The Sun.
London, England, 1855-06-05 00:00:00

THE StiN, LONDON, INETES 11.. A Y EVENING, JUN.E 5 1855

tain the dignity of the country and give satisfaction to the
people at large. (Hear.)
Mr. G. VERNON said the chief fault he had to find
with the late proceedings was, that the course pursued by
the Government did not appear to him to be one which he
could really understand. He could understand that mat-
ters might have been either ripe or not ripe for negotiation.
It was for the Ministers to decide that. If they were not
ripe, then, no matter how delicate our relations with Aus-
tria might be, nor how complicated the position of our
alliance, it would have been our duty and our policy to
have declared distinctly the only terms on which we were
prepared to negotiate a peace. (Hear.) We should have
made known our intentions to Russia in a manner which
she could neither misunderstand nor misinterpret. If, on
the other hand, we thought the time was come when we
might enter upon negotiations for a peace not dishonour-
able to oursel'es—if we were ready to accept conditions
infinitely more favourable to us than those for which
at the commencement of the war we professed to ask—
then he said those negotiations ought not to have been
broken off. So long as Governments as well as men
were influenced by human passions and human in-
terests, so long would armaments be necessary ;
but he was of opinion that this war was both just and ne-
cessary, for it syas undertaken for the protection of an op-
pressed ally, in defence of violated treaties, and in the
vindication of personal good faith and international law.
In warring, with Russia we warred more with a dynasty
than with nation ; and the more% he was convinced that
this war was just and necessary, the more was he appre-
hensive that we might take any false Step which might
lead to any misinterpretation of the motives with which
we were carrying it on. If in the origin of the waft we
had no definite object, we were committing a great crime;
and if we had a definite object, so soon as that object was
adequately attained, peace ought to have been sought for.
He did not go the length of sa)ing that we ought not, in
the course of the war, as our military successes became
great, to increase our demands. He simply said that we
ought not to go the length of asking for greater conquests
because we had gained greater successes ; though he ad-
mitted we ought to ask for greater securities for the at-
tainment of the objects we had in view. He trusted the
time was not come when we were going to set "nation
against nation," or to fight for the partition of Europe. He
hoped what we wanted was simply the settlement of the
matter of the Black Sea between Turkey and Russia, on a
fair and solid footing. He believed there was no problem
so difficult of solution as this balance of power that was
talked of in the Black Sea. The mode in whicb the Russian
proposition was treated reminded him of the hackneyed
expression so often quoted in that house by the gallan.
member for Lincoln :
" Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes."

