The Sun. — London, England, 1857-03-04 00:00:00

plenipotentiary of weis ht and character to arrange all ruaWr4 of difference br tweeo 113 and the Chinese. Mr. J. G. PHILLI MORE, with great reluctance but from stHro co- vie,ion , of .toty, wonl I vo e for the motion. Nit - . P. COCHRA at supported the motion, and insioed, from prirata ioforma',ioo he had obtained of the position of Canton ,tilat the ' J o A tbard men t must have pro duced immense ulaughter among the defenceless inha- bitant s. Mr. T. CITAWBVAS quot-d fr An the despatches to show tila% the bo,nbard-me,t was directed agai,, , t Goveroir.ent aod the Chinese s , ,ldipr4. Hu pro ceedetl to def,nd Fjic J B.sring and the charact,r of the transaction, 42e , 'er•Lity . Mr. ROEBUCK said that he looked upon the motion as one of censv.re, and of censure laid upon the noble lord at the bead of the Government and of his col- t e aettee, wine ha‘i accepted the responsibility of the con duct of Sir J. Ts,l,..ring It had been said there had been a wonderful coalition of patties. He thought his conduct would have treed him from the charge of anything like party spirit, Ja e had only to consider whether the con duct of the Government was likely to support the honour of the co offery. In Asia we were the only people of the western world who possessed large possessions, and in conduct were made to affect the cause of western civiles• ation, we were under a despotism, it might be said in eases of wrong that the people were not to blame ; but in the vase of liberal Government the dishonour fell from th'i noble lord at the head of the Government on to the people of the country. He had listened to the speech of the Attorney-General, which appeared to him to be that of a lawyer who held a brief for the defendant in a run ning -town case. (Laughter.) The issue before the house was a simple one. Ile would admit the Chinese and the police were wrong in boarding an English flag, butall the acts which had led to so greata division of opinion among the lawyers, led to the punishment of the people of Can ton in the mode in which it had been inflicted. If the same offence as that committed by the Chinese bad taken place by the police-officers at Liverpool on board g, it would have been considered perfectly correct. But the house should lo k to the case of a million and a half of people, cooped up in Canton, upon whom we had brought to bear the "civilisation of England." (Laugh ter) The Chinese were a highly civilised people ; put there were peculiarities in their civilisation, and the chief of these peculiarities was that they had not applied their civilisation to purposes of war. We sent out to Canton the secretary of the Peace Society, and see the result ! (A. laugh.) In Sir J. Bowring's hand was placed the honour and credit of England, and it rested in his hands—not in the flag that fl rated over the paltry lorcha. If the flag of England bad been tarni-hed, it was not by the police officers of Canton hauling it down, but because it floated over the ships that threw shot and shed upon defenceless and unarmed people. (Ironical cheers.) It bad been said the Chinese had broken the treaty. had we not broken the treaties on our side. (Hear) t The Go veroment of China professed to be the conservators of trablic morality, and they wished to exclude opium from the city of Canton and the ports of China. Tne chine , e were afraid of us, they saw how we had txr.ended our sway in India, mei they believed that we should do the same with them. We, had, in fact, already annexed China. (Lettehter.) Mr. GLADSTONE explained the connection of Lord Aberdeen's Cabinet with the appointment of Sir John Bo wring to his prevent situation. That appointment was made by Lard Chareed tri with the con-tent, certainly, of Lerd Aberdeen, but the rest of the Cabinet knew tithing whatever of the matter. He refused to consider this as a censure on Sir J. Bo wring ; he believed his policy bad been suggested ie the first instance, as it was opposed in the last by the Government. He reprobated the lan guage of Sir G. Grey in charging Sir Jas. Graham with insincerity ; and added that there was not a supporter of the resolution who was actuated by party motives. He wished he could say the same of the opponents of Government. Mr. Bentinck and Mr. Kendall avowed their intention to oppose the resolution rather than allow three insignificant individuals on his side of the house to find their way into office. He contended that the blue-book containing a list of insults to British resi dents showed that the general rule among the Chinese was not to insult the English. As a proof of it he men tioned that only two days before the affair of the lorcha the Chinese Commissioner had passed over a gross in fraction of the treaty on the part of an English missionary. He then adverted to the argument of the Attorney-Gene ral, and ridiculed the vanity of the learned gentleman in his assertion that till he (the Attorney-General) rose nothing had been said in the House of Com mons that was worth attention. He did not think the argument of that learned gentleman would weigh much with the house. If he• had correctly stated the law, it was time that law should be brought back to common sense. But be rested his case, not on statute or treaty law, but on natural justice. What were our relations with the Chinese ? We received the island of Hong Kong as a port only for careening and repairing ships—we had converted it into a colony of 60,000 Chi nese. We had promised to endeavour to put down smug gling —we had done all we could to encourage it ; and the very ordinance under which the lorcha was registered wee avowedly intended to extend the smuggling of opium. And now they had crowned the whole by making war with those who stood before them a 3 women or children. The Chinese could not meet us in the field—no glory could be earned ; and the British flag could only be stained by these transactions. On the other hand, the Chinese resorted to those miserable and detestable contrivances which their very weakness taught them. lie referred to the latest accounts received from Can ton, from which it appeared that tb.e city had been fired in various places, and that a large portion of the city was reduced to ashes. These were the ques tions to which Parliament had at its first opportunity, but still he feared too.late, directed its attention. If the agents were to be centinued nothing could be darker than the prospect. The Cantonese population were more embittt red than ever. But the political problem before them was exceedingly simple. There was as yet no d.-- claration of war, and therefore we could have no difi• cul'y in withdraaing our agents. He warned the teem against the ignoble fear of being thought afraid, which would lead them to go on in injustice simply because in justice had been begun. Many of those who refused to support this resolution still condemned the proceedings of Sir J. Lowring. If that statement went abroad to fo reign nations, with the fact that the house refused to sanction these opinions by their vote, it would seal the disgrace of England. But let him suppose the revere, and then be told that subordinate efficiale of England had committed injustice in the fir East, and were sup ported by the Government. An appeal was made to the robles and bishops of the land, but it failed. But the supreme apple' was made to the Commons of England, and they redeemed the honour and the good name of England. nr. BENTINCK rose to say something in explana tion, but he was very impatiently listened to, L , rd Pal- Inereton having risen at the tame time. He was under stood to say that Slr. Gladstone bad misrepresented something which he had said. He had not charged the s.elit hon. gent'enan with doing all that was y , la and di:;4racefol, but had said that toe right hon. gentleman and his friends had been fur seine years past aesocia'.ed with all the anti-protestant inunvatlons in the church. (Lnui cries of "No, no," and " Question.") Viscount PALAIERSTON was loudly cheered on rising. He coufes that from a gentleman possessing the talent and experience of the hon. member for the Wes; Riding—from a gentleman whose private and personal cha racter eta-ele so high in the estimation of those who know bite--I should not have expected such a motion ae ho has ma le, and such a speech as introduced that motion. The motion has been shown by Mr. Labouchore to b 3 con':re trs&ctory in itself. It falls short of the object at which 1, is aimed,and at which it was well understood to be director'. It is a motion calling upon the house, in the first place, to abstain from inquiry into the grounds upon which the hos tilities in China have been commenced, and following that up by a resolution condemning the me inures that have been taken to redress the injuries we have suffered. (Cheer' ) The hon. gentleman has talked of the logic of the Ch;ne.eo before the days of Aristotle, but if he had studied either the logic of the Chinese or of Aristotle, I think he would have been able to draw up a batter resolution than this. (Cheers.) He has also commended the morals of the Chinese. I think he would have done more for his own morals if he ba , l abstained from bringing forward this resolution. The question was between her Majesty's Government and Sir J Bo wring on one hand, and Commissioner Yeb on the other. The hon. gentleman stated that Sir J. Bowring was an intimate friend of hie, of 20 years' standing. Wo know that he was an associate of the hon. gentleman in that ca reer of public usefulness with which the name of the hon. member will go down to posterity, as having laboured to introduce a great improvement in our commercial system. What has happened since the hon. gentleman and Sir J. Bowring parted ? The hon. gentleman disclaimed any vin dictive feeling against Sir J. Bowring, and said ho was not anxious for vengeance. What injury has Sir J. Bow ring done to the hon. gentleman that ho should thus for get all the ties that formerly bound them. (Hear, hoar.) My notion of the way to treat a friend of twenty years is that you would view his course w ith indulgence— that if you thought an excuse could be made for any error you would endeavour to make it, but not attack him for th e fi rst wrong step which in your , opinion he had made, with all the bitterness and resentment which an enemy teight be suppos e t to (ff ear, hear.) By whom was Sir John Bowring fe :i l n . ted to this station ? Did he owe it to aristocratic irt whichatlipoz,nn the w e have u blc been told so often is the cause of v i ce (Hear.) Was he a member of that aristoe p gacy ? S e i r r - People. He had John Bo wring was essentially a man of the brought himself into notice by his talent, i ndustry, and public services. He was selected for the first appointment which he h e ld—that of consul at Canton—by myself, when I was at the head of the Foreign-office. I was led to make that choice because I had wa ched Sir John Bowring i n b his former course. He bad b e en employed in commerei negotiations at Paris ; he had distinguished himself by his knowledge of commercial matters ; he was a man of great talent and varied attainments, and I felt that ha was a man eminently fitted for the p )St for which I selected him. (Hear, beer.) Then came a vacancy in the office of plenipotentiary and superintendent of trade at Hong Kong ; and my noble friend Lord Cla rendon promoted him from the office of consul at Canton to th it appointtmlv. lie did it simply upon his own au thority. My noble ftierel on ioubtedly consulted me as • hiving inora knowledge of air J. Bowring, though my noble friend had been associated with