The Sun.
London, England, 1855-05-22 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MAY 22, 1855

at the head. They are anxious for an honourable. peace,
because they have no confidence, and because the feeling
abroad is that a large portion of the Cabinet are at this
moment anxious for peace at any price. (Cheers.) It is
because I am not anxious for peace at any price, but for
an honourable peace, that I ask the house to insist upon
discussing the propositions of the right hon. gentleman. I
must tell him that he has put himself in a position in
which the house has a right to call upon him to persevere
in his motion. He has thrust himself forward. There are
other gentlemen who would come forward; but he has fore-
stalled them, and the house has therefore a right to ask
him to persevere. We demand of him that he will perse-
vere, because we demand an honourable peace. Not a
peace at all price, but only an honourable peace. (Cheers.)
The Marquis of GRANBY said—lt seems to me of great
importance in decidinc, the question whether the discussion
is or is not to be postponed* that we should clearly under-
stand whether the negotiations are now actually taking place
or not, and there is a prospect of peace being concluded.
It appears to me also essential to know distinctly whether
the First Lord of the Treasury is willing to entertain any
propositions that may be made by any of the Five
Powers at Vienna, or whether the propositions which are
to be made are restricted solely to the Powers of France
and England. I ask this, because the date at which the
noble lord the member for London said that he had ex-

ha.usted his instructions was not the 26th of April, as stated
- ---• • •

. ,
by the right hon. gentleman the member for South Wilts
(Mr. S. Herbert), but, as I think, the 21st of April, before
Russia had made her last proposition. It therefore seems
to me that the noble lord received instructions from her