He believed the course we were adopting was the one least
likely to disappoint Russia and to serve Turkey. We
might go on from victory to victory, but when we bad la-
vished our treasure and our blood we might perhaps find
that we had destroyed the finances of Turkey and the bone
and sinew of the country, and that when we expected an
ovation, we would receive the curses of a beggared and de-
solated people. He thought the time would come when
reflecting men would feel that we were fighting more for
success than for any definite object.
Lord DUNGARVAN thought that the tone of the speeches
recently made by statesmen who had lately been high in
office must have a pernicious effect both on the people at
home and upon our brave allies abroad. (Hear, hear.) He
much regretted that those statesmen who had been in
office when war was declared, and who had taken an active
part in the prosecution of that war, should now advocate
on such slight grounds as they did a departure from a
policy they had been concerned in originating. (Hear,
hear.) For himself, he was inclined to rejoice that the
Russian plenipotentiaries did not accept the proposed
limitation of their fleet in the Black Sea, for that would
have been a condition for England or France to carry out.
That condition could have been no guarantee against Russia
having a number of ships on the stocks in every port in that
sea. Russia proposed that the straits should be open at all
times to the ships of war of all the nations, and that the
Porte should have the power at any time to call in the
fleets of France and England to its assistance. The noble
lord at the head of the Government had ably pointed out the
danger attaching to the first of these propositions, and the
latter was no concession at al, for ever since the treaty of
1841. the Porte had been in full possession of the power of
calling for the assistance of the fleets of the Western
Powers whenever it judged that assistance necessary. The
desire of Russia was in the eyes of the German Courts to
throw upon the Western Powers the onus of carrying on
the war.. That was a challenge which he hoped those
powers would accept, for he believed that England and
France united could fail in nothing, and the more so when
right and justice were upon their side. No doubt many
misfortunes had befallen us—no doubt many face's formerly
well known on the benches of the house would never more
be seen there ; yet nothing, he felt sure, would abate the
resolution that Englaud had taken in this case. Forbid it
that England should rush into war for the sake of prestige
alone ; still it could not be denied that prestige untar-
nished and unbroken was one of the mainstays of a kingdom,
and, careful as this country should be of her commercial
interests, if she wished to continue in her present proud po-
sition, she must not refrain from putting forth her strength
to support the Cause of liberty against force and injustice.
He could have wished to have been able to give his whole
vote in favour of the amendment of the hon. member for
Kidderminster ; but he should be acting better if he only
supported the first part of it, for it was, he thought, highly
improper in any way to fetter the hands of her Majesty's
Government in the present important struggle.
Mr. BAXTER objecte 1 to any vote that would hamper
the Executive Government, and this objection, he thought,
applied to both amendments now before the house. They
were both instructions to the Government-- the one to
make peace on Russian terms; the other, to refuse all fur-
ther negotiations. He could not agree to either of them,
and especially he could not agree to the amendment of the
hon. member for Kidderminster, that they would accept
of nothing but the diminution of the Russian fleet in
the Black Sea. He could imagine many other pro-
positions which would be even more acceptable, as,
for instance, the destruction of Sebastopol itself.
While he gave full praise to the eloquent and logical
speech of the right hon. member for the University of Ox-
ford made a few nights since, he thought the right hon.
gentleman, in'his laudable and Christian desire to stay the
effusion of blood, overlooked the fact that, if the allied
armies now retired from the Crimea without having ef-
fected its object, Russia would be more feared than ever
her prestige would be greater—her invincibility confirmed.
He individually, and al his constituents, had a direct in-
terest in the establishment of peace ; but be had come to
the conclusion that any peace -made now would not con-
tinue long. Under these circumstances, he was willing to
leave the question in the hands of Government, having
full confidence in them that they would conclude, not a
patched-up peace, but a peace that was not likely to be
broken during the present century.
Mr. HENRY BAILLIE condemned the conduct of the
Government in not having kept our army up to an
efficient point, and in not drawing upon the resources
of our Indian empire. He was against making peace on
Russian terms, as he considered the terms proposed by the
allies wholly inadequate to the exigency.
Mr. M. MILNES thought the best solution of the diffi-
culty would be to prohibit any vessels navigating the Black
Sea except for commercial purposes and purposes of naval
'police.
Sir E. DERING had-supported the motion of the right
hon. member for Bucks the other evening; but after the
explicit declarations of the Government, he was satisfied
of their sincerity; and he now hoped that Ministers would
insist upon higher terms than they had yet 'demanded.
Lord ELCHO was anxious to mark his dissent from the
sentiments expressed in the eloquent speech of his right
hon. friend the member for the University of Oxford—a
speech which he deeply regretted, as he believed the country
would accept it as a sufficient explanation of the blunders
that had occurred, and would consider " lukewarm" as
the reason of " too late,' but which he regretted still more
because he believed it would tend indefinitely to postpone
the prospects of peace, which the right hon. gentleman
was so anxious to attain. He maintained that there was
great danger in Russian power unless it was checked in
time ; and the propositions commended by the right hen.
member for Manchester were intended not to check Rus-
sian power, but to leave it as it was. He was in favour of
the Government propositions, which, he believed, con-
tained sthe principle of limiting Russian power. But for
himself ho believed that the road to a secure peace lay
through Sebastopol. Therefore, though it gave him the
greatest pain to separate himself from his friends on this
question, yet he was prepared to leave the question in the
hands of the Government, believing that they would not
continue the war a moment longer than was necessary to
secure a lasting peace.

Lord C. HAMILTON defended the Russian propositions
as more effectual for the maintenance of peace, while it
would not neerilesely humiliate Russia. He could not
therefore vote with the hon. member for Kidderminster,
as he did not believe the rupture of the negotiations was
attributable to Russia.

Sir B. LYTTON said the right hon. gentleman the
member for Manchester had summed up his objections to
the continuance of the war by, asking how it could subserve
the interests of England. He (Sir B. Lytton) would answer
that question by reminding him how eloquently, on a for-
mer occasion he declared that he and the party with whom
he acted were not anxious for any terms of pew.° which
were not consistent with the honour of the country.
(Hear, hear.) On that point the right hon. gentleman
should observe this distinction, that with individuals
jealousy of honour might be a mere sentiment, whereas
with nations it was something more—it was a condition
of greatness. (Hear, hear.) If the position of an
individual were lowered, he might still say, "My estate
is unimpaired, the law still maintains my rights and pro-
tects my person ;" but if the honour of a nation were
lowered in the eybe of other states, more especially the
honour of a nation like England, which owed its position
not to its territory but to its character—(cheers)—not to
the numerical amount of its armies, but to a belief in its
spirit and its indomitable will, the consequences would
affect its solid and vital interests. (Cheers.) Its credit
would suffer—its commerce would indirectly be damaged ;
even in peace:ul negotiations its claim would not be re-
cognised, and never again would it interfere with effect
against violence and wrong, and on behalf of liberty and
right. (Cheers.) These were some of the consequences
which would affect the interests of this country, if, other
nations could say—whether justly or not—that England
had grown unmindful of her honour. And he asked
his right honourable friend (Mr. M. Gibson) whether
other countries would not say this with every appearance
of truth, if after having got into a war with their
most powerful enemy, they accepted any terms
of peace which Turkey herself would indignantly refuse
to endorse,? (Hear. hear.) He did not mean to deny that
the right hon. gentleman was as anxious for the honour of
the country as any one of them. But he asked, did anybody
believe that a single subject of the Ottoman empire would
consider that they had fulfilled their engagement if they
consented to any terms of peace that would not take from
Russia a single fortrees or a single ship by means of which
she now held the Crimea? (Hear, hear.) The right hon.
gentleman and the noble lord who spoke last were consis-
tent in the course which they had pursued—they were
against the war from the first; but he could not conceive
how any member of the Government who led them into
the war—(opposition cheers)—and who were responsible
for all that it had cost them, could now suddenly as-
sume the language of peace societies--,-(hear, hear)—
and hold it a crime in thorn (the opposition) if they pushed
to a military success the
war which he and his col-
leagues commenced with a military failure. (Renewed
cheers.) He had listened to the speech of the right
hon. gentleman the member for the University of Oxford
with profound respect for his intellect and his eloquence
but he could not reconcile the course which he had sup:
ported at the commencement of the war with that which he
had advocated recently. There
not
what in the right hon. gentleman? could be no doubt as to
the war. He was sure he wouldeyes was the object of
of it which had been given that eveningaccept the definition
by his right hon.
friend the member for Southwark, and which he (Sir B.
Lytton) was astonished to hear, coming as it did from so ac-
complished a philosopher as the pupil of Bentham and the