him in negotiations at Paris, and ha I had experience of his talents. Bust he also consulted the then head of the Government (Lord Aherdeen) ; and though Slr. Gladstone may en eavour to thr.rwoff from that noble earl any responsibility—if respon sibility there be in that selection—yet I hold in my hand a letter which shows that Lord Aberdeen was consulted on the subject, and that he assented to the appointment. That letter is dated the 9th September. "My dear Cla rendon,—l am not well acquainted with Dr. Bowring. I never hal anything to do with him officially, but he is an eminently clever man, while his knowledge of Chinese gives him great advantages. You could not possibly find a better roan." (Cheers.) Well, then, I say that the right hon. member for Oxford University and the right hon. member for Carlisle alleged that the Government of which they were bath member had no responsibility in connexion , ith the appointment of Sir John Bowring. (Hear, hear.) Mind, I am not speaking of that responsibility as one that requires defence, because I think Sir J. Bowring a-very fit per=on for the appointment he holds, and that Lord Aber deen only showed his good sense in giving him a post for which his previous services rendered him peculiarly fitted. But .vho is the other gentleman who has been taken under the patr•mage and protection of both right hon. members, and whose character has been so much exalted at the ex pense of his opponents? What is the character of Yeh, the theme of so much generous eulogy? Why, he is one of the most savage barbarians that ever disgraced any nation, whether savage or civilised, on the face of the earth. He is accused of every crime that could dis grace human nature-- (cheers)—and certainly if I were to choose any individual as an object of my partiality and praise, I certainly should not prefer Yeh to the British regresentative. (Hear, hear.) Sir John Bow ring has been accused of meddling in affairs of great international importance, reckless of the consequences that might ensue from his acts. Why Sir John Bowring was, as we all very well know, a member of the Peace Society. (Loud laughter.) Sir John Bowring was distinguished for his amiable qualities and his mild disposition; and I should say that if any man was less likely than another to get the country he represented into difficulties or hostili ties, that man would certainly be Sir John Bowring. I have said that Sir John Bowling was a distinguished member of the Peace Society—no doubt if some other members of that society were in his position they would have got us very soon into a much more serious difficulty than that with which he is now charged. (Hear.) With respect to the introducer of this motion, what I complain of most of all is the tone and temper which the honourable member for the West Riding brought to War upon it, because it was remarkable throughout ler an anti- English feeling—an abnegation of all the ties that bind a man to his country and his fellow-countrymen, which I should hardly have expected from a man in his posi- tion. Cheers.) With the hon. member everything that, was Engliish was wrong, and everything that was hostile to England was right. (Hear.) The hon. member said that British merchants were a set of haughty, overbearing, grasping, irritating men, who for their own purposes and selfish objects were constantly getting us into disputes with the countries in which they were settled. Where did the hon. gentleman get this information of the British mer chants? Was it during hie recent continental tour that he discovered the British merchants to be so unworthy ? The hon. member said that he would not like to put over his counting-house " Civis Romanus sum." lam sure that if he were to write " I am a British subject," it would be held that he was so neither in spirit nor in heart, by those who saw it so inscribed. (Hear.) Again, the hon. member also said that the government of England were bullies to the weak and cowards to the strong; and that was said at the close of a war with Russia, one of the greatest powers of the civilised world—a war undertaken on every principle of justice and of right, and carried on in spite of every difficulty with au energy and courage that would havedone honour to any country on the face of the earth. But the boa member subsequently pointed out the object of his re marks. He said, " Would you have done this to the United States?" meaning that we were cowards to the United States, and this too from a member of the Peace Society. (Laugh ter.) He tauntsusin fact for having me 'le a friendly arrange ment with a kindred people—an arrangement which was agreeable to us, and was accepted with cordiality by the other naticn. Further, he taunts us for not making the difference a cause of war, and says we were cowards because we main tained friendly relations with the - United States, and that if we had had courage enough we should have gone to war. So much for the reasoning of a member of the Peace Society. (Laughter.) The illustration which the hon. member made use of was singularly unfortunate for the argument he endea voured to establish on it. He said, " How different was your conduct with the Unitei Statesin a case that arose in Charleston in South Carolina. A law was pas.ed in South Carolina, by which the coloured subject, if he came into Carolina, was put into prison and kept there until the vessel sailed." The hon. member added: "This was a gross outrage, which hurt the sensibilities of the British nation, and what did you do? Your consul at Charleston made an application to the Minister at Washington, who applied to the Secretary of State, and the matter was ar ' ranged, reasons being given why a federal Government could rot interfere in such a matter, and so the affair was settled without an appeal to arms." But that is exactly our case. If we had the power in China of sending a Minister to Pekin, if we had the power of addressing our selves to the Moonshee of the Emperor, no doubt the same result would have happened as in the United States, and all difficulties would have been surmounted. And that it is which constitutes the value and the vindication of the demand which has been made by our admiral for personal intercourse at least with the authorities of Canton. If our officials had the power and right to communicate even with the local Government when necessary, and much more if we had diplomatic communications with the central Government, it is manifest that the difficulties which have swelled into a quarrel, would have soon been arranged, and future arrangements of an amicable character at once been established. (Hear, hear.) Let us inquire what was the event which has given rise to these unprecedented at tacks. I will not, sir, go into the legal argument. Much of the discussion as to whether the lorcha was or was not a British vessel would have been carried on very appropr:- ately before the Court of Admiralty, or a committee of the Privy Council, on a question of whether or not she was a legal prize, and therefore might justly be condemned; but I hold of all that uissertation, however interesting it may have been, however valuable and extensive may have been the legal knowledge brought to bear on both sides, and in both houses—l hold that that dissertation does not real!) lie at the bottom of the subject. (Hear, hear.) We have a treaty with the Chinese, and that treaty says that Bri tish vessels shall not be boarded, nor have men taken out of them, without previous application to the British consul. The question then is, what should the Chinese know and believe the boarded vessel to be—did they consider her to be a British vessel or not? I say they did. (Cheers.) I say that the whole question turns on that, and when hon. members accuse Sir J. Bowring of flagitious falsehood when he stated that the Chinese did not know that the licence had expired, I say that that is the real gist of the whole case ; and inetea I of being a flagitious attempt at imposition, it was a real statemeutof the questioubetween the Chinese and British authorities, and was the sole ques tion to be adjusted. I say that if re Chinese authorities, knowing or believing that this vessel was a British vessel, nevertheless, in viol Awn of the treaty, boarded her, carried off her crew, and hauled down her colours—l say that that is the material part of the question, whatever may be the technicalities of the case. The question is—Have we been insulted, has there been a violation of the treaty ? —fur if so, our representa - ives had a right to demand, not only an apology fur the wrong, but an assurance that it would not be repeated. (Hear, hear.) But I think it has been shown that, in point of fact, this vessel was to all intents and purposes entitled to the protection of the British flag ; for although the zegister had expired five days before, both licence and register were good until the vessel returned t port. Why I never heard of such a quibble as that which maiataius that the Arrow was not at sea because she was in the river of Canton. I am really ashanetite hear serious argument addressed to ',his house on a distinction of that kind. (Hear.) The real meaning of the regulation that said the register should date during her whole voyage, and it was a miserable distinc tion to make, that she was not at sea because she was iu the river. I really did not expect such a line of argument. ( dear, hear.) What was the history of this lordly. Arrow She had a good register ; she went to Macao, took in a cargo, and brought to Canton. What had she to do at Canton? What did she do? She deposited her register with the British Consul. What was the Consul to do? Despatch a communication to the Hoppe to get permis sion for the lauding the cargo. There is no pretence that she landed her cargo contraband; it was of rice, and she lay openly opposite the town for five or six dais, of course with the consent of the Custom-house officers of Canton. I say, then, that the Chinese knew the Arrow was a British vessel, was engaged in a legal trade, had not violated any law, and was entitled to the protection which the ninth article of the treaty afforded her. (Hear, hear.) Nevertheless, the Chinese violated that treaty at the mo ment she was about to sail, boarding her and carrying off her crew. Then there is a question as to whether the Brl tieh ensign was flying, but we have it in the evidence of two respectable masters of vessels, Kennedy, the master of the lorcha, and the master of the I) set, both of whom were within 5U yards of the Arrow, and saw the British flag hauled down by the mandarin. They also saw, and this is a fact which has n o t been sufficiently noticed—they saw the Blue Petsr hauled down. I say that is important, be cause it is an answer to one of the main arguments of Yeh, who says the lorch a could not have had her ensign flying, because no vessel was allowed to h o i s t th e B r iti s h colour s until she was about to get under way. But she was getting underway, as every one knows that the Blue Pet er i s a s i gu of departure, so that she would have been off but for the detention in a few minutes. Another excuse was that there were no forei g ners on board, and th ere f ore h e did not believe she was a British vessel, but concluded she must be Chinese. True, there were no foreigners on board when the Chinese entered the vessel, but they went on board imme diately after, and before the Chinese left the vessel they were there also. Could there beany doubt as to theirknow ledge of the character of the vessel, it was dissipated when they found that on the representation of Kennedy they left two of the crew with