The Sun.
London, England, 1852-12-07 00:00:00

ventured to prepare as an amendment—words which he
thought would secure what the noble marquis professed to
desire, and what he believed all their lordships desired—
namely, a unanimous concurrence of opinion with re-
gard to the question involved. He placed those words
in the noble marquis's hands. The noble marquis did
not immediately return them, having stated that before
adopting them he must consult his friends. Who the
friends were with whom the noble marquis consulted he
did not know ; but he knew that he was waiting for the
noble marquis for a considerable period, and that on re-
turning to the house the noble marquis said, that though
he could have wished to place on record the words which
he had prepared himself, he was quite -willing to accept
his,(the Earl of Derby's), in order thatlthere might be
no division. Now, that was an exact statement of what
occurred ; and so far was he from thinking the scene
which took place discreditable to the House of Lords,
that he thought it was just an example of the manner
in which political opponents in that house were in the
habit—and he hoped would always be in the habit—of
dealing with each other, with frankness and with
courtesy, and as far as possible, endeavouring to
conciliate opponents instead of embittering differ-
ences, and bringing about unnecessary divisions.
Under these circumstances he had framed the resolution
which the noble marquis opposite had adopted—it simply
but fully adopted the principle of unrestricted competi-
tion, in the same form that the house affirmed the prin-
ciple of slavery emancipation and the Roman Catholic
Relief Bill; and it was unjust to call upon him, or other
noble lords who had thought with him, to retract or stig-
matise the opinions which they had heretofore held as
unwise or impolitic. (Hear, hear.) As well might the
Whigs, after the Roman Catholic Relief Bill was carried,
and Sir Robert Peel had returned to power, have gone
down to Parliament and required the right hon. baronet
and his friends to eat the words that they had uttered in
1834 and 1835. They were not called upon to declare
by a formal resolution that the opinion which they had
opposed had been " wise, just, and beneficial," and why
should the Government of the present day be accused of
wishing to pursue a reactionary policy because they re-
fused to stultify opinions which their friends and follow-
ers had steadfastly held throughout the entire controversy?
Such a course of calling upon noble lords to pronounce
against their;feelingrs and conscientious opinions in a re-
solution which should seek for nothing but a concurrence
of opinion, in its spirit was most injudicious, besides
being directly opposed to the usage of their lordship's
house. All that their lordships could possibly desire
was to pronounce in favour of the present commercial
policy of the country ; and for his own part, he need
scarcely say that he cordially concurred in the motion
made by the noble marquis. He concurred in it without
the slightest reservation, and he believed it could be con.
curred in by the great majority of his friends and sup-
porters ; but at the same time he was quite ready to de-
clare that, if words could be found to make the future
more clear and decided, he would unhesitatingly adopt
them. (Hear, hear.) He was, however, convinced that
no such words could be introduced into the resolution ;
and he therefore hoped their lordships would, resting
satisfied with the resolution as it stood, refuseto sanction
an amendment which could only be looked upon as a
medium for censuring opinions that some noble lords
had conscientiously entertained in bygone times.
(Cheers,)
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE had but a very few
words to address to their lordships before the resolution
was put. He was ready to confess that he had been a
party to the agreement which was made by the noble
marquis near him, and he certainly understood that, for
the sake of securing unanimity, the resolution proposed
by the noble earl at the head of the Government was to
be adopted, but, of course, that understanding could
not possibly be binding upon noble lords who were not
present when the agreement was made. (Hear, hear.)