; editor of Hobbes. (Laughter.) The right hon. gentleman
said the object was to punish Russia for her insolence.
Neither in war nor itelegislation could punishment ever be
an object—(hear)—though it was sometimes the only means
of preventing the repetition of crime. He took it for granted
that the right hon. gentleman the member for the Univer-
sity of Oxford would say that the object of the war was to
maintain the independence anti integrity of the Ottoman
empire. Well, but if that were the object, how in Septem-
ber, 1853, when addressing an audience at Manchester just
before the commencement of tb.o war, did the right hon.
gentleman speak on that subject ? He said, " Remetnber
that the independence and integrity of the Ottoman em-
pire are not like the independence and integrity of Eng-
land and France. The government of Turkey is a govern-
ment full of anomaly, full of difficulty and distress. ' Was
it likely that one who at the commencement of the war
took that chilling view of all the great human interests
that wore involved in the struggle would now give unpre-
judiced counsels with a view to the attainment of the
object? The right hon. gentleman complained that the
terms of peace had been unwisely extended. Who was
it that taught them to extend the terms ? (Hear, hear.)
Was it not the head of the Government which the right
hon. gentleman adorned? (Hear.) When Lord Aber-
deen was repeatedly urged to say to what terms of peace
ho would attach his favourite epithet—" safe and honour-
able"—he said it was impossible to state them, as
they must vary with the fortunes of war, and it would
make a great difference whether they were accepted at Con-
stantinople or imposed at St. Petersburg. Now he (Sir B.
Lytton) never approved of that answer. He had always
held the doctrine that if they made war it should be forno-
thing less and nothing more than justice—(cheers)—and if
the right hon. gentleman held it when out of office, why,
when in office, did he sanction Lord Aberdeen's making
the terms of peace dependent on military success ? How
could he continue to, sit in acabinet whichchanged thecha-
raeter of the war, and made it one of aggression ? He did
not say whether the strategy of the invasion of the Crimea
was right or wrong, but the moment the army landed, the
conditions of peace were necessarily altered. The right hon.
gentleman was a party to the campaign in the Crimea, how
then, could he shrink fromits logical consequences ? (Hear.)
Why was Sebastopol besieged ? Was it not because it was
the fortress which secured to Russia exclusive preponder-
ance in the Black Sea, and because itscapture was the ma-
terial guarantee by which they had pledged themselves
to maintain the independence of Turkey and the safety of
Europe? (Hear, hear.) It seemed to him very strange
to what double uses the right hon. gentleman could put
an ,ally. When the house desired to inquire into the
causes of the calamities of the army, the right hon. gen-
tleman said, " Take care what you are about ; to inquire
on such a subject may offend and alienate your ally,
France ;" now, when the question was how a peace could
be patched up, he seemed to forget that they had an ally
on the face of the globe—(hear)—and recommended them
to creep out of the quarrel in a manner which would ex-
pose them equally to the charge of desertion by Turkey
and of perfidy by France. (Hear.) He would put it to
any advocate of peace in that house whether a peace which
would have excited the indignation even of a commercial
people like our own would not have mortified the pride
of that gallant nation of soldiers with which the name
of Napoleon was associated, and shaken the stability of
a throne which seemed essential to the safety of social
order throughout the whole civilised world? (Hear.)
The right hon. gentleman had reminded .the house how
Russia had come down in her own terms. Buthow was this
change effected ? By diplomacy and negotiations, by notes
and protocols ? No, it was effected by the sword—it was
effected ou those fields of Alma and Inkerman, to which
the right hon.geptleman hadso touchingly referred. Should
all this blood have been spilt in vain.? With the soil of the
Crimea filled with the bones of our soldiers, were we to
leave the fortress of Sebastopol untouched, and the Mack
Sea to the Russian navy, in order that they might con-
tinually threaten the independence of that ally for whom
so many of our countrymen had already perished ? If we
permitted this blood to be shed in vain, it would be mere
quibbling to talk of effecting our object by negotiation. Let
them for a moment examine the question. What was the
object for which the affair had been undertaken ? Was it not
to put an end to the preponderance of Russia in the Black
Sea? And that involvedanother question, whichwas the best
means of preventing the outbreak of a new war that might
arise from the future position of Russia. (Hear.) One
means proposed was to overawe Russia by the presence of
an Allied fleet in the Dardanelles, and the right hon. mem-
ber for Manchester approved of that course. He (Sir E.
B. Lytton) should be induced to agree with him, but for
one thing, and that was, that while the Allies had only
three ships in the Dardanelles, Russia would have the
whole coast of the Black Sea bristling with her fortresses,
and could thus unceasingly increase her maritime force be-
hind the shelter of these strongholds, while England and
France would have to keep up a constant system of surveil-
lance on a sea where they would find neither ports of refuge,
nor arsenals in which to refit. (Hear.) This plan then
would not put an end to the preponderance of Russia.
All that it would do would be to guard at a great cost
against Russia abusing that preponderance, and so far
from putting an end to the possibility of a new war, you
would keep Russia perpetually threatening Turkey, and
England and France perpetually threatening Russia.
He could fancy nothing so bad for the independence of
Turkey as such a system of chronic protection established
within her own waters. The second proposition was that
of the mare &mum, with power to the Sultan to call
in the aid of the allies when necessary. But there would
be this difference, that Russia would constantly maintain
her strength, whereas the others might be unprepared, and
whereas now there was not a Russian flag flying in those
waters, and her ships had beetateven chased from the Sea of
Azoff, you would find, on the arrival of your contingent,
her flag flying on the walls of Constantinople. The hon. ba-
ronet having quoted the opinion of Marshal Marmont as to
the facility with which Russia might at any time make a de-
scan t from Sebastopol on Constantinople, while at the same
time she marched an army against the Balkan fortresses,
proceeded to say that, under such circumstances and with
such dangers, the proposition of the mare clausum would
be untenable. The right honourable member for
Manchester complained that the conduct of the
Western Powers with respect to the third point had been
very unsatisfactory. He did not dispute that proposition,
and all he could say was, that it only proved how fortunate
it was that the negotiations had been broken off. He
lamented to bear those praises of Russian moderation
from some of the most conspicuous members of the popu-
lar party in that house. Would not such expressions en-
courage Russia to hold on, and persevere in the war, in
the hope that the opinions of such influential persons
would have their weight with the English people ? (Hear.)
Every speech made in such a strain might be read by a
Russian general to his troops ; and Russian ministers
might translate it for the benefit of trembling merchants
and discont,lated nobles, if they desired to animate them
to resistance against this country. He honoured their bold-
ness in taking so unpopular a view of the question, but he
implored them to reflect whether they rightly exercised
their powers, when in a war undertaken to protect weakness
against aggression they took the part of the enemies of their
country. (Cheers.) He now came to the amendments,
andsit was with great regret he found there was not one
with whom he could cordially agree. He could not agree
to the amendment of the hon. baronet the member for Ox-
ford, much less to that of the lion, member for Kidder-
minster, and as to that with which the right hon. baronet
the member for Portsmouth had supplied him, it would
have been much more complimentary to the quarter from
which he had stolen it had not the right hon. baronet
added the crime of murder to that of theft. Taking the
bantling out of the cradle the right hon. baronet cut it in
two, and the part which he presented to the house had not
a leg to stand on. (A. laugh.) Now the motion of his right
hon. friend the member for Bucks, by implying a censure
on the Government for ambiguous language, offered a sub-
stantial reason why they, the House of Commons, should
volunteer to her Majesty the assurance of their'co-operation
i-i the war, or in the negotiation of a peace which they
should consider honest. But the moment you omitted
the censure, you implied that you found no fault what-
ever with the conduct of the war, or with the language
that had been held by the responsible advisers of the Crown,
and the resolution became an unnecessary platitude.
(Cheers.) It was with great satisfaction he found that the
motion of his right hon. friend had effected an object which
amply compensated for its defeat. It had not changed the
Government, but it had changed the tone of its members,
(Hear) He had no hope that this beneficial change would
last, but ho hoped the tide would not ebb as fast as the
suddenly galvanised zeal of the noble lord the member for
London, who expressed so much before the division, and
explained so much awayimnaediately after. (Cheers) The
motion of his right hon. friend had been conceived in no
party spirit. It had, on the contrary, cleared the ground
from all party influences, and had allowed them to discuss
the question, not as Englishmen against Englishmen,' but
as citizens of the same State discussing the policy which
ought to be adopted in a case of common danger.
(Hear.) Much reference had been made to Austria—
that power which was always ready to negotiate while it
hesitated to act. The time had now come for considering
what was the next position we could hold with reference
to that power ; and he earnestly entreated the house to dis-
tinguish between the friendship of that country and its
alliance. (Hoar, hear.) If they wished to limit the war
within narrow bounds, he thought they ought to maintain
friendly relations with Austria so long as she remained
neutral, because they could not injure that state without
injuring the balance of power in Europe. It was easy to
say that Austria might be reduced to a fourth-rate power,
but her answer would be this—lf you go to war to pre-
serve the balance of power, remember that Austria is as
necessary as a counterpoise to France, as Turkey is as a
counterpose to Russia. For these and other reasons he
would preserve friendly relations with Austria, but he
doubted the wisdom of that policy which had so earnestly
solicited her alliance. Suppose you had attained that
alliance, what would you have gained ? He said " Better
leave Austria alone, bide your time, don't offend or irritate
her, and inevitable events will bring her to your side."
Ho thought that our attitude towards Austria had been
much too supplicating. (Hear.) He now came to the pro-
blem laid down by the right hon. member for Manchester
—if we were to continue this war, of what shape was the
war to be ? Was it to be of a arge and comprehensive
character, ultimately involving changes in the governments
of Europe ? He warned them against raising hopes which
they might not be able to satisfy. (Hear.) He would not
admit that there was no hope of the restoration of Poland.
He would not prejudge what might be done with the
Crimea when we got it ; but he would not encourage
vague language which it might suit one minister to use,
and his successor to repudiate. Woe and shame to the
British statesman who should raise nations against
their rulers, not foreseeing that in those constitutional
changes to Which their governments were subject,
they might promise to-day that which their succes-
sors would withdraw to-morrow. (Hear, bear.) Those
nations who hoped for democracy must not look to
foreign soldiers, or the votes of foreign popular assemblies.
They could not receive liberty as a boon or extort it as a
right, exceplrit was signed at their own Runnymede and
under the shadow of their own oak. (Cheers.) Therefore,
let them confine this war to the object for which it had
been begun—the integrity and independence of Turkey,
with such guarantees for the future as statesmen might de-
vise, and victory might enable ua to obtain. (Hear.) That
conceded, he was not going to ask what new fortress was
to be attacked ; that was no affair of the House of Com-
mons. Matters of strategy must be settled by the allied
cabinets, and in councils of war. That house could judge
only of results ; and although the end of the war might be'
purely defensive, if they warted to drive Russia into
terms they must grapple with her wherever they could.
(Cheers.) The noble lord the member for Lynn had said
that there was nothing so impolitic as humiliating a foe
in support of his
when you could not crush him, quoting Machiavelli
scholastic
Russia,
m
proposition. He warned his noble
friend' against the attempt to reduce the grand science of
axbiuults. we We
could could
statesmanship
true, crush
crush h
not, ietrwaats.
tempt to be anything more than Russia. (Hear, hear.)
It might be said that William of Orange could not have
crushed Louis XIV., or that the burghers of the
Netherlands could not crush the house of Austria—but
William of Orange did crush Louis in aggressive action
upon Holland, and the burghers resisted successfully the
house of Austria. In the same way, his noble friend
might depend upon it, we could crush Russia in her at-

