The Sun.
London, England, 1864-07-05 00:00:00

PREFERENCE SHARES.

Great Eastern, E. Counties, Ext. No. 1,
Ditto, 6 per cent pf., 122
Great orthern, 6 per cent.. red. at 10 per cent. pm., 113! It
G t. Western, Wt. Midland, Oxford, I,t guaranteed stock, 1261
North 6taffordshire,

SECOND EDITION.

PREFEKENCE SHARES AND STOCKS.
Great Eastern 5 per cent. pf., 101
Ditto, 4; per cent., 901
FOREIGN RAILWAYS
Great Luxembourg, 10j
Turin nd 6aVcna; 31
West Flanders, 7g

FOREIGN MMES.
Cape Copper,
BANKS.

Alliance (11m.), (5
Australasia,
Ditto, new, F 7/
Bank of utago, lim., 4}
City, 145
Consolidated Bank, lira., 12 11;
Continental, lim., i 6/
European Bank, Um- 141
Hindustan, china, and Japan (1/m.),
Ditto, new, ' 6
Imperial Bank of India, china, and Japan, lim., 6
Imperial Ottoman, 181
Land Mortgage Bank of India, Him, 51
London B. of Slexioo and S. America, lim., /
London Chartered Bank of Australia, 241
London and County, 71
London Joint Stock, 471 8/
Merchant Bank, lim , lei
Mercantile and Exchang.e. lim., 19; ;
National dank of Ireland,
Ditto, new, 44}
Union of Australia, 57
Ditto, new, 54

MISCELLANEOUS.
Australian Agricultural, 21
Berlin Water Works, Jim., 91
Crystal Palace, 32}
Egyptian Coin. and Trading, lim., "41 I
English and Scottish Marine, Um., k
Financial Discount, lim., 5/
Gen. Credit and Finance of London, Jim., 7 1
Hudson's Bay. 174
Imperi 1 and Mercantile Credit Asso., 1int,,71
International Financial , ociety, lim., 101 10k
Joint Stock Discount, lim., 71 2 if
Land Securities, Inn., 4f
London Financial Association, 1im.,,,272 8
M dras Irr go.tton and canal,
Ditto, (all;, 2J 101
National Di-count Company, lint., 152 1 2
Ocean Marine (Insurance). 21/
Quebrada. Land, Rail, and Mining, lim., 31
Universalorl` ch me tee e andFini n ircri
nieerrese"
Insurance,
agrrYai Pnn ice ee( lim.,
unims c!), lim,, 71

ROYAL NAVAL RESERVE.—By areturn issued
yesterday it appears that the number of seamen enrolled
in the Royal Naval Reserva dawn to )March 31st last was
17.300, discharged 401, died 639, and entered the Royal
Navy 300—leaving a not number of 15,473 men still on
the books. Two of the dismissed men had entered the Con-
fad.3rate naw.l service,

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING-, JULY 5, 1864.

scarcely a throne that was not subverted. The King of
Denmark, in his character of a sovereign prince of Ger-
many, was affected by that great movement. The popula-
tion of Germany, under the influence of the very peculiar
excitement of that time, were impelled to redress the grie-
vances, as they alleged, of their fellow countrymen in the
dominions of the King of Denmark, and who were, of
course, his subjects. The Duchies of Holstein and Schles-
wig were invaded. A cruel war was excited by ambitious
princes in that country, under circumstances with which
we have become familiar. Ultimately, I believe, the whole
of the Continental dominions of the King of Denmark were
occupied by Austrian and Prussian armies. In 1851 tran-
quillity had been restored to Europe, sad especially to
Germany, and the troops of Austria ultimately quitted the
dominions of the King of Denmark. That they
quitted them in consequence of the military
prowess of the Danes, though it was far from inconsider-
able, I will not pretend to say, but they quitted them under
certain conditions, and under the influence of Russia,
which was at that time irresistible in Germany. The
conditions under which they qaitted Denmark were con-
cluded by the King of Denmark and the Courts of Berlin
and Vienna; and under those conditions the King of
Denmark entered into certain arrangements, with a view to
remedy the abuses complained of; but he never peelormed
or accomplished the engagements thus entered into—
partly, I have no doubt, from negligence, bec ruse we
know it is not the habit of mankind to perform disagree-
able duties when the pressure is withdrawn, and partly, I
have no doubt, from the peculiar character of the engage-
ments themselves. That was in the year 1851. In the year
1352, tranquillity being entirely restored, the treaty which
regulated the succe,,sion. was negotiated. In that treaty
there was not the sliehtest reference to the engagements
which the King of Denmark had entered into with the
German Powers. It was a municipal, a domestic, or as
we now call it, a Federal, and not an international, ques-
tion. Notwithstanding that it really related enly to the
King of Denmark and the Diet of Germany, once more it
attracted the attention of the Government of England and
the Ministers of the great Powers generally, who were the
signataries of the treaty of 1852. For some time after the
treaty of 1852 little was hoard of the Federal question and
controversy between the Diet and Denmark. After this
exertion and exhaustion the queston slumbered, but did
not die. Occasionally it gave evidence of vitality; and not
long after the accession of the present Government to office
the controversy between the Diet and the Ringer Denmark
gave evidence of very great activity and life. Her Majesty's
Ministers thought it their duty to interfere in that contro-
versy. Whether they were wise in taking that course of
conduct the house can decides well as myself, 1 confess
my own impression is, and always has been, that it would
have been much better to have left the Federal question
between the King and the Diet to have worked itself out.
But her l‘deje.ety's Ministers were of opinion—and uo doubt
there is much to be said in favour of that opinion—that,
inasmuch as the question, though a Federal question, was
one which probably, is its execution, might lead to aeuse
which would make it an international one, it would be
wiser and better to interfere by anticipation, and prevent,
if possible, that Federal execution ever taking place.
The comequence of that extreme activity on the part of
her Majesty's Ministers is a mass of correspondence which
has been placed upon our male, with wuich many gentle-
men may have some acquaintance, though they may have
been attracted and absorbed by the interest of more
modern correspondence which has within this year been
presented to the house. I should not b 5 doing justice to the
Secretary of State it I did not bear testimony to the un-
wearied perseverance end extreme ingenuity with which
he conducted that correspondence. The noble lord found