He did not find fault with his noble friend, the noble
baron who had moved the amendment, for having done
so, but under the circumstances which he had just men-
tioned, if the question came to a division, he should
abstain from voting for it. Having said thus much
'with respect to the position in which the house found
itself, he wished to say a few words with respect to
the motion which had obtained the concurrence of the
noble earl at the head of the Government. Without
entering into the question as to whether it was proper
or necessary that the house should adopt any reso-
lution, finally sanctioning the principle of free trade,
he would at once confess that it having been determined
that such a resolution ought to be passed, he should be
the last man to dispute about the terms in which the
resolution ought to be made. The position in which
they found themselves was this—the noble earl at the
head of the Government was willing to accept the deci-
sion of the country, as being against a return to a pro-
tective policy, and to adopt a resolutipn which should
pledge the house to adhere in future strictly to the prin-
ciples of unrestricted competition. Now, that being so,
and the Government having requested the house to forge
fetters by which they were hereafter to be bound, all that
the house had to do was to take care that the fetters should
be made with such well-tempered metal, that noble lords
opposite should find it difficult to escape from them. (A
laugh.) They were all free upon this subject ; but so far as
he himself was concerned, he could not help feeling that
there was a wide difference between making an agreement
with parties who had suddenly changed their opinions and
with parties who had held the same opinion throughout the
whole of the struggle. He was bound therefore to ad-
mit that the noble baron near him (Lord Beaumont) was
perfectly justified in proposing his amendment, and in
desiring that the house should express its opinion in
terms so strong and decisive that it would be impossible
for the house or the Government hereafter to withdraw
from it. (Hear, hear.)
The Earl of IARROWBY was opposed to any imi-
tation of the House of Commons in assigning reasons for
the resolution they had adopted. The objection to such
a course was that by assigning no other reason, tile
house in effect declared they saw no other reason for
opposing the recent policy than the inexpediency of fre-
quent change. It would be best to leave out that por-
tion of the resolution, and make it merely affirmatory.
He should propose, therefore, that they should leave out
all the preamble, and simply declare their adhesion to
the recent commercial policy, and that they would do
nothing to impede its operations or hinder its progress.
He doubted if the noble lord, or any noble lord in the
house, would assign the prosperity of the country to any
one cause, be it free trade or not.
Lord STRANGFORD, after listening to so much and
understanding so little—(a laugh)—only rose to express
his deep regret that the noble lord the member for Tiver-
ton (Lord Palmerston) was not a member of their lord-
ships' house. There would then be some chance of
scorning to a conclusion. (Laughter.)
The Duke of NEWCASTLE expressed his concur-
rence in the view taken by his noble friend (the Earl of
Aberdeen), and in the opinion which he expressed as to
the absolute inutility of the present or any other resolu-
tion. Under these circumstances, he rose to impress on
the noble marquis (Clanricarde) that it would be very
desirable for him to accept the proposal just made by
the noble earl--(" hear" from the Earl of Derby)—and
thus put an end to the discussion, by the omission in
the motion of the commencing words, of which so many
noble lords disapproved. (Hear, hear.) He thought
that they would be acting more wisely and prudently
as regards their own credit and the object they all pro-
fessed to have at heart, if they confined themselves
to the practical part of the resolution, omitting all
the preamble. If he were to understand from the
cheer of the noble earl opposite that this arrange-
ment met with his approval—(the Earl of Derby here
said he had no objection to it)—and if the noble marquis
(Clanricarde) would also assent to it, he should not think
it right to trespass long on the attention of the hous
Some observations had, however fallen from the nob
earl at the head of the Government, with regard to th

course and conduct of the late Sir R. Peel and his friends,
with respect to which he felt bonnd to offer a few re-
marks. He would not discuss with the noble earl what
the noble earl might consider the peculiar mission of his
noble friend (the Earl of Aberdeen) and the followers of
Sir R. Peel in that house; whether it was their bounden
duty, for some reasons which the noble earl did not as-
sign, to act as mediators between noble lords on the
Opposition side and noble lords on the Ministerial side--
to come forward as pacificators, who should turn the
balance, lie presumed, in favour of the Government. He
knew not what might, be the opinion of the noble earl,
but, with respect to the question immediately before
the house, this he could say, that they (the fol-
lowers of the lath Sir Robert Peel) considered
that a legacy had devolved on them from that
great and illustrious man—namely the protection of the t
commercial policy which he founded in this country, and
to the success of which they were all duly testifying.
