The Press.
London, England, 1858-03-13 00:00:00

THE PRESS, MARCH 13, 18513:

any sacrifice rather than change those laws and customs,
even indirectly, at the instigation of a foreign sovereign,
still it would be wise, consistently with that spirit and de-
termination, to maintain an unimpassioned and unpre-
judiced feeling towards the Government and people of
France. (Cheers.) I know that at this moment calum-
nies are circulated in every quarter with a view of making
the people of England believe that the Emperor of the
French, instead of being our faithful ally, has rather sought
an opportunity to pick a quarrel with England, because he
thought he had us at some disadvantage in consequence
of the disturbances in India. Gentlemen, there is nothing
more unfounded than that. (Hear, hear.) There is no
prince in Europe so well-informed on all political matters
as the Emperor of the French. There is no prince in
Europe so well-informed upon the means of defence pos-
sessed by this country as the Emperor of the French. I
will be bound to say that he knows much more about our
ships and soldiers than any of her Majesty's subjects, and
quite as much as her Majesty's Ministers. The Emperor
of the French, who is this well-informed prince, knows as
well as I do that, notwithstanding the fine army which
we have sent to India, we have at this moment in this
country a larger effective force than we have had at any
period for the last twenty-five years. (Cheers.) He
knows as well as I do that in twenty-four hours we could
man with able seamen the most powerful Channel fleet
that ever rode upon the English waters. The Emperor
of the French, who is the best informed prince in Europe
on English politics, knows I dare say as well as I do the
last monthly return of our recruiting rota; and he knows
that in this country, where we have no conscription, and
where we can only appeal to the patriotism and public
spirit of the people, there is • larger recruiting going on
at this moment for every arm of her Majesty's service
than during any month of the Crimean campaign. Then
what a calumny it is to pretend that he has picked an
occasion to quarrel with us on account of our Indian diffi-
culties. We must clear our minds of these prejudices.
The Emperor of the French, I am persuaded, is willing
now, as he was before this horrible attempt on his life, and
before this unhappy and blundering misconception of the
English Ministry, to cultivate the friendship of a people
whom he respects and esteems, and to preserve that
alliance which, to use his own words, can alone maintain
old Europe against those commanding influences which
are rising in other parts of the world. He is as ready as
ever to support that understanding between England and
France, which he believes to be the best security for order,
tranquillity, civilisation, and European power; but the
success of his efforts, and of those of the persons
who are responsible for the conduct of affairs here, to
bring about the consummation which I trust is at hand,
in the restoration of a good understanding between the
two countries, depends greatly on the Rood humour of the
English people, and the good sense of the French people.
I have touched at some length on this subject, which is
foremost in the minds of Englishmen at the present
moment. Yet I ought not entirely to avoid all others.
We have undertaken the responsibility of Government all
will admit at a very critical period. We have to encounter
some difficulties which are not of an ordinary magnitude,
bat I do not despair that we shall be able to steer the ship
in a manner which will be satisfactory to the people of this
country. In the first place we have at once to deal with a
subject of magnitude and interest—the government of
India. I will say a word or two upon that subject, because,
from what I see in the public journals, it is plain that
there is considerable misapprehension in the public mind
as to the position and the intentions of the Government in
respect to it.

I myself have ever been of opinion—at least since the
time when I could form any opinion of which I may be per-
mitted to speak now—that the Government of India is of
an anomalous character. In 1853, when the charter was
renewed, I thought it a great mistake to force Parliament
to legislate for India without waiting for the result of
those inquiries which were then being carried on by com-
mittees of both houses, which I think would have induced
Parliament to come to a different conclusion from that at
which it did arrive, and would have led to the termination
of what is called the double form of government. A noble
friend and colleague of mine, Lord Stanley, at my personal
instance and with my aid in debate, did bring forward a
motion to delay the settlement of the question until the
inquiry was complete. We were defeated on that occasion,
but the policy which is now to be pursued by all statesmen
is exactly that which we recommended in 1853, but which
a majority then refused to adopt. This year. when the
Government brought forward their measure for the new
form of government for India, there was an amendment
moved by a gentleman who is quite independent of party,
Mr. T. Baring, to the effect that it was not expedient to
legislate for Indiairit the present moment—having We-
ranee of course to the civil war now raging there. That
was not a party question—it was brought forward by a
gentleman who has no connection with party. When he
gave notice of that amendment no person was acquainted
with his intention but himself. My own opinion I confess
was, that until the military settlement of India had taken
place it was not expedient to invent a new Government.
I voted with the minority on that occasion, and I believe
my noble friend Lord Stanley voted with the majority.
But it is the intention of the present Government to pro-
ceed to legislation on this subject, and we have been
accused of inconsistency in voting that delay was expe-
dient in one month, and sating without delay in the next.
A moment's calm and unprejudiced reflection, however,
must convince any one that there is no inconsistency in
that course. It is said that we have bowed to a decree of
the House of Commons, expressed by the majority of 140
or 150 who voted in favour of immediate legislation, and
that having bowel to one decree we ought to bow to all
others from the same quarter. In the course which we
intend to pursue we do not bow to the vote of the House
of Commons, but we look to the effect of it. The great
objection which I urged in the House of Commons against