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

notion). I maintain, with deference to the opinion, of
course, which you (the Speaker) have expressed, in the
difficult position in which the house is placed, my hon.
friend near me was perfeotly justified in using the term,
after so ungentlemanly an attack as that made upon him by
the hon. gentleman the Under-Secretary of State.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, who was
vehemently aesailed with cries of "Order" from the Op-
position side, said—Sir, when the hon. gentleman (Mr.
Disraeli) rose there was immediate silence on this side of
the house. I trust we shall be permitted to say what I have
to say on this side in order. The hon. gentleman, as I
understood him, founded his justification in point of order
on what has just taken place upon an allegation made by
him that my hon. friend the Mader-Secretary ot State for
the Foreign Department charged hon. gentlemen opposite
with falsification. (Cheers.) In the first. 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 altnit, for I am
not conscious of it—if, and this is matter material to the
issue—if 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 cell the attention
of the house and chair to the subject the moment the
words were used. (Hear, hear.) I apprehend lam safe
in laying down that a breach of order—much less a mere
allegation ot a breach of order—committed by one
speaker, will not justify another in the same breach of
order. (Great iuterrup' ion.) I hope it will be clearly un-
derstood whether an imputation of calumnious statements
is or is not henceforward within the liberty of parliamen-
tary debate. (Oh, oh.)
Sir J. PAKIN G I.ON—I think it right, after what has
fallen from the right hon, 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. ger.-
tlemen on this side with falsification,we have a right to call
that word calumnious. (Conservative 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, and I do so in support of your jest authority, sir.
(conservative cheers.) You, sir, have been appealed to by
an hon. 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 obse• ved that he had not yet
concluded]—l must put it to the house whether we are not
imperil ing our just influence in the affairs of Europe awl
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 authority into disrepute. (Opposition cheers.)
The SPEAKER, who was received with solemn allence,
said—l am sure the hon. member for Leominster (MrHardy)
is the last member in the Meuse 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.
deg the whole House into a false position, that heated
language on one side should be a jure ificadon for language
passing the line of order on the other side. (Hear, hear.)
Certainly, anything imputing motives to an hon. memeer
is contrary to the elites oi this House (Hear, hear.) What
has pusses 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 confess there did not appear to me to be any neces-
sity for interruption or intervention on my part, The
hon. member for Leominster did not, I ain sure, intend to
impute motives which would be of an unparliamentary
character in this case. Under the circumstances of the
case it did not appear to me necessary that I should inter-
fere; but after what has occurred I do hope 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 just privileges of debate.
Mr LAYARD, rising amid loud cries ot " Order " end
" Chair," said—l wish to express my regret to the hon.
gentleman if he understood me. I aid not use the word
" falsification" as my own word, but I quoted it, as the word
of another. (Cries of " Name.")

An Hon. MEMBER—The Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Mr LA.YARD—If the hon. gentleman understood that
as an imputation on my part that ho was guilty of falsifica•
tion, I b,g to offer him my apology.
Mr 110 tiSM..n.N, after several vain attempts to gain a
hearing, said—l wish to speak on another point. (Oh, oh.)
The hon member for Leominster just now, holding in his
hand the terms of the motion of which I gave notice to this
house in March. (Loud cries of " Order," and " Chair.")
Let him give the terms,

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

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rcse and
adv:Ancel to the table. Th 9 cries were then intensified into
mast'foci,erouidemanda tor order, and the right hon. gen-
tleman, finding it impossible to proceed, stood a few mo-
ments in silence, and then resumed his sot.

The SPEAK ER—The right hon. gehtle; an is not going
to refer to whist. passed—
Mr. HARDY—It was in this &bite.
Tue SPE AK E It—l cannot allow words which were
tittered on a previous night—

