he had no confidence in France. He at tributed all the difficulty to the want of decision in the noble Premier, and regretted that the noble lord the member for Tiverton had not been at the head of the Foreign Depgrtment instead of the Home-office, for then he was confident the Emperor of Russia would not have dared to go the lengths he had done. No sufficient explanation had been given why the war had not been avoided ; but as we were at war, even at his time of life, if her Majesty desired his humble services, he was quite prepared to aid, as far as he could, in bringing that war to a successful termination. (Hear, hear.) The Address was thou put from the chair and agreed to neat. con. Lord J. RUSSELL—I have to ask your advice, sir, as to the next question. I wish to move that this address be car ried up to her Majesty by the whole house. (Hear, hear.) It is usual, I believe, to appoint a committee in such cases to prepare the address, but I believe that course not to be ab solutely necessary, and if we could depart from it I would at once move that the address be presented to her Majesty by the whole house. _ _ The SPEAKER—The noble lord has correctly stated the practice of the house. Whenever an address has been agreed to by the house in answer to a message from the crown, it has been usual to appoint a committee to draw up an address in conformity with the resolution of the house, but when an address from the house to the Crown has been taken up by a privy councillor it has not been usual to appoint a committee to draw it up, though the address presented by a privy coun cillor would be in the same form as an address presented by the whole house. The form of the address, however, can as Well be drawn up by the whole house as by a committee, and if the noble lord will move that the address be presented to her Majesty by the whole house, I am not aware of any objec tion to that course. (Hear, hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL --Then, sir, I win now move that the address be presented to her Majesty by the whole house. Mr. DISRAELI—I beg to second that motion. (Hear.) The motion having been put and carried, Lord J. RUSSELL said—l hope the house will agree to meet on Monday at half-past two, when I am led to believe I shall be in a position to convey to the house the command of her Majesty, that her Majesty will be graciously pleased to receive the address of this house shortly after that hour, viz., about three o'clock. (Hear.) The motion that the house at its rising should adjourn to Monday next was agreed to, and. it was ordered that the house should meet at half-past two o'clock, for the purpose of taking up the address. The Registration of Bills of Sale Bill was read a second time. _ . The High Treason (Ireland) Bill was read a third time and passed. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. Lord J. RUSSELL stated that on Monday , he proposed to take the Bribery Bill, and the bill for the Trial of Election Petitions, as the first business of the day. The house then adjourned at one o'clock. COTJNT.RY MARKETS. LIVERPOOL, MARCH 31. A fair attendance at this day's market. Prices not so good as on Wednesday, but we were still 3d to 4d per bushel for wheat, is 6d to 2s per barrel for flour, id per bushel for oats, and is per load for oatmeal, dearer than Tuesday; Indian corn is per qr. cheaper. WAREFIELD-MARCH 31. Short arrivals of grain to-day. The wheat trade has now assumed quite a different aspect, prices having ad vanced 5s to 8s per qr. Barley rather dearer. Beans are a better sale at fully last week's rates. Oats d per stone, and shelling is per load higher. EXETER-MARCH 31. CATTLi.—Prime beef, 10s 6d per score ; cows and calves, 141. to 17/. ; butchers' calves, Od to 54d per lb., rearing calves OOs to OOs each. Sheep, 6id to 7d. Lambs, Od to Od per lb. Store hogs, large size, 50s to OOs each ; slips, 25s to 00s ; small, 16s to 18s. Rough fat, 54d per lb. Pork carcases from 9s Od to 103 6d per score. CORN.—In our market wheat may be quoted from 9s 0.1 to Os lid. Malting barley, 4s Gd to 5s Od ; grinding do., Os Od to Os Od. Oats, 3s 3d to 3s 6d. Beans, ON Od to Os Od. Peas, 00s Od to 003 Od. FLOUR.—Fine, 59s Od to 60s ; seconds, 57s Od to 58e Od per sack. INVERNESS.—MAucII 28. CORN.—Wheat, white, per qr., 70s Od to 72s Od. Bar ley, chevalier, 30s Od to 32s 041; ditto, common, 30s Od to 31s Od. Oats, 26s Od to 28s Od. MEAL.