The Sun.
London, England, 1864-03-18 00:00:00

OF THE FRENCH.

Sir IL s r ['LACEY asked the First Lord of the Trea.
sury to allow the rno. tron which was en the paper
to have precedence of t no orders of the day.
Lord PALMERSTON, who did not at first reply to the
question, said he had no command over the orders of the

day.
DISRA.ELI was surprised to hear the noble lord
state that he had no command over tha business of the
house en a Government night.
Lord PALMErIi.STON repeated his statement, but added
that he was ready to give the motion precedence of the Penal
Servitude Act Amendment Bill, which was on the paper.
THE GOVERNMENT ANNUITIES BILL.

The CHANCE LLOR—Of tI;;EXCIIEQUER entered
info an elaborate statement of figures and facts to prove
that he was quite correct in what he asserted relative to the
Briti3h Provident Society, and the only mistake he com•
witted WAZ merely of a ....ethnical character, and canaieted

in describing the proceedings in Chancery as being
a trial. He would have been happy to have corrected
himself, but he felt bound to adhere to every p, rticular of
his original statement.

Mr. SHERIDAN, who frequently interrupted the
right hon. gentleman, repeated his pray.uue• statements in
substance at length.
The adjourned debate on the Annuities D.ll was resumed

Sir M. FARQUHAR, who moved that the measure be
referred to a select committee. The hon. baronet argued
that it was but fair that existing friendly societies, especi-
ally those which had been represented as fraudulent and
bankrupt, should be heard before a committee of the house
prior to the State undertaking to deprive them of the greater
portion of their business.

The amendment was seconded by Mr. HORSFALL, who
observed that the bill did not propose to amend the Friendly
Societies Act, while it would take from them the best life
assurances, leaving them with nothing but the sick fund
and contributions from old members, from which little or
no profit was to be had.
Mr. HODGKINSON and Mr. SALT supported the principle
of the bill as likely to confer a great boon upon the working
classes.

Sir F. GOLDSMID and Mr. GREGSON likewiso spoke in
its favour.

Mr. SOT HERON- ESTCOURT (whose re-appearance,
after his severe indisposition, was cordially welcomed by the
hc,use) said that if he were to consult his own feelings he
would support the bill, but there were many portions of it
which he thought the mature judgment of the house could
not approve. Its operation would cease at that point where
life assurance became profitable, and he hoped the Chancellor
of the Exohequer would consent to refer it to a select com-
mittee, by whom the whole of the details might undergo the
fullest consideration.

GOSCHEN approved of the bill, which he said
would not interfere with the liberty of the working classes,
who might accept it or not, just as it might please theta.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
could not on any account consent to have the bill referred
to a select committee, who would consider the whole ques-
tion of friendly societies, but he had no objection to see it
referred to a committee to consider the clauses in the usual
way.

Lord STANLEY approved of the compromise offered by
the Chancellor of the Exchequer:
The debate was then adjourned.
MR. STANSFELD AND SIGNOR MAZZINI.

Sir H. STRACEY moved " That the statement of the
Procureur• General on the trial of Greco, implicating a
member of this house and of her Majesty's Government in
the plot for the assassination of our ally the Emperor of the
French, deserved the serious consideration of this house."
The hon. baronet said that, in bringing the motion under
the notice of the house, he was not actuated by any animus
against the hon. member for Halifax, and he only did so as
an individual member, and because he felt that the dignity
of the house had been assailed, and that the Government
had not given the information which was due to the coun-
try upon so serious a question. Bat, to his surprise, on
looking along the Treasury Bench, he did not see that
member of the Administration who was chiefly concerned
in this question. It was far from his disposition t•o take any
one by surprise, but it was singular that the Government
had not sent to the hon• member, and that he was not pre-
sent. [Mr. Stansfeld at this moment entered the house,
and was cheered by the Ministerial side ; the hon. member
took his seat on the Treasury Bench next to Lord Pal-
merston The hon. baronet then traced the history of
the matter ; observing that on the first occasion when
the hon. member for Finsbury (Mr. Cox) called attention
to the extract from the speech of the Procureur-General,
the hon. gentleman entered into a considerable eulogy and
panegyric on M. Mazzini, which was certainly uncalled for.
The hon. gentleman on that occasion also said he felt
astonishment, mingled with indignation, that his name
should have been mentioned in the way it had been; and
declared his conviction that M. Mazzini was incapable of
assassination. The hon. baronet then read several passages
from the published writings of M. Mazzini, to show thnt it
he was incapable of assassination he was not incapable of
instigating to assassination. The hon. baronet next ad-
verted to the statement in the Times respecting the note of
an Italian revolutionary bank of which James Stansfeld, of
2, Sidney-place, Brompton, was the London agent. They
ought to be told whether the member for Halifax had ever
been connected with that No. 2, Sidney-place. The house
had never had a straightforward answer to the charges
made against the hon. member ; it had never been inquired
whether Mr. Flowers and M. Mazzini were identical, and
who was M. Fiori. It was not by a manifestation of indig-
nation that the members of that house were to be satisfied.
(Hear hear.) Had the hon. member expressed his regrets,

