The Press.
London, England, 1858-02-20 00:00:00

THE PRE S S, FEBRUARY 20, 1858.

yet it cannot but regret that her Majesty's Govern-
ment, previously to inviting the house to amend the
law of conspiracy at the present time, has not felt it
to be their duty to make some reply to the important
despatch received from the French Government,
dated Paris, January 20th, 1S 8, and which has been
laid before Parliament." the question, he said,
deeply concerned the honour of the country, and it
was especially necessary that the motives on which
the Government acted in bringing in their bill should
be duly placed on record. This was the object he
wished to secure by his present amendment. De-
claring that he objected to the bill also on its merits,
and should at another stage oppose a direct negative
to its enactment, the right hon. member recom-
mended the Prime Minister to study the example
set by the King of Naples when foreign powers
attempted to interfere in matters relating to domes-
tic administration.

Mr. BAINES explained the legal effect of the bill,
arguing that it was simply intended to supply a
defect, and remove an inconsistency in the law whose
existence no one disputed. Ile hoped that the
house would not, by accepting the amendment, post-
pone indefinitely a useful piece of legislation.

Mr. WALPOLE considered the measure founded on
right principles, and was ready to vote for it, but
insisted that the reason for passing it should not be
misconstrued. The world ought to be convinced
that the British Legislature had not stooped to a
concession to any crowned head, but reformed its
law for the benefit of every individual however
humble his condition. Citing some passages from
Count Walewski's despatch, he expressed his regret
th:it no answer had been sent to that missive. On
his own behalf and that of the party with whom he
acted, the right hon. member professed their willing-
ness to support the bill, but declined to proceed with
it further until the honour of England had been per-
fectly vindicated.

Sir G. GREY, after reverting to the legal character
of the bill, temarked that, apart from formal com-
munications, there could not exist in any quarter the
slightest misapptehension as to the real ireralses
which had actuated the English Government in
bringing it forward, and might induce Parliament to
pass it into a law. He gave reasons why the
Walewski despatch bad been left unanswered.
Defending the Government, he maintained that they
had done nothing inconsistent with the constitutional
law, and made no surrender of English privileges or
the dignity of the country. So long as the English
law of conspiracy remained imperfect no completely
satisfactory reply could indeed be returned. When
the House of Commons, by agreeing to the second
reading of the bill, had accepted its principle and
purged the law of its present reproach, the Govern-
ment could then reply with clear conscience to the
French despatch, and this course he intimated it
was their intention to adopt.
Mr. lii`MAHON opposed the bill, which would, he
maintained, establish a system of espionage and
persecution against foreign refugees. When the
legal offences were changed from misdemeanours to
felony, every one accused of inciting to conspiracy
would be left at the mercy of the police, who could
arrest them without a warrant, or turn them from
place to place as rogues and vagabonds.
Mr. BTNG also disapproved of the measure, be-
lieving that our concession to foreign menaces would
infallibly lead to further demands.

Mr. SrooNEn could not concur in the view taken
by Mr. Walpole, seeing no reason why they should
postpone passing a bill whose principle was con-
sidered unobjectionable.
Lord H. VANE would have voted for Mr. Gibson's
motion if presented as a substantive resolution, but
could not accept it as au amendment on the bill, of
which he approved.
Mr. BENTINCE wished to deal with the bill on its
merits alone, and without regard to extraneous con-
siderations. It would degrade the British Legisla-
ture to reject a good bill on account of anything
which foreigners happened to say, or might be
supposed to think, upon the subject.
Sir H. PEEL noticed as a curious fact that a
Liberal Minister had brought in a bill which all the
distinguished Liberals in the house had opposed.
The present law was perfectly adequate, and it was
contrary to the spirit of all our recent legislation to
aggravate the severity of punishments with the view
of suppressing crime. He proceeded to condemn
the measure as a symbol of degradation to England,
having been forced upon Parliament by the Go-
vernment, and under foreign dictation.
Mr. HENLEY supported the amendment, not as
objecting to the proposed change in the law, but be-
cause he concurred in the opinion that the Walewski
despatch should not be left without reply.
The Loan ADVOCATE viewed the bill merely as a
slight but useful reform of the criminal law. The
amendment that had been brought forward was not
in the slightest degree connected with the measure
itself, and might be brought forward in an inde-
pendent shape. He denied the existence of foreign
dictation, and disclainied, on the part of the Govern-