n that business, no doubt, a subject which is genial to hts
nature, viz , the opportunity of drawing up a constitution
for the Government of communities. (Laughter.) The
Secretary of State is almost as celebrated as a statesman
who flourished at the end of the last century for that
ability. I wilt not quarrel or criticise any of the lucubra-
tions of the noble lord at that time. I think his labours are
well described in a passage I observed in one of the de-
spatches of a distinguished S wcdish statesman—l think the
present Primo Minister—who, when he was called upon to
consider a scheme of the English Government for the ad-
ministration of Schleswig, which entered into minute de-
tails, and with that power and prolixity which only could
have been acquired by a constitutional Minister who has
long served an apprenticeship in the House ef Commons,
said—" Generally speaking, the monarchs of Europe find it
difficult to manage one Parliament ; but I observe, to my
surprise, that Lord Russell is of opinion that the King of
Denmark will be able to manage four." (Laughter.) The
only observation which I shall make upon that folio
volume of 300 or 400 pages which is on the table, and which
relates to the affairs of Schleswig and Holstein, is this—
that I observe that the other Powers of Europe, who were
equally interested in the matter, and Equally bound as 84.1.-
natarias of the treaty of 1602 to interfere if required—do not
interfere as the English Government interfere. That they
disapprove of the course taken I by no means sVieh to
maintain. When we make a suggestion upon the subject
they receive it with cold politeness. They have no objec•
tion to the course 'a hich we announce we are going to take,
but they confine themselves, with scarcely an exception,
to that conduct on their part. The noble lord fullews a
different course; but it is really unnecessary for me to
dwell on this part of the subject. We may dismiss it
from our mind. I have only touched upon it com-
plete the picture which I am bound to lay before the house,
in consequence of the events which very speedily occurred.
Ail this correspondence—this elaborate, and I will venture
to say, not using the terra offensively, but accurately—this
pragmatical correspondence—(a laugh)—was conducted in
the perfect ignorance of the people of this country, who felt
very little interest in this subject. I may say, even in Eta
rope, where affairs of d plomacy always excite more atten-
tion, little effect was ever produced. This correspondence,
however, culminated in a celebrated despatch, which ap-
peared in the autumn of 1662. Then, for the first time, a
very great effect was produced in Europe generally, and
certainly in Germany and France, and some interest began
to be excited in Elegland. Tee effect of the noble lord's
management of these transactions had been this. It had en-
couraged—l will not now kap to inquire whether it was
intentional or not—but it fa a fact that it had encouraged the
spread of the views of what is called the German party in
this contest. This had been the effect of the noble lord's
before eetspiencgiel,hyorottlythaind in consequencesdespatc
despatch of the
autumngeneral ionttleSrf;2renßeue; something
occurred which renewed that impression. Germany being
almost agitated on the subject, and England at last having
her attention called to the ease in 1663, which began to pro-
duce disquietude, and
directed to the subject, and the state of
affairsavnd
gentlemen of this house beginning to
h
prorogation of Parliament amount-
ing to a degree of public anxiety, it was thought necessary
thsehiorratity,e nt
attention
that an inquiry should be made of her Majesty's Govern-
ment on the subject, and that some means should be taken
to still that disquietude which prevailed in this country by
obtaining from her Majesty's Government a declaration of
their policy generally with respect to Denmark, That ap-
peal was not made in any party spirit, or in any way ani-
mated by that disciplined arrangement with which ques-
tions are by both sides brought before the house. It was
at the end of the session, when few were left, and when the
answer of her Majesty', Ministers could not at all affect
the position of parties, though it might be of inesti-
mable influence and importance upon the opinions of
Europe and on the course of events. (Hear.) That matter
was brought forward by my hen. friend (Mr S. Fitzgerald),
who always speaks on those subjects with the authority of
ono who knows what he is saying. (A laugh.) A commu-
nication was made to the First Minister on the subject, and
it was understood on this side of the house, from a previous
declaration of the noble lord, and from our experience of his i
career generally, that t was
not an appeal which would be
disagreeable to him, or which would he an occasion which
he would have any d'esir'e to eecapo. The noble lord was not
taken by surprise. He hirneolf fixed the moment—it was a
,
morning Rhea he would come down and explained
the views of her Majesty s Government. I am bound to say
the noble lord on that occasion spoke with that perspicuity
and complete detail in which upon diplomatic subjects we
acknowiedge him to be a perfect master. Tho noble lord
entered into the question, and gave to the house, who knew
little about it, a popular but accurate account of the whole
question. He described the constitution of the Diet, and
also, for the first time, what a Federal execution was, lie
was a little unhappy in his prophecies of what would hap-
pen with regard to the Federal execution. It is the only
mistake which the noble lord made. He said he did not
think there would be Federal execution; and if there were,
he thought we might be. perfectly easy that it would not
lead to any disturbance in Europe. The noble lord described
the position of Holstein as a %mean duchy of which the
King of Denmark was the sovereign prince, and by that
means a member of the Diet and subject to the laws of the
Diet. He showed that the Duchy of Schleswig was not a
German duchy, and the moment that Schleswig was inter-
fered with an international consideration would atlas.
(Hear.) He told us, in a re-assuring spirit, that his views
relations with Denzeiark
upon our were the same as they had
always been. I will read an extract from the noble lord's
speech, not because it is not familiar to the house, but be-
cause upon occasions like this we should refer to documents,
that we may not be accused afterwards of having coloured
or garbled statements. The noble lord's concluding
observations were—" We are asked what is the policy and
course of her Majesty's Government with respect to this
dispute. We concur entirely with the hon. gentleman
(Fitzgerald), and I am satisfied with all reasonable men in
Europe, including those in France and Russia, in desiring
that she independence ann integrity and the rights of Den-
eiark may be maintained. We are convinced—l am con-
vinced, at least—that if any violent attempt were made to
overthrew those rights, or interfere with that indepen-
dence, those who made the attempt would find in the result
that it would not be Denmark alone with which they mould
have to contend." (Cheers.) Now that is a clear, manly,
atatesmanlike declanoion of policy. It was not a hurried
or hasty expression, upon a subject of that importance, of
that character—on which the noble lord never makes hasty
declarations. He is a master of his subject, and he could
not be taken by surprise ; but on that occasion there was
not a chance of his being taken by surprise. The occasion
was arranged beforehand, and the noble lord was perfectly
informed or our object. Ho sympathised with that object,
of soothing the disquieted mind of Europe, and he knew he
could not arrive at such a desirable result more happily than

tion. France was not, his excellency said, indifferent to the
maintenance of the integrity and independence of Denmark
and it was not from any indifference that he disapproved of
your lordship's suggestion. (Opposition cheers,) Well, sir,
that was the intention of the noble lord with respect to
the change in the relations between England and France.
That was significant. (Opposition cheers.) I think it
was one which the noble lord ought to have duly weighed,
when he remembered the position which this country occu-
pied with regard to Denmark—that it was a position under
the treaty which did not bind us to interfere more than
France itself ; and, conscious at the same time that any co-
operation from Russia for the same cause, though by dif-
ferent means, could hardly be counted upon, I should have
said that a pro dept Government would have well consi-
dered their position, and would not have taken any course
which committed them to any decided line of action. But,
so far as I can judge from the correspondence before us,
that was not the tone taken by her Majesty's Government,
because we have extracts from the correspondence of the
Secretary of State with the Swedish Minister, the Diet of
Frankfort, and Lord Bloomfield—all written in one fort-
niyht which elapsed after the receipt of that despatch of
Mr Grey which notified the change in the feeling of the
French Government. It is highly instructive, and we shall
see what effect it produced on the policy of her Majesty's
Government, Immodiately after the receipt of that despatch
the Secretary writes to the Swedish Minister in the follow.
ing terms :—" Her Majesty's Government set the highest
value on the independence and integrity of Denmark. . . .
Her Majesty's Government will be ready to remind Aus-
tria and Prussia of their treaty obligations to respect the
integrity and independence of Denmark." Now this kto
Sir A. Malet, the Minister at Frankfort, on Sept 29, that
is, nine or ten days after the receipt of the French de-
spatch. "Her Mejesty's Government, by the Treaty of
London of May 8, 1852, is bound to respect the integrity
and independence of Denmark. The Emperor of Austria
and the King of Prussia have taken the same engagement.
Her Majesty could not see with indifference a military
occupation of Holstein, which is only to cease upon terms
injuriously affecting the constitution of the whole Danish
monarchy. Her Majesty's Government could not recog•
niso this military occupation as a legitimate exercise of the
powers of the Confederation, or admit that it could pro-
perly be called a Federal Execution. Her Majesty's Go.
vernment could not be indifferent to the bearing of such
en act on Denmark and upon European interests. Her Ma-
jesty's Government, therefore, earnestly entreat the. German
Diet to pause. and to submit the question in dispute between
Germany and Denmark to the mediation of other Powers
unconcerned in the controversy, but deeply concerned in the
maintenance of the peace of Europe and the independence
of Denmark," (Opposition cheers.) My object in reading
these despatches is to show that, after the first intimation of .
a change of opinion in France, the sincere policy of the Go-
vernment was not modified. (Cheers.) The Secretary of
State, on the 30th of September, 1863, writes thus to Lord
Bloomfield, at Vienna :—." Her Majesty's Government trust
that no act of Federal execution to whieh Austria may be a
party, and no act of war against Denmark on the ground of
th© affairs of Schleswig, will be allowed to cheil with this
primary and essential treaty obligation. Her Majesty's
Government, indeed, entertain a full confidence that the
Government of Austria is as deeply impressed as her Ma-
jesty's Government with the conviction that the indepen-
dence and integrity of Denmark form an essential element
in the balance of power in Europe." And now I have
brought the case to the end of September, and I hope the
house has clearly understood the course of circumstances.
There is nothing in the month of October to call for remark
at this moment; but we now arrive at theenonth of Novem-
ber, and approach a very important and critical state of
affairs. The month of November was remarkable for a re-
currence of two great events, which completely changed the
character, and immensely affected the aspect, of the whole
relations between Denmark and Germany, and which may
have produced consequences that only can be felt when one
sees the end of it. Early in November the Emperor of the
French proposed a European Congress. His position, as he
himself described it, was a very painful one from various
causes. He therefore proposed a congress. When Parlia-
ment met on the 4th of February I gave my opinion as to
the propriety of her Majesty's Government refusing to be a
party to that congress. As a general principle I think
that a Congress should precede action. If you wish
any,happyand permanent results from a Congress, it should
rather follow the great efforts of nations, and, when they
are somewhat exhausted, give them an honourable relief

