The Express.
London, England, 1861-03-05 00:00:00

PIEDMONT.

On the order foe going into a Committee of Supply,
Hr. HENNESSY called attention to what he termed the
active interference of the Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs in promoting Pielmonteee policy, and to the effect
.1 that policy, in increasing the national burdens in Pied-
moot, in the decline of it. trade and commerce. the wai.te
el the population in predatory war, and the consequent'
decay of agriculture, contrasting this state of things
with the tlourishiug condition of the papal dominionm
in all these particulars. In stating the facts fro
which be deduced the testa of the prosperity of tb
different porta of lts:y, he charged Lord John Russell with
deliberately concealing important despatches relating to the
trade of Tuscany and Naples, and then entered upon a cri-
tic:sin of Lord John's Italian policy, as developed in hie de-
spite hcs, in connexion with details of the military operations
is Soothers hale, and of alleged atrocities comm(tted by Sar-
dinian °fears. He discrisaNl the subject* of the elections in
Italy, end the manner in which, as he saul, the Piedmoetawe
bad ileait with the elections, as showing the little value to I 4,
attached to these elections. Ile spiraled to *eta on the
part of Lord J. Russell, which, he contended, amounted to
interfermee in Radian affairs, in spite of his professions,
and he reproached hint with a breach of international law,
and with destroying the confidence of European statesmen
in the honour, the honesty, and the integrity of the
British Fin eigu-office.
Mr. LAYA RD said he bad a special reason for rising to'
speak en this question ; be felt a deep interest in it. and he
knew something about it ; perhaps more than the bun.
geutleuian who lied just sat down, although be would not
detaiu the horse oolong se the hoe. gentleman bad. (Hear.)
The boa. member bail omitted in his speech a most im-
portant element. lie had maiie no mention of the Italians.
(Hear, bear.) The subject under considenitien was one of
very great importance, and one which ought to be debated.
The deepest interest was felt by the people of Italy in what
trasspirel in the English parliament. The people id Italy
watched every word that was spoken, and looked to the
eceistn, for council, advice, encouragement, and support.
He did not think the question ought to have been twilight
en in such a ouiuto•r. On Friday last be came down pre-
pared to move a resolution, stating that the policy which
had been pursued Sy the English gercrnment was in accord-
ance with the opinion of holm masses of the people of
England, and calculated to add honour and cheeky to the
country. He ahould have been glad to divide the house,
but be reflected that it might be considered as a party
question. Ile knew that the opinion of hon. gentlemen op-
posite was unfavourable to Italy. (No, no.) He knew
that every allusion to &Willis was unfavourably
cheered by this. But still be was aware that some
hon. gend~s opposite felt some sympathy with the
Italian people, and be did not like to plea them in the
position of voting against those with whom they generally
acted, and therefore refnsined from pressing his resolution.
Perhaps in the course of his remarks lie might end it seas-
easy to use some strew Lamm against the Papal goutveme ; but is doing so be begged to state that he did not
mean anything disrespectful to the Pope, who was& humane
and beassuleat man, and wall fitted to be the head .f the
catholic chart& He novas pre a vote against the Roman
catholic interest On the contrare, he had voted in favour
of every essawits, and disclaimed any desire to maks an