tempts to injure our ancient ally. The right lion. gentle.
man the member for Manchester had asked when, if the
policy indicated was followed out, would the war end ? He
(Sir B. Lytton) believed that if we were only in earnest in
carrying it on, and limited it to its legitimate objects, it
could not last long. In these days war was money, and
it was impossible for any power to sustain a long war
with a short purse. The pecuniary resources of Rus-
sia were already becoming exhausted—her trade was
almost annihilated—while her recruiting system was being
carried on in a way which, besides draining the country of
its adult male population, inflicted a heavy loss upon the
lords of the soil, and incalculable misery and discontent
upon the people. In conclusion, the hon. baronet expressed
a hope that when it should be asked what service the pre-
sent generation had performed, history would reply that
it drew the sword to protect the weak against the strong,
and that it had not sheathed it until it had redeemed the
pledge given to humanity upon the faith of two Christian
sovereigns, and vindicated' the cause of justice and liberty.
The LORD ADVOCATE thanked the hon. Bart. not only
for the clear exposition he hat given of his own views, but
also for having successfully disposed of the arguments of
those who were the opponents of the Government in the
present debate. It had been said that the country had
drifted into war. He altogether disputed the accuracy of
that statement. Never had a war been entered into by
the people of this country with so much deliberation. It
was not a war of passion—it was a war of dynasties—it was
a war of justice and of necessity; and he did not believe
the country would stop in its course until the object for
which the war hat been commenced had been achieved.
With regard to the origin of the war, when the right hon.
member for Manchester said it was owing to the tone of the
press 'and of the supposed impossibility of England and
France entering into an alliance to resist Russian aggres-
sion, the right hon. gentleman conceded the point that the
Emperor of Russia was all along waiting fur the opportunity
to attack Turkey. The interest we had in defending Turkey
was this :—That through the sides of Turkey our own liber-
ties were menaced. We had a plain and obvious danger to
ward off, and the question now to consider was, how best
we could place Turkey in such a position that the liberties
of Europe should be secure for the future. It by no means
followed, when the war was actually commenced, that
the status quo should be the condition of peace. The
right hon. gentleman the member for Oxford had said
that we ought not to raise our terms as the war went on ;
but the principle of altering the terms according to the
altered state of circumstances consequent on the war was
admitted by Lord Aberdeen himself, who increased the
terms upon which his Government were prepared to treat
for peace as the war went on. The terms upon which
peace might be negotiated on the one side and on the
other must always depend in a great measure upon the re-
sults of the war ; and the results of our military operation,
even before the recent successes, were certainly not such as
should induce us to accept lower terms than those origi-
nally proposed, but the contrary. (Hear, hear.) The main
demand was the limitation of the Russian preponderance
in the Black Sea, as embodied in the third point. The
only effectual means of carrying out that object was by
the measures proposed by the allies, for it was clear
that if the other proposition were adopted—viz., that
Turkey should have the right to call in the fleets
of France and England if she were menaced—in the
event of France and England not being agreed, or either
of those po vers not being agreed with Turkey, there would
be no protection for Turkey. Looking at the result of the
debate, he did not think the Emperor of Russia, or any
power in Europe, could now entertain a doubt that the
opinion of the House of Commons and of the country was
that we had entered upon a war upon just grounds, and
were -determined not to relinquish it until the end we had
in view was attained. (Hear.)
Mr. COBDEN moved the adjournment of the debate.
Lord PALMERSTON trusted that the house wou

