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

THE HORTICULTURAL SOLIETY.

officers.

Sir W. GALLWEY asked the First Commissioner of
'Works whether certain arcades and galleries, until lately in
the possession of the Kensington Royal Horticultural
Society, were about to become property of the State?
Mr W. CO WPER said a deed of conveyance was being
executed, but was not yet finished. The property never
belonged to the Royal Hortictutural Society. They were
the property of the Commissioners of the Exhibition of
1862.

.NEW ZEALAND.

In reply to as lloN. MEMBER,

Mr. CARDWELL said they had no further intelligence
from New Zealand. All they had was the telegram. The
mail had not yet arrived.
THE -VOTE OF CENSURE—THE ADJOURNED
DEBATE.
On the order of the day for the resumption of the ad-
journed debate being read,
Mr LAYARD said he never rose under a more painful
sense of the reaponsioility that devolved upon him than he
did that evening, because it would become hie duty
to justify the acts of one of the departments of the
Government, with which he, perhaps unworthily,
was connected. He should have, in the course
of his remarks to vindicate the character of a statesman
who had token his place in history, and one the object of
whose deeds has beekto add a lustre to the annals of his
country. Against that noble lord in the course of this
debate garbled extracts—he would not say falsified ex-
tracts—had been brought.' (Cries of Oh, oh.")
lie hoped hon. gentlemen would wait until
he had failed to prove his assertion, because there
would be plenty of time then to cry "oh, eh." The
right honourable gentleman the member for Buck-
inghamshire, in the course of his observations in bring-
ing forward the motion, had referred to early portions of
the negotiations, but in acquitting himself of his task, it
would be his duty to fill up the intervals the right hon.
gentleman had passed over. The hon. gentleman then
proceeded to narrate the whole of the negotiations on the
Danish question, beginning as early as those of 1848, which
eventually led to the treaty of 1852, which he stated was
not one of guarantee, but was one in the interests of peace.
lie could not assent to the principle laid down the other
evening by the hon. member for Rochdale, because he
felt that his principles, if carried out, would lead to the dis-
memberment of Switzerland. In considering the quee-
time with a view of arriving at a right conclusion, it
would be necessary to discover who were the principal
actors in transactions in which the Duke of Atignatenburg
wail concerned. Who, he would ask, advised the
Duke
of Augustenburg to accept the compro-
mise at that time offered him ? Who, he would
ask, advised him to resign his right, and whose name ap-
peared so frequently in the Dano-German papers ? Why,
M. von Bismark. (Cheers from the Opposition side.) Who,
in addition to this, did all he could to forward the same
object—why M. de Beast ; and yet these two persons were
now doing their utmost to set aside the established
succession in Schleswig-Holstein. When Lord
Russell Caine into office he found the Schleswig-Holstein
matter already in
a very complicated state, and on search-
ing the records
of the Foreign-office seven folio
volumes of despatches were found, and the language of
Earl Russell, which Was now so much found fault with by
the other side of the ham,
was almost identically the same
as already existed in these deepmehe8. In those despatches
—(cries of order, order)

Lord R. CECIL rose to order. Re did nqt think it was
competent for the hen. member to read from despatches
whi,,h were nor before Parliament.
The SPEAKER ruled that the despatches could not be
read.

Mr LAYARD then continued, and said that although
he could not read an extract from those despatches 7,
felt he could refer to them, and he therefore said that,ixty et " e
seven volumes nearly all the terms used by Earl Russell were
to be found. The hon. ;rent eroln then went cn to doknd
the course adopted by Earl Russell, and contended that in
all the steps he had taken in order to br ng the
hostile powers to amity and peace they had been taken
in concurrence with France, and he utterly denied that the
despatch, which had been so much commented on as having
been written at Gotha by Earl Russell under Ger-
man influence was consistent with the facts. Such
he assured the house was not the case, as the despatches
were written in L. ndon before he went to Gotha. The
proposals in that despatch were accepted by France and
Prussia, but refused by Denmark, and had they been ac-
cepted, they would have tended to a proper settlement of the
Schleswig-Holstein difficulty. The hon. gentleman then
read quotations from the speech of Lord Palmerston
in order to show that France and Russia were as much re-
ferred to in the event of aggression in Denmark as