offensive 'emetic against the faith of hon. gentlemeu oppo- I
site or the bead of their church. (Hier, bear.) He wee
astonished at the line of argument pursued by hon. gentle-
, men oppraite. They invariably connected the temporal
with the religious question. Now he whited to sever the
two questions. And he would ask, was there • single man
of eminence in Italy who felt favourably disposed to the
combination ..f the temporal and apintual power of the
Pope ! lie defied hon. gentlemen to mention one who was
eminent as a writer or a politician.
Its. HENNEtkiI—M. Zechi, the greatest astronomer in
Europe.
Mr. LAVABO—That gentleman was a Jesuit. He was
r. (erring to laymemand every emineut layman had declared
against the combined authority. And what was the infer-
ence ! Either the leading men were convinced that the
temporal and spiritual power of the Pope could not exist
together, or they had renounced Boman catholicism altoge-
ther. He believed these men to be good catholic; who de-
sired to separate the temporal from the spiritual power of
the Pope because they believed that by so doing his
spiritual power would be increased, and not diminished.
He remembered the Pope to have promised that
• municipal body should be elected in Rome.
And what were to be the qualifications ! Each
elector was to have a certificate of good political
sod religious conduct hewn his cure. A very easy mode of
extending government influence. Was there any hope of
reform in Naples? None. No bitterer sentence was ever
uttered by any man than the famous sarcasm of the Nea-
politan statesman Poerio, respecting the late dynasty—
Governments are founded upon truslitions ; the traditions
of the Neapolitan government are perjury. When the King
has produced his constitution he will swear to it, and then
prove his legitimacy by perjury : a man cannot forswear
himself before he has taken an oath." Never were words
more truthful thaa these. (Hear, bear.) Could they hops
for reforms in Venice ! No. But by • mosteuriousamount
of mismanagement, there was not an Italian left
in Venice whom the .tustrians could hurt. They were
compelled to rule by manes of troop. ; by the high hand of
military power ; no honest Italian would take any part in
the government. One of the first necessary meanires of
reformwas the abolition of ecclesiastical privileges and eccle-
siastical orders. Was it possible to expect to find there
two concessions made in Rome! The hon. member for
lentgarvan (Mr. Maguire) said that there were more civi-
lians than ecclesiastics in thepapal service. That might be
so, because the crowd of small appointments were such as
an ecclesiastic would not accept. But every high officer, every
legate, every political and diplomatic agent, every judge of
thecourt of appeal, was an ecclesiastic. And if there were
100 or 1,000 plaintiffs or defendants to a cause, and one
of them happened to be an ecclesiastic, immediately the
trial was burned off to the ecclesiastical courts, where there
was bribery and corruption of every kind, and justice was
bought and wild in the most flagrant manner. When, after
the peace of Villafranca, the Emperor talked of a confede-
nation being established in Italy, every Italian laughed at
the idea. The time for a confederation was pant. (Hear,
hear.) Why there were ne longer any sovereigns left in
Italy to confederate, except one. (Hear, hear.) Every
throes which had existed there was either filled or sup-
' ported by foreigners. Would the Archduke of Tuscanyhave
reigned for an boor without the support of Austria or the
sovereigns of those contemptible duchies? (A laugh.)
But who was Victor Emmanuel? He was an Italian
prince, becalms he had done that which no other bad had
the fortune to attempt—namely, the task of uniting the
peal Iteban nation. Bat be could not have carried out
those views without the universal confidence and support of
all the Mamas. The hon. gentleman had spoken of Voting.
He said that the invitation to Victor Emmanuel was not the
invitation of the psonle. That be (Mr. Layard) denied.
He was in Italy at the time of the elections at Garton.
He observed the peasant population coming regularly to
the polling booths, each distnct with the priest at its head,
voting with the greatest deliberation and calmness, without
intimidation and bribery. Then, again, letthem look at the
parliament of Tuscany. There was not an historic name in
the country which was not represented there. The clergy,
mime; the arta, each had their representative. Whom did
they elect as their provisional dictator , . Was be • dams-
adventurer! No less • man than Riasoli-
besr
hear)—sa man of large possessions, of high family,
who had devoted his life and his means to the improvement
of his country. He (Mr. Lewd) un lertook to say that •
number of men could not have been chosen who more faith-
fully represented the feeling of Tuscany and the
Legatione Another thing was that not one man
had taken part in the revolution against whom
any crime or scandal had been alleged. There
had bees no speculation in the funds; no persons of ill
private character, who had taken an active public part in
the matter. Not • word had been breathed against any
fee who had taken part in this great movement At Rome,
on the other hand, everything was done by bribery
and corruption. Not an order could be got to see •
public museum—nothing could be done without bribery.
la fact all the movements had been carried by the moderate
party, all of whom turned to the constitutional King of
Sardinia and his able minister, Count Cavour. (Hear, hear.)
As to intimidation at Naples, the military commander bad
told him that during the elections the whole number of
soldiers in the town was just two.midtwenty. He believed
also that the numbers polling, as quoted by the honourable
gentleman opposite, must be founded oa misconception.
(Mr. If ranimeme—They are official.) He believed that the
, despatch of the noble lord was fully justified, simply be-
' came the noble lord told the truth. He could justify the