allow this amendment to be disposed of. He considered
that the amendment on which the hon. member would
wish to state his sentiments was the amendment of the
hon. member for the University of Oxford (Sir W.
Heathcote).
Mr. COBDEN begged the noble lgrd's pardon, but it was
on this amendment that he wished to state his sentiments.
Mr. DISRAELI hoped that there would be no difference
of opinion on this important point. There were several
amendments on the paper, but it appeared to him that this
was the real question on which the opinion of the house
was asked—whether the conferences were to • proceed, or,
as it was understood, to be closed immediately—was this,
had the best means been employed by Government to esta-
blish the equilibrium, and put an end to the preponderance
of Russia in the Black Sea. A more important question,
or one more deserving the consideration of the House of
Commons could not wall be conceived. When the noble
lord at the head of the Government announced, before the
recess, that he intended to support the first part of the mo-
tion of the hon. member for Kidderminster, he (Mr. Dis-
raeli) told the noble lord that he must be prepared for con-
siderable debates in consequence of that declaration. Not
only was the whole question of the policy of Government in-
volved in the discussion, but much more than that—the
future means by which peace was to be maintained. He
might also take that opportunity of answering the remarks
of the Lord Advocate, and perhaps he might he able to show
him that the subject was of much wider character than he
seemed to suppose. The learned lord imagined, acting
under the instructions of the Government, that there
were no other means by which the preponderance of Russia
could be possibly checked and controlled. He (Mr. Disraeli)
thought, however, that it was the duty of the House of
Commons to enter fully and completely ino this discussion;
that the first part of the amendment of the hon. member
for Kidderminster was the real business before them ; and
that all the rest was " leather and prunella." (Laughter.)
The noble lord, therefore must not suppose that they
could proceed to an early division upon a subject on which
it appeared to him the discussion had only commenced.
The debate was then adjourned till this day.
The Mortmain Bill was read the scowl time.
TENANTS IMPROVEMENTS COMPENSATION
(IRELAND) BILL.

