The Sun.
London, England, 1864-07-08 00:00:00

Tin SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 8, 1864.

uption). I maintain, with
the house is placed, my hon.
pedakefeerr)ehncae7 to;:tr_h:::e:,soep,liiniinon,of
ur the
course, (the (twhheicSli
friend near me wac perieotry justified in using the term,
after so ungentlemanly at' attack as that made upon him by
the hon. gentleman the Under-Secretary of State.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, wno was
vehemently assailed with cries of " Order" from the Op-
position side, said—Sir, when the hon. gentleman (Mr.
Disraeli) rose there was imlXtiiate silence on this side of
the house. I tr.ist we shall be permitted to say what I have
to :ay on this side in order; The hon. gentleman, as I
understood him; fotincled his justification in point of order
on what has just taken place upon an allegation made by
him that my hon. friend the Under-Secretary of State for
the Foreign Department charged hon. gentlemen opposite
with falsification. (Cheers./ In the firsi place, lam not
aware that he did so—(oh, oh)—that the allegation was
correct in point of fact; but permit me to say that, if these
disorderly words were used, which I do not aimit, for I am
not conscious of it—if, and this is matter material to the
issue—it disorderly words were used by my honourable
friend, it was the duty of gentlemen who thought them
disorderly to do that which was done by my honourable
friend the Under-Secretary of State, and call the attention
of the house and chair to the subject the moment the
words were used. (Hear, bear.) I apprehend lam safe
in laying down that a breach of order—much less a mere
allegation of a breach of order—committed by one
speaker, will not justify another in the same breach of
order. (Great interrup ion.) I hope it will be clearly un-
derstood whether an imputation of calumnious statement:
is or is not henceforward within the liberty of parliamen-
tary debate, (Oh, oh )

Sir J. PATON G ''ON —I think it right, after wh It has
fallen from th., r 4 ,ht hoe. gentleman, to state that I myself
heard—and I may say heard with deep indignation—the
word " falsification" from the hon. gentleman on the oppo-
site side. (Cheers.) I myself said across the house at the
moment the word was too bad, and I say, if the hon. gen-
tleman is to be allowed to use language accusing hon. gen-
tlemen on this side with falsification,we have a right ,o call
that word ca uninious. (C3nservative cheers.) I say, after
all that has passed, I think the Speaker has ruled most
properly.

Mr B. OSBORNE was heard in preference to Mr
Hardy, who was then rising, and said—l rise to speak to
order, and to make a respectful and moderate appeal to the
house, anct I do so in support of your just authority, sir.
(Conservative cheers.) You, sir, have been appealed to by
an hou. gentleman in this house, and having laid down the
law, which I think you did in your usual candid and
straightforward manner--.[Here the hon. gentleman was
interrupted by the rising of Sir Minto Farquhar, who, in
the general turmoil, had not observed that he had not yet
concluded]—l must put it to the house whether we are net
imperil ing our just influence in the affairs of Europe and
this country it, when you hive given your decision, that
the speaker, whoever he may be on either side, is in order,
the noble lord or any other member of this house is to get
up and dispute your decision—(Opposition cheers)—and
endeavour to overrule it. Such is not my idea
of the way to pre-erve order, and 1 am surprised
that the leader of this house should endeavour to
bring your au-hority into disrepute. (Opposition cheers.)
The SPEAKER, who was received with solemn silence,
said—l am sure the hon. member for Leominster (MrHardy)
is the last member in the Heim to impute motives to any
man. Certainly the debate has been very warm and excit-
ing, and I should regret to hear, because it would be put.
ring the whole House into a talse position, that heated
language on one side should be a justification for language
passing the line of order on the other side. (Hear, hear.)
Certainly, anything imputing motives to an hon. memoer
is contrary to the rules o: this House (Hear, hear.) What
has passed in the explanation of this matter, has in some
degree in my view altered the case. I mean that
it appears to me that language which rather passes
the ordinary rules of debate, has been used in conse-
quence of similar language having been used previously.
The debate has been a heated one, and as it was going
on I conress there did not appear to me to be any neces •
city for interruption or interventien on my part. The
hon. menwer for Leominster did not, I ant sure, intend to
impute motives which would be of an unparliamentary
cnaracter in this case. Under the circumstances of the
case it did not appear to me necessary that I should inter-
Pfero; but after what hae occurred I do nope that the house
will return to a calmer spirit, and I trust that, though the
moment is an exci ing one, language on no side will be
used which passes the kis!. privi;oges of debate.
Mr LAYARD, Hein; amid loud cries of " Order " and
" Chair," wish to express my regret to the hon.
gen Leman if he understood me. I did not use the word
" fwsitication " as my own word, but I quoted it as the word
of another. (Cries of " Name.")