instead of displaying a confident and irritable manner, and
swaggering tone--(hear, hear)—the house would have been
much more conciliated. It was due to the dignity of the
Government of this country either to have demanded that
the fullest information respecting the charges of the Pro-
cureur General, or at once openly to have repudiated them.
The conduct of the Government in the matter would be re-
garded as un-English, and it would add to the ignoble
humiliation under which the country was suffering. (Op-
position cheers.) In conclusion, the hon. baronet expressed
his regret that he had been compelled to bring forward a
motion which he felt might have the effect, at al events for
a time, of imperilling the career of advancement on which
the hon. member has entered. (Cheers.)

Lord C. HAMILTON seconded the amendment.

Mr. STANSFELD, who, on rising, was received with
cheers from the Ministerial benches, said—lt is not my in-
tention to say one word in reply to the criticism of the hon.
baronet upon the character of Marzini. I have already ful-
filled that which I believed my duty in bearing testimony
in regard to a man whom 1 have known for many years. So
far, therefore, as I am concerned it is fitting that that discus-
sion should not be continued, and as far as I am concerned
it is now at an end. I address myself to the motion of the
hon. baronet, which appertains to me and my character.
The very terms of that motion appear to me to justify the
coarse which I pursued on the first night that the subject
was introduced to the notice of the house. The hon. baronet,
taking up the statement of theProcureur-General, moves—
(The hon. gentleman read the terms of the motion.) Now,
I put the same interpretation, right or wrong, upon the re-
marks of the Procureur- General which has been put by the
hon. baronet. I hold in my hand a copy of the limes of
March 1, and I there find the statement of the Prooureur-
General given in these words. (The hon. member having
read the extract from the speech of the Procureur- General,
which has been so frequently before the public, continued :)
I must say it appeared b me that an imputation so odious,
so utterly unsupported by evidence, was one which cauld
only be met by a general denial ; but which, although
general, I believe has been complete; and which, if accom-
panied by some expression of contempt and indignation, was

yet no more so than what the House of Commons will have
thought natural. (Hear, hear.) Now, sir, what is the evi•
dence of this crime. The hon. baronet has not read the evi-
dence, but ho has supposed it was to the effect that Greco was