by a frank exposition of the policy of the Government. It
is my business to-night tc vindicate the noble lord, who has
treated this declaration as one used only to amuse the House
of Commons. lam here to prove the sincerity of that de-
claration—(hear)—beeause we have now on oar table re-
cently and long since this speech was delivered, the diplo-
matic correspondence which was then pursued by her
Majesty's Government on this subject. The right hon.
gentleman then proceeded to quote from despatches written
by Earl Russell to our ministers in Berlin and Vienna,
stating that if Germany persisted in confounding Schles-
wig with Holstein, the other Powers of Europe might con-
found Holstein with Schleswig. That reassuring state-
ment of the noble lord was, I think, a wise and judicious
policy at that time, because he knew that then Franco
was perfectly ready to co-operate with him in any measure
which he thought proper to pursue, with respect to
these transactions between Denmark and Germany; nay,
not only that France was ready, but that she had
spontaneously offered to act with us in any manner
which we liked. The right hon. gentleman quoted a de-
spatch from Lord Cowley in support of this assertion, in
which M. Drouyn do Lhuys expressed himself as desirous
of acting in concert with us in this matter. He then went
on to inquire how this change of feeling on the part of
France had been brought about, For when in September
Earl Russell had reminded the French Government of their
offer, and requested them to act in concert with us in event
of matters in Denmark requiring intervention, the applica-
tion had been first coldly received, and finally refused. He
then went on to say, I atop now to inquire what hat caused
this change in the relations between the two courts. Why
was France, who at the end of the session was so cordial and
ready to co-operate with us, at the end of two or three short
months entirely changed? At the commencement of last
year an insurrection broke out in Poland. Unhappily, in-
surrections in Poland are not unprecedented. This insur-
rection was extensive and menacing, but there have been
insurrections in Poland before quite as extensive and far
morennenacing—the insurrection of 1831, for example. For
at that time the Poles possessed a national army, second to
none for valour and discipline. Well, sir, the question of
Polish insurrection in 'lB3l was deeply considered by the
Government of that day. They went thoroughly into the
matter, and felt the soundings of that question. It was in-
vestigated and maturely considered, and the Government of
that day—the Government of William the Fourth—arrived
at these two conclusions, that it was not expedient ex... En-
gland to go to war to restore Poland; and, secondly, that if
England was not prepared to go to war, any interference Of
another kind would only aggravate the calamities of that
fated nation. (Hear, hear.) These were the conclusions at
which the Government of Lord Grey arrived, and they
were announced to Parliament. This is a question which
the English Government has had more than ono cpportu-
nity to consider, and on every occasion they have considered
it deeply and completely like men. The Polish question
occurred again in 1855, when a conference was sitting at
Vienna, in the midst of the Russian war. Again, her
Majesty's Government—the Government of the Queen—had
to consider the question. It was then considered under the
moat favourable circumstances to Poland ; for we were at
war with Russia. But, after performing all the duties of a
responsible Ministry under such circumstances, her Majes-
ty's Government arrived at these conclusions—that it was
not only nut expedient for England to go to war to restore
Poland, but it, was not even expedient to prolong war for
that purpose, And equally they arrived at the second con-
clusion, that any interference on our part, without action,
would not be just to the Poles, and must tend to increase
their difficulties. Thus this very question of Poland has in
the present century, within the last 34 years only, been
twice considered by two Governments ; and therefore when
I remind the house that when it was considered by the
Cabinet of Lord Grey in 1831, the individual who filled the
office of Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and whO of
course greatly guided the opinion of his colleagues upon such
a question, was the present First Minister—and when I also
remind the house that the plenipotentiary at the Conference
as Vienna, to whom and upon whose responsibility in a
great degree the decision was then arrived at, was the pre-
rent Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs—l think Eng-
land had a right, when the great difficulty of last year arose
with respect to Poland, to congratulate herself that in a
situation of such difficulty, at an emergency when a mis-
take might produce inealculable evils, its fortunes were re-
gulated not only by two men of great abilities and experi-
ence, but by statesmen who upon this subject possessed a
peculiar experience, who had thoroughly entered into the
question, who knew all its issues and the contingencies
that possibly might occur in its management, and who, on
the two occasions when it was submitted to the decision of
England had been the guiding Ministers in the wise decision
which was then arrived at. Now, sir, I must remind the
house that what is called the Polish question occupies a dif-
ferent position in France to what it does in England. I will
not admit that is deep sympathy for the Poles the French are
superior to the English. I believe lam only stating accu-
rately the feeling of this country when I say that among
people of all classes there is no event which they look back
to with more regret than the partition of Poland. (Hear.)
It is universally considered and acknowledged by them as
one of the darkest, if not the darkest, page in the history of
the 18th century. (Hear, hear.) But in France the Polish
question is not one which merely interests the sentiment of
the millions, It is a political question, and a question of
the highest class in Francs. IL is a question which inte-
rests ministers, and cabinets, and princes. There is a be-
lief in France which has made the restoration of Poland a
traditionary policy in that country, namely, that that re-
storation would tend to add to the power and the glory of
France. In France it is also -a
practical question, because
there are men now alive who can remember when the eagles
of France floated over the ancient capital of Poland. But I
think that their feelings of pride must be dashed with a
sentiment of remorse, if they really value 'so much the re-
storation ef Poland, when they remember the opportunity
they then lost. Then the house must recollect that when
an insurrection occurs in Poland, it is a different affair in
France to what it is in England. It is not an affair that
merely interests those who frequent the cafes and casinos,
but it at once strikes into the secrets of cabinets and prin-
ces. Well, Sir, the ruler of France, a sagacious prince and
a lover of peace, as the Secretary of State has just informed
us, was perfectly alive, of course, to the great Issues in-
volved in what is called the Polish question, But France
knew very well that England had twice had an opportunity
of considering this question in the completest manner,.and
had arrived at a settled policy, and, with characteristic cau-
tion, the Emperor exercised great reserve, and held out but
little encouragement to the representatives of Polish feeling.
He knew well that in 1855 he, then being our ally, had
urged this question upon the English Government, and that
under the most favourable circumstances for the restoration
of Poland ; and he knew that we had then adhered to our
traditionary policy, which was neither to go to war nor to
pursue a war, and therefore the Emperor of France and the
French Governusent generally exhibited a very great reserve
on the subject. But what, in a short time was the astonish-
ment of the Emperor, when he found the English Govern-
ment embracing the cause of Poland with an extraordinary
fervour ? The noble lord the Secretary of State, and the
noble lord the First Minister, bat especially the Secretary
of State, announced their policy as if it were a policy new
to the consideration of statesmen, arid about to lead to im-
mense results. The noble lord the Secretary of State sent
a copy of his despatch to all the Courts of Europe who were
signataries to the Treaty of Vienna—from the King of
Portugal down to the King of Sweden—calling Russia to
account for the position of affairs in Poland. We know very
well that for three months Europe believed there was to be
a general war on a great scale, of which the restoration of
Poland was to bo one of the leading objects. Is it at all
surprising that the Government of France and the French
people should have responded to such stimulating proposals?
(Hear, hear.) It was not only natural=--it was inevitable.
We know the noble lord (Earl Russell) fooled them to the
top of their bent. The House recollected the noble lord's
six propositions, to which he called the attention of the
Emperor of Russia in the most peremptory manner. The
'Louise remembers the closing scene, when it was arranged
that the ambassadors of France, Austria, and England
should on the very same day appear at the hotel of the
Minister of Russia, and should present notes of the most
cordial tone, ending with three identic paragraphs, to show
the agreement of the three Powers. It was generally be-
lieved there was to be a general war, and that France,
Austria, and England would unite to restore Poland. The
house remembered the reply of Russia—that the Russian
Minister replied to all this with haughty sarcasm and with
indignation which deigned to be ironical. Well, Sir, there
was only one step to take, according to the view of the
French Government, and that was action. They appealed
to that England which had itself excited agitation on the
subject and raised expectations; but England recurred to
the traditionary policy of this country, and confessed it was
a momentary indiscretion that had animated their counsel,
and that they never meant anything more than words. (Op-
position cheers.) A month afterwards they sent a despatch;
but this did not alter the position of the French Emperor
and the French Government. He load been induced by us
to make promises which he could not fulfil. He was placed
in a false position to the people of Poland and the people of
France, and therefore I am not surprised that when the Sec-
retary of State was a little alarmed at the progress of affairs
in Germany, he thought it discreet to reconnoitre his posi-
tion; and that in September he should have been received
at Paris with coldness, and that ultimately his despatch was
answered in this manner : Mr Grey, writing to Lord Rug-
sell, said, on 18th September, 1863, " The second mode of
proceeding suggested by your lordship, viz., 'to remind
Austria, Prussia, and the German Diet, that any acts on
their part tending to weaken the integrity and independence
of Denmark would be at variance with the treaty of May 8,
1852,' would be, according to the opinion of M. Drouyn de
Lhuys, in a great measure analogous to the course pursued
by Great Britain and France on the Polish question.
(Laughter.) He frankly avowed that he should so speak to
the Emperor as to place France in the same position with
reference to Germany as she had been placed in with regard
to Russia. The formal notes addressed by the three Powers.
to Russia had received an answer which literally meant no-
thing, and the position in which those three great Powers
were now placid was anything but dignified ; and if Eng-
land and France were to address such a reminder as that
proposed to Austria, Prussia, and the German Confedera-
tion, they must be prepared to go further, and to adopt a
course of action more in accordance with the dignity of two
great Powers than they were now doing in the Polish clues-

And, sir, I did not think itmy duty to conceal my opinion
when her Majesty's Government had felt it their duty to
refuse a proposal of that character. But lam bound to say
that, had I been aware of what has been communicated by
these papers—had I been aware, when I spoke on Feb. 4,
that only a week before the Parliament met—only a week
before we were assured by the speech from the throne that
her Majesty was continuing to carry on negotiations in the
interests of peace—that her Majesty's Government had
made a proposal to the Government of France which must,
if accepted, inevitably have produced a great and enduring
European war—l am bound to say I should have given my
approbation in terms much more cautious. But, whatever
difference of opinion there may be as to the propriety or
impropriety of her Majesty's Government not acceding to
the Congress, I think there was not then, and I am sure
there is not now, a second opinion as to the mode and man-
ner in which that refusal was conveyed. (Opposition cheers.)
Tho noble lord, when ho vindicated that curt, and, as I con-
' ceive, moat offensive reply, dilated on the straightforward-
ness of British Ministers, the candour of their language,
and the clearness with which they were determined to con•
vey their meaning. I wish that that straightforward lan-
guage and that spirit had dictated same of the despatches
and declarations made to Denmark. (Opposition cheers.)
It is a great pity we did not have a little of that rude frank-
ness when the fortunes of that ancient kingdom were at
stake. But there was another great event happened, let
me remind the house, in the month of November. The
King of Denmark died, and the death of the King of
Denmark entirely changed the character of the question,
both as regards Germany and Denmark, and as regards
this country and Germany. The question had been a
Federal question before, when the noble lord in his de-

spatches threatened to have recourse to arms ; but, after
the death of the King of Denmark, it became an inter-
national question, because the controversy was with the
Diet of Germany, which had not recognised the change in
the succession to the various dominions and states of the

King. It was an international question of magnitude and of
a menacing character, and it was under these circumstances,
and when the question became European, and immensely
magnified and multiplied, that the offer of a Congress was
made on the sth of November. The King otDenmark died
on the 16th :4ovembor ; and on the 27th of the same month

England declined to accept the invitation to the Congress.
It was, therefore, with the complete knowledge of the in-
creased risk, and the increased dimensions of what was at

stake, that the noble lord sent that refusal to the Emperor of
the French. (Opposition cheers,) It became her Majesty's
Government at this moment to consider seriously their po-

ei tion.