ever England was. The honourable gentleman then pro.
ceeded to read extracts from the correspondence, to show
that Earl Russell had not used the threats that had been
attributed to him, and he denied that that noble lord had
ever lost one favourable opportunity of offeri ,a mediation,
even when the Diet was threatening --., cation. The
noble earl ' had been accused of aed .t'li g Denmark
in negotihtions, but honourable members, if they
read the blue-book aright, must come to a
different conclusion. Then, again, it had been said that
Earl ?tassel' had launched his noble friend Lord Wodehouse
to Copenhagen, but at whose suggestion was he sent
from England, not certainly at the instance of this coun-
try, but at the instance of Russia, and he utterly denied
that Earl Russell had ever asked the King of
Denmark to do an illegal act, such as had been imputed to
him by hon. gentlemen opposite. There was a de-
spatch written by the noble earl of the most important
nature, which had been generally misunderstood,
it was not a war despatch, but one which was hoped would
preserve peace. It was not addressed to France alone, but
also to Russia, Sweden, Austria, and Prussia, and he con-
tended that as all the other powers to the treaty had refused
to fulfil it, England was released from the necessity of
going to war. The hon. member for Horsham stated on
Tuesday night that England went into the Conference de-
claring she would support the independence and integrity
of Denmark; but this she never did, for even Denmark
admitted that they went into the Conference without any
/
regard to the basis of 1851 or 1852. Ihe right hon. gen-
tleman opposite said by way of complaint that her Majesty's
Government WO proposed in the Conference the line of the
Bchlei, and that it was made without the co-operation of the
ambassador of Russia. But it hon. members would turn
to the record of the Conference they would find Lord Cla-
rendon stating in two of the protocols that that proposal
was not solely the proposal of her Majesty's Government,
but that it was brought forward with the co-operation of the
neutral Powers. Baron Brunnow consented to support the
proposal, and said that he was prepared to go into the Con-
ference on the basis of 1852, but if that basis were found to
be untenable, he would support the line of the Schlei. word
Russell had been accused of breaking his promise with re-
gard to the line of the Schlei ; but what the noble lord said
was that he would not propose an other '..ine but that of the
Schlei, not that he would not make another proposition,
which was an important distincthon. (Hear, hear) Viliat
hitry have thought if tile noble
would that house or the covert
lord had said, •' I will renke no proposal for aeoitration ; let
them go to war." Why, that was a step in the way of
peace. The propes
-al was unfortunately refused by Denmark,
Austria, and P-„asaia, and war ensued. He must refer to
another stet'ament of . he hon, member for Horsham, because
he believed that there never had been a speech made in that
house which had shown a greater disregard for dates.
(Laughter, and " Hear.") The hon. member stated that
ke had heard Lord Russell say in the other house that
within twenty-four hours he had again made an offer to
France to go to war for Danmark. [Mr FITZGERALD sig-
nified dissent.] The hon. gentleman must not contradict
him—(lauehter)—he was afraid he was pressing him too
tight. When the hon. member made that statement he
(Mr Layard) interrupted him, and said it, was not the case ;
and the hen. gentleman said, "I heard the Foreign Secre-
tary say that the French Government had declined to go to
war for Denmark." He (Mr Layard) had to state ?hat there
was not the slightest foundation for that. When the Con-
ference met, the Emperor of the French spontaneously
stated why France could not give her support to Denmark
at that time. He had shown that Lord Russell had not used
threats, but that the language he had used had been uni-
formly used by France--that he had not been unnecessarily
meddling, and that he had supported the honour of this
country, and had throughout shown an ardent desire to
maintain peace. (Cheers.) He now came to a very im-
portant matter. The right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr
Disraeli) stated that a change of language had taken place
on the part of France in the autumn of last year, and he
attributed that change of language to two reasons—first, to
the way in, which France had been treated in the Polish
question; and, secondly, the refusal to accept the Congress
propesed by the Emperor. His right hen. friend the mem-
ber for Stroud, in his very able speech, had ventured to
grapple with the right hon. gentleman on the question of
Poland, and bad shown that that policy had been forced
upon the Government by the House of Commons—(hear,
hear)—and that the Gevernment had acted in complete
conformity with the decision of the house. Then, again,
with reference to the speech of the hon. member for Hors-
ham, who had referred to despatches of Feb. 18, Feb. 21,
and Feb. 27, would the house believe that not one of the
dates of these despatches was correct ? That part of the
speech was a complete and absolute mystification, The
eeepatch of Feb. 27 only existed in the hon. member's ima-
gination, and the other two despatches had nothing to do
with this particular question. (Cheers.) But what were the
facts ? The debate on Poland took place on Feb. 27, On
March 2 Lord Russell wrote the first despatch, and he sug-
gested to the French Government—not in the strong terms
of the motion, but in more courteous terms—the spirit of
the address of the hon. member for King's County. (No,
no.) Let the hon. member who cried " No" refer to the
despatches. The hon. member for Horsham, on the occa-
sion of the debate on Poland, reminded the house that be
had seen an illustrious Polish patriot, who hoped that some