and his friends are determined to have an honourable
peace, but that there are others who would have peace at
any price. Ido not know upon what authority he makes
that assertion, or why he and his friends are to arrogate
to themselves an exclusive appreciation of the value of the
honour and dignity of the country. (Hear, hear.) I do
not yield to him or to any man in this house in a desire
to uphold the dignity and honour of my country—(hear)—
and I would not be the man to stand up in my place in
the House of Commons and advocate any course which I
thought inconsistent with the safety, the honour, and the
dignity of the country. (Hear, hear.) The Government
ought, I think, to have anticipated discussion when they
laid these papers on the table of the house. (Hear,
hear.) I considered, when the Government placed be-
fore the houses of legislature a record of the proceedings
of a recent conference, they invited the opinion of Parlia-
ment on the course which they had pursued ; and having
myself perused the papers, I felt at liberty, under the
circumstances, to move an address, with a view of sub-
mitting an opinion to the consideration of the house.
But I admit the difficulty of the position, now the Go-
vernment tell us that the conferences are not ended, and
that before they are fully concluded, the Austrian Go-
vernment are understood to be charged with pro-
posing some plan for bringing about an understanding be-
tween the belligerent powers—that that government will,
before the conclusion of these conferences, submit a plan
to the governments of France and England, for the re-es-
tablishment of peace. This being the case, and hearing
also from the government that under these circumstances
they would feel at liberty to discuss with frankness and
without reserve the various proposals tl.at have been made,
I admit I feel that I should not ho serving perhaps tho ob-
ject I have myself in view, or serving the public interest,
if I were to persevere in this motion. And I feel this the
more especially when the right hon. gentleman tells me
he will meet it by moving the previous question, becasise
the division would then be taken, not on the merits of my
proposal, but on the preliminary consideration of whether
or net it was convenient, after the statement made by the
government, that such a proposal should be made at all.
In postponing it, however, I mean not to abandon the
proposal. (Hear, hear.) But if the existence of the con-
ference is to be a reason why the opinion of parliament
should not be taken on the policy of the government, I
want to know how long these conferences are to last ?
(Hear, and a laugh.) For if they are to go on from day to
day till the end of the session, they will thus undoubtedly
gain the advantageof throwing overthe discussion on their
policy altogether. While, therefore, I feel compelled to re-
spond to theappealsthathave been made to roe to postpone
the motion now, I beg to give notice of my intention to
take the very earliest opportunity after Whitsuntide of
bringing it forward. (Cheers.)
Mr. MALINS could nothelp rising to express his opinion
on the present state of affairs. The nation was watching
the proceedings of the house with intense anxiety and yet
no rational grounds were given to warrant the expectation
that any propositions would be made. Nothing was given
by an assurance that at some indefinite period some pro-
positions would be brought forward. The opinion of the
country and its feelings had a right to be considered.
A general feeling now prevailed that the house had
been wanting in its duty, and treating this great ques-
tion with an indifference which would, in his opinion pro-
duce a deep digust throughout the land. He trusted that
Government would make up its mind to deal with the
country and the house as the house and the country had
dealt with them. Government had upim all hands received
the most friendly support. The country had, however, ex-
pressed its opinion that the war which it had got into,
whether rightly or not, ought to be carried on to an honour-
able conclusion. He considered the present occasion as
nothing more than a solemn farce and preconcerted scheme,
which was intended to be a delusion for the country when
the country was anxious to maintain its honour and great-
ness. He must say that he heartily disapproved of the
course which was being taken on this question, and he
would not give his support to a Government which would
carry on the affairs of the country in this manner.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said it was clear that the course
which the house ought to pursue depended on the fact whe-
ther it was true or not that the conferences were closed.
If Austria was about to produce propositions which might
or might not be accepted, it was clearly a legitimate ex-
cuse for the house not to enter upon this discussion at the
present moment, and, in his opinion, the right hon. gen-
tleman the member for Manchester had exercised a wise
discretion in the course which he had taken. He (Sir H.
Willoughby), however, trusted that the doubt would be
cleared up as to whether any propositions were to be ex-
pected from Austria.
Mr. JOHN M`GREGOR believed that Austria, al-
though acting in good faith, would never agree to make
an aggressive war against Russia, which she could not do
without dismembering the Austrian empire. He thought
the war had been entered into without due consideration,
and in ignorance of the power of the Russian empire, and
trusted that every means would be adopted to establish a
permanent and honourable peace.
Mr. CAYLEY said he had always looked upon the mo-
tion of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Milner Gibson) as in-
opportune and dangerous to the best interests of the coun-
try, and he considered the discussion which had just taken
place still more dangerous. Those who imagined that the
tone of this discussion represented the feelings of the people
were most egregiously mistaken, and if the speeches which
had been delivered should influence the negotiations now
going on, they might lead to the establishment of a most
disastrous peace. The more Parliament protested in favour
of peace the more distant would it be, for Russia would look
upon the course taken by the advocates of peace at any price
as an encouragement to continue the contest. (Hear.)
SUPPLY.

Maresty's Government that, whatever propositions Russia
might make, they were not to be entertained, but that he
was to come back to England. This is a point which I
wish to have cleared up before the house decides whether
the discussion is to be adjourned or not?
Lord J. RUSSELL—Sir, it is of course at the discre-
tion of the right hon. gentleman the member for Manches-
ter to choose whether he brings on his motion or not.

With regard to that point, her Majesty's Government have
no advice to give him. They will only say that they are
ready to meet the motion if it is persevered in, and to
acquiesce in its postponement if it is postponed. The hon.

and learned gentleman the member for Sheffield says that
the declaration of my noble friend amounts to no more than
what might be said at any moment in any war ; that is to
say that her Majesty's Government are ready to entertain
propositions for peace, Now, this is not the state of affairs
as they are at present. We are bound, as far as we can,
considering the confidential nature of the communications,
to state the present condition of affairs. In the first place,
therefore, I think it right to fill up that which isnot stated,
in the protocols, which are merely summaries of confer-
ences which lasted often from four hours t 9 four hours and
a half. At the last conference at which I had the honour to
be present Count Buol said that he did not think the dis-
cussions would lead to any result, or that the belligerent
Powers were likely to agree ; therefore he thought that the
conference had better terminate. He also said that he did
not think the means of accommodation were exhausted,