—Oatmeal, per imp. boll 22s Od to 23s 0(1; ditto second, 00s Od to Os 0(1; barleymeal, 15s Od to Os Od; peasemeal, 15s Od to Os Od ; bran, per stone, Os 7d to Os Od ; Ist flour, per 2801 b, 54s Od to 568 Od ; 2d ditto, 47s Od to 49s Od ; oatmeal, best, per st. of 141 b imperial 2s 2d to 2s 4d ; ditto second, Os Od to Os Od ; barleymeal is 4d to is 6d ; peasemeal, 18 exl to Os Od ; Ist flour, 2s 9d cash, 2s 7d credit ; 2d ditto, 2s 3d cash, 2s 7d credit. BRISTOL SUGAR—MAndu 31. There has been an exceedingly dull market this week fo all descriptions of sugar, and the buyers do not seem dia posed to increase their stocks, even at a further concession in prices. The transactions since our last report are, con sequently quite unimportant. The refined market is also miserably flat, and prices are again rather easier. COAL MA" Prices of Coal per ton at ti 9. d. Burnhopo l6 0 Carr's Hartley 2O 0 Davison's West Hartley 20 0 Hasting's Hartley 2O 0 Old Adairs 16 6 Raveusworth Hartley l9 6 Redheugh Main 16 3 Tanfield Moor l6 0 Tanfield Moor Butes 17 0 West Hartley 20 0 Wylam . 18 0 Wallsend, &c. Bell and Brown 18 Gosforth lB 6 Barton lB 6 Lawson lB 3 Riddell lB 6 1 Eden Main 0 0 3 Bell 19 6 Framwellgato l9 0 1 Haswell 21 0 Kepier 20 6 7.-MARGH 31. the close of the market : Wallsend, &c. s. d. Lumley 19 0 Pensher 19 0 Plummer 2O 0 Russell's Hetton 20 6 Stewart's 0 1 0 Whitwell l9 9 Cassop l9 6 Heugh Hall . 19 3 South Kelloo 19 3 Whitworth lB 3 Low Bitehburn 16 3 West Tees . ..18 3 St. Helen's Tees l7 9 'Woodhouse Close 17 0 Birehgrove Graigola 27 0 i Cowpen 2O 0 Sidney's Hartley 2O 6 Derwentwater Hartley. 20 l i Grey's West Hartley l9 0 iLlangennech 23 0 ~ Tyne Cannel ..23 0 COURSE OF EXCHANGE-YESTERDAY. Amsterdam.— ...... 11 133¢ Gibraltar .. • • •-••• • ** "' Ditto, three months .. 11 15 ILeghorn 30 70 Rotterdam .. ..... • .... 11 15 Genoa •• •• •• •• •• •• •• 25 573 Antwerp .............. 25 20 Milan•• •• •• •• •• •• •• Brussels .. 25 20 Venice •• •• •• Hamburgh ..... ..... .. 13 4N Naples •••••••• •• •• • • .. 414 Altona ................ 'Palermo .............. 126 Paris.. ........ .... .... 25 0 :Messina..., „ ........ 126 Mar5ei11e5.............. 25 37% !Oporto ..., ............ 114 Ditto, throe months .. 25 3.5 !Lisbon ................ ` ~ Rio Janeiro ............ Bourdeaux ............ Philadelphia .......... -. Frankfort-on-Maine .... l ig :B uenos Ayres ...... •• • • Berlißerlin ...............• New York, 60 days' sight n .. .. • • ...... ...... Trieste .... ........ •••• " 45 PRICES OP BULLION, PER OR. 11 40 Pete to •••• •• • ' 3t Foreign Gold in Bars £3 17 9 Madrid ...... •••• •• • • 50 _ Portugal Gold Coin .. 0 0 0 Cadiz .......... •• •• • —503 i Dollars .... 0 5 0% Bareelona....•••• • • •• •• New Dollars . . 0 0 0 Seville .....• •• •••• • • • • iilvcr in bars ...... 0 5 IN BANK OF ENGLAND. An Account pursuant to the Act 7th and Bth Victoria, cap 34, for the Week ending on Saturday the 25th day of March, 1854. ISSUE DEPARTMENT. Notes Isstted ...• .... 27,874,310;1 Government debt.... 11,615,100 Other securities ...... 2,984,900 Gold coin and bullion. 13,874,310 Silver bu11i0n........ £27,874,310 £27.874,310 M. MARSHALL, Chief Cashier. Dated the 30th day of March, BANKING DE . Proprietors' capital .. 14,553,000 Rest .... ............ 3,744,205 Public deposits (in cluding Exchequer, Commissioners of National Debt, Sav ing's Banks, and :PIRTMENT. Government securities (includg.Dead Weight Annuity) .......... 11,792.116 Other securities • ... 15,757,604 Notes .. ............ 6,633,535 Gold and silver coin .. 754,972 Dividend Accounts) 4,423,827 Other deposits Seven Day and other 1,124,969 £34,938,227 £34.938.21 MARSHALL, Chief Cashier. Dated the 30th day of March, 11 PRICE OF SUGAR. The average price of Brown or Muscovado Sugar, comPut 4a , from the returns made in the week ending the 2 8 th dor e' March, 1854, is 255. lid. per hundredweight, e xolneive of the duties of Customs paid or payable thereon on the portation thereof into Great Britain. ,„ • GLASGOW AND SOITTH-WISTENN RAILWAY.TraMO re' turn for the week ending March 25, 1854 ...... 25,016 4 8 Corresponding week last year ..................... 4,329 9 7 Increase in 1854 .............................. £686 15 1 'WATERFORD AND KILKENNT RAlLWAY• — Traffic m u ,* for the week ending March 25 (29 miles) £154 1 1 Coy rresponding week last year (13 wiles) 57 3 10 [ADVERTISEMENT.] Holloway's Ointment and Ping the most effectual remedies for Gout and Rheumatism. —] Extract of a letter from Mr. Thomas Wyborn, drug• gis t, Eton, dated April 26, 1852:—" To Professor Hol lov ray. Sir,—A case has lately come under my notice which I think should be publicly known. It is that of a ipoor man, who suffered so dreadfully from chronic rh, iirmatism, that he lost the use of one side and enb dured incessant pain. He was under different medical treat ment, and at Westminster Hospital the faculty pronounced him incurable. However, this was not the case„ for by the use of your ointment and pills, he baa been, restored to health and strength."—Sold by all druugists, and at Professor Holloway's Establishment) 244, 1 Strand, London. s Al' i ff* 31 et dir bat the ued the ) is ❑ot ber the ble ity the ite en ng OR be Ne he he L 1 \7 ~s:} I*' ) i:t . ‘4-.4 , V