directed to apply to some person at my address for money for
the purpose of this plot. Why, air, even supposing the letter
found in Greco's possession was the produc.ion of Mazzini,
that letter did not refer him to my address, tut to another
address for money. Upon him was stated to have been found
a slip of paper, on which was written, it does not appear in
whose writing," Mr Flower, 57, Thurloe-square." [An HON.
MEMBER—" M. Flower."] That was the whole of the evi-
dence. The hon. baronet then refers to the '37 plot, and
hints that I had been constituted by Mazzini treasurer to
that plot. What is his evidence on that? There were two
supposed extracts in letters from Mazzini referring ail per-
sons in vague terms to my address for money if they re •
quired it. That was the whole extent of the evidence as far
as the Tibaldi plot was concerned. Now, I. am willing to
admit, with that evidence, he or any gentleman would have
been justified in asking for explanation in a case of that
kind ; but I cannot conceive how any man, con-idering the
evidence, could have been led to the conclusion which the
Procureur- General was induced to express in this case.
[An HON. MEMEER—I deny that.] (Cries of " Order.")
I was about to say that I did not think I should give any
other but a general denial to any statement of that kind, but
the circumstances of the case are now entirely changed. The
whole subject is in the possession of the house, on the mo-
tion of the right hon. baronet. I have therefore no hesita-
tion or difficulty, and I do not consider there is any indig-
nity, in offering any explanation to the house which the
house may think requisite, or answering any question
II which the house may think desirable. Let me take the
statement of the Procureur. He states I was a person
placed in correspondence with Greco. Now, neither by
letter nor personally, neither directly nor indirectly, had I
ever communication with that person, nor did I know of his
II existence, nor, until I saw the report in the paper, even his
' name. (Cries of " Oh, oh," " Question," and loud cheers.)
Now, let us go back to the case of Tibaldi. M. Mazzini has
already voluntarily written to the press to state that there
was no such fund or such plot, and of course he has never
asked me to become the treasurer of it. It is hardly neces-
say for me to say that which I now say very distinctly, that
I never held the funds or advanced any money for any such
purpose, or for any purpose whatever, to persons who
were engaged in connection with that conspiracy. It is
one thing to have had a long personal intimacy with a
man, and another thing to be supposed to be implicated
in his undertakings—(derisive cheers from the Opposition)
—whether of a character which will bear investigation, or
of a character attributed to me. The hon. member has re-
ferred to the trial of Orsini, and has said my name wasim-
plicated in that trial. Ido not know how to reply to that
assertion, because this is the first time I have heard my name
connected with it. (Oh, oh, from the Opposition, followed
by cheers from the Ministerial benches.) If the hon.
baronet will adduce any evidence or make any statement, I
am ready to answer it. (Cheers.) The hon. baronet has
referred to the loan notes. In 1860, immediately after the
fall of the Roman republic, I was requested to allow my
name to be placed upon the back of those notes, as a refer-
ence to persons who might apply to take them, their object
being to aid in the objects of Italian unity and independence.
Now, I am quite ready to admit I consented that my name
should be so used; but in a few weeks I saw reason to
consider the propriety, and even legality of that step, and
' thought I was justified in taking counsel, and asking the
opinion of an old friend of mine, an eminent member of the
legal profession (Mr. Sergeant Manning.) Taking his
advice, I requested that my halite should be withdrawn