noble lord from a little book which he held in his hand, the
title of which was " Lombardy, by Cleo. Bowyer, D.C.L.'
Here was a peat aathority, and ow which weld
Dot be accused of partiality. Speaking in 184 t, the
writer said of the King of Sardinia that 'ae was invited into
Lombardy by the government de facto, and that that was
' no intervention, but was sanctioned by the law of nations.
The writer quoted William 111. and Vattel as if it were the
noble lord the member for London—(a laugh)—and held
further that a foreign power might interfere between con-
tending parties to put an end to civil war whenever it felt
that such a state of things might be dangerous to itself. The
writer then went on with warm expressions of sympathy
fora free country, and said that Italy was entitled to be-
come an united nation in virtue of her common !angular,
literature, and patriotism; and, in conclusion, rejoiced that
Italy was winning a great cause by righteous means.
(Cheers.) He (Mr. Layard) did not care or Vatted. We
had not thought of Vattel when ship money was to be re-
sisted ; what he wanted was to know what were the wishes
of • whole people. (Hear, hear.) It was true he had, in
common with the noble lord the member for London, been
opposed to one kingdom, but the Italians willed it other-
wise, and they were entitled to have their wish. He had.
however, one word to say, which he trusted would reach
them. He trusted they would preserve their municipal
institutions when what little liberty they had had was
served, when the taxes were collected without a
expense, and sometimes took discount and paid them in -
ranee. (A laugh.) He trusted that with such a king as
Victor Emmanuel, such • minister es Cavour, and such a
leader as Garibaldi, the cause of Italian nationality would be
ultimately triumphant. (Cheers.) He thought that glory,
and very enviable Flory, would attacltto the two noble loads
on the Treasury peach if they enabled, by their line of
policy, Italy to assume that place among nations to which
she was so well entitled by her patriotism. (Hear, hear.)
Sir G. BOWYER said he would not follow the hon.
gentleman who had just eat down into all the details of
that violent invective which he bad pronounced against the
Papal government. He would only venture to allude to
one or two points, from which it would be seen that the
hon. member's general correctness might fairly be ques-
tioned. The hon. gentleman had told the house an old
story shout • certaiu church and an inquisitor. Well, there
was a foolish person who, holding a very obscure and sub-
ordinate office—that of an inquisitor—thought he would
show his authority and give himself a little consequence by
publishing the decree which the hon. member had so much
dwelt upon. When, however, that decree was reported at
Home it was immediately quashed and annulled, and the
person who issued it was discharged from his office.
So much for that statement. Then the honourable
gentleman told them about some brigands near Rome who
stopped a railway train. That feat certainly showed most
extraordinary strength in those people. (Laughter.) He
thought the brigands who stopped a steam engine working
on a railroad must have been quite as strong as those bulls
the bon. gentleman discovered at Nineveh. But the fact
was, the whole story was a hoax. He now came to the
thin' caae—the famous massacre, gait was called, at Perugia.
When he was at Rome he saw two British subjects—a lady
and a gentleman—both protestant; who were eye-witnesses
of what occurred at Perugia, and they assured him
there was no massacre at all—(" oh, oh,'" and derisive
laughter)—that the town was taken by storm, and about
persons killed, but that those persons, instead of being
women and children, were soldiers with erns. in their hands
who were killed in fair fighting. (Oh, oh.) The hon.
gentleman had further quoted • pamphlet written by him
(Sir G. Bowyer) in Is4ll. To every word he then wrote he
still adhered, but the circumstances which occurred in Otte
were altogether different from those which ware occurring
now. At that time there was no conspiring with the King
of Sardinia against Austrie. The hon. gentleman quoted
I that pamphlet as if he could prove him '(Sir G. Bowyer) to
be guilty of contradiction, and as if he were in former days
in favour of intervention, and now in favour of eon-inter-
vention. He maintained that, according to international
law, if • war were going on, an adjoining country had •
right to interfere when it hd so interest in the matter ;
but what ho complained of now was that intervention was
only considered right and justifiable when it was under-
taken in favour of rebellion. When they heard of
massacres and atrocities committed by the revolutionary
harty the hon. gentleman said, of course such things must
ppen at a time of revolution ; but when • single man was
imprisoned by the other party, there was the greatest outcry
raised and the Neapolitan government was denounced Mate
most violent manner, although the man in question wan in
prison for undoubted treason. (011, oh.) He could not believe
man united Italy founded upon crime, and when he saw
the rebellion, baud and wickedness with which it had been
sccemplisbed, he believed united Italy must fall, and vied-
ily. la the days of all that was great in art and science,
them was no united Italy. It was only so when the country
was ground down under an armed tynanay. Italy was now
under • military tyranny. He should like to see an united
Italy obtained by honourable and just means—which did
sot destroy the traditions of history— which did not destroy
the rights of princes—and which did not destroy the laws
of nations. (" Hear, hear," and "Oh, oh.") If the people
were haft in the enjoyment of their rights,
and in the enjoyment of their own nationa-
lities, they might have an united Italy by
means of • glorious federation, because the Italian people
were not of one nation ; they were of different origin. Me
Lombards were of German origin, and the Piedras:4km