. ...
Mr. HARDY—Without imputing motives either to the
right hoe. gentleman opposite, what I intent to say, and
what I do s.ty still, is, it these expressions are nut retracted
by those who hey that th y had been falsified on this siae
of the house— that is a calumny, by whomsoever delivered.
y may be spread with-
outmotives;
Idotnteotpietrnspounte 8 rflp :et:
dy
iens
g.
itA cbaeliangumillaenced I y
_
but the statement involved the honour of gentlemen on this
side of the house. At the same time, the hon. gentleman
has not apologised to me, for I require no apology. I can
only say I did not impute to the hen gentlemen opposite
(Mr. Layard), or to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, any-
thing wilful ; but in the heat of debate, they u' ed words
which were calculated to wound the honour and feelings of
hon. gentlemen on this side of the house. (Hear, hear.)
(Ile hen. gentleman then rtsutned the point in tae debate
at which he was interrupted.) The hon, gentleman oppo-
site (Mr. Horsmen) had accused him of not quoting the
tno objection to read the
" That, in the opinion of this house, her Majesty ought not
whole
o thins.—
his;.— address. Eur.
Ho Hitesm hAaNd....ihe
last
paragraph
3..
to be advised to give her assent to any new engagements
affecting the integrity and independence of Denmark until
those engagements have been wade known to Parliament.'
(Hoer.) 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
being taken at any period. On
than(Mr. Hoffman) said that there was no
tobeecctot hniootnre. contrary, genii
y,thin
diecuscion
t-Lurd Russell and the noble lord opposite
had said it would be injudicicus, and might inteifere with
the negotiations, to bring this
question forward at. an
earlier peri d, or while the Conference wag sitting. This
being so, the time they had taken was the earliest time
the) had the opportunity of doing so. They did not in-
terfere during the progress of these negotiations. The do
sire of every man was that the peace of Europe should be
restored it possible; and if this Conference bad been brought
to an atnicable conclusion, no one would have been more de-
lighted than he at such a conclusion. They were. told, It
is Lot only the past, you must tell us something about the
bluer. Now, as to the future, the hon. gentleman (Mr.
Layard) had told them that be had seven folio volumes re-
lating to certain proceedings,
which none of them had seen.
Were they despatches or were they documents in extenso 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 had been laid before the house, and it was on the case
of the Government that they asked the verdict of that house
The he
and the country. ---n* REntlea:an was in possession
of information which none of them had. And it was ins •
possible to constitute a Del--e fro r
policy for the future when they had
not the means of information. Ron. get:ideate° said " Bring
forward your vote of want a confidence." Well, they had
accused the Government of mismanaging
these affairs and
damaging the interests of peace, and would any one say that
was not a vote of want of confidence ? 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 advised, and their advice had nut been taken.
The condition of things had been changed, and they had
deserted those to whom they had given advice. The hon.
members for Bradford and Rochdale had condemned in
strong terms the conduct of the Government, and so had
that watclias al Teae'em,
he called himself, who was
always lookieg after British honour and interest. He flow
upon Lord Russell, tore from him every rag, and had left
eughter. This speech was followed by a
and exposed him in his nakedness to that house and to
the country. (L
remarkable statement; that the ban gentleman
was going to follow gentlemen to the Government
lobby. Ha could hardly wonder at that. Four-
teen years ago the noble Watch. Jog as he called )
him-
self—had saved his master, and he was about to follow him
into the lobby in the cam's way again. (Laughter.) If it
were admitted , hat England oc'upied an embarrassing posi-
tion, who had brought her into that position? and how did
the present Government find her when they became p is-
ceased of the seals of office P 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 _ I

