The Press.
London, England, 1856-07-05 00:00:00

AFFAIRS OF ITALY.

Lord LYIVDHURST rose and said:

A short time since I asked my noble friend the Secre-
tory of State for Foreign Affairs whether he would lay on
the table of the house the correspondence which was un-
derstood to be going on relative to the affairs of Italy.
Since that period my noble friend has on two separate oc-
es4ions stated that correspondence was going on with the
Courts of Naples and other European powers upon the
affairs of Italy. As far as Naples is concerned, that cor-
respondence is. I presume, at an end, and I fear is at an
end without any satisfactory result. I form that opinion
from what has been passing at some recent trials, which
hive disclosed proceedings of a most scandalous nature ;
▪ ich as, for instance, ministers of religion being stripped
of their religious dress and threatened with imprisonment,
ald threatened with the infliction of lashes unless they
eansented to give evidence against the accused. Looking
at the whole course of these proceedinga, they appear to
be s mere duplicate of those which took place upon the
trial of Poerio, of which my right hon. friend the member
for the University of Oxford has given so graphic a de-
scription. Ily lords, it appears to me, as far as I can col-
lect, that the whoL• Government of Naples is at the hands
of police agents, spies, and informers. and I begin to de-
spair of the state of things in that country. I beg to ask
ray noble friend, whether he is prepared to lay upon the
table oopies of any correspondence which may have passed
between this Government and the Government of Naples

~-~ '~

p re ri co S.

and other European powers with respect to the affairs of
Italy ?
- -- -

The Earl of CL/RENDON replied :
My lords, I cannot at present inform my noble and
learned friend whether it will be in the power of her
Majesty's Government to lay upon the table the corre-
spondence to which he has alluded. That correspondence,
as respects Naples, has not yet been brought to a close.
We have not received any answer to a despatch communi-
cated by her Majesty's Government, in conjunction with
that of the Emperor of the French, to the Neapolitan
Government. The King of Naples was absent from Naples
at the time. He returned for a few days, and I have
reason to believe that while he was in Naples he ordered
that an answer should be returned. That reply will be
probably communicated in a few days through the Neapo-
litan Ministers in London and Paris. That answer has
not, however, been received, and until it is, and until the
Government determine what steps it may be necessary to
take in respect to that answer, my noble friend will under-
' stand that it would be premature to lay it upon the table.
With respect to the correspondence between this and other
Governments on the affairs of Italy, it is perfectly true
that her Majesty's Government have offered their opinion
and advice to those powers, in whose occupation a certain
prtion of the Papal territory has been; but I do not know
that the object that my noble and learned friend has at
heart is likely to be served by producing that corre•
spondence at present. The only result would be to
check that friendly and confidential communication which
is now going on, and from which some good may be
expected. Your lordships must be aware that to create
the state of things which would render the withdrawal of
those foreign armies safe must be a work of some time.
I can therefore only hope that my noble and learned friend
will accept my assurance that nothing that can possibly be
done by her Majesty's Government has been or will be ne-
glected to procure the cessation of that foreign occupation.
I believe that the Governments of France and Austria
both desire to withdraw their troops from the Papal terri-
tory, and that the Papal Governments are not indisposed to
give their assent to the withdrawal of those troops as soon
as a small military division arrives which the Pope is now
organising.
Lord LYNDHURST :

Will my noble friend lay the answer of the Neapolitan
Government upon the table u soon as it arrives ?
The Earl of CLARENDON
:-
Until I see the nature of the reply T cannot give an
answer to my noble and learned friend; but he can take an
opportunity of repeating his question.

The Joint-stock Companies Bill was read a third
time and passed.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MoNDAI.
GREECE.

Lord PALMERSTON, in reply to Mr. James Macgre-
gor whether the Government were prepared to lay
on the table of the house the correspondence respect
ing the relations between this country and Greece
which had taken place subsequently to that already
laid before Parliament exteAding to May, 1854, said
that there were no particular questions pending be-
tween this country and Greece during the period to
which the question related. A great many reports
of what was called in foreign lanknage " brigandage"
had been received, but there waa no question pend-
ing requiring papers to be brought torward.

NATIONAL GALLERY SITE BILL.
Lord PALMERSTON, in reply to Hr. Spooner,
said the Government would not proceed with the
National Gallery Site Bill, at all events for this
session. He should move that the order for the
second reading be discharged.
The order was then read and discharged.

DESTRUCTION OF THE FORTS ISMAIL ♦ND REEL
Lord PALMERSTON, in reply to Colonel Dunne
whether any information bad been received of the
destruction of the forts of Ismail and Reni, said
that the Government had no positive information In
the subject ; but he believed that the Russians con
ceived themselves at liberty to destroy the works
alluded to ; though he should hardly think they would
deem it worth while to (1,3 so, for the only result of
such a proceeding would be to impose on the Turks
a certain expense for re-establishing the forts when
they came into possession of the ceded territory.

IRISH MILITIA.