tb;,,,,g ~,,,.),./ },, a...,,. 5,-..- P -.1.. r. ud . .te c, k'.3./ic La,ra),l) V,..0
that illustrious patriot. But why was the promise held out
to him at the time? Because hon. gentlemen opposite thought
they would embarrass her Majesty's Government. (No, no,
and cheers) The right hon. gentleman opposite had declared
that there were only two lines of policy to be pursued with
regard to Poland—viz., that Poland eh uld be made an in-
dependent kingdom, or that the Poles should be declared
free. The resolutions of the hon. member for King's County
were war resolutions, and the right hon. gentleman oppo-
site objected to them, and recommended they should be
wtthdrawn, in order that they night be emasculated, [Mr
DisRAELI —I recommended hies to withdraw the resolu-
tions.] Tho noble lord at the head of the Government was
willing to have a discussion, but hon. members opposite
objected, The hon. member for King's County said he was
ready to proceed with the resolutions; but where were the
right hon. gentleman and the hon. member for Horsham
when the division took place ? Why, to use a word which
had become almost classical, they " skedaddled." (Laughter
and cheers.) But what was the fact ? The fact was that the
hon. member for King's County was betrayed, and the
illustrious Polish patriot was betrayed also, (Cheers.) He
(Mr Layard) knew the history of that transaction. That
illustrious Polish patriot was led to believe that the Con,
servative party were going to support him, and he be-
lieved that Poland was going to be restored by war. But
the fact was that the whole thing was got up to embarrass
her Majesty's Government. When they found the country
was not for war, they skedaddled. (Laughter and cheers.)
Then the right hon, gentleman said that in the answer
given to the proposition for an European Congress the
Emperor of the French, whom he called his peculiar friend,
had been offended ; but did not the right hon. gentleman
himself use more offensive language when he accused the
Emperor of the French of having abandoned an old ally
and a people who had freely shed their blood in support of
his dynasty. Such language, which was a reflection on the
honour of the Emperor as a sovereign, and on his humanity
as a man, was infinitely more discourteous than anything
which had been written in Lord Russell's despatch, (Hear,
hear,) He had listened in vain to the speeches of hon.
members opposite for any clue to the policy they intended
to pursue. He had heard much about the honour of Eng-
land and peace; but the country would not be satisfied with
such vague words. (Cheers.) He should he glad to hear
how her Majesty's Government could have :cted otherwise
than they did. He had only heard of two suggestions; the
first was that made by Earl Grey, that in the month of
January this country should have sent 25,000 men to the
Dannewerke ; the other was that her Majesty's Governmeh:,
should have observed a total abstinence from interfe,enea.
With regard to the first proposal, would any reaso-4ahie man
have thought of sending 25,000 men to Dt,fimark, in the
depth of winter ? That was a proposi
`:
chimerical for consideration, There /on too vague and
was one passage in the
speech of the right hen. member tor Stroud which deserved
attention; that part of it Which drew a distinction between
interference and intervention. With regard to interference,
he was as much opposed to it as the hon.member for Rochdale
or the hon.member for Birmingham; but mediation in favour
of peace is a matter of duty. (Cheers.) And any Government
having the opportunity of bringing about peace, but who re
fused mediation for the purpose, would be deserving not , f
praise, but of execration. (Cheers) He wished to make one
more reference to the speech of the hon. member for Hor•
sham. 'When it was objected to hon. gentlemen opposite
that they did not bring forward a motion before the Confer-
ence met, the hon. member for Horsham exclaimed, "How
could we pronounce an opinion or bring forward a motion,
when the papers containing the despatches were only laid
on the table at the end of March ?" Now, au far from that
being the case, the papers were presented the Ist day of
March. (Loud cheers upon the Ministerial benches, and
cries of " no, no" on the Opposition benches.) Therefore,
the stet-ewer. tof the hon. gentleman was most reckless.
(Renewed cries of "no, no" from the Opposition benches.)
T here was a difference of a whole month between them, and
ample time was allowed for bringing for ward a motion.
Mr BAIL LlE—They were not distributed until the 20th.
Mr LAYARD—The correspondence only ended at the
beginning of February—:he answer from Vienna was not
received until then—and the papers wore in the hands of
members at the beginning of March. From the right hon.'
member for Berks it was impossible to obtain any definite
idea o' his policy. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gen lowan
was too much vereed in the mysteries of politics to commit
himself. (Cheers.) But, looking round to the men of that
party w•ho had not the art of the right hon. gentleman,
what. did they say ? Why, the one amongst them who was
most clmenei was the right hei member for Huntingdon
(Gen Peel), He would not step to aelawhether and did not
confirm the various suspicions floating in the political world
—(laughter and ironical cheers)—but the right hon. gentle-
man, having begun his speech by declaring he was no par-
tisan, went on to remind the house that two years ago,
in an atter dinner speech, he had spoken of the maculation,
" degradation,"
and evert' other a tion—(laugh ter)—which
had befallen this country
hn reference to Denmark. Ana
then the right hon, gentleman, being at the end of his
tether, and having completely exhausted his own vocabu-
lary, had recourse to the columns of the morning Standard,
where alone he could have fennel language so choice, and
branded us as big mouthed bullies who sneaked off on the

