The Press.
London, England, 1857-02-07 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

Avaeks and months was held by that portion of the
press which is supposed to receive some inspiration
from the noble viscount at the head of her Majesty's
Government ; and that it does so the noble earl
opposite (Earl of Clarendon) will hardly venture
expEcitly to deny. Was there any term of vitupera-
tion not used in connection with the King of
Naples? We were told that the British fleet was to
sail, that it required nothing but the sight of our
fleet to make the people of Naples and of Sicily
revolt, that the King would thereupon become a
fugitive upon the face of the earth, and that then
God knows what was to happen. And yet the Royal
Speech now refers to the "friendly oommunications "
held with the King, and expresses great surprise that
his Majesty refused to take the advice tendered to li iin
in consequence of which England and France with-
drew their ambassadors. And what was the reply
of the King of Naples to that? He merely said to
the ambassadors, " I wish you good morning, gen •
tlemen !" (A laugh.) Thus, two of the greatest
nations in Europe threaten to withdraw their mis-
sions as a menace, and in return the ambassadors
are quietly told feat they may walk downstairs.
The ambassadors submit to that indignity ; they go
sway without the slightest excitement on the part of
any human being ; no additional precautions are
taken by the Neapolitan Government ; a 'miserable
attempt at insurrection in Sicily is put down in an
instant ; a wretched attempt at assassination ends in
the execution of the criminal ; and that is the whole
result of your interference, except that, at the hands
of a power like Naples, the Governments of England
and France have received a well-deserved affront.
(Hear, hear.) I think, then, that the interference of
her Majesty's Ministers at Naples was unworthy of
the policy of this country, and I think that the
result is an undignified conclusion to an unjust
attack. (Cheers.)

My lords, I regret that the topics upon which
am obliged to touch are so numerous, but I am com-
pelled to follow, to a certain extent, each of the sub-
jects upon which her Majesty invites us to pronounce
an opinion or to call for explanation. Passing to
another point, I confess that I see with deep regret
the two petty wars in which we now appear to be in-
volved. I regret the state of our relations with
Persia; I look with even more regret, and with even
greater doubt as to the justification of our cause,
upon what has taken place in China. (Hear, bear.)
Assuming, as undoubtedly I do assume, that the in-
dependence of Herat, or rather the non-occupation
of Herat by Persia (if Persia is to be considered as a
country in a state of dependence upon Russia), is not
a subject of indifference to this country, I am cer-
tainly not prepared to defend the tortuous and devious
policy pursued by that State with reference to
Herat. In 1852 I, or rather my noble friend (the
Earl of Malmesbury), bad occasion to expresg our.
selves pretty strocgly to the Court of Teheran, and
we received in return from the Shah the most
solemn assurances—assurances which were not ad-

hered to—that no attempt should be made upon
Herat. Thereupon we felt it necessary, in conse-
quence of the falsehood—l will use no other word—
of the representations made by Persia, to suspend all
diplomatic relations with the representative of that
country resident here. At the same time, however,
we did not on that account relax our efforts to carry
out our object; and being at that time on terms of
perfect amity with Russia, and the Russian Minister
co-operating cordially with ours in Persia, we did
obtain in 1t45:2 the abandonment of Herat by the
Persians; and in 1853 an agreement was entered
into between the Shah and Colonel Sheil, of which
we know nothing except from the public papers ;
but which, judging from what has there appeared,
does not seem to have been very skilfully drawn
up or expressed. Of what has passed between this
country and Persia since that time I know very little,
at least from official sources, because the articles of
agreement to which I have alluded have never been
laid 'nefore Parliament. ( Hear, hear.) But, as I
understand, in that agreement Persia undertook to
make no attack upon Herat, while we undertook,
should there be any such attack on the part of any
other power, to use moral persuasion in order to
prevent the conquest of this city. Now, if I am
rightly informed, there never was any Persian attack
on Herat until the beginning of the year 1855, at
which time our new ally and old enemy, Dost
Mahomed, advanced an Affghan army to Candahar.
The ruler of Herat for the time was apprehensive
that Dost Mabomed was meditating a march on
Herat, and had he meditated such a march it would
have justified the interference of Persia. In the
belief of a coming Affghan attack the ruler of Herat
himself called for the interference of Persia to defend
him; but as the Persians came a little nearer than he
thought quite desirable, he suddenly turned round
and asked the Affghan to defend him against the
Persians. In the conflict which ensued the Affighans
were signally defeated by the Persians, who having
in the first instance advanced, as I have said, at the
request of the Governor of Herat, made themselves
masters of the city. Now, if the Affghans really in-