With the Congress offered, with the death of the

King, it is my duty to remind the house of the manner in

which the Secretary of State addressed Europe. Neither of
these events appeared to have modified his tone. On Nov.
19th, the King having died, the Secretary of State wrote to

Sir A, Monett. On the 20th he wrote lettere of menace to

the Governments of Saxony and Wurtemburg, setting forth
that, as a matter of course, they would recognise the King of
Denmark as the heir to all the States which were comprised

in the Treaty of 1852, and which were held under the

sceptre of the late King. On the 23d November, four days
before Lord Russell refused the invitation to the Congress,

he wrote—" Her Majesty's Government expects that all the
Powers who signed the treaty of 1852 will acknowledge
King Christian as the King of Denmark ; and if the troops
_ _ _

of the Confederation entered Holstein, the Powers who

signed the treaty of 1852 would have a right of interfering."
(Hear, hear.) On the 30th of November he wrote again to
_. .

Sir A. Paget, proposing ;,he sole mediation of England. He

wrote another letter to Sir A. Buchanan, saying that he
would leave to Germany the responsibility of raising a ge-

neral war in Europe, which the Diet appeared bent on pro-
voking. That was the tone which her Majesty's Govern-
ment, after due consideration, atter refusing the Congress,
after the death of the King of Denmark, which changed the
Federal question into an international question—that was
the menacing tone which her Majesty's Ministers adopted

owards every Court of Germany. - (Opposition cheers.)

Now, after the death of the King of Denmark, it became
her Majesty's Ministers, instead of following that course, to
have maturely considered their position. There were two
courses open to them, both equally intelligible and equally
honourable. It was open to them, after the death of the
King, to have acted as France did—France, that occupied

a position in this matter so dignified and satisfactory that
she has received the compliments of our baffled Minister.
(Cheers and laughter.) It was open to the Government to

have adopted the same course as the other neutral Powers,
and that course was fiaukly announced to the English
Minister by the Minister of France. On Dec. General

Fleury stated to Lord Wodehouse, in Copenhagen, that the

only instruction which he had received from the Emperor

wai not to take part in any negotiations there, but that he
was to tell.the Danish Government explicitly that it Den-

mark became involved in war with Germany, France
would not come to her assistance. (Cheers.) I say that if
England had adopted that course it would have been Intel
•
ligible and honourable. (Cheers.) We were not boundi by
the Treaty of 1852 to go to the assistance of Denmark f she
became involved in war with Germany. No one ever pre-
tends that we were. (Hear, hear.) As a matter of high
policy, much as we may regret any disturbance of the ter-
ritorial arrangements of Europe, the policy of this country
xt
being one of tranquillity and peace, still there were no high
great considerationsgoing
o
andot incurringpol cy
which would
njuo
the
se of i f
a y
England in
n
Euro-
pean war without allies that we could have counted upon.
(Hear, hear.) There was another course equally intelligi-
ble and equally honourable. But lam bound to say that I
would have recommended this country to take the same
course as Franco adopted. If the noble lord and his col-
leagues are of opinion that the balance of power was en-
dangered by the quarrel between Denmark and Germany,
they were perfectly justified in threatening Germany,
and taking upon them the general management of the
affairs of Denmark; but they were bound, if war did take
place, to support Denmark. (Opposition cheers.) Instead
of that, they invented a process of conduct which I hope is
not easily to be exampled in the history of this country, and