first show of danger. (Ironical cheers and laughter.)
The hon. member for 'Bradford (Mr W. E. Forster) quoted
one part of the gallant general's speech, in which he spoke
of the tarnished honour of England ; but there was another
part of the speech, in which he said that, if such things had
happened in common life, the greatest coward would have
rushed forward to protect the weak, without even asking
what was the cause of quarrel--and then, added the right
hon. gentleman, he saw no reason why the Foreign-office
should not have acted in the same spirit. Well, what Was
that but a war policy ?—(Ministerial cheers)—and a war
policy of the very worst kind, because it was founded upon
sentiment, and not upon tight. (Loud cheers) That was
the policy of the right hon. gentleman, who leas loudly
cheered by every member on the benches opposite. (Re-
newed cheers.) Who did they next put up to advocate a
peace policy ? Why, of all men in the world, the noble lord
the member for Stamford (Lord It. Cecil.) (Laughter, and
ironical cries of " Hear, hear.") If there was any member
of the house who had used strong language in favour of
Denmark, it was the noble lord (Cheers.) The noble lord
was a man of great power, and if it were not that he was in
the habit of showing an unfairness towards his political op-
ponents that went beyond the privilege of partisanship —the
noble lord would be a very great man in that house, and he
had no doubt he would be so in future time. But he would
ask the house whether the noble lord had ever made so bad
a speech as on the other night—(laughter)—and the reason
was because he aevocated a
heTcb eaoh6huftetwsothehhneaoee.i
that ins
:eoti
nnnuhe
house,
mbar
.gaembdeßoe:np;opltifieoonnmtsrhoi
tetnwehi
noc:osrecuiethotoanutaliht:nl
country
own sentiments. (Hear.)
hoe
re e no differencespeechtche
admittede
?r s i
The
oow saidfna
ht
ihs tst
vteeerrar:: and
ndwaoboa ndsl
e
had made more progress with .
men sitting upon
hundred years precedtg. :n the last 25 years than in any
marvellous Well, had the right hon. gentle-
‘,-nese benches no hand in producing that
"progress ? -(cheers)—had they not, by availing
theills`.;tves of the ability of the hon. member himself, given
to this England of ours some beneficent legisla ion ?
(renewed cheers)—and had not gentlemen on the benches
opposite taken a tone which must be especially distasteful to
the hon. member on the vital question of America? (Cheers.)
Why, if kentlemen opposite had been upon those benches,
eve Fl.ould have been at war with the United States. (Cheers
and loud cries of " No, no," from the Opposition benches,)
See hal they were committed as regarded America ? He
and others saw around that house anxious faces, who were
waiting for the overthrow of the Government, because they
know that the moment the gentlemen opposite came in the
rams would go out of Liverpool. (Loud cries of "No, no,"
from the Opposition benches.) Why, almost the highest
legal authority of the party had committed himself in that
house to the policy of the rams. (Cheers.) The hon. gen-
tleman continued—Let me ask what great crime has Earl
Russell committed to authorise the house to eject the Mi-
nistry ;rom office? I do not mean to say that mistakes may
not have been committed—(Opposition cries of " Hear,
hear")—still I do not admit any.
_But who is there that
has had to carry on a long and difficult negotiation that has
not had to say, on looking back, that something there was
which might have been done better? (Ministerial cheers.)
I boldly say that, during the whole of these negotiatiots,
my noble friend has done his utmost to preserve the moth-
ration of Europe, and that any mistake which he may have
made is infinitesimally small compared with the great policy
which he had carried out. (Cheers.) Talk of lowering the
just influence of the country 1 I will tell you what has
lowered i-s just influence. It is the speeches we have heard
from the other side of the house, telling foreign countries
and foreign Governments that we are humiliated—telling
them, while actually fouling y .ur own nest, that an Eng-
lish Ministry can be base, dishonourable, and cowardly.
(Loud cheers.) 'Tis that which lowers the just influence of
England in Europe. (Renewed cheering.) You may con •
demn the Ministry, but, let me entreat of you, don't degrade
the country. (Great cheering.) You say you simply mean
a vote of want of confidence; then, if that be so, withdraw
this resolution (Cheers.) R 'member, your resolution de-
clares that the great influence of the country has been
lowered, and remember, if it is carried, that that will be