him. I say, then, away with such ex cuses; it is a falsehood, a flagitious falsehood, to say that there was no British ensign fly ing, nu foreigners on hoard, at the time they took these men away. (Hear.) What, then, was the allegation made as an excuse for the course of proceedings, quite different from the excuse after wards put forward by Yah when collecting evidence to suit his purpose. The allegation of the officer commanding the party was that there was an old man on board who went by the Dame of the Priest, and that this man was supposed to be father to a pirate who was somewhere else. (A laugh.) On the Chinese principle that relatives mast answer for re latives, th 4 would no doubt have cut off the head of this Bu that old reran if they could not get at his son. But why did they takethe rest of the crew ? Th e y a ll ege d it was that they might repeated statement t et o was M nu serve a s w i tnesses i n th e i nves ti ga ti on o f th e case . r n . o p t a m rk ad es e l o v n h l e y n to h e the applied Admiral—itforthewas release of the man whose men. They said it was on account of this old then Yels, son with was supposed to bo engaged is piracy; but —I don't de n y his 3ility for which he is distinguished ance except it b e a ability, although I d emur t o hi s forbear - ' but Yoh, with his forbearanceabila to tell the truth—(a laugh) spirit, entirely shifts frouirttybearance, and conciliating tirely different story. Wiui,s• ground, and t e ll s an en t sa ilor having been some months before that? H e sa y s th a t a by pirates was able to recognise one att ac k e d i n hi s vesse l ne of the pirates on board the Arrow by two circumstances, one that h turban, and the other that h e had lost a front e wore a r I ed tooth. do not know whethe r a red turban i s a very peculiar a t Canton, but I th ink that if i n Bailin headdress g rapidly past the lorcha in another vessel this man was able to distingui s h his enemy on boa rd b y no greater mark than the loss of a front tooth, he must have been admirably fitted for a sharpshooter, and would do deadly service with a Minis rifle. (Laughter.) So gross an outrage on thin Country to be THE SUN, LONDON, W justified by such an excuse, and yet Yeh has been justified in this house for making that excuse. (Hear.) Well, the wrong having been committed, we demand an apology and an assurance that hereaft3r such a violation of the treaty shall not be committed • and it was not till after a forbeer , slice of some days, and the refusal of any satisfaction on he part of the Chinese, that measures of hostility were re -orted to, the first being the seizure of a junk, and the se .:oncl an attack on some fort, The hon. member for the West Riding was very fond of referring to the United itat -A as models which we should imitate on all occasions. vow, what was the conduct of the United States comman ier in a case that occurred the same time as that of the krrow ? A boat rowing past during the dispute was fired The crew, believing it to be a mistake, hoisted the "American ensign, but the firing was continued. There was An outrage requiring reparation, but it was not a deliberate violation of a treaty, and might have been the accidental misconduct of a gunner, or the Chinese might have thought be American ensign had been hoisted as a subterfuge. But the commander of the United States man-of-war first born ,arded the fort, and then demanded an explanation. They first knocked down the offending fort, and then sent to Yeh for an apology. He not only destroyed the fort, but sub sequently, seeing suspicious preparations making in an , other fort, he attacked that also before the expira tion of a truce which the Chinese had demanded for the purpo3e of deliberation. I contend, then, as the hon. umber for the West Riding is fond of making comparisons, that our forbearance contrasts favourably in this case with the proceedings of America. We demanded eparation. Was the matter one of little consequence ? What matter, it has been said, that a number of men were taken from a small vessel? Why, sir, it is one of many acts violating our treaty rights. We have by the treaty f .Nankin obtained the right for all British subjects to enter and reside without molestation in five cities of China, of which Canton is one. The privilege, with regard to Cantoa, is contemptuously refused. We have, moreover, he right of holding land in these cities for commercial pur poses. And it is distinctly stated that as the wants of the British community expand, they should have places as- Signed to them by commission. That has been refused at Canton. We have had a very small area assigned to ns, where all the foreign merchants are crowded together to their great inconvenience. But I know we want to have more ground assigned to us—we do not care where — for warehouse room. We have in vain appealed to the Chinese —we have in vain appealed to treaty rights, and at this s inoment a great portion of British merchandise and pro perty is stored in Chinese warehouses, which are not under the control and custody of British merchants. Well, then , there was that determination on the part of the Chinese authorities to refuse everything that the treaty guaranteed to us, and everything which it was possible for them to deny. (Hear.) And what is the ground of the refusal? It is that the people of Canton are so barbarous, se cruel, so savage, so hostile to foreigners, that it would not be safe for British or foreign subjects to enter the city. The hon. member for the West Riainu rave us a complete refutation of that allegation on the part of Yeh and his prelecesaor, for he read a statement to us showing that British officers and British subjects have walked through the suburbs, and were treated with civility and kindness, mixed with a little curiosity to know of what materials their clothes were composed ; but that no insult or molestation was offered to them. Web, sir, do the wills of the city of Canton make a division between barbarism and civi lity, between brutality and good humour ? (Hear.) If Canton was the only town with which we had commer cial relations we might believe that Yeh knew his country men better than we did ; but into Shanghai, which is as considerable as Canton, and which is every day growing in importance, British subjects are allowed not only to enter but social intercourse takes place ; everything is conducted with humanity and good humour; and so far from any difficulty arising in consequence of what has taken place at Canton, no difference has taken place in our relations with the people at Shanghai, nor, indeed, with the inhabi tants of any of the other cities which we have a right by treaty to enter. (Hear.) I believe that this plea is only one of the flagitious falsehoods put forward by Y eh and his pre decessors, in order to have an excuse for violating the treaty by which the Imperial authorities are bound to allow our entrance into Canton. (Hear.) Although I say that this proceeding with regard to the lorcha is a violation of our treaty rights, it is not the first. It is only part of a deli berate system to set at nought all treaty rights, to set the populace against us, and to frighten us away for purposes of their own, and that they may have an undue advantage over us. (Hear.) This is one of the most important rights which has been violated in the case of the Arrow. How could commerce be carried on in security if British vessels licensed and registered, and placed under the protection of the British flag,. are liable at the caprice of the Chinese police and the Chinese authorities to have all their crew taken away perhaps; when they are going to sail. (Hear.) This vessel had no cargo, but she might have had a valu able cargo and might have been stripped of all hands and exposed to the mercies of the pirates in that quarter; to say nothing of the loss which might accrue from detention when the vessel was about to sail. The right, therefore, which was violated was an important right—important to British commerce in Canton, which was gradually increas ing, and which could only be carried on in small vessels of the description of this lorcha. There was no pretence for saying that the vessel was engaged in piracy or smug gling, and the old man who was seized was not accused of any criminal act himself, but as the relation of a man who was suspected of crime. (Hear, hear.) Can it be said that the Government of Canton showed that kind ness, justice, and forbearance, which would make remon strance unnecessary? Why, the answer of Yeh to the ap plications made to him, so far from showing any intention to change his proceedings, showed that there was reserva tion in his mind, and that he would commit the same act again—(hear, hear)—for what he says is, that no Chinese official shalt take men in future out of British lorchas without reason. Who is to judge of that reason? Why, the Chinese authorities themselves. (Hear, hear.) What is the object of the treaty? To prevent the Chinese from setting up their own reason as a ground of interference with the just rights of the British merchants. (Hear.) The hon. member for the West Riding says you must remember that it belongs to the Chinese authorities to arrest Chinese cri minali. That is to say, the Chinese authorities are to set aside the rights we have by treaty, to arrogate to themselves privileges which by treaty do not belong to them, and his Chinese officials are to judge of the innocence or the crimi n ility of the crews of English vessels. (Hear, hear.) Ido not think that anybody has asserted that these men were legally seized because they were Chinese subjects, and yet they were placed at the mercy of this human monster. (Heir.) The hon. gentleman (Mr. Cobden) Las asked whe ther, if a Spanish criminal were on board an English vessel, in a Spanish port, we would act towards Spain as we have acted towards China, or whether we would subject foreii,ia ers to our own municipal law and regulations in foreign ports. These assertions are true, but the hon. gentlemen who thus argued omit the circumstance of the treaty, which overrides international obligations, and which is es pecially enacted for the purpose of overriding them. It is perfectly well known that in treaties with the less civilised nations of the world, we require that British subjects should not be confined exceptin the presence of the British consul. That is the case in Turkey; it is the case in Per sia ; and much more is such a precaution necessary in China. (Hear, hear.) If the Chinese authorities hed been the mild, gentle, humane, and forbearing people they are represented to be, wo might have said, we will trust to you and hope that when a British subject is con cerned you will have recourse to the British consul. But we know the atrocious system of administration which is carried on in China, and especially in Canton. But what can you expect from a person who boasts of having struck off 70,000 Chinese heads in one year by the axe of the exe cutioner. I remember some years ago reading that between 5,000 and 6,000 had been put to death, and the mutilated remains of some had been allowed to remain in the slaugh terhouse whilst others were brought there to execution. What were they to think of the barbarity of a Government which perpetrated cruelties greater than were ever heard before by the beheading of 70,000 men in a single year. I have heard what I believed to be a joke ; but it has been co.,firrnett by more than one gentleman who is conversant with China, that persons who are condemned to death give 200 dole. to others to represent them. (Laughter.) I said how can that b?, and I was informed that these persons say your life is so precious you are not so certain that you will be beheaded in a few months at the caprice of some Chinese official; your head will be cut off, and you will get nothing for it; is it not batter for you to be beheaded a fortnight earlier, and be able to leave something to your family? (Laughter.) What a pleasant state of society this must be in this much-landed Government. These barbarities are in flicted by Chinese authorities. The first act of Yeh on the breaking out of the dispute was to offer a reward for the head of every Englishman. (Hear.) The next proclamation we have had is that he would take secret methods of extir pating these hated foreigners, and by the last accounts from Hong Kong we have seen how these secret methods are carried out. (Hear.) We see in the atrocious murder of 11 Europeans, how these proclamations have been car ried into effect. lam quite astonished at the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) when, instead of that generous zeal and those noble sentiments which he has at his command when he wants them, he tells us that, quoting from the discussion which took place 15 years ago, " Of course these Chinese poison their wells." The right hon. gentleman now undertakes to defend these poisonings. (No.) Yes, sir, I say undertaking to defend them. (No, no.) He says it is the resourse to which the weak are dd.