Lord PALMERSTON, in reply to Mr. Davison
whether any particular time had been fixed for the
disembodiment of the Irish militia, said that the
period of their disembodiment in different parts of
the country should be made to coincide as far as
possible with the commencement of agricultural
operations.

PURCHASE OF COMMISSIONS.

Mr. PEEL, in repl to Major Reed, said' that the
commission of inquiry on the system of purchase of
commissions in the army was sitting and carrying
on its investigations.

APPELLATE

Lord PALMERSTON, in reply to Sir J. Graham,
said he intended to fix. the Appellate Jurisdiction
Bill tor Monday next, and the Testamentary Juris-
diction Bill for next Thursday.

BISHOPS'

Lord PILILERSTON in reply to Mr. Gregson.
stated that no general enactment legalising the re-

tirement of prelates would ba introduced, but that a
special bill would be brought in enabling the Bishops
of London and Durham to retire, according to a
wish they bad signified to that effect.
AMERICAN ENLISTMENT QUESTION.
On the order for going into a Committee of
Supply,
Mr. W. Brown, Mr. Cheetham, Mr. Ewart, and
Mr. Spooner, appealed to Mr. G. H. Moore,
under the peculiar circumstances in which our rela-
tions with the United States now stood, not to bring

forward the motion of which he had given notice that

evening.
Mr. MOORE declined to adopt the suggestion, and
proceeded to move, by way of amendment to the
order, the following resolution
That the conduct of her Majesty's Government, in the
differences that have arisen between them and the
Government of the United States, on the question of
enlistment, has not entitled them to the approbation of
this house.

The hon. member for Mayo then undertook to
prove—first, that the neutrality law of the United
States had been grossly and deliberately violated by
persons acting with the approbation of her Majesty's
Government ; and, secondly, that her Majesty's
Government had contemplated and sanctioned the
violation of that law. Upon the first point he
insisted that Mr. Crampton had only performed the
duties indicated to him by Lord Clarendon, and had
acted upon an interpretation of the American law
sanctioned by the earl, but directly contrary to the
opinion of an eminent American lawyer previously
consulted. It was true that Lord Clarendon had de-
precated all violation of the neutrality law ; but the
whole question turned upon the interpretation of the
law. In the correspondence with the American Go.
verninent Lord Clarendon furnished Mr. Marcy with
such an explanation of the American law as proved
there could have been no violation of it. Yet Lord
Clarendon—after receiving the opinion of this
eminent American lawyer consulted by Mr. Cramp-
ton, which clearly laid down that not only
was the person enlisted punishable by law, but the
person who enlisted, hired, or retained him with the
intent to be enlisted was also punishable by law,
whether the person hired or retained went abroad or
not—on the 12th of April wrote to approve of Mr.
Crampton sending agents first to ascertain the dis-
position of the people, and then to inform any
favorably disposed of the terms her Majesty's
Government offered for recruits and the places to
which they should repair to be enrolled. Mr.
Crampton had been enjoined to conceal nothing
front the United States' Government; hut conceal-
ment, he (Mr. Moore) contended, was the very key-
stone of the whole proceeding. While Mr. Cramp-
ton was away in Canada perfecting his plan of
enlistment in the United States, and engaged in
drawing up memoranda and instructions for bis
agents, bis secretary, Mr. Lumley, was giving
explanations to Mr. Marcy denying all participation
in these illegal proceedings, and assuring Mr. Marcy
that Mr. Crampton's visit to Canada was only to pre-
vent an infraction of the treaty between the two
countries. After the trials of the agents, when the
complicity of Mt. Crampton was made fully known
to Lord Clarendon, he not only did not express the
smallest disapprobation of Mr. Crampton's proceed-
ings, but justified them, and argued that he had not
violated the law. The English people could not ob-
ject to the course taken by the American Govern-
ment, or to the manner in which they had vindicated
their own honour. The American Government had dis-
missed Mr. Crampton, and for this disgrace her
Majesty's Government found relief by writing letters
to say "they were gratified that their assertions that
they did not intend to violate the neutrality laws or
the sovereignty of the United States bad been unre-
servedly accepted by the President," which was
not the fact. The issue of the whole affair was
very simple. Lord Clarendon had been engaged
in a petty intrigue—as he always was—and he had
been found out—as be always would be; and in this
case be had brought discredit not only on his own
character, but on the people and the Crown of this
country. The house bad now to decide a simple
question of right and wrong.
Mr. BELLEW seconded the resolution.
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL said the Government
were charged with having infringed, first, interna-
tional law, and, secondly, the municipal law of the
United States. Now, the American law permitted
its citizens to engage in a foreign service, and did
not prohibit its subjects when beyond the boundaries
from enlisting in such service. But the persons
intended to be enlisted in the present case were not
American citizens, in the proper sense of the term,
but British subjects who had emigrated to America,
and political refugees from Europe, and if these men
desired to leave the United States, provided the
municipal law of the States way► not violated, they
could be received into oar service without any in-
fraction of international law. But it was said that
men were enlisted on the American soil, contrary
to the law of the United States. This, howilver,