1 which I can only de riceibe in one sentence as one of menaces
which were never ac nomplished, and of promises which were
never fulfilled. (a leers.) With all their difficulties, they
never hesitated in the it line. I must do them the justice to
say, that as far as the semblance of menace was concerned,
there never were more spirited and independent Ministers.
(Opposition cheers and laughter.) Let us indulge them, at
least for a moment, with the enjoyment of the phantom of
proud courage. (La lighter.) What did they do ? They sent
a special envoy to Denmark to explain and enforce their
policy, and to arrt :age everything. He was Lent there
ostensibly to conga a tulate the ne w Ring upon his accession,
but it was avowed 111 at his mission went further than this,
and was of far graa'tt r importance. I will not read all the
instructions which ea are given to him, but will merely read
the concluding sent ,t.ce, which sums up the whole. It is
this: " The result' son are to arrive at is the fulfilment of
the treaty of 1852, r Jid of the engagements entered into by
Prussia, Austria, ar al Denmark." Lord Wodehouse, there-
fore, could not be a t tault with respect to what he was to do.
He was a man of smite experience; he held a subordinate
but still importantreosition in the administration of foreign
affairs; he had bee a ambassador to a foreign court, and
before he went to Ia =mark he made a speech of a very de-
cided character in fa your of that country. I have nothing
therefore to say agai net the appointment, which was a very
important one. Wh et was the conduct of the Secretary of
State while Lord W odehouse was going to carry out his
instructions? Diet the Secretary of State falter in his
tone ? It was hbout this time that the famous letter,
the great diplomatic reprimand, was sent to Sir A.
Mallet for having talked of the protocol of 1852, instead
of the treaty of 1f152. This was the time when all the
ambassadors of Europa who talked of the protocol of
1812 were to be stopped short, and who, however ele-
vated their position, and however great their powers of
logic, were to be pulled down directly for this great diplo-
matic lapsus. (Laughter and cheers.) On the 17th of
December the noble lord, in a letter to Sir A. Buchanan,
said that any departure from the treaty of 1852 would be
inconsistent with good faith ; and on the 22d the Govern-
ments of Wartembnrg,Hanover, and Saxony were told that
if they carried out the Federal execution the most serious
consequences would ensue. (Hear, hear, from the Ministerial
side.) I want to know what hon, gentleman mean by
cheering the language of that despatch ! Why, the smallest
power in Europe would feel itself obliged to resist a demand
made in each languege. When you employed language of
that kind in despatches which were usually mild in their
tone, what interpretation was to be put upon it but that yon
meant to go to war? (Opposition cheers.) This was the
state of things after the King's death, atter we became ac-
quainted with the policy of France, after the French Minister
informed Denmark that if she became involved in war with
Germany, France would not come to her assistance. Not-
withstanding these threats and repeated menaces, the Fede-
ral execution took place. (Hear, hear.) That is not evidence
(elitist influence in the councils of Europe. (Cheers.) But
what course did the Government pursue under these cir-
cumstances? Why they went again to France, and after
all that happened they tried the expedient of supplicating
her for assistance. On the 27th of December Federal exe-
cution took place,-and on the 28th they made application
to the French Government, on which occasion Lord Cowley
in humble accents said that her Majesty's Government were
sincerely anxious to act with the Imperial Government in
this question. (Hear, hear.) To be sure they were sincerely
anxious to do so. (Laughter.) To this lowly supplication a
curt reply was given by the French Government; but not-
withstanding this, the Secretary of State in 24 hours
after wrote the most furious despatch he had ever written.
It is necessary to call attention to the contrast between
the menaces directed against Germany, and those held
towards Denmark. The first great object after the King's
death was to induce Denmark to revoke the patent of
November relative to the constitution of Holstein. Her
Majesty's Government instructed Sir A. Paget to commu-
nicate with M. Hall, the Danish Prime Minister, on the
subject. In the course of the interview Sir A. Paget
warned the Minister of the dangers which would ensue if
the patent of November was not withdrawn. In conse-
quence of that warning he gave up his opinions and the
patent. What is the interpretation which, is private life,
we would put on language like that? You would suppose
that if you acted upon it you would be involved in respon-
sibility. (Hear, hear.) We come now to this execution in
Holstein, and, literally speaking, the Federal execution was
a jegal act, and Denmark could not resist it. But, from the
manner in which it was announced to be carried into effect,
and in consequence of the pretensions connected with it, the
Danes were of opinion that it would have been better at
once to resist the execution. Well, her Majesty's Minis-
ters, actuated by the best motives, wanted the Danish Go-
vernment to submit. What was their language ? Sir
Alexander Paget replied to the Danish Minister "that
Denmark would at all events have a better chance of secur-
ing the assistance of the Powers if the execution were not
resisted," (Hear, hear.) 1 ask any candid man what
would be his interpretation of that language? (Hear.
hear.) On the 12th Earl Russell himself tells the Danish
Minister in London that there is no connection between the
engagements of Denmark and Germany and the engage-
ments with the German Powers in 1852. Of course, such
a declaration by the English Minister in the metropolis
must have had the greatest effect upon the Federal policy,
and so the Danes submitted. But having revoked the
patent—having submitted to the execution—there seas then
4 new demand upon them—a demand for the repeal of the
whole constitution. I want to place clearly before the house
the position of Denmark with respect to the mach-talked-of
constitution. There bad been in the preceding year a par-
liamentary reform bill carried in Denmark, but the King
had died before giving his assent to it, although he would
have most willingly done so. The instant the new king ac-
ceded to the throne this parliamentaryreform bill wae brought
to. him. Great excitement prevailed upon the subject,
and the King was placed in a most difficult position. Now,
observe this—England, who was intrusive and pragmatical
in the counsels she gave—who never allowed Denmark to
do anything without her advice, and who was always sug-
gesting and prompting, hung back when the question came
to be whether the new King should give his assent to the
reform bill.; England was selfishly silent—she would not
incur responsibility—the excitement was great, and the
King gave his assent to the bill. But understand, at that
moment it was not at all impossible, if her Majesty's Go.
vernment had written a despatch to Copenhagen, which
the King might have put before his council, and had ex-
pressed the wish of an ally who was then looked upon by
Denmark with the utmost feeling of confidence and with
the utmost hope, especially after France had declared she
would not assist her—if England had put forward this de-
spatch, begging as a favour that the King would not give
. his assent to the new‘Constitutien for a brief space—say for
six weeks—in order to assist England to carry on her nego-
tiations with the German Powers, I cannot doubt but that
the King would have avoided that act, which was most in-
jurious to his fortunes. However, the instant he assented
to the bill, the English Government began to write de-
spatches, calling upon him to revoke it. But could he
revoke it ? The King of Denmark was a really constitu-
tional king ; he could have only put an end to the constitu-
tion by force, by a coup d'etat, and he was not in a position
to do that. But I sincerely believe that, even if he were in
the position, he would have had no inclination to perpetrate
such an act of enormity. (Hear, hear.) Well, what was the
other course open to him ? The only other constitutional
course he could have had recourse to was to call together a
new Parliament and propose that they should revoke the
constitution. Now see what would have been the state of
affairs if, after our Reform Bill had passed in 1832 and
the new elections had taken place, Lord Althorp came
down to this !house and called upon the new Parliament
to revoke the Reform Bill and to give him leave to in-
troduce a bill for that parpose. it would be asking for
that which was utterly impossible. And let me call
attention to the manner in which this request was made.
First of all, the Secretary of State writes to Lord Wode-
house, who was then at Copenhagen formally arranging the
repeal of the constitution. The right hon. gentleman. then
.
quoted the despatches of Lord Wodehouse, and of Sir
KA-
Paget, describing the effdrts which they had made al
and drive Mat-
Hall, the Danish Minister, to induce the Danish
ment to listen to the advice of the English Lern.
vernment,
to be
eputm f
tffoe
sr w. a rNd
oextreme t pretensions
the
conclusions .
andters notto e extremities. r
ete Hall that if the
drawn from this language ?
writes, "It was my duty to declare to • .
her
(Hear.) The special envoy
..observations ? (Hear.)
vernment must leave Denmark to
thOstaable for M. Hall, who
(Cheer%) I ask, are there two
herpan ownish Government
responsibility. rej„ected our adeveiceeeunterMoaieersmtya'neyGoen-
was the author of the constitution, to
isneteerwpbreattahtisopnpsetnoedb.e put
wupe.oeni.n.v
put an end to it ; he
resigned, and a new Government Was formed, and a Parlia-
ment was called under the new constitution in order to pass
an Act to terminate its own existence. In January Sir A.
advice of
fconsolation
their
best of
friend,wingcharPagettheisthendthtabtat they
had acted the
p ,
entirely with Germany."
(Laughter.) Now I have given three of the great subjects
in which the representations of England induced Denmark
to take a course against her convictions, and. as the Danes
rn ability e n
0f
believed, against their policy. The plot begins to thicken.
Notwithstanding the termination of the patent of Holstein
—notwithstanding the Federal execution—notwithstanding
the repeal of the constitution, more is wanted, and Schles-
wig is about to be invaded. Affairs become now most cri-
tical. N 3 sooner was this known than a very haughty
menace was sent to Austria. Austria was threatened that
if Schleswig was invaded the consequences would be Ber:-
ons—(a laugh)—the question would cease to be purely o
German, and would become of European importance. a
the 4th January Lord Russell writes to Mr Murray at the
Court of Saxony, that the moat serious consequences are to
be apprehended if Germany invaded
.Schleswig--and on the
9th he writeaagain to Dresden that the line. taken by Saxony.
destroys all confidence in the diplomatic relations
. with
Saxony. (Hear, hear.) Oa the 18th. he writes to
.Lor
referring to
. the experience
Bloomfield in the same tone, and,
of Russia in regard to the Crimean. war, points out how the
consequences of demanding material guarantees from
mark may rectal upon Germany.. 'yell, notwithstanding,
• takes
these solemn warnings, the invasion of Schlesstvfa,
They
place, and what is the conduct of the Government
hurry again to Paris—(cheers and laughter on
of the Opposi-
tionnon-
benches)—they Propose a joint declaration
answered the
German Powers, Well, that despatch was

next day by Lord Cowley, representing the opinions of the
French Government. He said—" As to the Four Powers
impressing upon the Diet the heavy responsibility that it
would incur, if by any precipitate measures it should break
the peace before the Conference which had been proposed
by the British Government for considering the means of
settling the question between Germany and Denmark, and
thereby maintaining the peace, can be assembled. M.
Drouyn de Lhuys observed, that he hid not forgotten that
when Russia had been warned by France, Great Britain,
and Austria, of the responsibility she vas incurring by her
conduct towards Poland, Prince Gortechakoff bad replied
that 'Russia was ready to assume that responsibility before
God and man.' He, for one, did not wish to provoke ano-
ther answer of the same sort, to be received with the same
indifference." The interest of the drama ceepens. The
next day Lord Russell writes to Lord Cowley, and pro- 1
poses concert and co-operation with France. Lord Cow-
ley writes the next day to Lord Russell that the French
Government want to know what "ecncert and co-opera-
tion" mean. Lord Russell writes that "concert and co-
operation" mean, if necessary, material assistance to Den-
mark. (Opposition ironical cheers.) That must have
been about the same time that the Cabinet was sitting
to draw up her Majesty's speech, and when we were
being assured that negotiations were continued in the in-
terests of peace. (Renewed Opposition cheers and laughter.)
Now what was the answer of the French Government, when
at last England had invited France to go to war, in order
to settle the questions between Germany and Denmark ?
The right hon. gentleman then read a despatch from Lord
Cowley to Earl Russell, setting forth that while the French
Emperor recognised the value of the London treaty, a war
with Germany was the most burdensome and hazardous
that France could undertake, especially when he (the Em-
pent.) remembered that he was an object of mistrust and
suspicion to Europe, on account of his supposed projects re-
lative to the Rhine. For these reasons the Government of
the Emperor declined to make any engagement on the sub-
ject of Denmark. Well, after having received that despatch
—although it may be very hard to convince the Secretary of
State—the noble lord might have begun to suspect chat the
great influence of England was lowered in another quarter
of Europe. (Hear, hear.) I have now brought events down
to the point of the meeting of Parliament—but I will not
dwell on what then occurred. When we met there were no
papers e before us. I asked for papers, and I felt at the
time that on neither side of the house was there a sufficient
sense of the great importance of the °cc •sion, and of the
singular circumstance that papers had not been presented to
us. I remember it turned out afterwards that it never was
intended that papers should be presented at the meeting of
Parliament. Subsequently, however, the noble lord at the
head of the Government, treating the matter in his jaunty
manner, said, "You shall have papers, and I wish you joy
of them." That was the tone in which the First Minister
spoke of the most important diplomatic correspondence that
has been presented to Parliament since the treaty of Amiens.
Weeks and weeks elapsed before we were really masters of
the case; but during the interval most alarming and distres-
sing circumstances had occurred—circumstances involving
the greatest perplexities. You all remember Jutland ; you
all remember the inquiries made on the subject, and the as-
surances given by the Government. It was impossible for
us to act, because at that time we had not these papers be-
fore us, and the moment we had the Conference was an-
nounced. Now, one word about the Conference. I myself
had no hope that the Conterence would arrive at any advan-
tageous results; and, after reading these papers, I cannot
fail to perceive that no side wished for a settlement of the
question—except, of course, her Majesty's Government.
(Laughter.) The Conference lasted six weeks, or rather it
wasted six weeks. It lasted as long as a carnival, and, like
a carnival, it was an affair of masks and mystifica ions.
(Laughter and cheers.) The summary of the Conference
was this—Her Majesty's Government made considerable
proposals to the Conference. They proposed, first, the dis-
memberueent of Denmark. (Opposition cheers.) So much
for its integrity. (Continued cheering.) They proposed,
secon ily, teat the remainder of Denmark should be placed
under the joint guarantee of the great Powers. They would
have created another Turkey in Europe—the scene of the
same rival intrigues and the constant source of mieappre-
hension and frequent wcrs. Now, I ask the house what is
its opinion with respect to the management of these affairs ?
I have drown at the beginning that this inter`erence of
Ea glaad originated in a treaty in which we incurred no
otiigatione different from those of France. I have shown

