The Express.
London, England, 1863-07-11 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, SATURDAY EVENING, JULY 11, 1863.

meats that have been suggested. I think it would be very
disadvantageous to the public service that any such reso-
lution should he adopted—(hear, hear)—end therefore the , •
discussion. as regards practical results, would have to im-
portant effect. I can assure my hon. and learned friend and !
the house that whereas 1 think it is now plainly acknow-
ledged by everybody that the wishes of the Emperor of the
French to find a fitting opportunity for that ackoowledg.
meat have not been altered or changed, and that, on the
other band, her Majesty. goverment, who at the present
moment do not see that that fitting opportunity has arisen,
are willing at all times to exchange opinions with the
French government, not only on that, but on every matter
of great moment in which we have a common
concerti. (Hear. hear.) Oo public and general grounds,
therefore, I should urge him to winery with
the request of the hon. and gallant officer. (Hear, hear.) '
But there is one circumstance peculiar to the present debate
which I think makes it still more desirable. It is hardly
possible that the debate could be resumed without the re-
sumption of the discussion of what passed between my hon.
and learned friend and the hon. member for Sunderland in
their interview with the Emperor of the French. Now it
was quite natural that they should have sought that inter.
view. My hon. friend the member for Sunderland, as we
well know, his frequently had interviews with the Emperor
of the French upon those questions with respect to which
he has taken a very active part in this house, namely, ques-
tions relating to navigation, and we knew and were per.
fectly cognisant of those interviews. Therefore
it was perfectly natural that they should see the
Emperor of the French, and it was equally natural that.
seeing the Emperor, be and they should express their opi-
nions upon American questions. But I humbly vesture to
submit to them that the
,question as to what passed in an
interview between two private gentlemen, even though they
were member, of this house, and a foreign sovereign, es
not • question fitting to be discussed in this house. (Cheers.)
It must naturally lead to explanations on both sides, that,
like all publie explanations of private conversations, may
lead not only to unpleasant feelings on both sides, but tend
to prevent the Emperor of the French from continuing that
courteous and useful reception which he so graciously is
pleased to give to all Englishmen of note—(hear, hear)—who
come furnished with information that may be useful to the
friendly relations of the two countries. It is obvious that
that disposition which he has so eminently, and which is so
honourable to him, and so useful to the interests of the two
oouotries, must be changed if be feels that what passes in
the abandon of private intercourse is to be made the subject
of public discussion in the British House of Commons.
(Hear, hear.) Now, as it is impossible that the debate can
be resumed without leading in some way or other to the
revival of that discussion, I hope my hon. and learned
friend will consent to withdraw it, and that my boo. friend
the member for Sunderland, who his hitherto taken no part
in this dismission, will continue that discreet silence—that
abstinence —(a laugh)—which he has hitherto pursued,
and that he will be content to let the matter rest.
No one has any right to blame him for the part
which he took in going to the Emperor of the French
sod communicating with him as he did ; but I think he will
feel, as the house I am sure must feel, that with a view not
only to the good relations between the two countries, bat
with a view to she continuance of that access to the person
of the Emperor on the part of British subjects of note
which it is very desirable to maintain, itis math better that
nothing further should be said on the subject either in
future discussions or when my hon. and learned friend rises
to state whether he will or will not accede to the request
made to him by the hon. and gallant officer. (Cheers.)
Mr. LINDSAY made • few observations in justification
of himself and of Mr. Roebuck, who, he said, had stated
nothing but what was true. He recommended Mr. Roebuck
not to make • hasty answer to the appeal addressed to him,
but to take full time for consideration.