(Hear, hear.) From that duty lie could assure the noble
earl they were not likely to be diverted by any observa-
tions he might make. The noble earl said he could par-
don some degree of feeling on the part of his noble friend
(the Earl of Aberdeen), because it was natural that he
Should he anxious to express an opinion favourable to
the f
policy of Sir R. Peel ; but his noble riend exl
!aid that though it would have been his individuaplress wishy
„mu' declare that policy "wise, just, and beneficial," yet it
° not be desirable to endeavour to do that which the
noble earl hinted at in his somewhat impassioned pero-
ration, imtheir
opinions
poseon noble lords opposite a recantation of
said heBll.l, nand for that very reason his noble friend
noble earl at thet wish to propose any such words. The
abstainer of the Government had, however,
studiously
eon f!orn answering the 'question why,
when his own
cepted certain resolnet? o es in the other house had ae-
on jse and voted for them, he now
objected to calling
same resolutions? (Rehar, Rousehe of Lords to adopt the
this course the
noble earl left the house to draw one
either that he was willing easetn.te of two inferences—
either
in the House ceinmons, decided slur on his
he considered ob-
ley refusin to call
on their lordships to adopt words which
; or else, which
jectionable and repulsive to their feelings
would be a still more painful cone •
hial°n' and that
The
rae-
(the Duke of Newcastle). would. be sorry toarrivneeat atthhet
the noble earl was not sincere in his declaration
0 le
spect to the practical acceptance of free tree,. The n b
earl had obserrred what would have been thought, ii
on
Sir R. Peel's accession to office in 1834 and 1835, a
tion hadebeen made to declare the Reform Bill a wis
just, and beneficial" measure ? But the case was in no e'
re-
spect parallel with the present. If Sir R. Peel, from the
passing of the Reform Bill up to his accession to office in
1834 and 1835, had constantly brought forward in his place
motions for the repeal of the Reform Act—if he had been!
making speeches session by session against it—if he. had.
been receiving deputations in his house and telling his
friends that at the propertime the Reform Act would be re-
pealed, and if they only waited he would give the word "UP,
Guards, and at 'em;" if he had attended a great meet-
ing and said, "he would cry halt in the downward
course of legislation which was being pursued ;" if that
had been Sir R. Peers career then would the members
•f either house of Parliament have been justified in im-

posing a test on him when he took office in 1834-35.
(Hear, hear.) But in the first reformed Parliament Sir
R. Peel took the earliest opportunity of declaring that
he accepted the Reform Act as the irrevocable settle-
ment of a great constitutional question. (Hear, hear.)
Therefore there was no parallel between the position of
Sir Robert Peel in 1834-35 and the present position of
the noble earl at the head of the Government. (Hear,
hear.) The noble earl had ventured on somewhat deli-
cate and dangerous ground when he pointed out to
the mover of the amendment and to other noble lords
the various periods when they abandoned the prin-
ciples of protection and turned Free-traders ; and,
though the noble earl ended by saying, " God forbid
that I should taunt anybody for a change of opinion !"
yet, by another allusion to the course taken by Sir
R. Peel and his colleagues in 1846, he appeared de-
sirous of expressing an opinion that there had been some
dereliction of duty, and some infraction of political
principle in the course then pursued. (Hear, hear.) The
noble earl said that be certainly objected, and still did,
to the manner in which, and the men by whom, the mea-
sure of 1846 was carried. He (the Duke of Newcastle)
did not deny, any more than Sir R. Peel or any of his
Government denied, a change of opinion, but the com-
plaint against the noble earl was that he had not changed
his opinion. If the noble earl had come forward and
said that his opinion had changed at the 11th or 12th,
or, it might be said the 13th, hour, then the present re-
solution would be unnecessary, He should then feel it
no more necessary to bind the Government than he
should to bind their lordships' house, which had never
swerved in any vote from the course of free trade during
the last 10 years. [Here the Earl of Derby made some
observation.] He repeated the words " during the last
ten years ;" for from 1842 to the present year there was
no instance in which that house had attempted to reverse
the course of free trade. In 1842' the whole of the
tariff was carried in their lordships' house either with
no division or by considerable majorities. The repeal of
the corn laws in 1846 was carried, notwithstanding the
strong opposition and eloquent speech of the noble earl
opposite, uner the guidance of that great and illustrious
man, whose warning voice would not again be heard in
difficulty and danger. (Hear, hear.) In the same year the
alteration of the sugar duties was carried, the noble earl
opposite declining to divide the house ; and two years
later, in spite of the noble earl's opposition, the repeal
of the navigation laws was carried by a strong majority:
From that time to the present, notwithstanding all the
speeches made in that house, and the violent attacks on
the course pursued—though they were told that ruin had
overtaken the country, and that their course was most
disastrous notwithstanding all this, that house had
never swerved from the free-trade course. (Hear, hear.)