On the order for going into committee on this bill,
Colonel DUNNE hoped the Chief Secretary for Irelano
would give the house ample opportunity to consider and
discuss the amendments which he proposed to introduce
into the bill.

➢lr. HORSMAN said his amendments would appear on
the votes to-morrow, and ho proposed to bring them under
the consideration of the house on Thin-slay next.
Mr. S. FITZGERALD said it was ludicrous to suppose
that the houso could discuss the amendments on so early a
day as Thursday.
Lord NAAS also' thought that more time should be
allo wed.

Lord PALMERSTON then said the discussion would be
taken on Thursday week.
The Grants of Land Bill was read a second time.
ORDNANCE BOARD BILL.
On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Mr. STAFFORD hoped that a measure for the recon-
struction of an important public office would not be read
the scond time without a full discussion.
Col. DUNNE complained that no clear statement had
yet been made in the changes in the Ordnance Department.
Mr. MONSELL said he was anxious to make such a
statement. He would postpone the second reading till
Friday,
EPISCOPAL CAPITULAR ESTATES BILL.
The Marquis of BLANDFORD hoped the house would
go into committee pro forma upon this bill, in order that
he might introduce certain amendments and alterations.
The bill then passed through committee pro forma, and
was ordered to be reported on Friday.
NATIONAL GALLERY, &c. (DUBLIN) BILL.

This bill passed through committee.
EDINBURGH LANDS BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
SEWERS (HOUSE DRAINAGE) BILL.
The Lords' amendments toothis bill were considered and
agreed to.
YOUTHFUL OFFENDERS BILL.
Mr. ADDERLEY obtained leave to bring in a bill to
amend the Youthful Offenders Act.
The house thqn adjourned at half-past twelve o'clock.