After a good deal of conversation.
Mr. ROEBUCK said he would reserve his decision until
Monday night. Poes,bly the question under discuuion
might receive a solution in the meantime.
Mr. LA YARD wished to put his hoe. friend the member
for Gelway right upon one point. His bon. friend had lic-
ensed him (Mr. leyard) of stating that Baron Gros had
refused to give a copy of the despatch. He had rid nothing
of the kind. What he had said was that the despatch
having been published in the Moniteur, there was no se-
cant for sending a ,opy of it to this government. As
regarded the statement of the hon. member for Sunderland
there were two allegations which bad been made
by the honourable and learned member for
First, that an application bad been made
to the British government to know if it were
prepared to unite with the Emperor of the French in re-
cogoising the Confederate States, and the second was that a
despatch which had been communicated to the British go-
vernmeot in confidence having been sant to the cabinet at
Washington, the Emperor of the French declined to send
another proposal. In reply to thine statements he had only
to refer to the answer of the Monsieur, which showed that
the Emperor had said nothing of the kind imputed to him.
What his Majesty implied was that he should instruct Baron
Gros to sound the British government. With regard to the
second statement, if he could show that the despatch
alluded to by the hon. member for Sunderland bad been sent
in February, then his whole accusation fell to the ground,
for the proposal was said to have been made in November.
If the despatch allotted to had been shown in February, how
came it that the proposal was made in November of the
same year! He (Mr. Layard) had stated on a former even-
ing without the slightest equivocation that no communication
of any despatch had been made to the United States govern-
went at either an early or. late period of theyen. Since then he
himself and two clerks in the Foreiv-office had carefully
searched all the despatches from the beginning of 1862, and
he could solemnly state on his word and honour that no
such transmission of a despatch had taken place. The hon.
and learned member for Sheffield must therefore be under
some such misapprehension as had occurred to the hon.
member for Sunderland last year. That boo. member came
over with a confidential communication from the Emperor
of the French, and scarcely had he set his foot in England
when a telegram arrived stating that be had no authority to
make a communication from the Emperor. No doubt some-
thing of the same kind had happened on the present occa-
sion. He did not know whether the alleged conversation
had tame place in French, but he was certain that the boo.
and learned member for Sheffield must be labouring under
some grave misapprehension.
POLAND.

Mr. S. BEAUMONT inquired whether the hoe. member
for King's County intended to take an early day for the
resumption of the debate on Poland.
Mr. HENNESSY hoped that the noble lord at the bead
of the government would give bhn Thursday night.
Lord PALMERSTON was afraid he could not give the
boo. member Thursday, Oa he was anxious to geil on with
supply, but the hon. member might take Monday week.
Mr. HENNESSY intimated that be should endeavour to
bring forward his motion on the first supply night.
Mr. HOESMAN hoped that the noble lord would re-
consider his determination, Si Monday week would be
within ten days of the end of the session. He thought the
hon. member fir King's County might get Thanday next.
Sir G. GREY .aid that at the morning sitting a general
with wan ermined that supply should be taken in the
evening, and it was then arranged that it should be taken
on Thursday next.
Mr. COLLINS thought that a series of morning sittiogs
might be given to Poland. (A laugh.)
Mr. HENNESSY complained of the conduct of the noble
lord in receding from the pleige which he had given on a
former oricasioa. He should place his motion on the paper
for Thursday next, but if the right hon. member for Stroud
would orneent to bring on his he (Mr. Hennessy) would
give way.
After an observation from Mr. WHALLEY,
Mr. HORSHAM expressed his regret that government
was not about to fulfil ha pledge given to the hon. member
for King's County. He thought a discussion on the affairs
of Poland was oeoes.ary, and he felt this so strongly that if
the hon. member for ing's County did not get every faci-
lity, be (Mr. Horsman) should bring forward his motion on
the next supply day, and he gave notice that., not on one or
two, but on repeated occasions, he aheuld endeavour to ob-
tain a complete dimension on the Polish question.
Lord PALMERSTON wished to say one word. The hon.
member for King's County reproached him with a breach of
faith respecting hit motion, but he denied that he had com-
mitted any. He had promised the boo. member a govern-
me A night, and he was prepared to give him Monday week.
Thursday he could not give without inconvenience to the
public service. At the same time, if the hon. member
brought forward his motion on supply the government
could not help it.