but as every member of the conference had a right to
bring forward propositions, he hoped upon an early
day the conference would again meet for the purpose of
considering any propositions which might be proposed. To
that I answered that I certainly hoped that the means of
accommodation might not be exhausted ; but as my in-
structiqns were exhausted, I therefore hoped that Count
Buol wyould not name an early or any fixed day for the
meeting of the conference, as I was unprovided with in-
structions to discuss the propositions which might arise.
That was not without . precedent even during the present
conference, for during the time that the Russian plenipo-
tentiaries were waiting for instructions from St. Peters-
burg the conferences were adjourned. There was a sub-
sequent meeting of the conference—showing clearly that
they were not entirely broken off—at the request of
the Russian plenipotentiaries, and at that confer-
ence the French Minister for Foreign Affairs, following
up what I have stated, explained very clearly the reasons
why his instructions were exhausted. He said, with
reference to the new propositions of the Russian
plenipotentiaries, as he had already declared at the last
conference, that since the Russian plenipotentiaries had
declined in every form whatever we had proposed, there
was a limit to our instructions on the proposition relating
to the neutralisation of the Black Sea. After that rejection
we were not empowered to consider proposals which did
not include those terms. The French Ambassador, Baron
Bourqueney, and Lord Westmoreland also agreed in this
conclusion. The right hon. gentleman the member for the
University of Oxford said that the plenipotentiaries differed
amongst themselves. They all three made the same decla-
ration. They said that as the Russian proposals contained
the principle of closing the Dardanelles, but not the entire
principle of opening the straits to all the Powers, there
was an element of accommodation. Count Buol declared
that not even a basis of accommodation was contained in
the proposals of the Russian plenipotentiaries. Again, the
conference was adjourned without any date being appointed
for its meeting; but the Austrian Government declared
through Count Buol that, in their opinion, the means of
accommodation were not exhausted. I must ;say that
throughout the discussions the representatives of Austria
have shown that they agreed with the Western Powers,
and not with Russia in her propositions. (Hear, hear.)
The difference between theta undoubtedly was this. Whilst
tie plenipotentiaries of France and Great Britain were not
ready to listen to any terms which did not contain a last-
ing and solid peace, the Austrian plenipotentiaries were
most unwilling to put forward any grounds in such man-
ner as should immediately involve Austria in the danger
and miseries of war without being positively certain that
every means of accommodation were finally exhausted.
That of course made some difference with respect to the
spirit with which the different propositions were received.
With regard to the opinion and moral support, we could
not have received better than that which we received from
the plenipotentiaries of Austria. Now, it is not
only difficult but impossible to aecertain anything
precisely with respect to propositions for peace,
which I think [must come from some foreign Govern-
ment and not from our own ; but my opinion cer-
tainly is that, whether the propositions lead to peace or not
—because upon that question I feel myself quite incom-
petent to give an opiniuu—the Austrian Government will,
before the conferences are finally closed, make some pro-
positions. I imagine that those propositions must have
one of two resuPs—either they will be rejected by one, per-
haps by both, of the belligerent powers, and then the con-
ferences will be broken off—it is no doubt perfectly com-
petent for any member to ask the house to declare its
opinion on the negotiation—or the negotiation will bo re-
sumed, and there will be a better prospect of peace being
concluded. I do not think it is possible for me to say
more. When hon. gentlemen say that our statements are
vague, that the speech of my noble friend near me is
vague, it is because there is nothing ilefinite and precise
in the situation. (Hear, hear.) Of that which is in it-
self indefinite it is impossible to give a precise and defi-
nite explanation. This condition of affairs differs ma-
terially from the supposition made by the honourable
and learned member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck), which
is that at any time during any war propositions of peace
may be made by any of the parties. There have been
conferences for the purpose of considering the terms of
peace. The four belligerent powers have not agreed upon
the terms of peace, therefore the negotiations have hitherto
failed. But the negotiations are suspended, not totally
broken off. I do not know that I can add anything more
to this statement. Of course it is for the right hon. gen •
tleman the member for Manchester to take any course