Therefore, any resolution, as far as that house was con-
cerned, merely expressing adherence to principles from
which the house had never swerved, was unnecessary,
and the only reason for passing the resolution, though a
milk-and-water one, would be that it might be binding
on the Government and the noble earl, whose course had
altered, but whose opinion he had himself stated to re-
main unchanged. If it were the desire of the house to
adopt the proposal of the noble earl on the cross benches
(the Earl of Harrowby), he should be unwilling to pro-
tract the discussion, being satisfied that whatever resolu-
tion might be passed by the house, the great cause of
free trade and enlightened commercial policy was per-
fectly safe, because its principles were based on the im-
mutable grounds of justice. (Hear, hear.)
Lord BEAUMONT, in reference to what had fallen
from Lord Strangford, said they did not want the noble
lord, the member for Tiverton, in that house, because
his genius was present there, for the noble lord on the
cross benches had proposed an amendment which ap-
peared to be approved of by all parties. (Laughter.) He
expressed his willingness to withdraw his own amend-
ment.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE consented to the
alteration of the resolution as proposed by the Earl of
Harrowby.
The Earl of DERBY, in expressing his concurrence
in this arrangement, observed that it was a curious
coincidence that in both houses the different narties had
been brought more in harmony by a resolution inter-
posed. (Laughter.)
The resolution, as altered by the Earl of Harrowby,
was then agreed to, in the following terms :
" That this house adheres to the commercial system
recently established, and would view with regret any
renewed attempt to disturb its operation, or impede its
future course."
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE desired that it
should be entered on the journals that the resolution
was passed nem. dis. (Hear, and laughter.)
GREECE.
Lord STANLEY of Alderley, pursuant to notice, in-
quired of the Government whether there was any ob-
jection to lay before Parliament a copy of the protocol
signed by England and the four great European powers
respecting the canton of Neufchatel ; and also of the
convention betsfeen England, Russia, France, Bavaria,
and Greece, for the settlement of the succession of the
throne of Greece ; and to ask a question respecting a
report that there had been some recent changes in the
political relations of the territory of Montenegro ?
The Earl of MALMESBURY— My lords, with
respect to the first question put to me by the noble
baron, I can only make to him the same reply that
I did last session. Negotiations have not been pro-
ceeded with subsequently to that period, and the
protocols to which he alludes have not been prepared
to be laid upon the table of your lordships' house ;
but they give her Majesty's Ministers the power
of choosing their own time to begin these nego-
tiations. The present does not appear to her Ma-
jesty's Government to be a proper time for entering
into these negotiations, and the other parties who have
signed the protocols are of the same opinion as her Ma-
jesty's Government upon that point. With respect to
the treaty relating to the Greek possession which has
just been signed between the four powers, it will be in
your lordships' recollection that when the independence
of Greece was accomplished, it was considered an object
of great importance that the dynasty should be secured
to that people, and that the succession of that dynasty in
a regular line should be guaranteed by the contracting
powers of Russia, France, and England. After the dy-
nasty had been secured, and Greek independence made
safe, the Greeks themselves framed a constitution, and
the articles in that constitution declared that no future
King of Greece should be of any religion but the Greek
faith. It is known to your lordships that the present
King of Greece was brought up from his childhood in the
Roman Catholic religion, the consequence of which is,
that the treaty has never been enforced. It ap-
peared desirable that the same guarantee should ex-
tend so far as the constitutional wishes of the Greek
people were embodied in their constitution, and that the
three powers should guarantee to the Greek people that
the future King of Greece should be of their own faith, as
well as the dynasty which had been guaranteed to the
Greek nation in 1832. It became necessary, therefore,
to accomplish this end, and to revise the treaty of 1832,
for the purpose of rendering it more in accordance with
the 40th article of the constitution. Her Majesty's
Government thereupon invited the Courts of Russia and
France to join them in the endeavour to accomplish that
object, and the three courts together have revised the
treaty and signed the convention accordingly. But I
believe I am in order when I say that it is not the cus-
tom to lay such treaties upon the table until the act of
ratification has taken place. The last of the questions
of which the noble baron has (riven me notice is, whether
any change has been effected in the state of the
political relations of that wild country situated
on the borders of Albania, and called Montenegro.