branded upon the records of P • rliament for all time. (Great
cheering.) But I utterly and entirely deny that the just in-
fluence of the country has been lowered, and I look forward
with confidence to the verdict of the house and the country
upon the question. (Cheers.) I can't believe, after the state-
ment which I have made—l can't believe, after showing
hoe- Lord Russell has been misrepresented and misunder-
stood, how unjustly he has been abused—l cannot believe,
I say that the house or the country will condemn a Minis-
ter who has laboured beyond all other men with truth and
sincerity, and, in spite of taunts and threats, has success-
fully laboured, throughout a period of unequalled difficulty
and danger, to preserve to th s country the inestimable
blessings of peace. (The hon, gentleman resumed his seat
amidst loud and prolonged cheering )
Mr HARDY said he did not wonder that gentlemen
opposite should have received with cheers the first
defence for the Government despatches. (Cries of "No,
no," in the Ministerial benches) It was not his intention
to revert back to the early period of 1848, as in his opinion
the origin of the present controversy dated from Septem-
ber, '62. On the 24th of September in that year Lord
Russell gave the German Powers to understand that he
would support them in their contest with Denmark, and
4 1•••-s- .1, Ws. t .v
which directly induced the issue of the letters patent. The
correspondence with Mr Howard fully established that. But
the hon member who had just spoken had charged his right
hon friend the member for Bucks and his hon friend the
member for Horsham with misquoting the correspondence.
Well, he challenged that statement, and asserted that it wee
utterly unsupportable. If any passage had been misquoted
why had not the hon member corrected it at the m, ment
But no, with that subtlety and cunning for which he was
distinguished. (Shouts Of " Oh, oh," from the Miuisterial
benches drowned the rest of the sentence.) The extracts
read were perfectly correct and complete in themselves, and
were such as to convey the whole tt nor of the despatches,
And, with regard to their tenor and bearing, the hou gen-
tleman had taken very good care not to allude to what had
fallen from gentlemen sitting on his own side of the house.
The hon member for Rochdale said of our diplomacy—" It
was anarchy—it made us the disgrace of Europe." And so
also the right hon member for S;roud (Mr llorsman). No-
thing could • xceed the strength of his language with respect
to this diplomatic correspondence. But hat right hon gen-
tleman had taken a most extraordinary course upon the
question. The right hon gentleman said the Opposition
was responsible for what had taken place, and that they had
allowed the time to pass by when they ought to have inter-
fered, And then the right hon gentleman, with a humility
which was almost touching, declared that even he—the
sense-carrier of both sides of the house—(laughter)—had
been neglecting his duty—(renewed laughter)—that even
he, in common with an apathetic Parliament, had been
neglecting his duty. (Much laughter.) Why, there never
was a man in that house fitter to have brought forward the
question of Denmark. The right hon gentleman could
not have compromised any one but himself; for one so
isolated, one so independent, had never occupied a seat in
Parliament. (Hear, hear.) Any one who remembered the
bitter language which had fallen prom the right hon. gen •
tleman with respect to the occupants of the Treasm y bench
knew that he was not shy in attacking a Ministry, (p,,,e
newed cries of Hear, hear.) And now, to turn to the %-
member the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affair-
.
to 'on.ifh t:
citeullestthioenhwone.regennottledmelaivnertehdatto the pap
papJrs -relating I
be
tiers at the commence-
ment of March. [Mr. LAY •'
. _eat) dissented.] Why, upon
the 18th of March the re ,
_eche lord at the head of the Foreign. office himself ga-15 the
reason
why they had not been
produced. f". -
Under
eupposition cheers.) The hoe. gentleman the
, decretary has had his attention called to the mat-
free. I gave him the opportunity of correcting himself, but
he would not be corrected. (Opposition cheers.) Upon the
18th of March, Lord Ellenborough wished to bring forward
his motion, and what did Lord Russell say ? "I do trust
the noble lord, upon grounds of public policy, will adjourn
the discussion until all the papers are before your lordships."
(Loud cheers from the Opposition.)
Mr LAYARD (interrupting)—l did not say the papers
were in the hands of members on the Ist of March.