147

tended to take possession of the city, occupation
of Herat by the Persians, however displeasing it
might be to the British Government, was not under
such circumstances a violation of the agreement.
But observe what has been the state of Persia. She,
a weak, powerless, but at the same time an Oriental,
and therefore an astute State, has found herself sub-
jected to the pressure of two mighty antagonists,
England and Russia. It' I have been rightly in-
formed, she offered, when it fist broke out, to take
part in the war in the East, and to join in an
alliunce offensive and defensive with England and
Ft ance, by which she might secure her independence
against Russia. That proposal, I believe, was
d, dined, and she was required to maintain a strict
neutrality. She did, in consequence, abstain from
making any attack upon Turkey ; she did, I believe,
maintain that strict neutrality which consists in
refraining from offending either great antagonist;
but at the conclusion of the war, when the predomi-
nance of Russia, as indicated by the capture mid
abandonment of Kars, appeared to have given her
the supremacy in Asia, as it undoubtedly did, at that
time Persia thought that she was subjected to more
danger from the hostility of Russia than she could
be from the hostility 01 England, and she conse-
quently took no great pains to disguise her unfriendly
feelings towards this country. 1 will not go into that
miserable business which appears to have been the
immediate cause of Mr. Murray's retirement, from
Teheran, because that was only one of the petty
affronts which Persia thought she might safely offer
to the representative of this country. But 1 think it
exceedingly natural that Russia, being at that time
at war with us. should stimulate Persia to take the
step she did, and should endeavour to inflame her
against England. lam also persuaded, my lords,
that it is at the present moment the sincere desire of
Russia not to be invoived in another ear with this
country—, Hear, hear)—hut to maintain friendly
relations with her; and that with that view she is
at the present moment exercising her whole influence
to induce Persia to comply with your desires and to
act in the manner which you require.

Let me take the liberty of saying that I think it
would be for the benefit of• England and Russia, not
only now but for all time, that the two countries,
Atlghanistan and Persia, should form an interval
between their respective territories ; and that it is an
object to be aimed at by every statesman who talks
of resisting the encroachments of Russia to main-
tain between India and Russia the largest possible
space of independent territory, and thus to prevent
any contact between the two countries, and at the
same time to prevent the chance of a collision. I
believe that Russia herself is deeply impressed with
that truth, and that although she stimulated Persia
when she herself was your enemy to resist your
wishes, yet at the present moment, when that is no
longer the case, she is making efforts in a very dif-
ferent direction. For my own part, with regard to a
settlement with Persia, I believe more in the efficacy
of the representations of Russia than I do in the

-r
expedition to the Persian Gulf. I say nothing
against the valour, the zeal, and the promptitude
displayed by that small expeditionary force. Oaths
contrary, the signal manner in which it has suc-
ceeded reflects the highest credit upon the Indian
Government, and it.must be satisfactory to my noble
and gallant trend near me (the Earl of Hardwicke)
to reflect that Admiral Sir H. Leeke was one of that
unfortunate class who, upon account of it being sup;
posed that their age was not adapted for active
service, were compelled to retire. Sir H. Leeke,
then, entered the Indian service, and it must be
satisfactory to my noble friend to see—to have seen
it shown—that the step to which I have referred
deprived England of some of her best admirals, and
that among those officers who were compelled to
retire were many who were capable of good and
meritorious service. (Hear, hear.) I heard with
dismay, and I heard with satisfaction, first, of the
advance of troops on Cabul, and then of their retro-
grade movement. [The Earl of Clarendon was
understool to deny that such a movement had taken
place.] Well, then, perhaps when the papers which
have been promised to us are laid upon the table
they will throw some light upon the subject, and I
will now only say that I should view with great
anxiety any advance ou that side.

There is another point of importance in a consti-
tutional point of view, and that is the authority by
which the war with Persia was begun. I have seen
the proclamation of the Governor-General of India,
by which he declares war against Persia, but I have
yet to learn that. the Governor General of India has
any constitutional power of proclaiming war on the
part of this country. I have hitherto always under-
stood that the proclamation of war was part of the
prerogative of the Crown, and that war must be de-
clared by the Crown with certain formalities. If in
this instance it had been intended to declare war it
would have been the duty of the Government to call
Parliament together, and to make them acquainted
with the reason for such a proceeding. I quite an-