- • yen to defend themselves from the strong. It is only ne cessary, therefore, for any parties to say that they are too weak to resist in order to obtain the justification of the . right hon. gentleman of the basest and most treacherous crimes that can disgrace humanity. (Loud cries of "No," and cheers.) I was the more sorry to hear it, because 1 had found an excuse—and, as I believed , a tine one—in my own mind, for his words on a former occasion. I did not believe the light hon. gentleman to justify poisoning. (Oh, oh.) What I believed ho meant was, that they were such a barbarous nation as to be capable of such enor mities, that they practised such treachery, and combined such cruelty with their acts, that it was only natural to suppose that they had committed deliberate poisoning. That was the notion I had. I regret to say that on the pre sent occasion the manner in which the right hon. gentle man has treated this subject induces in my mind the idea that he was offering a sort of excuse for the practice. He urges that their covetousness justifies them in practices in which nations far less civilised than they, in which Kaffirs and Indians do not indulge. Well, sir, then I say that it was essential that we should require the fulfilment (:)' treaty obligations because the parties with whom we he 1 to deal were not ouly forgetful of those engagements, but were going step by step in a direction to place the safety of our colony at stake. (Hear, hear.) Then, however, it is said that we ought to have commenced by reprisal. We did so. The admiral proceeded to seize a junk. What was the result ? Commissioner Yeh said—" You have taken a merchant vessel for which we do not care." Could the admiral submit to this contempt ? No. Upon that it became necessary to hare recourse to further measures. But then it was said you went step by step, allowing between each attack au interval of reflection fur Com inissionerYeh, but when youhad seized the ship youought to have been content—you had obtained satisfaction. What was the condition in which we should have stood ? Yeh would have said, "I have triumphed over those English ; they asked for an apology and explanation. I never made an apology nor confessed my self wrong. I have gained a political victory over these barbarians." Then it was said that these measures had been attended with such slaughter. Have hon. members read an account given by naval officers about the c .pture of these forts? Why, he said there was a feeble resistance, which inflicted little loss upon our people, who, when they entered the forts, found that the manda rins had got boats for their own escape, but had left the garrison to its fate, that the garrison thereupon rushed into the water? What did our people do? Did they attack them? Did they fire upon them? They saved them—rescued them from the water, and then sent them in their own boats to the opposite shore. Was that a measure of ci u3lty ? These measures of aggression were the work of some hun dred seamen, aided, no doubt, by th eereaence of the fleet. And you have only to read these papers to see—SirJ. Bowr ing being at Hong Kong and Admiral Seymour at Canton —that the detailed execution of the measure rested princi pally with the admiral. And if Sir M. Seymour had said, "I think we have done enough and that we ought now to be satisfied," Sir J. Bowling would have bowed to the de cision. I cannot, sir, agree with Ono who hate Wien the other side of the question in the view which they take of this correspondence; so far from seeing any arrogance, in sult, and brutality on the part of our plenipotentiary, and moderation and gentlemanly conduct on the part of the Chinese, I think that the letters on our side are marked with caution and moderation, whilst those on the pelt of the Chinese authorities are tissues of equivocation and falsehood. When the admiral found the Chinese Commis sioner was determined to push matters to an extremity, he agreed to the suggestion of the plenipotentiary, and said that there must be no further concession, and that an official communication with Yeh must take place. That is the na total course of all hostile disputes of this kind : if the de mands made in the first instance are refused, and if a con tinual resistance is mettle, the demands increase with the continuance of the resistance. It is the ordinary case, and no party can complain if, by his own acts and want of faith, he subjects himself to a continual demand. It is then said that the demands which were made were entirely at variance with the letters which I wrote on the subject. and with the instructions of my successors in office. Why, sir, lam as tonished that men of real intellect, men who profess to de sire to act reasonably, who boast of stating the truth, should confound things which are totally different. (Hear.) This demand, which I thought and which my successors slid ought not to be pressed for by means of hostilities, was a demand for a full enjoyment by the public of the treaty — a demand for a general and unrestrained admission of all British subjects into the town of Canton, to live there, to have their houses of busine-s, to communicate freely with the Chinese. Is that the demand now made by Sir J. Bow - ring ? His demand has bean one of a much more limited character—it is a demand simply for an official communica tion between himself and the commissioner in the first in stance, no doubt with provisions for future communication when occasion should require. Is that a demand which it was altogether unlawful to make, or which was inexpedient to be made, or which would be disadvantageous to Euglaud? Even upon the argument of the hon. member for the West Riding I call upon him as a witness to show that it would be a very valuable concession, valuable not only for our ow n interest, but for the Chinese, in avoiding difficulties in cases of future disturbance or collision. And therefore I say — things having come to this pass—that our representatives in China did well in adding to the demand they had already made for the fulfilment of the treaty in this respect. Things therefore now stand in this position. It has been said we are at war with China ; we are not at war, at least I hope not. Up to the last accounts the quarrel was purely local—(hear) —and still existed simply througL the character of the men so unfortunately placed at •nanton. The last accounts, moreover, showed no pro bability of any disturbance of the peaceable arrangements existing between our people and the people of China. (Hear, hear.) We are asked what our future policy will be. That must of course depend upon the course which the Chinese may take. Our first duty will be to care for the protection of those British subjects who have gone out upon the faith of such protection, and also to care for the interest of those merchants in this eqtantry who have large property in China, liable to all the ace:dents which exten ded hostilities would lead to. We have no wish for con quest, no desire to make China a British empire. It has been acid that China is endangered by our trade. Is Brazil in danger, or any other parts of South America endan gered by our trade there ? I say, therefore, that those who say that the Chinese are right in keeping us out, are not paying attention to those plain facts which ought to lead them to a contrary inference. It would, on the contrary, be a great advantage to the people of China if a larger in tercourse were established. (Hear, hear.) If this unfor tunate occurrence had not intervened, we were in commu nication with the Government of France, and probably should have communicated with the Government of the United States, in order to the sending of a friendly diplo matic mission to Pekin, with a view to make arrangements for securing fresh commercial relations. Of course what may be done must depend greatly on what is now taking place. France and America are entitled to ask for an ar rangement of their treaty, and England, which has a right to be placed on the footing of the most favoured nation, will be also entitled to participate in any alteration which may take place. lam sure that any step in this direction, tending to do away with the obstructiveness which has existed in China, will be of immense benefit as well to the British producers as to the Chinese consumers. The very limited extent of cur dealing hitherto has been one cause amongst others of the extensive trade in opium, which the right hon. gentleman has dexterously dragged in to catch a few stray votes. We can only pay for our goods in opium, as the very small quantity of British is not at all equal to the amount of Chinese produce taken by us. Since 1842 to the present time the quantity of tea imported into this country has more tlan doubled, having increased from 42 millions to 80 odd trillion pounds, and the increase in silk has been still greater in proportion. I cannot have the slightest doubt that if by communication with the Chinese Government on the part of the Governments of England, France, and the United States, we had succeeded in ob taining a larger opening for commerce and freedom for trade, notouly would immense benefits have been obtained by the three countries, but the advaptages to China would have been incalculable. The question, sir, is now put, what are we to do ? The hon. member for the West Rid ing not choosing to allow events to develop themselves, calls on the house to affirm the resolutions, which would defy the ingenuity of man to determine whether they are to be taken as a censure on our officials in China, or a cen sure on her Majesty's Government at home. The right hon. member for Buckinghamshire, indeed, in the few observa tions he made some nights since on the question of the ad journment, adopted the latter alternative, and received them as a censure on the Government. Much of the argu ment then used in the debate may be left out of calcula tion. If the conduct of our officers was imprudent and wrongful, we ought at once to have censured and withdrawn them. We have not done so, but on the contrary have thought it our duty to approve and support them, believ ing they had done the beet according to their judgment. Having done that, of course the responsibility of their acts falls upon us ; and therefore the vote of this evening, if in favour of the re7olutione, will imply a censure on us. Something, sir, struck mo very painfully in the course of this debate. Nothing can be more respectable or more de serving of sympathy than an a pp eal to hi g h considerations when made on a proper occasion, bat I cannot say as much for a parody of the language used by Lord Chatham and Burke in circumstances totally different. (Hear.) • When, sir, an appeal is made to the great principles of truth, of justice, of humanity, and of the Christian religion, I say, sir, that appeal is a perversion of thcee sacred prin ciples, when those principles are only invoked in de fence of flagitious falsehoods—(cheers and counter cheers) — and of cruel inhumanity and atrocious crime% That, sir, is what I have heard' with pain. It is painful to see such principles appealed to in support of an Attempt to break down all moral feelings, to justify crime, and induce us to confound right and wrong. What, then, is the object of this motion? The hon. member who moved it 'appears to aim in a great degree at his old and bosom friend, Sir John Bowring. Now, I have always understood that the way in which friends ought to deal with each other is that indi cated by the poet,— " Be to their faults a little blind, Be to their virtues very kind, And fix a padlock on the mind." (Laughter.) But whether the hon. member for the West Biding, has acted upon these principles with regard to his dear, his bosom, his ancient friend, Sir John Bowring. I leave to the house to determine. (A laugh.) At all events, I venture to say that there is no man whose hears will be more grieved at the enmity and bitter n e ss , undeserved and unexpected, of an old' frien d than Si r J ohn Bowling, will be when he reads these debates. (Cheers ) But, eir, what is it, then, that we are wan ted to do? Are we to send out ' to China and say, " Tell Yeh that he is right. Tell him that subtle lawyers have discovered by a great variety of legal technicalities that the lorcha Arrow was really not a British ship according to the imperial law, that therefore he was right in what he did, and that he may do the same again with any vessel under British colours which he may think, with what he calls rea son, is liable to the same in sult."' (Cheers.) What would be the consequences of that? Our trade at Hong Kong and Canton would be as insecure as if pirates had gained posse ssion of the latter city as well as of other ports. These w ould be no security for any British property at Canton or upon the river. But would that be all ? Why, Yeb, raising a song of triumph, would way Englishmen are afraid of m e . I have, " These cowarlly n e driven away all the barbarians t hat were h ere . Th ey tell me that England i s a gFeat pwer and has a great navy and army, but Englishmen are afraid of me. I, Commissioner Yeb, will do what I like with them in future, and whether it pleases me to adorn the palisades with English rather than with Chinese heads, I will do what I please ; and their pronerty shall b e p l un d ere d b y whoever chooses to do so." Would that state of things be confined to Canton? We have great and extensive interests at other ports as well as there. Shanghai, for example, is almost a European community. What man will answer for the security of our people at Shanghai one fortnight after the news of the adoption of such a motion as this 'Pit would be a virtual casting-off of your British communities; it would be committing them to the mercy of these barba rian's ; it would be a public manifestation to the whole world that you are not prepared to defend with your power those whom you have induced to place themselves and their pro perty in a foreign land. Such a proceeding would, I say, be disgraceful to the country as well as dangerous to those whom we are bound to defend. (Cheers.) The right hon. gentleman at the conclusion of his speech described in very eloquent terms the opinion which, in his view, foreign na tions take of the possible decision of this house. Sir, I am afraid that the' 7 view will be far different from that of the right hon. gen"eman. They will say, " Here is a Power that has been formerly great in anus, whose fleets have floated triumphantly over every ocean ; the people of this country are governed by a deliberate assembly—powerful, as the right hon. gentleman says, and responsible for its acts. At last a change as come over the spirit of their dream. This mighty, aryl hitherto undaunted nation, who have deemed it their duty to protect their fellow-subjects wherever they were authorised by their laws to go —this proud and hitherto mighty people have laid aside their bold front and have shrunk from encountering Commissioner Yeh. They who have braved the armies of Russia ; they who maintained a long and not unsuccessful conflict with ono of the greatest nations in the world"—with whom I trust, we are destined never again to come into conflict except, as cur French neighbours say, in a conflict of gene rosity—(hear, hear)—" thi s peop l e aro no w overcome by the love of gain. (Cheers.) They fear the expenses and the efforts which may be necessary to protect their coun trymen, and they abandon a large community of British subjects at the extreme end of the globe to a set of barba rians— a set of kidnapping, murdering, poisoning barba rians." (Cheers.) I say fo re ig n nations would feel that England has descended froin'that high station which hitherto she has occupied, at the beck of some of the basest, the meanest, and the moat degraded beings in the civilized world. (Cheers.) They would say, " What leas brought about this change?" Those who look below the surface, those who look not merely to results, but investigate caus es, would say, " Do nut beli eve th at the British nation i s a party to these proceedings. (Loud cheers.) No," they would say, "take care of yourselves ; do not imagine that so h ild, so bravo, so generous a people are consent i ng parties to this cowardly arrangement, or that you may safely trust to meet with similar con d uc t f or th e f uture. (Hear, hear.) It is an occasional event. (" Hear," and laughter.) It depends upon an accidental condition of things in the great council of the British nation. There have been ered int o —( c h eers )— among men com binations recently ent who bad for a long course of time b een k ep t apar t b y th e s trongest (linker-lo° of 0 1 111 1ole, and by recollections of resentment even not now entirely forgotten. They would say, " This combination, not daring t o pu t f orwar d th e i r acts in the face of clay—having concluded a secret treaty —(cheers and laughter) —not guaranteeing their present state of p o ssession (that being th e l as t t hi ng t h ey w i s h t o do), but guaranteeing to each other the state of possession which they hope to obtain—have cautiously abstained in the resolutions they have proposed from using words which would fully in the face of day have e x pl a i ne d an d clearly developed unto al l the nations the object which they have i n v i e w. (Cheers.) They have shrunk from moving an ad dress to the Queen to remove Ministers whose places they want to occupy. (Cheers and laughter.) They k ne w that that Government, not so much p er h aps f or it s own merits as for the demerits of those who might be its rivals (laughter)—did possess the approval of the country, and tbat, if the question were fairly put, Aye or No, will ' you, have that Government or the Coalition Government which we aro prepared to offer you ?' They knew per fectly well what the answer of the country would be. (Loud cheers.) Knowing that, and therefore sheltering themselve3 under the mysterious veil of unintelligible phrases, and impo-ing upon the conscientious feelings of honourable and respectable men who, in support ing the resolution, do not stop t I inquire whether the war is just or necessary, or what the wrongs are which have produced it, but are prepared upon every occasion to assert that no recourse to force is ever legitimate or allow able "—foreign nations will say that this coalition, prac tising upon the good feelings of these persons, and uniting themselves with those from whom they have been hitherto long and widely separated, have—if the result should be so—succeeded in (I will usenouncivilterm) extracting from the house a vote the effect of which is different from that which it would have been had they manfully and boldly stated their object. (Cheers.) Foreign nations will say, " Don't trust the English Government. Look at the re sult of this debate and division. There are some members of the Legislature who raise the nicest legal quibbles, who endeavour to excuse the most atrocious crimes —(cheers) — who take part with any foreigner against an Englishman, and who—like the hon, member for the West Riding— almost repudiate their country. This result may have arisen from a combination of accidental circumstances, but beware how you imagine that you can venture to deal with the British Government upon the assumption that they represent the feelings and intentions of the na tion." I don't intend to follow the example of the right honourable baronet the member for Carlisle (Sir J. Graham), who went so far as to say that every mem ber of this house would be accountable for the vote be may give not only to his own conscience, not only to his constituents, not only to his countrymen, but—if I did not misunderstand him—at that last day when all human actions will be scanned. I don't go so fsr as that—(cheers and laughter)—but I do say that this house has now in its keeping not only the interests, the property, and the lives of many of our fellow-countrymen—(cheers)—but that it has also in its keeping the honour—(cheers)—the welfare, the reputation—(renewed cheers) —expressions which my noble friend the member for the city of London justly pre ferred to the foreign term "prestige"—of this great empire. (Cheers.) That is a sacred and a holy trust, and hon. gen tlemen should conscientiously consider in what manner they propose Ito discharge it. They may think they are only expressing their disapprobation of the destruction of certain fortresses or of particular public buildings in Can ton,—they may think they are only recording an opinion that less severe measures would have been sufficient to meet the case,—that the additional demand made was one that might have been foregone,—or that if they had been in the situation of Sir John Bowring they would have acted somewhat differently. These are highly honourable considerations, and it is quite proper that they should have their due weight, but there are greater inte rests at stake in the vote to be given to-night. (Cheers.) This house has now to determine a question of vast ine portsneo to British interests that non- n=ist, and that may hereafter accrue. Not merely the property, but I will venture to say the lives of many of your countrymen de pend upon your vote. Those who are most averse to the laws which inflict upon the greatest malefactors the penalty of death may well pause before they come to a decision by which they may, it is to be feared, pass sentence of death upon many of their fellow-subjects abroad. (Hear.) I have trespassed longer than I had ietended to do upon the attention of the house, but I do trust that hon. gentle men will not allow themselves to be carried away by the eloquent flourishes which we have heard in the course of the debate. I trust they will view this subject in its true light, as bearing upon the real interests of the country ; and I am satisfied that impartial men, who are not wedded to party, who are not members of any coalition that has been formed—(cheers)—and there are, and I hope always will be, in this house many men who act most indepen dently and who exercise their own judgment upon the questions brought before them—will give their votes in such a manner as to maintain the honour, the dignity, and the. interests of the country. (Loud and continued cheering ) Mr. GLADSTONE—I rise just to say one word in expla nation. I understand that during my temporary absence from the house the noble lord at the head of the Govern ment stated that I had defended the acts of retaliation which bad taken place in China. Now, in answer to that statement, I need only refer to some of the expres sions which I used. 1 remember two of them. I de scribed those acts of retaliation as detestable acts, and I spoke of them as an abominable system of warfare. (Hear, hear.) Lord PALMERSTON—What I said was that the right hon. gentleman had done his best to characterise what had taken place as a wanton attack by the strong upon the weak. (Hear, hear.) Mr. DISRAELI—I wish, Sir, very briefly to recall the attention of the house to the real issue which we are about to decide. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord has entered into the subject with a great deal of detail—(cries of Divide, and cheers from the Opposition)—which I should have hoped after the discussion which has taken plane had become obsolete. (Divide, and hear.) The noble lord has cast imputations upon the right hon. gentleman the member for the University of Oxford, and has in truded into the debate observations which, must have originated from a speech made many years ago. The noble lord has also found fault with the resolution upon which we are now about to decide, and has charac terised it as being indefinite, and he has attributed to me the expression of an opinion that it is a vote of censure on the Government. Now, I beg toinform the noble lord that to me the resolution appears both definite and moderate, and the implication that it is a vote of censure on the Go vernment did not originate with me, but with the learned Lord-Advocate. In feet, on the motion for the adjourn ment of the debate I stated that as the Government con sidered the motion to be a vote of censure I should not be willing to press it prematurely to a division. I am, how ever, unwilling to quarrel with the name • the noble lord has accepted, and I also accept this as a vote of censure on the Government. I think it more for the honour of the House of Commons - that it should be so considered than that it should be regarded as a mere censure upon absent officials. (Hear.) I can assure the house that lam not going to enter into any of the legal arguments which have been adduced, and I must admit my surprise that the de bate has been so lengthened by the introduction of the legal element into the argument, because it appears to me that the observations dispose of the whole of that part of the subject. (Hear.) In'the first place, if the Arrow had been a British ship, built at Blackwell, owned by an Englishman, and manned by British seamen, I do not think that the Government would have been authorised to take the course which they have adopted (hear) and in the second place the representatives of England in China were unable to take their stand upon the case which they originally stated, and were driven to placing the whole matter on a very different issue, and therefore I think that the legal part of the question as regards the error is not very material. The question has all along been one not of law, but of policy, and it is to the question of policy that I shall briefly address myself, for that is the question upon which we are called upon to decide, and I hope that the house will not be diverted from the real issue which is in volved by the tone which the noble lord lord so singularly adopted t6wards the close of his speech. (Hoar.) The noble lord made use of a regular to quoque argument. Some gentlemen have found failt with what they have described as a disregard for truth on the part of Sir John Bowring'; to that the noble lord replies that Yeh is a liar. (" Hear, hear," and a laugh.) Some gentlemen have spoken with mere freedom than perhaps I should have allowed myself to use of the conduct of British merchants abroad ; to that the noble lord replies that we who are going to vote for this resolution are influenced by a lust for gold. (" No, no," and hear.) Let us come to this question of policy. It appears to me that Sir J. Bowring has been unjustly treated by the ma jority, indeed I may say by all the speakers who have ad dressed the house, because his conduct has been ratified, sanctioned, and approved by the Government, and is, in my opinion, not to be too strictly reviewed by the House of Commons. But the case is much stronger than that ; I have only known Dr. Bowring as a public man, having sat with him in this house, as many of us have done; but I remember that three or four years ago he returned from his consulate, having revisited England in order to receive his instructions before he appeared in his new and superior station at Hong Kong. Sir J. Bowring then called on several of the leading members of both Houses of Parlia ment, an], among others, he did me the honour to call on me, th o ugh I had no social acquaintance with him. He tale i very frankly of his ideas with respect to the position of China and the policy to be pursued there, and lam bolind to say that the policy then recommended by Sir J. Bowring was the policy which he has recently put in prac tice, and which is before us in the papers on the take. I have a right to assume that he spoke as frankly to her Ma jesty's Ministers as he did to those members of Pat liament on whom he called, and I have further a right to assume that they entirely shared his views and approved his policy after he entered upon tho Government of Hong Kong. (Hear, hear.) Now, if this be the case, I think that under all the circumstances the conduct of Sir J. Bowring is not open to severe criticism, but that it is the policy of the Government we are called on to discuss. (Hear, hear.) It would in such circumstances be most un generous on our part and most unjust to make this an hone on the personal character and conduct of an absent man. (Hear, hear.) Let us, however, look at this policy. It is an attempt by force to increase our commercial relations with the East. (Hoar, hear.) I agree with my hon. friend the member for Liverpool and myhon. friend the member for Hastings that it, is most desirable to have our com mercial relations with China increased ; and I should look forward with great interest to the new treaty for th;e object to which the noble lord has referred; but I cannot reconcile such a policy with the course that has recently been pursued by the Government. (Hear, hear.) There is one idea too prevalent with regard to China,—viz., that all England has to do is to ant with energy he in ar or F er ift t y o produce the same results as in India. (Hear, years ago Lord Hastings offered to conquer China if he were only allowed 50,000 men. So great a captain as the Marquis of Hastings might have conquered that empire, but since the time when our Clives and Hastings founded our great Indian empire the position of affairs in the East has greatly changed. Great Powers have been brought into contact with us in the East. We have the Russian Empire and the American Republic there, and a political compromise developing itself like the balance of power in Europa ; a nd, if you are not cautious and careful in your conduct n ow in dtaling with China, yo u will find that you are likely not to establish coelmerce, but to excite the jealousy of powerful States, and to in volve yourselves in hostilities with nations not inferior to yourselves. (Hear, hear.) Look at the positio n i n w hi c h you have placed y ourselves within these two months with the two countries of Persia and China. (Hear, hear.) I hope we may have peace with Persia, and th a t i n a f ew days that peace will be announced, having probably ac cepted the very terms we some months ago refused. (Hear, hear.) But if you have peace with Persia you will pro bably have succeeded in establishing Russian ascendancy in that country by your violent conduct—(Hear, hear) — while in, China where also you may soon have peace, you will have established the ascendancy of the United States. (hear, hear) If that is the true state of affairs, this coun t r y must dismiss from its mind th e id ea of dealing as it has done with barbarous States with which Powers civilised like ourselves have great sympathies, and we must habituate ourselves to the idea of ex tending to countries like China the same diplomatic in] tercourse that we have with other nations. (Hear, hear.) f ou cannot do that in a moment ; but I maintain that we have made great advances in our relations with China already, and that the policy which the Government has adopted is one which will deprive my hon. friends the members for Liverpool and Hastings of those very results which they desire to obtain. (Hear, hear.) You are deal- must have seat out reinforcements sufficient to protect ing with a country of immense antiquity. You have been th em . Those reinforcements will be able t o p rotect the reminded in this debate that China enjoys a civilisation of British residents in the north as well a s in the south of 25 centuries. Why, sir, the civilisation of Europ e is no- China. It seems to m e that all the mischief that could be thing to that. But the result a those ancient habits and done Lae been already done, for have they not burned d owns customs is the existence of great ceremony and e ti q uette, the factories and all the mercantile residences at Canton? and you expect that a country of that kind should not be 8,000 or 10,009 houses have been de.troyed—that is to say, outraged by the frank and sometimes the brutal freedom the residences of about 30,000 or 40,000 inhabitants. All of European manners. With the policy which has been this mischief is done, and a vote of this house cannot make indicated by the noble lord—the policy of combination the matter worse. The noble lord predicts that terrible with other powerful European States in attempting to in- dangers would result from a change of ministry ; but we fluence the conduct of the Chinese by negotiations and all remember that in the midst of the last Chinese war, in treaties—it is my firm• hope and belief that ultimate l y , 1840, Sit Robert Peel was carried into power,—and yet sv° slowly and surely, we may attain our end ; but it is beca use do not find that British interests in China suffered by that the actual policy of the Government—the policy approved c h a nge of ministry, for the war was, in fact, carried on and vindicated by the noble lord—seems to me inconsistent more fiercely than before. The noble lord has found fault with the policy of combination with other European States with the terms of my motion, which he says were dictated that I think the time has arrived for the House of Corn- by a co mbination of parties ; but I beg to state distinctly moos to express an opinion upon events so startling and that no one in this house, with the exception of my right upon behaviour so inconsiderate. How has the house been honourable friend the member for Manchester (Mr. M. called upon to express its opinion? We have been told to- Gibson), was consulted by me with regard to the terms of night of factious combinations and concerted movements. my motion. Neither directly nor indirectly, was any in- Let us see whether the fats justify such broad accusations tiination given of my motion to any