of its policy, and when Denmark and England bad proposed
a certain line as an ultimatum, and that proposal was re-
jiccted, her Majesty's Government proposed an arbitration,
which it ought to have known Denmark could not accept.
Now, how was the Government going to meet this question ?
The amendment which was to be submitted to the house
evaded the pith and souse of the original motion, to which
indeed it might be added as a rider. (Opposition cheers.)
It was certainly true that the peace of England is at this
moment inviolate, but then it should be borne iu mind that
that was not the object of the negotiations. After all their
threats and failures, the Government were trying to back
out on the plea that England is at peace. He believed that
this country had been lowered in the opir,ir n of Europe by
the course pursued by the Government. He deeply re-
gretted that she had been brought to such a condition; but
the gentlemen on his side of the house maintained that the
present Government were responsible for it. They (the
Opposition) had menaced throughout the whole of the
session ; they had now struck the blow ; and they were
now ready to take the responsibility which might follow,
(Loud cheers from the Opposition.)
Mr lIORSNL,N rose to explain that he had never said,
as the hon. gentleman. seemed to suppose, that the Germans
were a set of bullies.
Sir F. GO LDSMID owned that he found a great difll•
culty in deciding what to do. He could not say " No" to
the resolution of Mr Disraeli, yet he could not give a vote
which would assist to place the Opposition in office. Under
these circumstances, although he entirely differed with Mr
Kinglake in his amendment, he would accept it as the only
mode of escaping from the horns of a dilemma.
Mr G. %V. BENTINCK thought it was the duty of the
House of Commons to look to the honour of the country
and not to be influenced by sentiment either in favour of
Denmark or against Germany. The resolution of Mr I ;is-
retell was only a truism, and under present circumstances
had become a platitude. It was impossible to deny that the
policy of the Government had lowered the reputation of the
oountry in the estimation of European nations. Nothing,
in fact, could have been more unfortunate; but although
he was prepared to censure it he would not support the re-
solution if he believed that any compact existed between
the Opposition and the Ultramontane party below the
gangway.
Mr COGAN denied that the question of peace or war
was at issue. The real question which the house has to
decide was in what wanner it could best vindicate the honour
of the country. Our foreign diplomacy had, is his opinion,
reduced us to such a state that we were neither loved nor
feared. To have made Earl Russell the head of the Foreign
Office was a great mistake—a cruel joke on the part of the
Premier, and had been most disastrous to the country. The
policy of the eovernment towards Leland was almost as
unfortunate as that pursued in reference to Denmark. They
had outraged and insulted the people of Ireland by sending
Sir R. Peel to direot their affairs. As an Administration
their diplomacy abroad had failed as lamentably as their
policy at home, and in voting censure upon them he would
do so, not in order to place a Conservative Administration
in power, but to purify the Liberal party.
Mr PEACOCKE also spoke in favour of the reso-
lution.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL observed that the argu-
ments of the hon. gentlemen who supported the resolution
meant that England must no longer negotiate unless she
had her hand on her sword, and unless she was prepared to
go to war if her counsels were discarded, If a majority of
the house were to sanction such a policy, it would go forth
to the world that England would on till occasions act upon
the principle of following up the language of remonstrance
with armed interference. He maintained that the words of
the Government which bad been characterised as menacing
were not menaces, but the mere denunciations of the honest
truth-02e coming warning of mischief and danger. Earl
E assell, in his conduct of the foreign affairs or the country,
had pursued an honest, straightforward course, and any
failures that had occurred were o be attributed to the infir-
mity of humanity, and not to any miscarriage of the policy
which the Government had laid down for their guidance.
He contended that England Lad been as cautious and re-
served in not encouraging Denmark or holding out expec-
tations of help as aliy of the other Powers which had
entered the Conference. The resolutions submitted by Mr
Disraeli were, in his opinion, a lame and impotent conclu-
sion to the premises and arguments by which they were
supported. If there had been a breach of faith on the part
of the Government, it was not by getting rid of the Minis-
try that we were to be relieved from our engagements. The
fact was that there were no such engagements as ham been
alleged, and the real object of the vote of censure was to
displace a Guy, rnoient to answer the purposes of a party
irrespective of the effect upon foreign countries, Such a
course was not worthy of the reputation of a great party,
and he thought it would be tar more honourable and satis-
factory it they did their best to maintain the -faith of treaties
than to succeed to power by availing themselves of
the " chapter of accidents." He could not understand
how hon. gentlemen opposite, with all the letters material
to the question before them since the 3d of March, should
be cuutunt to watch and wait for toe course of events, and
then ccm down to the house with a motion, not complain-
ing of the non-fulfilment of pledges on the part of England,
not condemning the Government for not going to war, but
blaming thorn for having citmpromised the chances of peace.
(Cheers.; He admitted it was proper end patriotic for an
Opposition, when the Government were honestly and ear-
nestly conducting negotiations, to wait until such ne-
getiatious were either successfully concluded or failed;
but it was not consistent with patriotism to stand by it' they
saw the honour 01 the country was compromised. It the
Opposition thought, after France and Russia had declined
to co-operate, that England should go to war, that was the
time tor them to declare that the country should not be