mediately from those documents. (Cheers.) I have no-
thing further to state to-night. These are the simple facts
as far as I know them, as far as I am interested in this
matter. If there is any other question occurring to the
mind of any hon. member, I am perfectly ready to answer.
I have no hesitation in answering any question that is
asked. (Cries of No, no, from the Opposition.) The hon.
gentleman here appeared to be about to resume his seat,
but, as if recollecting an omission, he resumed; I have
omitted one important part, the question of the use to
which my house has been turned, as a natural consequence
of intimate personal relationship, to which I never for a
moment hesitated to acknowledge. M. Mazzini's letters,
the house will understand, have not been able to reach
him for many years, if addressed in his own name. He
has therefore asked his various English friends, of whom
I am one—(loud cheers from the Opposition, followed by
counter cheers from the Ministerial benches)—to allow
letters to be addressed to their houses. Letters for him
have been addressed in that way to him, and among others
letters have been addressed to him under the name that has
been mentioned here. (Loud cheers from the Opposition.)
They have been addressed to my house under the name,
amongst others, of " Signor Fiori." (Cheers.) I need not
say that the name " Flower," as the house will easily un-
cle stand, is a translation of the Italian name " Fiori"—
(derisive cheers)—but I have made inquiries, and I do not
believe any letter for Mazzini has been addressed to my
house in the name of Flower. (Derisive cheers.) I en-
tirely admit at the same time that it is not advisable, and
it is not fitting, whatever may be the contents of Mazzini's
correspondence, that his letters should be addressed to the
residence of the person occupying the position I now oc-
cupy. (Hear, hear,) But it has not been necessary for
me to make any representation on this sabject to Mazzini.
He has volunteered to rue a statement that he has
taken measures to prevent his correspondence being ad-
dressed to my address. (Loud cheers from the Opposition.)
I have contented myself with stating facts. I say Ido not
think any one can dispute the truth of what I say. I have
no knowledge of these transactions to which the hon. mem-
ber referred, and I now leave this question without further
remark. (Cries of "Oh I oh!" and cheers.)
Lord H. VANE had heard with great regret the expla-
nation brought forward by the hon. gentleman. He ad-
mitted that explanation was much more satisfactory than
the one he afforded the other night—if that could be called
an explanation—(Cries of " No, no," from the Opposition)
—which was simply a defence of M. Mazzini. The house
had nothing to do with the character of Mazzini. They
had certainly had no right to defend it; they had
no right to go against the whole moral sense of Europe.
(Cheers,) It was a mistake to suppose that this sense
of the principles of M. Mazzini was confined to
the Imperialist party in France. He could say,
from personal knowledge, that ndne upheld his principles
except it were the remnant of the party of '93 ; for even the
republicans, the former supporters of General Cavaignac,
revolted against the principles of Mazzini, and repudiated
the idea of asoociation with a man so held in abhorrence
throughout Europe. (Cheers.) No one had suspected that
the hon. member was himself guilty of participation in
such a horrible plot; but no one could deny that the hon.
gentleman had been guilty of great imprudence, according
to his own admission that night, in allowing letters to be
addressed to his own house for Mazzini, when he could not
be c ,gnisant of the nature of that correspondence. He
thought the French people, the French Chamber, and the
French public had a right to complain of such conduct on
the part of a member of this house, who had now been
drawn into the admission that he had dropped all connec-

tion with Mazzini. (Cries of No, no.) The house had
nothing to do with personal friendship, but had a right
that such friendship should not compromise that house,
should sot compromise the Government with which the
hon. member was connected, and should not compromise
the pecple of England. (Cheers.)
Lord H, LENNOX had shared in the indignation and
astonishment at the speech of the Procureur-General; but
the statement of the hon. member astonished him when he
said that he heard for the first time that night that his
name was implicated with Mazzini. [Mr. STANSFELD—
I said Orsini.] The noble lord proceeded to say that tho
name of the hon. member for Halifax appeared in the acte
d' accusation on the trial of Tibaldi in 1857, and was fol-
lowed by Mr. P. A. Taylor. who avowed a long and inti-
mate friendship with Signor Mazzini, and stated that his
house had for years been placed at the disposal of Signor
Mazzi❑i for the reception of his Continental correspondence.
Sir J. PAKINGTON next rose, and, after expressing
his opinion that the explanation offered to the house by
the hon. member was not satisfactory, asked the noble
lord at the head of the Government whether any expla-
nation had been offered by her Majesty's Government to
the Government of France with respect of the speech of the
Procureur-general.

Lord PALMERSTON then rose amid loud cheers, and
said—Nothing undoubtedly can be, generally, more pain-
nal than personal discussions in this house. At the same
time, I cannot express any regret that the hon. baronet has
brought this subject forward, because it has drawn from my
hon. friend a declaration which, differing from the right
hon. baronet (Sir J. Pakington), I think perfectly satisfac-
tory—(cheers, and cries of " Oh")—because it gives a denial,
an absolute and total denial, to the only charge which has
been insinuated against him, viz., having any cognisance
whatever of the plot. The right hon baronet asks me
whether her Majesty's Government has deemed it right to
make any communication to the Government of France on
a passage in the speech of an advocate in a court of justice
in France ? Why, sir, no. (Loud cheers.) We have no
right to take cognisance of what takes place in a court of
justice in France with regard to matters which are brought
before them. If there was an opinion that anything which
passed upon that occasion amounted to a charge against my
hon. friend that he had any connection, direct or indirect,
with that transaction, the answer to that imputation and
insinuation was given to the world by my hon. friend in this
house, and that was a sufficient refutation. (No, no, from
the Opposition.) But I will freely own that I should have
felt humiliated if I had had to be a party to a communica-
tion to the French Government, telling them that an Eng-