hon. gentleman oppo on the part of the noble lord. Why, sir, one thing is quite s it e , or i n an y o ther part of the house, with the exception clear. Here is a motion of which notice was given by a of my right hon, friend. I challenge contradiction of tha; gentleman who acts certainly in ne political connection assertion from any and every quarter. (Cheers.) How, then, with hon. members on this side of the house, and with not can the noble lord charge me with entering into a conspiracy many on the other side. (A. laugh.) It is evident that the to drive him from office ? He has talked about party com motion could not have teen seen before it was placed in binations, but why has he not had the boldness to tell the your hands, sir, by any great number of members, because house that I cannot hope to gain anything by a change of —the objection was, I admit, almost a technical one— ministry? I shall not take office in consequence of any it was drawn up in such a manner, with what we call change of ministry, nor do I hope or expect that the divi the annexe of a proposed committee, that many honour- sion on my motion will lead to that change of ministry able gentlemen on this side of the house at once declared of which the noble lord has so much dread. But even that they could not support it i n th a t form. (Hear, if that should be the result of my motion I do hear.) We have been told, sir, of party moves. I not think that, a change of Ministry would be any great really think the time has come when both sides of the calamity. (Laughter.) Daring the 17 or 18 years that I, house should cease indulgiag in these platitudes. (Cheers have had a seat in this house I know that, whenever a and laughter.) Why, sir, everything is a party c hange of Ministry is expected those who are interested in move in a house which ought to be ruled by party, and, s upporting the existing Ministry are all on the qui vive— which, if not ruled by party, wou ld soon l ose it s significance. they tell us that Heaven and earth will come together if What is a party but a body of men who have a policy the dreaded change should happen. And I never knew a which they recommend, and who do not shrink from the change of Government where the people did not gain some responsibility of putting that policy into practice ? But I thing by it. ( aanglater and cheers.) And I will tell the maintain that there has been no party move on the pre - house what will be th e result of a chan g e of Ministers. I sent occasion. A resolution has been brought forward by take it for granted that either the, right hon gentleman the hon. member for the West Riding. On this side of opposite (Mr. Disraeli) or my right hon. friend near me the house it has received considerable, but not unanimous (Hr. Gladstone) will be the Chancellor of the Exchequer. support. I have the misfortune to differ on this occasion What will be the effect? They will take that budget and from many gentlemen with whom I act in political life, reconsider it, and we shall have a reduction of 2,000,0e 01 . and among whom are some of my most intimate friends in i n th e e ee eediture. Now, the noble lord (Palmerston) private life. If I look to the benches opposite I find sometimes dealt some hard blows at me, but there is so there the noble lord the member for the city. (Cheers.) m uch polish in his thrusts Vest it is impossible for me to He is also a party to this unprincipled combination. I be angry with him. (Cheers.) No person in this house really think that the First Minister should settle his corer- has fewer enemies, and lam not among them. (Hear.) teous description with his late much-cherished and hon- Yet I will tell the noble lord candidly that I should make oured colleague, and not with me. (A. laugh.) There are a most excellent bargain .for the country if I disposed of a'so gentlemen opposite who once did act in very intimate him for that 2,000,000/. of reduction. Much laughter, in connection with the Conservative party, and the spine- which Lord Palmerston heartily joined.) I have only one hension that that intimacy shoule he renewed has conjured remark to m.ito, led it " "'lit ' 11 . 1,,, n. and learned up before the First Minister a combination at once the me mber for Hertford. I must confess his speech a little most horrible and *the most heterogeneous. (Cheers and surprised me. (Hear, hear.) He took me to task for the laughter.) The First Minister is of all men the man who character 1 had given of British merchants engaged in the cannot bear a coalition. (Laughter.) Why, sir, he is the China trade, and he argued in favour of calling those Bri archetype of political combinations without avowed prin- ti s h merc hants to give evidence in favour of the Govern ciples. (Great cheering and laughter.) See how his Go- ment. Now, if any one happens to recollect, there was a vernment is formed. It was only last year that every little while ago a me etin g at the Freemas one' Tavern, at member of his Cabinet in this house supported a bill in- which Lord Shaftesbury ought to have presided, but being troduced, I think, by a late colleague. It was opposed in obliged to rig up a jury-mast—(a laugh)—and improvise a the other house by a member of the Government, who, to president, they called upon the hon. and learned member excuse his apparent inconsistency, boldly declared that for Hertford to take the chair. What weer that meeting when he took office the First Minister required no pledge for? Why, every speaker denounced the British mer from him on any subject whatever. (Laughter.) Yet chants in China for carrying on the opium trade. (Hear, the noble lord is alarmed and shocked at this unprin- he a r.) It was from those speeches, which I carefully cipled combination ! The noble lord cannot bear coali- read, and from which, as is my wont, len t out certain tions ! The noble lord has acted only with those among passages, that I got so much information with reeard whom he was born and bred in politics. ACheers and to these 'Chinese merchants. (Cheers and laughter.) rob laughter.) That infant Hercules (exclaimed the right never be angry with the hon. member for Liverpool, who hon. gentleman, pointing to Lord Palmerston) was taken has certainly a feminine way of scolding, but if I had in out of the Whig cradle, and how consistent has been troduced a tithe of the facts which have been forced upol . l his political life ! (Renewed laughter.) Looking back my notice as to the doings of this exceptional body of Bin upon the last half century, during which he has professed tish merchants, the hon. member, instead of scolding me, almost every principle, and connected himself with almost would have been obliged to find arguments to defend his every party, the noble lord has raised a warning voice to- friends. The hon. member for Hertford (Mr. T. Chambers) night against coalitions, because he fears that a majority took us to task for not acting in a judicial way. He was of the House of Commons, ranking in its numbers some of the president of a meeting where the speakers excommunis the most eminent members of the house—men who have sated and outlawed the British merchants, yet he called been colleagues of the noble lord—may not approve a policy upon these outlawed representatives , of th e Briti sh mer• with respect to China which has be g un in outrage, and chants as evidence to the character of the Government. which, if pursued, will end in rain. (Loud cheers.) That, (Laughter.) lam obliged to the house for having heard me. sir, is the position of the noble lord. And what defence of In all sincerity I wish this motion to be taken without re-, that policy have we had from the noble lord ? Has he ference to its consequences, and with the sole desire to do laid down a single principle on which our relations with justice to the merits of the case. I think it hard that any China ought to depend ? Has he enunciated a solitary po - hon. gentleman should be debarred from giving an honest lineal maxim which should guide us in this moment of vote on a question of this importance. I will admit that peril and perplexity ? On the contrary, he has covered a Parliament government must be carried on by parties. If weak and shambling case by saying—what ?—that he is parties were more advanced, and came up to my standard, the victim of a conspiracy. (Cheers and laughter.) It's I might join them; but as it is lam isolated, and am con the old story. How often does a prisoner at the bar, tent to be a pioneer. Bat there are great occasions upon when he is in the unfortunate position of having no de- which all parties ought to give an honest and conscientious fence, declare that the whole thing is a conspiracy ? vote. We all of ushave moments when we look back upon. (Cheers.) The noble lord was singularly inconsistent in the such a vote as this with more satisfaction than any vote. language which he addressed to the house. He carefully given in the mere scramble of parties. I tell my hon. enumerated the various influential sections which are com- friends near me (on the Ministerial benches), many of bined against him. He alluded to the different distin- whom, I fear, are giving their votes with heavy hearts, guished statesmen who, disagreeing on other subjects, that I wish they would look at this question free from agreed in their opinion of his policy. He did not enter party bias, and give that vote which will be most for their into any manly or statesmanlike-defence of his conduct. own peace and happiness of mind. (Cheers.) He reproduced petty observations made in the course of Mr. KINNAIRD was unable to obtain a hearing for the debate which I thought really had become exhaust ed some m o m ents in conse q uence of loud cries of " Divide." and obsolete, and therrhe turned round and said that the Silence was restored, upon his promise not to detain the whole was a conspiracy ! (Cheers) Accustomed to majo- house, and he then said he was present at the meeting rities which have been obtained without the assertion of a referred to by the hon. member for the West Riding, and single principle, which have, indeed, been the consequence he did not shrink fro m ownin g it. The right hon. mem of an occasional position, and which have, iu fact,originated her for Wiltshire asked him how he could reconcile the in the noble lord's sitting on that bench without the neces- vote he was about to give in favour of the Government sity of expressing an opinion upon any subject, foreign or with his objections to the opium traffic, and the right hon. domestic, that can interest the heart of the country or influ- baronet. the member for Carlisle went so far as to say he once the opinion of the nation, the noble lord will at last washed his hands of the blood- g uiltiness in the slaughter find that the time has come when, if he be a statesman, he at Canton. For the hundreds of lives lost by recent pro must have a policy—(cheers)—and that it will not do, the ceedings at Canton hundreds of thousands of lives were instant that the blundering of his Cabinet is detected, and lost in consequence of the opium trade. every man accustomed to influence the opinion of the house The house then divided, and the numbers were— unites in condemning it, to complain to the country that For the motion he is the victim of a conspiracy. (Cheers.) Let the nob l e Ag ainst it lord not only complain to the country, hut let him appeal Majority against the Government l6 to the country. (Cheers.) I hope that my constituents As soon as the clerk at the table handed to Mr. Cobden will return me again ;if they do not, I shall be most happy the paper containing the statement of the numbers, and it to