I believe that since her Majesty's present Govern-
ment have come into office there has been no change
whatever in the state of those relations. The chief
of that country, bears a double title. He is the head of
the Greek Church in his own country, and he is also the
temporal sovereign of that country. But, as head of
the Greek Church in his own country, he is under the
jurisdiction of the Emperor of Russia, who, your lord-
ships know, is looked upon as the head of the whole
Greek Church. The chief of Montenegro has, therefore,
been, as his ancestors have been before him, to the Court
of St. Petersburgh, to receive the sanction of the Em-
peror to his episcopal jurisdiction and titles at Monte-
negro. -
With respect to the independence of that coun-
try, whatever may be the opinion of different persons
upon that question, it seems to he a question rather for
intiquaries than for Cabinets to settle. But the pine-
ical fact is, that it has been an independent country
something like 250 years—and although various at-
tempts have been made by the Porte upon 'its in-
dependence, they have only lost large armies in the
efibrt to subjugate it, and he believed that, in

its present practical position, it remained, as far as
possible, the same now that it was 200 years ago.

THE FRENCH EMPIRE.
The NOBLE EARL then continued as follows—Having
hue answered the question of the noble baron, it now
becomes my duty to announce to your lordships an event
which you must have all long since expected ; but which
is not diminished in importance by the circumstance
that it has been so long expected and foreseen. I allude
to a notification which has been made to her Majesty's
Government by the Secretary of State for Foreign Af-
fairs at Paris, announcing that the French people have
determined to change the constitution of their govern-
ment from a republic to an empire, and to attach to the
Prince President of the Republic the imperial dignity of
EmperOr. That notification was made to me on Thurs-
day last, and having been communicated by me to her
Majesty's Government, her Majesty's servants have
thought it right, without further delay or hesitation, to
advise her Majesty cordially to accept and recognise the
new constitution selected by the French people for their
own government. My lords, it has been, as yourlordships
know, our usual policy for the last twenty-two years—
indeed ever since the revolution of 1830 in Paris— to
acknowledge the constitutional doctrine that a people
have a right to chose their own sovereign without the
interference of any foreign power ; and the sovereign
having been freely chosen by them, that that sovereign
or ruler, or by whatever name he may be called, being
de facto ruler of his country, should be recognised by
the sovereign of this. If there may have been formerly
any doubt existing as to what was the distinct will of a
nation in the respect to the choice of their sovereign—if
we have doubted for one moment the distinct intention
of a people at any former time—upon this occasion, my
lords, it is perfectly impossible to mistake their un-
doubted determination—three times in the most solemn
way---three times expressed for the same person, in
when a. repulai
G most public manner, perhaps, of which history can
e, the
afford out a.n
Phili example. At the revolution of 1848,
Public succeeded to the monarchy of Louis
ing present Emperor of France was resid-
usual canvass
in tbis entry, He went over with none of the
importance, which takeso place at elections of minor
may
Banfwlteuhal magnitude elsewhere ; he
a„en
went over, I
ranee that
o.thing but his name—a
a magic which has an efftoect upt lons
name so great in F
tehvoi dpeonotpl yl e i
tnhfua
ts eedx
pi-
w ie
rt
make Europe understand.
ence only has been able