Sou, upon

he evidence of the Secretary of State himself,
that the position of France in regard to Denmark is one
quite magnanimous and free from all perplexities. I have
shown you, on the other hand, that the position of Eugiand
arrassing, intolerably.cliffi3ult, and full of humi-
au. (Cheers.) I have narrated to you how your affairs
i—and now, what is your opinion ? Do you see
in the management of :hese affairs that capacity which is
adequate 'to the occasion—that sagacity, that prudence,
that dexterity, that quickness of perception, and those con-
ciliatory moods which you always hold to be necessary for
the transaction of your f)reign affairs ? (Cheers.) Is that
the knowledge of human nature, and especially that pecu-
liar kind of science most necessary in these affahs—a know-
ledge of the character of foreign countries and of the chief
Return on the scene ? For my own part I find all these qua-
lities wanting, and in consequence I eee that three results
have accrued—lst, that the avowed policy of England has
failed; 2d, that cur great influence in the councils of
Europe has teen lowered—(chcers) and 3d, that in con-
skr quenea of our great influence in the councils of Europe
being lowered, the securities for peace are diminished,
se aro the three consequences which have cc-
ed owing to the want o'qualities to which I have alluded
gement of these affairs by
I laced not trouble the house with addi-

is most E
lia

are m

tho Gov

(pence of

ntu-nt.

tionel argument to prove that the Government have failed
in accomplishing their avowed policy of upholding the in-
dependence and integrity of Denmark. (Hear, hear.) Thai
result may for the present be thrown aside. I come, there •
fore, to the second. By the just influence of England in
the councils of Europe I mean an influence contradistin-
gteehed from that which is obtained by intrigue and secret
understandings —I mean the influence Lhat results from the
conviction of foreign Powers that our resources are great
and that our policy is moderate and stedfast. (Hear.) Since
the settlement that followed the great revolutionary war
England,who obtained at that time, as she deserved to do—
for she bore the brunt ot the struggle—all the fair objects
of her ambition, England has upon the whole proceeded on
a Conservative foreign policy, I do not mean by a Conser-
vative foreign policy a policy that would disapprove, still
less oppose, the natural development of nations, but I mean
a foreign policy that is interested in the tranquillity and the
prosperity of the world, whose normal condition is peace—
(cheers)—and which does not ally itself with the revolu-
tionary party of Europe. (Hear, hear.) Other countries
have their political systems and their public objects, as
England has, though they may not be obtained by them
The position of England is, therefore, in the conduct o
public affairs and in the councils of Europe, essentially that
of a moderating reed mediational Power. Her interest and
her policy are, when changes are inevitable and necessary,
to assist, so that these changes, if possible, shall be accom-
plished without war, or, if war occurs, that its duration and
its asperity shall be mitigated. That is what I mean by the
just influence of England. It appears to me that this just
influence of Europe has been—l will not say forfeited, but
has been diminished. Within 12 menthe we have been twice
repulsed at St. Petersburg ; we have supplicated more than
once at Paris ; we have menaced Austria, and Austria has
allowed our threats to pass over like the wind. (Hear, hear.)
Vie have threatened Pa ussia ; Prussia has defied us. Our ob-
jurgations have rattled over the heads of the German Diet,
and the German Diet has treated them with contempt,
During the last few months there is scarcely any form or
diplomatic interference that has not been suggested and
adopted by the English Government, except a Congress,
(Laughter.) A Conference of Vienna, a Conference of
Paris, a Conference of London, all in their turn have been
suggested. Joint mediation, sole mediation, original
notes, relative notes, identic notes, sole notes, or notes
joint and separate. (Laughter.) Couriers have been
,cotssing Europe in exuberant rapidity ; and last, and most
of all, a Conference was held in the Cabinet of our Queen,
over which the chief Minister of our foreign relations
Vresided, which was attended with all the pomp and solem-
nity requisite for so great an enterprise ; but we find that
its sittings have been perfectly barren, and the chief Mini-
sters of the CroWn closed the proceedings be quitting the
battle .scene of their exertions, and appearing in the two
Houses of Parliament to tell the country we have no allies,
and because We have no allies England cattnot act alone
(Loud die's by the Conservatives.) I do not undertake
j to do ustice to the exulting boast of the Secretary of State,
in the bitterest motet= of his discomfiture, when he seemed
to take consolation for the moment even in the sympathy
and politeness of the neutral Powers. I do not grudge
Lord Russell the sighs of Russia or the smiles of France ;
but I regret that, with the chars&eis
" tie indiscretion in his
present forlorn state, he should have
r quitted the Confer-
ence, and to have taken his seat ia the House of Lords to
denounce the perfidy of Prussia
and
mourn over the
ficklenees of Austria. There wanted sutot
com-
plete the picture, and it was supplied by
tohne totlCh to
First Minister of the Crown. I listened
—(loted cheers by the Conservativee)-4
witehnoble lord the
astonishment.
astonishment to the noble lord as he denounced with
of his victim, and inveighed at the last moment over vitcheee
obstinacy of unhappy Denmark; Denmark which Would
°eta-
not submit to an arbitration, an arbitration Wilk': the
German Powers would not have accepted. And What
ecurity
ecurity had Denmark, when in the Conference eh%
could not be assured that the neutral Powers
would have recourse to force to secure her the line ot
the Schlei—what security had she that any other line
wau.d be secured to her by an unknown arbitrator?
(Hear, hear.) It &es appear to me impossible to deny
that, under these circumstances, the influence of England,
the just influence of England in the coancils of Europe, is
lowered. (Cheers.) Now I ask, what are the consequences
of this just influence in the councils of Europe having been
lowered? I say the consequences are, to use a frequent
phrase of despatches, " most serious," because, in exact pro-
portion as the just influence of England in the councils of
Europe is lowered, I say the securities of peace are dimi-
nished. (Hear, hear.) I lay this down ate a great principle
which cannot be controverted, in the management of our
foreign affairs. If England has resolved on a particular
policy, war is not probable; if there be, under the circum-
stances, a cordial alliance betweett England and France, war

are violent, so it is with her Majesty's Government, So
long as the cordial feeling with the great Powers existed
they spoke ssith moderation—they counselled with dignity;
but, like all incompetent men, the moment they are in
extreme difficulties they conduct themselves in a way that
is ludicrous and false, and the affairs of the country cannot
be arranged by the resources they possess. See the de-
spatches that have been written—that memorable despatch
which was sent to St. Petersburg in January about going
to war against Germany. Then we went twice to Paris,
entreating the Emperor to assist us in consequence of our
mistakes. It is only by giving them credit, as I do through-
out, for complete sincerity of expressions and conduct, that
the behaviour of the Government is at all explicable. As-
sume that their policy was a war policy, and it is quite in-
telligible, but when difficulties arise, then they instantly
have recourse to violence in every word they utter. Every
despatch they write seems to look to a scene of collision.
What is the state of Europe at this moment, produced by
the mismanagement of our affairs ? I know not what other
hon gentlemen may think, but to me it seems most serious.
I find the great German Powers openly avowing that they
have not the capacity to fulfil their engagements. I fiad
Europe impotent to vindicate the public law, because a great
alliance has been broken up; and I find a Government of a
great, proud, and generous nation like England, with the
reserve of magnanimity, shrinking from the responsibility
of undertaking war, and sensitively smarting under the im-
pression that her honour is stained, and stained by pledges
which I maintain ought not to have been given, and expec •
tations which I maintain ought never to have been held cut
by wise and competent statesmen. (Cheers.) It appears to
me, therefore, obvious that her Majesty's Government-have
failed in their avowed policy to maintain the integrity and
independence of Denmark. It appears to me undeniable that
the great influence of England in the councils of Europe
has been lowered, and it appears to me that the consequence
of this towering of our influence is t o diminish the security
for the maintenance of peace, (Cheers.) And what &fence
have we ? If a criticism is made on his ambiguous policy,
the noble lord says to me, " What is your policy ?"
(Ministerial cheers and counter-cheers.) I say my
policy is the honour of England. (Laughter and
cheers.) The honour of England and the peace of
Europe—and the noble lord has betrayed both. (Conser-
vative cheers.) I can understand a Minister coming to
Parliament when there is a question of domestic interest
of the highest character—the emancipation of the Catholics,
the principle on which oar commercial code is to be esta-
blished, or our representative system founded. I can under-
stand a Minister, though I think it a weak point, saying
upon these questions he would leave Parliament to decide
what should be their policy. Parliament is in possess'on of
all the information on these subjects that is necessary or
that can he obtained. Parliament is as competent to come
to judgment us the Ministers themselves upon such ques-
tions. But it is quite a new doctrine in Parliament to ap-
peal to Parliament to initiate a foreign policy. (Cheers.)
That is a prerogative of the Crown, exercised under the
advice of responsible Ministers, It is devised, invented,
carried on in secreay, and justly and wisely so. What do
we know what is going on in Downing-street at this mo-
ment ? For aught I know, the noble lord may have made
this morning another proposition which may light up a
general European war. (Hear, hear,) It is for Parliament
to inquire, to criticise, to support or condemn our foreign
affairs, but it is nut for them to initiate a foreign policy, in
absolute ignorance of the real state of affairs, As well might
you ask them to set a house on fire. Igo fanner. He
is not a wise, I am sure he is not a patriotic man, who, in a
crisis like the present, would accept office under conditions
which might be found not only unwise but impossible to
act upon. No, sir, we must not allow her Majesty's Mi-
nisters to escape from their responsibility. (Cheers.) That
is the meaning —that is at the bottom of all these demands
oe.what is your policy. From the first night we met, on the
4th of February, that has been the question, Parliament
was called together by Ministers in distress to give them a
policy. Parliament has maintained a dignified and discreet
reserve, and now you find in what a position these Minis-
ters has,e placed the country. It is, not for us to help these
Min:eters in their foreign relatfons. The most we can do is
to tell the noble lord what is not our policy. We will not
threaten and then refuse to act; we will not lead on our
allies with expectations we do not intend fulfil. If it
ever be the lot of myself and those with whom I act to
carry out the important negotiations of this country, as the
noble lord and his colleagues have done, I trust we shall
not at least carry them on in such a manner as it will be
our duty to come to Parliament and announce that we have
no sily, and then to declare that England can never act alone.
(Cheers) These are words which ought never to have es-
caped the lips of any British Minister. (Cheers.) They
are sentiments which ought never to have entered his heart.
(Cheers.) I repudiate and reject them. (Cheers.) I re-
member that there was a time when England had not a tithe
of our resources, when, actuated by a patriotic course, she
triumphantly encountered a world in arms. (Cheers) And,
sir, I believe now, if the occasion were fit,ing—if our inde-
pendence and our honour were attacked and assailed—if our
empire were endangered—l believe England would rise in
the magnificence of her might, and struggle triumphantly
for those objects for which men live and nations flourish.
(Loud cheers.) But, sir, I for one will never consent to go
to war to extricate Ministers from the consequences of their
own indiscretion. And it is in this spirit.that I have drawn
up this address to the Crown. I have drawn it up in the
spirit in which the Royal speech was delivered at the com-
mencement of the session. I am ready to vindicate the
honour of this country when it is necessary, but I have
drawn it up in the interests of peace. (Cheers.) Sir, I beg
leave to move the address which stands in-my name. (Loud
cheers from the Opposition.)