lish gentleman—a member of Parliament, holding an office
under Government—was not connected with an infamous
plot. (Hear.) I congratulate the hon. gentlemen opposite
on the feelings and sentiments which seem to actuate them
on the present occasion. (Cheers and counter cheers.) We
have been told that the imputations, false as they were, of
the Procureur-General have excited the indignation of
the French nation, and that something is due to the
feelings of France as an atonement for the suspicion
they entertain that something or other has taken place
in this country which indirectly, if it does not acquiesce
in, at least amounts to a disclaimer from participation in the
attempt which has been made. We have been reminded of
1858. There was then an attempt actually made on the life
of the Emperor of the French, Well, what did the Govern-
ment do at that time ? We spontaneously proposed to the
house a measure which was intended to prevent the recur-
rence of such attacks. (Loud cheers and counter cheers.)
Hon. gentlemen opposite publicly and formally expressed
their approval of that measure—(renewed cheers)—but
when they thought that a combination of circumstances and
an absolute abandonment of their own opinions might lead
to a change of Government, they threw over their promises,
cast their indignation to the winds, and objected to that to
which they had formerly declared their adhesion, and re-
fused that satisfaction which they now seek. (Cheers and
cries of " Question.") Well, sir, I say that the language
which they use on the present occasion against a member of
the Government needs no explanation beyond his own de-
nial. With regard to my hon. friend, I ~ay that. if I thought
that for a moment that he could have had the slightest par-

ticipation in the transaction to which the discussion of this
evening alludes, I should have represented to him that it
would be more becoming that he should cease to be a mem-
ber of the Government. (Cheers.) But I have not done so,
because I know my hon. friend is incapable of such an
action. (Cheers.) Therefore, sir, I say that Ido not regret
the motion of the hon. baronet, because it has afforded to my
hon. friend an opportunity of repeating the disclaimer which
I think he male sufficiently on a former occasion. lf, how-
ever, that was not deemed satisfactory, the statement he has
made to-night ought to be a conclusive reason why the
motion of the hon. baronet should not be acceded to. (Loud
cheers.)
Mr. DISRAELI confessed that he was disappointed at
the tone which had been taken by the noble lord, who had
had a golden opportunity of extricating the house from
a very painful position. The noble lord, however, had
taken refuge in that vein to which he was too accustomed.
He thought it unfortunate that the noble lord, imme-
diately after saying that he would submit to no act of
humiliation, called attention to the circumstances of 1868.
As to the President of the Board of Trade, surely some re-
gard might have been had to the feelings of an absent man.
The noble lord ought to have been ashamed of attacking by
inuendo a man so distinguished. (Opposition cheers.) The
noble lord's remarks proved that he did not understand the
very point upon which the decision of the house was asked,
Let us see what occurred. The Procureur-General—the
Attorney-General of a great country—publicly stated, in a
court of the highest consideration in France, to the effect
that a member of Parliament had been the medium by
which Mazzini communicated with the conspirators against
the life of the Emperor. Did the hon. member for Halifax
deny the statement? Why, he admitted it. (Loud Oppo-
,-ition cheers.) He did not deny that these letters did come,
and that his house in Thurloe-square was the medium of
communication between Mazzini and his correspondents.
Mr. ST A NSFE LD —What correspondents ?
Mr. DISRAELI—What correspondents? You know
them better than I do. (Cheers from the Opposition.)
What correspondents? Why, the assassins of Europe.
(Renewed cheers,) The right hon. gentleman proceeded to
say that it was the universal feeling throughout the coun-
try that the dignity of the house had been compromised,
and he was sorry to add that, after the expressions used by
the noble lord, the Government had been compromised also.
His hon. friend had, in no spirit of unfriendliness to the
noble lord—(laughter)—given him an opportunity of com-
ing forward and asserting that he would take those steps
which a person in his exalted position could easily do to re-
move tha extreme apprehension and the great and growing
disquietude which this affair has occasioned. The noble
lord had only to sa, that after the statement of the
loon. member for Halifax he felt he should feel it his
duty to place himself in communication, by which. at
least regret might be expressed, that even unconsciously