which he pleases, and we shall be ready at any time to
meet his propositions.
Sir J. PAKINGTON said—lt does not seem to me that
the noble lord has stated any facts whatever, or added any-
thing to what has fallen from the noble lord the Prime
Minister, which can guide the house to a decision upon the
question whether the right hon. gentleman the member
for Manchester ought or ought not to persevere in his mo-
tion. I do not believe that there is on either side of the
house the least disposition to press her Majesty's Govern-
ment. (Hear, hear.) The circumstances are too important
for any such desire to exist; but if the right bon.
gentleman the member for Manchester is deterred from
persevering in his motion, I think it right that the house
should have a more explicit statement from her Majesty's
Government on the point, whether the conferences are still
going on, and negotiations still pending. I think that
difficulties have arisen, and this confusion has bean
created, from the fact that the negotiations have taken
place at the capital of a neutral power. Our representa-
tive still remains at Vienna, but the plenipotentiaries
have returned, and Government has laid the protocols
on the table of this house. The natural and usual course
is for Parliament to pass its opinion on those protocols,
and I cannot see why the right hon. gentleman the mem-
ber for Manchester should forbear to press his motion, un-
less Government is prepared to tell the house that negotia-
tions aro still pending, and that they are still open. I think
it right that the house should have a more explicit declara-
tion on this point. It is impossible for the house not to come
to the conclusion that her Majesty's Government is a party
to the two courses which have been proposed—first, by the
right hon. gentleman the member for the University of
Oxford, who proposes the adjournment of the house ;
secondly, by the right hon. gentleman the member for
South Wilts, who has intimated his intention of moving
the previous question. I think from the conversation which
has taken place that the house has good cause to believe that
her ilajesty's Government is anxious that one of the two
courses should be adopted. The noble lord says that he is
prepared to meet the motion with a direct negative. Why
then had he not asked the right hon. gentlemen not to bring
forward their motions, in order that he might meet it in this
way ? Why did the noble lord put aside the regular busi-
ness of the evening in order that the right hon. gentleman
the member for Manchester might give Parliament an op-
portunity of expressing its opinion on this question, when it
now appears that the noble lord and her Majesty's Govern-
,
occurred which renders it desirable that the discussion
should be postponed, I think the house will agree if her GovernmentMa-
snuoc
hr
ea declarationexpresses
—certainlys
furcohman desire;honere
Majesty'shas bbuete,nino assignedtohv ee
ra
nb-
' why the noble lord should change the purpose which I
' announced b
eenilssoignned whyaform the
eroccraisgihont h;
oann. dgelnttlheinian think no
hrmeaosmon.
. ber for Manchester should not persevere in his motion.
Sir G. GREY---I think the question of the right hon.
Bart. has been answered in anticipation. He is asked
• whether the conferences have been closed, or rather be has
assumed that the plenipotentiaries have been withdrawn.
I think the statement of my noble friend was that the con-
ferences were not closed, but were now in the same position
' as when they were, at the request of the Russian plenipo-
tentiaries, adjourned, without a day having been fixed for
their renewal. They have not been finally closed, and any
proposition by any of the powers may still he entertained
by the members of the conference who still remain at
Vienna. Therefore it is not the truth that the plenipoten-
tiaries have been withdrawn. My noble friend was
associated with Lord -Westmoreland. The French Mi-
nister for Foreign Affairs was associated with Baron
Bourqueney, who is left also at Vienna. Lord West-
moreland has also full powers to act alone, and Baron
Bourquency has the same powers. The elements of the
conference, therefore, still remain, and on any day o n
which the conference may be reiumod, any new proposi-
tion may be taken into consideration. The right hon.
baronet has assumed that her Majesty's Government were
a d Ili Os 131
isol anxiously . 0 11
Tthhaetwsatattcehmfeonr
tevhearys opportunitye
etno
daevnodiiedthis
my noble friend at the head of the Government. He stated
that Government were prepared to meet the discussion if
the house pleases to go on with it, and if the right hon.
' gentleman the member for Manchester, after what he has
heard, is willing to leave the discretion in the hands of the
house. (Hear.)
Mr. M. GIBSON—The right hon. geutlenian has placed
rather a heavy responsibility on me, but I admit I am
bound to endure it, as I have given notice of moving this
addros. ' Tho hen. and learned member for Sheffield says
I have thrust myself forward in the matter, and that he