were Cisalpine Gauls, and what could be more distinct
than the Piedmonteee and the Neapolitans? The people of
Italy were like (hoes of India—of various races. If they
wished to bring Italy into one country, under one govern-
ment, they must crush all their muuicipal institutions, and
reduce everything to a dull uniformity noder a military
tyranny, and that was what the King of Sardinia was doing.
But he believed that if the Piedmonteso troops were
to leave Naples the people would carry their
king back upon their shoulders. (Laughter.) Well,
then, he wanted to know what the policy of the noble
lord was. Was it Italian, French, or English? They bad
lately read a remarkable speech of Prince Napoleon. (Hear,
bear.) Perhaps the noble lord would say that they were
going to act in unison with France. The prince said in the
senate that " the empire represented modern society in its
progressive tendencies." He (Sir G. Bowyer) did not
know what that meant. He wanted to know what
the prince meant by the principles of 'B9. Did the noble
lord adopt them? If liberty were so much approved of,
why did not the French government commence at home
(Hear.) But they preferred stirring up revolution in Hungary
and in Poland, havit.g placed in Italy under his feet
by holding up the bauble of Italian unity. He now de-
sired Germanic unity, and her Majesty's government, in
playing into his hands, were a revolutionary government.
(Oh, oh.) He denounced that policy es un-English, and
they might call it what they lived, but it all tended to in- I
crease the power of the French Emperor. (Hear.) The '
Emperor of the French would go on from one step to
another, till at last we were obliged to go to war with him.
But it would be too late, we should have given him too much
power. He would invade this country. He believed thespirit
of this country was too great to allow it to be invaded by any
power with success, but the bare attempt would produce
something like national bankruptcy. (" Oh," and
laughter.) We were obliged to keep up • large army of
200,000 volunteers now to meet this danger, because
our policy was not an English policy.
Mr. E. JAMES moved the adjournment of the debate.
Lord PALMERSTON said he should not object to the
adjournment, but be hopedu it would be adjourned till to-
morrow, and then brought to a conclusion.
Sir J. PAKINGTON complained of Sir Baldwin Walker,
a most important witness in the future inquiry into the
Board of Admiralty, being allowed to depart in the Har-
ebells frigate, in violation, as he contended, of a pledge
givento the honest
Sir J. ELPHINSTONE was of opinion that, in the
absence of Sir Baldwin Walker, the committee would be
perfectly useless and a mere mockery.
After stew words from Mr. COXINCHAM,
Lord C. PAGET explained that as Sir Baldwin bad been
detained too long, and as he had given evidence before a
commission with reference to the branch of the Admiralty
with which be had been connected, he (Lord Clarence) bad
not understood that the house had expressed • wish that he
should remain, and he had so informed the Duke of Somer-
set ; but, if the house desired it, Sir Baldwin could be
called back.