ment, all intention of restricting the sacred right of
asylum.
Mr. GnaesTorin claimed the right of discussing
changes in the English law solely upon English
considerations. It was hard upon Parliament to
be asked to debate a bill brought in under menace
from a foreign power. The juridical and political
bearings of the question had been to 3 constantly
confused. At the very commencement, the bill,
though strictly a legal measure, was introduced by
the political Minister and advocated on political
gro-ands. Addressing himself to the question raised
by the amendment, he observed that the house was
practically called upon to decide whether the French
Minister's despatch required an answer. He gathered,
indeed, from the Ministerial explanations that an
answer had already been given, but merely a verbal
one, and of such vague informal communications the
Legislature was especially bound to demand an
account. Analysing the successive propositions con.
prised in the despatch, Mr. Gladstone commented
upon various points which in his opinion required
refutation. He blamed the conduct of the Govern-
ment who left the missive without reply, but brought
a bill before the house which was, it appeared, to
furnish their real reply • o the French Emperor.
While proposing a retrogressive change in the law,
the Administration had not yet attempted to ex-
pound the actual state of the law for the information
either of the English or the French public. The
bill, if passed, would not accomplish the object fur
which it was demanded. In increasing penalties, it
made no provision for detecting crime. The
Emperor Napoleon might accept it for a time as a
personal compliment, but when its illusory character
was discovered, fresh demands would be urged, and
keener irritation might arise than had hitherto been
excited between the allied nations.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL took upon himself the
responsibility of having suggested the bill, which, he
assured the house, had been proposed before he ever
heard of the Walewski despatch. Having repudiated
all foreign parentage for the measure, Sir R. Bethell
entered upon a legal disquisition, showing the
present condition of the law, and explaining the
particular imperfections which the bill was designed
to rectify.
Mr. DISRAELI observed that the condition in which
the question was presented had undergone a com-
plete change since tie debate and vote on the intro-
duction of the bill. The house then decided I') a
large majority to pass a resolution which in effect.
expressed their sympathy with the French nation
upon the atrocious attempt lately made against the
life of their Emperor. Ten days had since passed,
and the issue now rested only between the House of
Commons and her Majesty's Ministers. No light had
yet been thrown on the mystery surrounding the
reception of the Walewski despatch. Where was the
answer to that despatch ? Some indefinite words were
said to have been interchanged in the saloon of the
French Ambassador, and their scarcely articulate
expression was the only reply to a document which
had been circulated throughout Europe, and was
actually laid ou the table of Parliament as a basis
for legislation. The apology for the minatory ad-
dresses published in the Noniteur was not given until
the Bth of February, while the bill before the house
was announced four days previously, on the first
night of the session. The Government had acted in
haste and perplexity, utterly regardless of the honour
and dignity of the country, until reminded of their
duty by the outbursts of public opinion in the house
and the country. In the previous debate lie had
expressed regret that the despatch had not been
answered on the moment, and this sentiment
had outained universal concurrence during
the period that had since elapsed. Lord
Palmerston had confessed that the despatch
was unanswerable, except in the substantial form of
a new law. He still believe 1 that a firm and digni-
fied reply might have been written, which would
have appealed to the noble sentiments of the French
people, and rendered unnecessary the present appeal
to Parliament to alter the criminal law. The ques-
tion now awaiting decision really involved the deci-
sion whether the Government had or had not done
their duty. If the amendment was carried, the bill
would not be rejected, but still remain on their table
for future and deliberate discussion. In supporting
the amendment they performed a public duty, and
in carrying it they would, as he believed, accomplibh
a public benefit.
Lord PALMERSTON, in reply, contended that the
Ministerial bill bad been opposed, not by argument,
but by vague declamation. He proceeded to notice
the speeches of various objectors to the measure, and
emphatically denied that the often-mentioned de-
spatch of the French Minister either insulted, or
was intended to insult, the English people.
The house then divided, when there appeared,
For the amendment 234
Against it

Majority against Government )9

jatign AO (colonial ]nttiligente.