Mr. GROGAN wished to know whether the Government
intended to proceed with supply during the present sitting?
Mr. WILSON replied that the Government did not in-
tend to go into committee, but the order of the day would
be read, for the purpose of giving hon. members an oppor-
tunity of bringing forward motions of which they had given
notice.

Mr. DISRAELI wished to know if any supply would be
taken before the holidays.
Mr. WILSON said there was no probability of any votes
on supply being taken until after the holidays, because
when the order of the day for going into 'committee of
supply on Thursday was moved, the hon. member for
Aylesbury would bring on his motion, the discussion on
which would no doubt take up all the evening.
Mr. DISRAELI thought there should be some specific
understanding in so important a matter as to whether
supply would be gone into on Thursday or not.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, said the
course followed in respect of supply had been adhered to in
the present case. When they came to the order of the day
respecting it, that order would be postponed until Thursday.
Mr. OTWAY Asked if supply would be taken on Thurs-
day M
r. WILSON replied that it would, for the purpose he
had stated.
The motion for the adjournment of the house was then
withdrawn.
VICTORIA GOVERNMENT BILL.

Sir J. PAKINGTON suggested that the Grants of Land
Bill should be put down for a second reading at tho same
time as this measure, so that the discussion could be taken
upon them both at the same time.
Lord J. RUSSELL had no objection to that course, and
would put them down for a second reading on the 11th of
June. _ _ _ _ _ _ - -

Mr. LOWE said he could not undertake to discuss both
bills in the same debate, as his objections to the ono were
totally different from the objections he had to the other.
• Both bills were then ordered to be read a second time on
the 14th of June.
COAL MINES INSPECTION BILL.

This bill was read a second time, and ordered to be cm.
mitted on the 7th of June.
FISHERIES (BRITISH ISLANDS AND FRANCE
BILL.
, This bill was read a second time.
DISSENTERS' MARRIAGES BILL.

This bill passed through committee pro forma, and was
ordered to be re-committed on Monday week.
PERSONAL ESTATES OF INTESTATES BILL.
This bill was considered as amended, the amendments
agreed to, and the bill ordered to be reprinted with the
amendments, and read a third time on Friday next.
MILITIA (No. 2) BILL.
The amendments to this bill were considered and agreed
to, and the bill ordered to be read a third time on Friday.
NATIONAL GALLERY (DUBLIN) BILL.
This bill was read a second time and ordered to be com-
mitted.
EDUCATION OF PAUPER CHILDREN, BILL.
' This bill passed through committee, and was reported to
the house. •
The Brighton Incorporation Bill was read a second time.
AFFIRMATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
The Lords' amendments to this bill were considered and
agreed to.
MR. LOCKE KING obtained leave to bring in a bill to
alter the mode of amending acts of Parliament.
The bill was read a first time.
TRUCK AMENDMENT ACT.
Mr. CHARLES FOSTER obtained leave to bring in a
bill to alter and amend tht act Ist and 2d Wm, 4; c. 37,
commonly called the Truck Act.
The bill was read a first time.
The house adjourned at five minutes to eight o'clock, till
twelve o'clock to-morrow.