The departures from the port of London for the Aus-
tralian colonies during the past week have comprised
nine vessels, of the aggregate capacity of 5,270 tons.
The rates of freight exhibit a tendency to improvement
[ADVERTISEMENT.]—Du Barry's delicious Revalenta A rabica
Food cures indigestion (dyspepsia), constipation, and diar-
rhoea, dysentery, nervousness, biliousness, and liver com-
plaints, flatulency, distension, acidity, heartburn, palpitation
of the heart, nervous headaches, deafness, noises in the head
and ears, pains in almost every part of the body, tic doulo-
ufaoe-ache, chronic inflammation, cancer and ulceration
roeftxhe stomach, pains at the pit of the stomach and between
the shoulders, erysipelas, eruptions of the skin, biles and
carbikncles, impurities and poverty of the blood, scrofula,
cough, asthma, consumption, dropsy, rheumatism, gout,
nausea and sickness during pregnancy, after eating, or at sea,
spasms, cramps, epilepti fits, spleen, general
quietude, sleeplessness, involuntary blushing,
vd
dislike to society., unfitness for study, loss
lowaerbai
llisytpsyiir , t sin ,
tremors,
of memory, delusions, vertigo, blood to the head, exhaustion,
melancholy, groundless fear, indecision, wretchedness,
thoughts of self-destruction, and many other complaints.
It is, moreover, the best food for infants and invalids
generally, as it never turns acid on the weakest stomach,
nor interferes with a good liberal diet, but imparts a
healthy relish for lunch and dinner, and restores the faculty
of digestion, and nervous and muscular energy to the
most enfeebled. In whooping cough, measles, smallpox, and
chicken or wind pox it renders all medicine superfluous
by romov'ng all inflammatory and feverish symptoms.—
In canisters, 11b. 2s. 9d.; 21b. 45. 6d.; 51b. 11s. ; 121 b. 225.
The 121 b., carriage free, on receipt of Post-office order. Barry
Du Barry & Co., 77, Regent-street,
London ; also at 182,
Piccadilly; 60, Gracechurch-street ; 330, and 451, Strand;
4, Cheapside • 60 and 68,
• ' Cornhill ; 49, Bishopsgate-street;
,
55, Charing-cross; 54, Upper Baker-street; 63 and 150,
Oxford-street ; 89, High-street, Camden-town ; 18, Pall-
mall ; 7, Pall-mall-East ; 132, New Bond-street ; 24, Mot-
comb-street ; 13, King William-street, City 30, Conduit-
street; 21, Cockspur-street ; 95, Farringdon-street ; 67, St.
Paul's Churchyard ; 6, Edward-street, Portman-square.
[AnuaTissmasrr.] Tns WAR IN THE EAST. —POWERFITL
PATENT RECONNOITRING GLASSES.— Messrs. S. and B. Solo-
mons, opticians, 39, Albemarle-street, Piccadilly. observe
opposite the York Hotel. By her Majesty's Royal
improvements
be
rilliant
dliant extraordinary Telescopes,
Camp, Race-
course, Opera, and Perspective Glasses, to know the distances
iLne ttthe
er s
InPaeteetntpefwme
r fvua 11
"a
nbdl
of objects viewed through them—of great importance to the
army, navy, and others. These telescopes possess such extra-
ordinary powers that some 3i inches, with an extra eye-
piece, will show distinctly Jupiter's moons, Saturn's ring,
and the double stars ; with the same telescope can be
seen a person's countenance three miles and a half distant,
and an object from 16 to 20 miles. They are of larger and all
sizes, with increasing powers accordingly ; while their vary-
ing from 4 to 6 inches enable us to, discover more than the
above and the (locoman with his 6 satellites, &c.---The Royal
Exhibition, 185:L.—Valuable, newly-invonted, ver-
y small,
Powerful waistcoat-pocket glass,the size of a walnut by which
a person can be seen and known 1a miles distant; they answer
every purpose on the race-course, and at the opera houses,
country scenery, and ships are clearly seen at 8 to 10 miles,
They are invaluable for shooting, deer-stalking, yachting, to
sportsmen, gentlemen, gamekeepers, and tourists. Opera,
race-course, camp, and perspective glasses, with wonderful
power.—Newly-constructed Spectacle Lenses of the great-
est transparent power. Tho valuable advantage derived from this invention is, that vision becoming impaired is
preserved and strengthened, and very aged persons are
enabled to employ their sight at the most minute occu-
pation—can see with these lenses of a much less magnify-
ing power—and they do not require the frequent changes
to the dangerous effects of further powerful assistance. Deaf-
ness—New Discovery.—The Organic Vibrator, an extraordi-
nary powerful, small, newly-invented instrument for deafness,
entirely different from all others, to surpass anything of the
kind that has been, or probably ever can be, produced. Being of the same colour as the skin, is not perceptible ; it
enables deaf persons to hear distinctly at church
public assemblies ; the unpleasant sensation of singin and at
g noises
in the ears is entirely removed; and it affords all the assist-
ance that possibly could be desired. 39, Albemarle-street,
Piccadilly. Observe —opposite the York Hotel.

LAW 1-2‘7TELLIGENVE (THIS DAY).

ROLLS COURT.
KATE V. SMITH.--JUDGMENT.
In this case, which came before the Court upon mo-
tion at the last seal,
The Master of the Rolls, on taking his seat this morn-
ing, stated that since the case was before him he bad
carefully read the papers, and was of opinion that he
ought to make no order upon the motion.
It appeared that the plaintiff while a minor had got
considerably into debt, and had given securities the
day after he came of age to the extent of upwards of
12,0001. The bill was filed to impeach those securities,
on the ground that the plaintiff was not liable to pay
them ; and, also, for an injunction to restrain the de-
fendant from proceeding with an action-at-law to recover
the amount of the bills given by the plaintiff. An in-
junction was obtained, exparte, for that purpose, and a
motion was made at the last seal to dissolve that in-
junction, on which motion his honour now gave judg-
ment, declining to make any order upon it, except that
the costs should be costs in the cause.
His Honour then proceeded to hear motlons.
All the other Equity Courts beard motions, it being a
seal day, hut nothing of the slightest interest occurred
in them during the morning.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
(Sittings in Banco.)
CLAYTON V. FENWICK.