FRANCE.

The appointments to the new military commands
bee been officially announced in the Moniteur this
week. Marshal Magnan remains at Paris, and
Marshal Castellan at Lyons. Marshal Canrobert
is appointed to the Nancy command, Marshal Boa.
net that of Toulouse, and Marshal D'Hilliers that of
'fours. Marshal Pelissier holds the command-in..
chief.
The trial of the conspirators is said to be fixed for
the 25th.
The Due de Montebello has accepted the embassy
to St. Petersburg.
M. de Persigny has arrived in Paris from London.
It is not believed that the report of the European
Danubian Commissioners will be ready for some weeks.
"The reports," says a Vienna letter in the Cologne
Gazette, "are looked for with considerable anxiety.
It is affirmed that the French commissioner has
proposed a constitutional form of Government, and
that Russia, Prussia, and Sardinia approve of his
views. On the country, Austria and the Porte are
of opinion that the constitutional form should not be
insisted on. England is said to admit the French
views, bat with some modifications. Opinions differ
gewise on the point of hereditary right for the
Prince at the head of the Government. Persons
who are well informed think that in the end a hospo.
dar for life will be decided on."
SWITZERLAND, BELGIUM, AND SARDINIA.
The Federal Council has decreed that the refugees
in the Cantons de Vaud, du Valais, de Neufchatel,
du Tessin, de Soleure, and de Bale-Jura, shall be
located in the interior. Belgium has receded to the
demands of France relative to refugees, as also has
Sardinia.

SARDINIA AND NAPLES.
The Cagliari question is not yet satisfactorily
settled. The Neapolitan Government have declined,
politely, but firmly, to accede to the demands of
Sardinia.

TURKEY.

The Porte has sent a circular note to its represen-
tatives abroad, in which it supports the demand of
France and England that the recent treaty on the
navigation of the river Danube must be laid before
the Paris Conference, saying that the Conference
would be justified in enforcing alterations of the sti
pulations of that treaty. The note bears the date of
the :26th of January.
AMERICA.

The Lecompton constitution has been sent, with a
message, into Congress by Mr. Buchanan, who advo.
cates the admission of Kansas as a State. Great
excitement existed in Congress, and an animated
debate ensued. The debate was adjourned.
The House of Representatives had received tha
reports of the Naval. Committee upon the action of
Commodore Paulding in capturing the filibusters.
The majority reported his conduct as a grave error,
which called for the disapproval of Congress. The
subject was referred to a committee of the whole
house.

Advices had been received from the headquarters
of the army at Utah to the Itith. Brigham Young
bad delivered another warlike sermon in the Taber-
nacle, and enjoined the Saints to " stick by " bim.
Colonel Johnstone anticinated the troops would have
to light in the spring.

6otrt anb ,faspa.
Her Majesty the Queen and the Royal Family
have passel the week at Buckingham Palace. Ou
Thursday her Majesty held a levee, which was very
numerously attended. Her Majesty received up-
wards of fifty congratulatory addresses upon the
marriage of the Princess Royal.
The confirmation of his Royal Highness tbe Prince
of Wales will, it is reported, take place this spring at
Windsor.

His Royal Highness Prince Alfred will shortly
take his first cruise at sea on board R.M.'s screw-
fngste Earyahm, 51, Captain J. W. Tarleton.

The Right Hon. W. E. and Mrs. Gladstone have
arrived in town for the season.

Volitual.

ACABINET CouNcn, was held on Satnrday at the
official residence of the Premier in Downing-street.
All the Ministers attended.

PUBLIC MEETINGS denouncing the Conspiracy
,8111 have been held this week at the Freemasons'
l'ivcrn and in Lambeth, and at each the popular
Minister's " treacherous and humiliating policy "
Nits denounced. AL the Freemasons' Favern meet-
ng Lord Palmerston and his colleagues were, by
esolution, declared " unworthy of public confidence."

I