Load PALMERSTON gave an aasarance that this should
be dove. _ _

The motion for the adjournment of the debate was then
agreed to.
On the order for the committal of the Parochial Asen•
means Bill,
Sir G. LEWIS moved that the bill be referred to a select
committee.

After some discussion, the house divided npon this mo-
tion, which was carried by 47 to 15.
The Load Government Act Amendment Bill wee read a
second time.

The Enclosure Bill and the Marriages Validity Bill weed
through committee, and, after some further business, the
house adjourned at five minutes put 1 o'clock.

ILato intelligent&

HOUSE OF LORDS.—MAiez 4.
APPEALS.

(Before thro Lord Chancellor, Lord Cranworth, Lord Wens-
leydale, Lord Chelmsford, and Lord Kingsdown.)

BRIISTOW o.

This was an app;;;I from the Court of Chancery. The
question involved is the right of the appellant to be in-
den:aided out of certain moneys which Warne payable by
the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, under contacts
entered into by the appellant, as master of the ship Kenil-
worth, for the conveyance from the Mauritius and the Caps
of Good Hope to England of troops, and stores,
againstpaymentsymente and liabilities made and ireubaggage, rred by the
appellant at the Mauritius and the Cape, in pursuance of the
provisions of such contacts, and to enable him to perform
the same. At the bearing of the suit Vioe.Chancellor
Wood decided in favour of the claim of the appellant, but
his decisiol was reversed on appeal by Lord Chelmsford,
them Lord Chancellor. Hence the present appeal. The short
questiao is, whe-her the master of a vessel has a lien upon
the freight for the general expenses incurred in earning it.
Sir H. Canna red Mr. Bagpllay, Q.C., appeared for the
appellant ; Mr. Amphlett, Q.C., and Mr. Z. Macnaghten,
for the respondents.
Judgment was reserved.

EQUITY COURTS.—bfazat 4.
(Before tbs Leeds Jostiese of AppsaL)
SPITILGIN r. WHITT.

This was an appeal motion to discharge an injunction
panted by Vice-Chancellor Stuart, restraining the defend.
ant White, until further orders, from acting as the agent or
manager of the society firmed for the printing and publish-
ing the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, or selling any of
their books, or receiving any monies due to the society, and
for other 'airmen.
The ap motion was partly argued by Mr. Bacon,
Q.C., and . Hobbotue, for the appellant, on the 17th and
18th January last, and an order was then taken
by agreement, and at the suggestion of the
court, that the residue of the mo.ion should
stand over until an action of damages then at
issue, in which Mr. White, as plaintiff, sought compensa-
tion for damage alleged to have been suffered by him in
eorirequenoe of the injunction, should have been tried.
That action having since been disposed of, Mr. Matins,
Q.C. (with whom was Mr. H. Stevens), was now in pert
heard for the plaintiffs in support of the injunction, when
upon it appearing that issue had been joined in another
action for compensation brought by Mr. White, a similar
order to that taken on the former occasion wan suggested
by their lordships, and taken by agreement between the
parties.

(Before Vico-Chancellor air W. P. Wood.)
LUCK v. WALKII.

This was a will are. The testator pve his real aisle to
his sou for life, subject to an annuity of 1201. to his widow,
which he charged thereon. He further directed that a
valuation should be made of the rent of his real estate so
given, and that his son should pay to his daughter an
annuity equal to half the amount at which the rent should
be valued, after deducting the annuity given to his widow.
The estate at the date of the will, and of the testator's
death, was in mortgage; and the principal question was,
whether the daughter should bear one half of the interest
on the mortgage, or whether the son was to pay her •
moiety of the rent, without first deducting such interest
therefrom, as well as landlord's taxes, insurance, premiums,
&c., and the widow's annuity.
The Vice-Chancellor considered that the testator, in
speaking of the rent of his estate, meant that which he
had power to dispose of, i.e., the estate subject to the
, and accordingly decided in favour of the son.
mortgage
Cairns, Mr. T. H. Terrell, Mr. Waugh, Mr. Holt,
Mr. Batten, and Mr. Whitbread appeared in the cue.