meet him on the hustings at Tiverton. (Renewed was seen that the Government was defeated, there was a cheers.) I should like to see the programme of the proud loud cheer, which was suspended while the number& were leader of the Liberal party—" No reform, new taxes, Can - announced; but after their announcement it was repeated, ton blazing, Persia invaded." That would be the pro- and continued for some minutes. gramme of the statesman who appeals to a great nation as THE WINE DUTIES. the worthy leader of the cause of progress and civilisation. Mr. OLIVEIRA. had upon the paper a notice of motion (Cheers.) I hope that the house will not for a moment be for the appointment of a select committee upon the wine influenced by the languid menace of the noble lord. I duties; but, at the suggestion of the Chancellor of the hope that hon. members will feel to-night that they have Exchequer, he consented to postpone it for a fortnight. a duty to perform which will be remembered long after The house adjourned at 25 minutes after 2 o'clock.' this Parliament shall kave ceased to exist ; and that, not frightened by the menace Ofea Minister, they will dare to vindicate the cause of justice, and to lay down a principle , without the observance of -which the empire of which we are so proud may soon be questioned. (Loud and pro tracted cheering.) Mr. COBDEN—As I have been personally referred to during the four nights of the debate by many speakers, and as much has been erroneously attributed to me, I trust that I may claim the ihdulgence of the house for a few minutes while I reply to them. I have been accused of ungenerous language towards Sir John Bowring. Now, I stated that I had 20 years' acquaintance with Sir J. Bowring, and that I would rather not refer revengefully or harshly to him, and the only epithet which I applied to his unfortunate de spatches was that in which I described one of them as thd most flagitious public document which had been ever pub lished. I repeat those words, and lem sorry that a sense of duty compels me to do so. (Cheers.) The noble lord at the head of the Government remarked upon my conduct to foreigners and to my own countrymen, and character ised it as un-English. (Cries of " Hear, hear," from be hind the Treasury benches:) Will that very small knot of gentlemen up in that quarter (pointing to the rear of the Treasury benches) cease to proclaim the nakedness of the land by interrupting me ? because, though I know there will be a very large vote for the Government upon the oc casion, those feeble cheers show that there is not very much heart in the business. (Cheers.) If the house will give use its attention I promise to be very brief. (Hear.) The noble lord characterised my conduct ea- anti-English. He described me as being very prone to take the part of fo reigners, and in the same breath \ the noble lord said that Posterity would regard me with some degree of considera tion for having rendered some service to my country. I thought there was some inconsistency in that statement, and I do not, understand how posterity could regard with favour one who abandoned his own countrymen and sided with foreigners. (Hear, hear.) There are some people who suppose that the noble lord's motives of action are not always the best, and part of the press believe him to be ac tuated by almost treason in his public conduct. (A. laugh.) The noble lord therefore should be himself disinclined to fix on men false motives and unworthy objects. My only motive of conduct in this house is to promote the just in terests of my country, believing them to be - in harmony with tho interests of the whole world. (Cheers.) The noble lord has referred again to my remarks with respect to British merchants, and with that dexterity he knows so well flow to employ has attributed to me all sorts of as persions on the character of British merchants. Now, I made no disparaging reference to British merchants as a body. (Cries of "Oh !") I spoke of certain merchants at Liverpool, represented by Mr. Charles Turner, chairman, who, in the name of the East India and China Associa tion, sent a memorial to Government, recommending the Government to insist on the opening to foreign trade of any port on the coast of China, or on any navigable river, and on placing consuls at them, and, moreover, desired that our ships of war should have free neviga tion, and access to all ports and rivers in China. (Hear, hear.) I say that such a document applied to an inde pendent and great empire was never before published to the world. (Cheers.) With respect to the language I used, it was applied, not to the merchants of Liverpool generally, but to the persons who expressed such sentimeets; and I say such language is worthy of reprobation. (Hear hear.) The noble lord has stated that but for these unfor tunate events at Canton the Government had made repre sentations to the Government France, and was about to make them to America with a prospect of success, for a joint representation to Pekin, in favour of greater commer cial facilities with China. That is an important disclo sure, and tends immensely to aggravate the misconduct which has led to these unfortunate events. (Hear, hear.) Is there now a prospect of such an arrangement being made? I speak advisedly when I say I believe that Ame rica will not be a party to any combined action with the Government of this country on the basis now taken up in China. What does the noble iced want with another treaty with China? He tells us he believes the reason why so few of our manufactures enter China is that there la a in terned duties and obstacles which prevent their circulation inland. Well, this may be true ; but I think that he is mistaken. I think that a country which shows such an almost unparalleled freedom It her ports, that puts no re striction on shipping, that giiss such facilities for the car rying on of business, is not very likely to put obstacles in the way for the purpose of preventing the circulation of manufactured goods in her interior. But if that s il l the . reason why we send no more goods to China now th_ fore the war of 1840—viz. to the extent of only 1,2 °exit, pmeernatnonf Canton uue,tloes willthe nteosladfetlso'rriemtsbvienkthstsheatoht r the interior of China of which he co m p lains ? The g a s h t e r übcotirohn e a s r i d. nt grievance in this affair is that you are carrying on ties now without any definite obj ect, and no possible h good view of alarming us, that if a vote a can arise from them. The noble lorddvherassetotlod t u h s e , w G i o th ve t r h u s . icularly in China dis astrous all over the world, and part of revenge _ ment should be given to night the results will be most where British lives may the Chinese. But we have no residents at Canton, and he destroyed out by by the latest information which I have received on this and the anger is a es in taken refuge at Hong K on g , gro wn they will be starved subject all the English residents in thedsouth of' C th hin t a haye f t o h r a e w p a l n a t c fscparrocili provisions. athere s th rp g r l e a sunse, however th t i t h e i r joins niassaored,by the Chinese, se you no danger of Country Markets. LIVERPOOL—MARm 3'. At this morning's market we had a moderate attendance of dealers, but their operations were rather unimportant. Wheat sold at Friday's full rates, and in some instances Id and 2d per bushel decline on the week was submitted to. Flour has still a dragging sale, and can be bought on easier tams. Indian corn was in less demand to-day, and prices were barely supported. No other change occurred in the week's quotations. LEEDS, Mews 3. Our supplies of wheat are moderate, and the condition ig not much improved; the trade rules slow, and we cannot quota any alteration in prices from Friday. Barley is held for extreme rates, which rather checks business. Beans are fully a 9 dear. Oats and other articles as before. Average prices of grain—Wheat, 55a 7d; bailey, 47s 2d ; oats, 27s 2d ; beans, 40s 4d ; peas, —3 rye, 40:. 10d. HULL, MARCH 3. There was a moiler tte supply of wheat from the farmers to. day, which met a ready sale at Is over last Tuesday's rates. Foreign without alteration. Barley fully as dear. A little more demand for beans and fresh oats. Linseed unaltered. Cakes firmer. 8 8 Wheat, English, red 56 to 60 Ditto white 6O to 63 Dantzia and Konigs- B. B. , I Peas, grey and black Linseed, Black Sea... 68 to 70 ID itto Petersburgh ... 56 to 67 Ditto Rigaand Arch -1 ange l D itto Konigsberg and Memel . 5O to 58 berg - 65 to 70', Pomeranianandliam- burgh Danish, Holstein, and Friesland 54 to 53 Russian and Odessa 53 to 63, Oats, English Ditto Danish Ditto Friesland Ditto Russian 27 to 30 \ I Barley, malting Ditto grinding 32 to 381 Beaus Ditto foreign Peas, white and yel 4O to 42 Per Ton 11u110103 to 1041550 d !Ditto fine foi 81 lOs Od 10l Os 'Ditto inf. for 0/ Os Od to 0105 Rapeseed ool os t o 00 1 O s I Rape cakes —s Od to 1378 Si Tares, En.slialt Ol. to —a (Ditto ."oreign Guano OOl Os Si to 13! 105 Bones ;Flour, per 355.385. COURSE OF EXCHANGE.-YEBTXRDAY. Am5terdam............ 11 16 Gibraltar .... •• ••• • • • Ditto, three months .. 11 18% Leghorn ••.... •• • • 29 45 RotterdaM ............ 11 18% Genoa ................25 7234 Antwerp 95 5256 Milan ...... • • Brussels 25 50 Venice................ iiamburgh. ............ 13 8% Naples .. • 43% Altona •• •••••••••• •• • • ;Palermo .• •• ..... ••• •• 130 Paris .... .... 25 275, Messina .. 1304 Ditto, three months .. 25 674 Lisbon .. 51% Marseilles 25 70 Oporto • • 52 Liourdeaux .. • • ........ Rio Janeiro...... Frankfort-on-Maine 119% Buenos Ayres.... • • Berlin New York,6o days' Philadelphia sight TEICES or 'mums, 1 . 211 oz. Foreign Gold in Bars £3 17 9 Portugal Gold Coin .. 0 0 0 Mexican Dollars .... 0 0 0 N e w Dollars ••• • •• 0 0 0 Silver in bars • • •• 0 5 1% Vienna•••••••••••••••• 10 27 rricste. ••••••••••••.. 10 28 Petersburg ............ 37% Madrid •••••.. •• 4, •... 49% Barcelona •••••••••••• ... .......... B I Ry H_S. OF 1 six - . On the 3d inst., in Manchester -square, the wife of Robert Pashley, Esq., Q.C. Ou the 2d list., at Tnlse-hill, the wife of Mr. John li ar & castle. ADArGwrER• On the 2d inst., at 17, I n verness-terrace, Hyde-p ar k , the at 2,_ , C_ . ornwall-terrace, L ee , s ent, the lady o wife of H. J. Noye s, Es q . On the 21 just., of Mr. W. C. B. "KIY HMARRIED, On the 2Sth nit., at New.. College Chapel, St . J o h n ' s-wood Isaac Antoine Chomel, ofGeneva, to Mary Fowler, of Spring. field Villas, Kilburn. On the 17th of January Last, at Allahabad, India, John Grattan A n derson, Esq., late o f H .M. ' s 37th Regt., second surviving son of Lieut.-Colonel H. Anderson, of Fort Am herst, Chatham, to Alice Morgan, only daughter of William Abbott, Esq., jun., of Doctors'-commons. DIED. On the 3d inst., at 30, Cavendish•square, Lieut.-General Felix Calvert, C. 8., Colonel of the 90th Regt., aged 67. On theigd inst., at 15, Addington -place, Camberwell, Peter Andrew Spence, Esq , of Crosby-hall-chambers, Bishopsgate• street, aged 67. On the 2d inst., at 484, Oxford-street, Bloomsbury, Maria, wife of Mr. Thomas Bourne, resident secretary New National Assurance and Loan Company. On the 2d inst , at Hyde, Isle of Wight, Anna Maria, the wife of the Rev. Frank Hudson. On the Ist inst. at Valworth Castle, co. Durham, Anne, relict of Lie u t.-General Aylmer, aged 80. On the Ist inst. at Hayes, Kent, Lydia, wife of the Rev. William Drummond, aged 52. On the 28th ult., at Longsight Abbey, Plymouth-groves Manchester, James Fernley, Esq., aged 62. LONDON • Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the county of Middlesex, Wednesday, March 4, 18157.