An Hon. 111EMBRR—The Cnancellor of the Exchequer.
Mr LAYAILD—it the hon. gentleman understood that
as an imputation on my part tliat he was guilty of falsifica-
tion, I hg to offer hiw my apology.
Mr HOUSMAN, after several vain attempts to gain a
hearing, said—l wish to speak on another point. (Oh, oh.)
The hen membe: for Leominster just now, holding in his
hand the terms of the motion 01 which I gave notice to this
house in March. (Loud cries of " Ordsr," and " Chair.")
irtt Lou give oue Lena&

Mr, lIARDY—Ar, Speaker, I trust that neither now
nor upon any other occasion shall I be wanting in respect
for the chair, or for the coaracter and dignity or this house,
but I cannot help saying that, on the firet night of this de-
bate, the hon. geotlenian accused the right hon. gentleman
the Chancellor of the Exchequer—(Load cries by the Op-
position, amidst which)

The OHAN'ELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose and
advance ito the table. Tb.- cries were then intensified into
must vociferous deuriancil for order, and the right hon. gen-
tleman, finding it impossible to proceed, stood a few mu-
meats in silence, and then resumed his Goat.

The SPEAK ER—The right hon. gentleman is not going
to refer to what pa:3Bo—
HARDY—It was in this debate.
The SPEAKER—I cannot allow words which were
uttered on a previous night--

Mr. HARDY—Without imputing motives either to the
right hon. gentleman opposite, what I meant to say, and
what I do say still, is, if these expressions are not retracted
by those who bay that th. y had been falsified on this side
of the house- that is a calumny, by whomsoever delivered.
Ido not impute motives. A ealntunir May
be spread with-
out the person spreading it being influenced icy motives;
but the statement involved the honour of gentlemen on this
side of the house. At the mane time, the hon: gentleman
has not apologised to me, for I require no apology. I can
only say I did not impute to the hoh gefitiehian opposite
(Mr. Layard), or to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, any-
thing wilful; but in the heat of debate, they uf ed words
which were calculated to wound the honour and feelings of
hon. gentlemen on this side of the
house. (Hear, hear.)
(The hon. gentleman then resumed the point in the debate
at which he was interrupted,
) The hon. gentleman oppo-
site (Mr. Horsman) had kectised him of not quoting the
terns of his addrSis. He had no objection to read the
whole thiLt.,;...:-IMr. HOluistafs—The last paragraph.]---
`t -oat, in the opinion of this house, her Majesty ought not
t'l Oa advised to give her ailment to any new engagements
affecting the integrity and independence of Denmark until
those engagements have b'en made known to Parliament."
(Hear.) He was at that point when the hon. gentleman
(Mr. Layard) stated the house were in possession of the
papers relating to this matter on the Ist of March. The
right hon. gentleman (Mr.Hottnatt) said that there was no
objection to this discussion being taken at any period. On
the contrary, both Lord Russell and the noble lord opposite
had said it would be ilijudicicus, and might inteifsre with
the negotiations, to bring this question forward at an
earlier period, or while the Conference was sitting. This
being so, the time they had taken was the earliest time
they had the opportunity of do:ng 80. They did not in-
terfere during the progress of these negotiations. The de-
sire of every man was that the peace of Europe should be
restored it possible; and if this Conference Lad been brought
to an amicable conclusion, no one would have been more
.de-
lighted than he at su6, a conclusion. They were told, It
is not only the past, yelt
must tell us something about the
futur. Now, as to the future, the hon. gentleman (Mr.
Layard) had told theM that he had seven folio volumes re-
lating to certain proceedings, which none of them had seen.
Were they despatthes or were they donunfents in exteneo of
which they had heard from the hon• member and the noble
lord ? It was plain it was only the case of the Government
that bad been laid before the house, and it was on the case
of the Government that they asked the verdict of that house
and the country.
The hon. gpossible to constitute apelicoyf them
forhad. And it was im
entianan was in possession
of information which lloliothe future when they had
not the means of information. Hen. gentlemen said "Bring
forward your vote of .
damaging the interest
peace, and would any one say that
oe fnt of con
accused the Government of mismanaging these affairs and
fidence." Well, they had
was not a vote of want of confidence P If it were not, he
would like to know what was. The Government had
threatened and menaced and had not fulfilled their threats.
They had alvised, and their advice had nut been taken.
The condition of things had been changed, and they had
strong terms the conduct of the
deserted those to
members for Bra
Government, and so had
whom
and
dy
Rochdale had condemned in
had given advice. The hon.
that watchful Tear'em, as be called himself, who was
always looki,,g atter British honour and interest. He flew
upon Lord Russell, tore from him every rag, and had lett
and exposed him in
his flatted ness to that, house and to
the country. (Laughter.) This speech was foilowed by a
remarkable statement, that the hem. gentleman
was going to folios gentlemen to the Government
lobby. Ha could hardly wonder at that. Four.
teen years ago the noble watch-log as he called him-
self—had saved his master, and he was about to follow him
into the lobby in the tame way again. (Laughter.) If it
were admitted that
tion, who had brought her into that position ? and how did
England occupied an embarrassing posi-
the present Government fled her when they became pss-
sessed of the seals of office S according to the statements of
the Government themselves, they had been up to the middle
of last year in accordance with France and Russia. The
fact was that they had arrived at this position by constant
meddling. With regard to the Conference, he could not
help thinking , hat all mankind, like M. Drouyn de Lhuys,
foresaw how it would end. The Government began
by discarding the treaty which had all along been the basis