Mr. Hill, Q.C., and Mr. Addison were for the plain-
tiff ; and Mr. Temple, Q.C., and Mr. Unthank for the
defendant.
This was an action for trespass for removing certain
turnpike gates placed on the road from Newcastle-on-
Tyne to North Shields, and came before their lordships
for their opinion with reference to the various local and
general acts bearing on the question. The plaintiff was
clerk to the trustees for putting into effect an act for
repairing these roads passed in 1831, and the defendant
was the surveyor to the Corporation of the borough of
Tynemouth, enforcing the public Health Act of 1848.
On the 7th January, 1852, the Council had occasion to
use the North Shields road with carts and horses, and
pass over the sites of former turnpike gates, on which
the plaintiff caused bars to be put up, and refused to
let the horses and carts pass without payment of toll.
The defendant then removed the bars and passed over
the roads, which was the trespass complained of.
The roads and branches passed within the borough of
Newcastle-on-Tyne,Tynemouth, Shields, and othertown.
ships. The question for their lordships' opinion was,
whether the trustees for putting into execution the Ist
and 2d of Win. IV., chap. 72, were entitled to collect
tolls within the borough of Tynemouth, and which de-
pended on the point whether the local Board of Health
were authorised, in a provisional order they made in
1851,- to direct the Towns Municipal Act to be incorpo-
rated with the Local or Improvement Act, so as to make
it of force within the borough of Tynemouth. The
tolls were mortgaged in a heavy amount, and assuming
they were put up on the road within the borough in a
legal manner, the tolls collected there formed a very
material, if not principal, part of the fund from which
the pat-ties who have advanced the money were to look
for repayment, and that these tolls were mortgaged
prior to the passing of the General Board of Health
Act, and the attempt to incorporate the 50th sec-
tion of the Towns Municipal Act, so as to make it a
binding enactment within the borough of Tynemouth. North Shields Local Act reserved the right of the
mortmees. The grand question was, whether if the
50th section of the Towns Municipal Act did not apply,
and the trustees of the roads may, in certain places,
erect toll bars, collect tolls, and repair the roads, whe-
ther they were justified in doing so at the particular
places they had erected them.

Lord Campbell, at the commencement of the case,
observed that the plans provided for the guidance of the
Court in the case, by the plaintiff, were so complicated
as to rather mystify than elucidate the case, extending
over as much paper as would cover the area of the
Court, and directed they should not be allowed in the
costs ; and

Mr: Justice Erie remarked that the interlacing of so
many acts of Parliament, and sections of the acts, made
this a very complicated case.

The arguments had not concluded when we went to
press.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

(Sittings in Banco.—Before the Lord Chief Baron, and
Barons Alderson, Platt, and Martin.)
JOHNSON AND OTHERS V. SHREWSBURY AND BIRMINGHAM

RAILWAY COMPANY.

Mr. Raymond appeared to show cause against a rule
obtained by the plaintiffs for a review of the Master's
taxation of costs, in the matter of an arbitration between
the parties. It appeared that the action was for a breach
of contract entered into between the plaintiffs, who are
contractors with the defendants, for the working of their
line for the term of seven years, but which was broken
off before the expiration of that period in consequence,
as was alleged by the defendants, that-the plaintiffs bad
worked the line improperly. The learned counsel sub-
mitted that there was nothing in this case to distinguish
it from many others of a similar kind, and there was
nothing to take it out of the general rule and practice.
Baron Martin observed that surely the Master must
be the best judge of the taxation of the costs in question.
The Chief Baron said that the reason why the rule
bad been granted in the first instance was because the
Master thought the Court might fortify the opinion that
all the Masters seemed to entertain, that two counsel
ought not to be allowed in an arbitration case, which
was one of the questions arising in this case.
Baron Alderson also observed that the Masters were
guided by general practice and discretion, and if they
were not trusted to the Court would have to tax the
costs in every matter.
Mr. Raymond having been further heard,
Mr. Phipson argued at some length in favour of the
rule.

The Court finally decide.] that the rule must be made
absolute in the matter of reviewing the taxation of part
of the costs, and that the question of counsel must be
left to the consideration of the Master.

BANKRUPTCY COURT.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Fonblanine.)
The power of the Court to grant execution for costs.
IN RE BERESFORD.
This bankrupt was described as of Portugal-street,
Lincoln's-inn-fields, cabinetmaker, and to-day was ap-
pointed for his last examination.
Mr.- Lucai cpposed on behalf of the trade assignee,
who was the only creditor who had proved his debt,
but his Honour, after hearing Mr. Chidley, allowed the
bankrupt to pass, reserving all questions as to conduct
until the certificate meeting.
Mr. Lucas then applied for an immediate execution
to issue from this Court against a person named Davison,
for costs in a petition to dismiss the assignee for mis-
c,nduct. It appeared that Davison, who is a friend of
the bankrupt, sought to prove a debt and choose him-
self assignee, but from doubts his Honour would
not admit the Roof, and the assignee was ap-
pointed, and as there were no assets he made
inquiries in the belief that property had been concealed.
Davison then petitioned the Court to dismiss the
assignee, but his Honour considered that the charge was
solely to get rid of the assignee, and dismissed the peti-
tion with costs. Davison to avoid this petitioned the
Insolvent Court, and the present object was to get an
immediate execution before he could obtain protection.
His Honour said it was a very unusual application,
but it would be granted.