Mr HARDY—The hon. gentleman (Mr Layard) has
used language with respect to gentlemen on this side of the
house which does no credit ei. her to him or the Government
which he represents. (Cheers from the Opposition.) And
now, when the hon. gentleman is Convicted of a misstate-
ment which he made in the hearing of the house—when he
used those words—l am surprised that hon, gentlemen who
sit by should have allowed him to make his calumnious
statements. (tzie, of " Order, order.")
Mr LAYARD—I rise to order. I move that the words
just used by the hon. gentleman bs taken down. (Hear,
hear, Order, order, and cheers.) I alluded to the words
" calumnious statements." (Hear, hear, and cheers.)
Mr HARDY (to the Speaker)—lf I am out of order, I
shall hear from you, sir. (Cheers by the Conservatives.)
The SPEA KER—Thoe does not appear to me to be
anything out of order.

Lord I'ALMERSTON then rose, and was received with
cheers by the Ministerial party, and loud•and vociferous
cries of " Order" from the opposite side of the House, He
said—l rise to order. I apprehend that it is a fundamental
rule governing the debates of this house :hat motives are
not to be imputed to hon. gentlemen. (Interruption) I
appeal to you, sir. (Oh, oh, arid much opposition by the
Conservatives.) When a member attributes to another that
that he makes caluminous statements
An. HON. MEMBER—The :-peaker has decided that
he has made a statement not out of order.
Lord PALMERS lON essayed to make further remarks,
and continued :or several moments gesticulating to the
house. The deafening cries of "Order'' from the Conser-
vatives, however, quite drowned the voice of the noble vis-
count. At length, on sitting down, he said that "calumny
does impure motives, viz., that he distorted the truth."
Mr. DISRAELI, whose rising was the signal for com-
plete silence in the house, and who was at first quietly
heard, said—l rise to order also----to speak on the point
of order. I understood, having listened to this debate, that
the hen. gentleman the Under-Secretary of State charged
gentlemen on this side of the house with falsification.
(Hear, hear, and loud cheers by the Conservatives.) Gen-
tlemen on this side of the house, conscious that they did not
merit that charge, and not wishing to disturb the order of
debate, were content, when the time arrived, to reply, in
terms befitting an accusation of that kind, and in a sense
which every gentleman in Europe would think fit—(inter-