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, who rose
amidst loud cheers, said—Sir, I will venture to assure the
right hon. gentleman that he shall have no ground to corn.
plain of any attempt on the part of her Majesty's Govern-
ment to disguise or to escape from their responsibilities.
(Hear, hear.) Whether, indeed, he has rightly discharged
the duties of an Opposition—whether he has successfully
vindicated the large motion he submits to the house—is a
matter, I think, fairly open to inquiry ; but as I admit
honestly and fairly that his charges against the Government
are bold and palpable., the first demand is that we should
offer a defence. Therefore I make no apology to gentlemen
who have placed amendments on the paper, although I can
well understand that the hon. member for Bridgewater (Mr
Kinglake) and the hon. member for Warwickshire (Mr
Newdegate) should, in the interests of England, substitute
questions which really do involve a policy for a motion
which involves none. (Hear,) At the same time it is our
duty, while wholly refraining from any attempt to check
free discussion, to meet the accusations which he has
lavished upon the conduct of her Majesty's Government.
Now, sir, it is as well to have something to agree on, and
am glad to find there is a starting-point which the right
hon. gentleman and her Majesty's Government possess in
common-1 mean the starting-point concerning the pro-
ceedings of last summer and early autumn, and the decla-
ration made by my noble friend at the head of the Govern-
ment in the month of July, as being an authoritative an-
nouncement by my noble friend of his own opinion that the
Treaty of 1852, entered into for the purpose of maintaining
the independence and integrity of Denmark, would receive
that support from united Europe under which it had origi-
nally been framed. I agree likewiss he has fairly proved
that my noble friend, in giving that opinion with respect to
the probable conduct, the anticipated conduct, of the other
Powers, patties to that treaty, likewise implied the readi-
ness of the Ministry of which he was the head to take their
part in it, (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman has likewise
stated, and fairly stated, that at that period France and
Russia were of the same mind. Up to that simple point
the right hon. gentleman and the Government are agreed,
and 1 now set on a long and dreary journey of dissent. The
right hon. gentleman says, in the month of September,
there was a total change in the policy of France. I do not
know that it is necessary or expedient that we should enter
at this period upon the course taken by her Majesty's Go-
v:rnment with respect to the Polish question. As far as I
know, the Parliament of this country did not in either
house act with regard to Poland on the principle of extreme
reserve. On the contrary, both in the House of Lords and
in the House Commons members did lift up their voices on
behalf of suffering humanity. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. DISRAELI—Not by us only.
Mr. GLADSTONE—Not in the least; but I will add
that the most pronounced charge with respect to the
supposed conduct of her Majesty's Government in
regard to Poland was this—that the noble lord the Secre-
tary of State for Foreign Affairs had, by his declaration at
the commencement of the discussion that we would not
take up arms for Poland entirely destroyed and crushed the
hopes of the Poles. (Rear, hear.) The right hon. gentle-
man says there was a change in the policy of France in the
month of September. Was there such a change ? The right
hon. gentleman has undoubtedly
quoted a despatch of Mr.
Grey to support the statement which he has made; and the
right hen, gentleman gracefully apologised to the house for
troubling it by quoting from despatohes. I am more dis-
posed to complain of the sins of omission than the sins of
commission. (Laughter, and hear, hear.) But the right
hon. gentleman, while professing todisregard and pass over