involved in war, The course pursued by the Opposition
Was one which he believed the house would not endorse or
approve, but he was sure it would be more satisfactory to
the Government to fail on the present occasion than to suc-
ceed to power by availing themselves of the chapter of acci
dents. (Cheers) There was no advice given by her
Majesty's Government that had not been given by France
and Russia. These Powers had equally declared that,
under certain circumstances, they might be induced to take
part with Denim:at, but for reasons of their own they had
not adhered to that promise. filer Majesty's Government
were willing to adhere to it if the other Powers did, and if
they had the assistance of France and Russia they would
have given material aid in stopping the war. But, al-
though France and Russia had acted in a preciseiy similar
manner, the conduct of these powers was represented as
honourable, while her Majesty's Government was consi-
dered worthy of censure. (Rear, hear ) He 13,:lieved the
honour of this country had not suffered from the manner
in which these negotiations had been conducted. Ile be-
lieved the only way to maintain the influence of the coun-
try was to do right, and advise others to do right, and not
to en'er upon useless and unnecessary wars. (Cheers.)
Whatever might be the opinion of that house at the present
moment, he was sure that the verdict of posterity would
not endorse those imputations upon the Government which
tir.d formed, the main stsple of the arguments in the present
debate. (Cheers,)

Lord J. MANNERS expressed his surprise at the sub-
lime audachy- of assertion into which the learned Attorney-
G encral heti allowed himself to be betrayed. The Chancellor
of the Exchequer and the Under-Secretary for Foreign
Affairs had been bold enough in their statements, but the
z ti of the hon. and learned gentleman had carried him
further, and enabled him to improve upon those statements.
'Flee Attorney-General had totally misunderstood the tan-
gaege of the address. Alt that they said was that it was not
right for England to encourage resistance on the part of
Denmark, either directly or indirectly, unless they had pro-
posed to carry out their threats and fulfil their promises.
Five years ago the noble lord had come into office, in order,
in the first place, to carry a democratic Reform Bill, and in
the next to raise the name of England to a height which it
had not attained under the wise and temperate management
of Lord Derby. (Laughter on the Ministerial bencties )
Well, how bad the noble lord redeemed that boasted pledge?
HUM had he maintained the honour and character of Eng-
land in those transactions ? Why, from every foreign news-
p aper, from every foreign capital in which an unfortunate
Euglishnsen miEht happen to reside, from every foreign
Court to which the Government had addressed its Eder le
complaints, there tame one and the same answer, More
than that, the very speech of the Royal Commissioners at
the commencement of the session admitted that, whereas
in 1859, when Lord Derby's Government succeeded to the
management of affairs, England was loyal to all the other
Powers of Europe, in 1864 she stood in a position of im-
potent isolation. (Cheers.) Why was it that great States
like Prussia, and small States like Saxony, equally repu •
diamd our interference ? The cause was not deep. It
had been reserved for Lord Russell to combine a
parody of the language of Lord Chatham with an exagge-
ration of the policy of Sir Robert Walpole. But it was said
they were not concerned with Lord Russell alone, but with
the whole of the Government. He admitted that, and far
be it from him to fellow the example of the noble earl him-
self in 1855. when he made one of his colleagues responsible
for the guilt of the whole Administration. lie, therefore,
would not charge Lord Russell alone with the failure of
these negotiations. He must say that, having been in the
house on that memorable July morning of last year, when
the noble lord at the head of the Government delivered
nimself of that famous statement to which such frequent
reference had been made, he could not but accuse the noble
lord of a singular blindness in regard to the threatening
aspect of this quarrel. In spite of the warnings which he
received, the noble lord rose in his place in the end of July,
and said that he saw no danger to Europe under those cir-
cumstances. They were now told that the dignity of that
house, would Suffer if it gave expression to the universal
voice of the country If the House of Commons failed to

give expression to that voice, they failed in the discharge of
one of their most solemn and most important duties. The
time, he thought, had come when this house must express
its opinion on the conduct of the Government. (Hear,
hear.) If, having expressed the threats they had expressed,
they had pursued a bold and vigorous policy in the outset,
they might have stifl this iniquitous war in its bud ; but,

instead of that, it appeared to him the Government had

neither known how to uNintain the peace Li Europe, nor
now to uphold the dignity of Englar 1, (Heat, hear.)
It appeared to him that the one had been and was still
imperilled, and the other was tarnished, in the keeping of

her Ma►jesty's Ministers. He had perused these dem-

moats with pain and regret, and it waa with pain and with