the immaterial and irrelevant portions of those despatches,
refers to the mortification which France felt on account of
, the refusal of the joint application of the three Powers by
Russia, and he fairly quoted the resolution of France—a re-
solution at which none can wonder and none can complain
—to avoid repeating a diplomatic measure of the same cha-
racter as that which had exposed her to the refusal of Rus-
sia. But the right hon. gentleman gave the house to under-
stand, or left it to be inferred, that the meaning of the de-
claration on the part of France was this—" Do not look for
any more co-operation from me with respect to Denmark—
' our policy is changed ; but if you had stood by us in the
case of Poland, I would have stood by you in that of Den-
mark. Inasmuch, however, as you abandoned me in respect
to Poland, I will leave you to conduct your own affairs in
reference to Denmark." (Cheers.) Sir, I will give again the
very words of the despatch referred to by the right hon:
gentleman, and you will Rea whether the words of Mr Grey
were not very definite, and whether they did not bear an
interpretation the most remote from that given by the right
hon. gentleman. The words were written at the time that
he says France was adopting a policy of inaction in refer-
ence to Denmark. What were the words of M. Drouyn de
Lhuys ?—" France may not (his excellency said) be indiffe-
rent by any means to the maintenance of the integrity and
independence of Denmark, and it was not from any indiffe-
rence that he disapproved of your lordship's suggestion;
that he had already represented to the German Powers that
if they invaded Holstein for the purpose of effecting a revolt
in Schleswig, and if they went further and invaded Schleswig
itself, they would be infringing on the rights of an inde-
pendent sovereign, and entering upon a grave question
affecting the balance of power in Europe, to which France
could not remain indifferent." (Applause.) And is it not
the fact that all these expressions, when they came from the
pen of my noble friend the Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs, are treated as menaces, which are to bind us to go
to war; but that, when they proceed from the mouth of the
French Minister for Foreign Affairs, at the very moment
when, as the right hon. gentleman says, France was re-
nouncing all co-operation with us, with regard to the
Danish question, they are not considered in that light at
all? (Cheers.) The right hon, gentleman went on from
the September stage to the November stage in these com-
plicated proceedings, and he referred to the discourteous
terms in which the noble lord the Secretary for Foreign
Affairs treated the proposal of the Emperor of the French
for the assembling of an European Congress. My noble
friend is a man of truth and honour, given to speak out with
as little of circumlocution as circumstances would permit.
(Laughter, and hear, hear.) But what course did the right
honourable gentleman himself pursue ? Did he pursue
a course calculated to mend our manners ? How did he
describe the proposal made by the Emperor of the
French ? On the 4th of February, 1864, this master
of diplomatic courtesy—this statesman so carelul
of the floe feelings of our neighbour, so sensible of the value
of the ahiance between the two countries—somewhat curtly
and somewhat succinctly, as I venture to think, described
the proposition which had been made by the Emperor of the
French for an European Congress as an " adroit manceuvre.'
(Oh, oh, and loud cheers.) I refer to this matter in order
that I may meet the inferences which the right hon. gen-
tleman proceeded to found on our refusal to join in the Con-
gress, just as he found baseless inferences on our proceed-
ings in regard to Poland. He stated that we had refused
the Congress in a manner that could not but be exceedingly
disapproved of. He said that France, on the death of the
King of Denmark, resolved to take no part in the question,
and he quoted a despatch, dated December 19, from Lord
Wodehouse to Earl Russell, in which he says General
Fleury, the envoy at Copenhagen, had had instructions
from the Emperor not to take part in any negotiations there,
but to tell the Danish Government explicitly that, if Den-
mark was inclined to gc to war with Germany, France would
not come to her assistance. I am astonished that the hon.
gentleman, bewildered, I suppose, with the study of these
fifteeen hundred pages—most anxious, because his
candour is well known to the world, and giving the
fullest powe s of his mind to these papers—yet by
some unlucky fate, some ill-natured star that crossed
his good intentions, has almost in every case—
and I will make good what I am now stating—has mis-
represented the real effect of those papers even which he has
quoted. What did he say in this instance with respect to
General Fleury ? It is true we received this statement
from Copenhagen, and on receiving it we determined to
verify it by referring to Paris. Accordingly, we referred it
to Lord Cowley, who returned from M. Drouyn d e Lhuys,
with this important addition—for the right hon. gentleman
says France had definitely refused to take any part, in the
question—M. Drouyn de Lhuys stated positively that no
declaration had been made either by or to the King of Don-
mark which did not leave the Emperor free to take any
course which he might think fit. (Cheers and counter-
cheers.) Do hon gentlemen opposite really mean that that
is not a material part of the statement ? (Cheers.) Is that
a policy of absolute renunciation. It was a very wise
course on the part of the Emperor of '..he French, and it
might have been wise and prudent on his part that he
would not lend to Denmark his military support; but that
is not the policy which was enunciated by the right hon.
gentleman, and it is totally different from the effect of the
statement of General Fleury quoted by the right honour •
able gentleman, because it is expressly stated that
the Emperor of the French fully reserved to himself the
right to enter into the Danish question as freely and as
fully as he should think fit, (Hear, hear, and cheers.) I
now come a step further in the statement of the right hon,
gentleman, which I think contains an important point. The
right hon. gentleman says, that in al! cases where the Go-
vernment found themselves • strong they were moderate in
their lauguege, but when they found themselves weak they
became violent; and on that principle he accounts for the
letter written on lice. 25,.f0r the purpose, he says, of me-
nacing the Diet in case they proceeded to Federal execution.
Her; again I am sorry to say that the right hon. gentleman
has not quoted the document fairly or truly. I am in the re-
collection of the house, and in the presence of the right hon.
gentleman. In quoting the letter of Dec. 2.5, which he de-
scribes as one of great violence, he makes a mistake in one
sentence of considerable importance. He says my noble
friend menaces the Diet in case of their proceeding to Fede-
ral execution. He read the words generally and commented
upon them. He read the wens "any precipitate action on
the part of the German Confederation at the present moment
may lead to consequences fatal to the peace of Europe."
(Hear, hear.) But what is the preamble to that letter?
Why, sir, it is not with respect to Federal execution at all—
it does not once mention Federal execution, nor has in any
reference to it, which was the inference sought to be con-
veyed by the right hon. gentleman. But what was the pre-
amble to which I have referred ? The Diet sitting at Frank-
fort appears to claim a right to decide on questions of suc•
cession in the several States composing the Confederation,
and to be bent on asserting such a right in the present case
—the case of Holstein. Therefore, I do not hesitate to say
that the quotation of the right hon. gentleman does not
give him a tittle of foundation for his argument. The
question has no reference to Federal execution, but it had
to the claim of deciding as to succession, which had been
more or less made at diffatent periods by the German
Diet, but which were not admitted to be part of their regu-
lar attributes and jurisdiction. Does any hon. gentleman
imagine that the claim of the German Diet to determine
the succession of Austria or Prussia would be allowed for
one moment? But it was to this significant claim of the
German States, and not to Federal execution, that the
letter referred which was quoted by the right hon. gentle-
man, and quoted, I may say, in a manner which entirely
falsifies its purpose and effect. (Oh, oh, from the Opposi-
tion benches.) I say he quoted it for the purpose of illus-
trating our menaces against Federal execution ; and I speak
in the presence of hon. members who can judge of the words
of the right hon. gentleman and the inference which was
sought to be conveyed by the quotation. I now come to
the despatch quoted by the right hon, gentleman, and here
again I am sorry to say I cannot speak of his quotation in
any other terms than those which I have already used. (Oh,
oh, and hear.) I come to what I may call the lugubrious
despatch of Dec. 29. The house will remember that in
quoting the despatch the right hon. gentleman resorted to
the fullest use of his comic powers of description—(loud
laughter, and oh)—of voice and of warning. We all re-
member the plaintive tones with which he described her
Majesty's Government as addressing itself to France. Her
Majesty's Government, he said, were most sincerely desir-
ous to act with the Imperial Government on this question.
This letter referred to the proposal made by the British
Government for a Conference on the Danish question ; and
the right hon. gentleman read on, and said that when M.
Drouyn de Lhuys expressed a general desire to co-operate
with England Lord Cowley remarked that it would be a
curious thing if a difference of opinion prevented co-opera-
tion, and that no answer was made. He said that he had
made an application to France to join us in a European
Conference on the affairs of Denmark, to which Lord Cowley
could not get an answer fiom M. Drouyn de Lhuys; and
that, finding that he could not obtain an answer, he felt
himself bound to wind up the conversation with the ex-
pression of a hope that the difference of the opinion about
the Congress in reference to Poland would not prevent co-
operatien with regard to the affairs of Denmark. There the
right hon. gentleman stopped, but what was the inference
he drew ? Was it not that France had rejected the proposal
of the Conference ? Unless it had that meaning, it had
none at all, for the whole gist of his argument was to show
that long after France had resolved on a course of action,
and had announced it to Denmark, we went to Pat is, bor-
ing France and pestering her with proposals to which she
would nOt listen or consent. Again I say he has misled the
house ; and whether he has or not the house will judge for
itself when I have read a few words from the despatches
which were quoted by the right hon. gentleman. In the
conversation of Lord Cowley and M. Drouyn de Lhuys,
Lord Cowley says I presume I may give them assurance
that the Emperor's Government are not prepared to reject
the motion of the conference;" and M. Drouyn de Lhuys
replied—' • The Imperial Government are anxious to prevent
a war, and if it saw its way to prevent it through a Con-
ference, it would not refuse to take part in it." (Cheers,)
The right hon. gentleman described what he called the Em-
peror's policy of renunciation. But Lord Cowley says, "I
have detailed, as far as time will permit, the general tenor
of the conversation with M. Drouyn de Lhuys, and his ex-
cellency expressed an opinion that, if your lordship should
also insist on knowing the intentions of the great German
Powers, it would aid in bringing this question to an issue,"
That is what the right hon. gentleman thought fit to de-

scribe as a policy of absolute and positive renunciation and
refusal. (Cheers.) Now I come to the revocation of the
patent. The right hon. gentleman says the Danes revoked
the patent on the recommendation, and abandoned resistance
in Holstein on the recommendation of herMajesty'sGovern-
ment, and that they approved the new constitution when we
asked them to do so. lam not here to bring an indictment
against the Danes. When we recollect that the throne of
Denmark is occupied by a sovereign who succeeded to it
under circumstances of great difficulty, and with an inheri-
tance of embarrassment caused by the conduct of his prede-
cessor and the policy of the Ministers whom he found in
power, I for one am not able to say with confidence that it
was within the means of the present King of Denmark to
unravel the difficulties with which he found himself beset;
but at the same time I beg to say with respect to this, as
well as to the other main allegations of the right hon. gen-
tleman, they are without the slightest foundation--(oh, oh)
—and are not borne out by any of the quotations which he
has made. He says that the Danes did this at our instance.
My answer is that they did it at the joint instance of the
Powers. He says they did it when we requested them to
do so. My answer is, they were not done until the conces-
sion was too late, and was valueless for the purpose for
which it was required. Now, let us see how the truth
stands. I say, for the sake of wounding the Government,
ho fixes on the country responsibilities which she does not
bear. Do not let it be supposed that this is a matter to be
settled between party and party in the House of Commons,
because England is bound by the engagements of her
Ministers—(hear, hear)—and if the engagements are made
by us, the right hen. gentleman, on his accession to power,
would be bound to fulfil them in the sense which we attach
to them. He says Denmark revoked the patent on our re-
commendation, and that that constituted a quasi-engage-
ment on our part. What is the fact ? On the 7th of October
the British Government remonstrated against the patent,
and advised its revocation. When was it revoked ? On the
7th of December, two months after; and not two months
measured by time in the ordinary way, but by events of the
greatest consequence. The new constitution had been
passed, and the revocation of the patent when it came, as
plainly appears from the conversation of Lord Wodehouse,
was of the smallest importance. So much for the revocation
of the patent. I think I heard the right hon gentleman say
that M. Hall offered to revoke the patent in the month of
October. I.am aware that an offer was made in October to
revoke it, but it was a conditional offer, for M. Ball stated
that one of the conditions on which the patent would be
withdrawn, would be that England and France should give
the Danish Government a formal promise of ca-operation. In
point of fact, the revocation was withheld during the time it
was of use, and granted only when it was of the smallest
possible importance. The right hon. gentleman also said
that on three great subjects Denmark had also acted upon
our advcie, and that contrary to her policy. Did the
right hon. gentleman mean to say that Denmark acted
upon our advice alone? (Hear, hear.) If he means to
say that, I affirm that there is not the smallest founda-
tion for the statement. If he means to say that Den-
mark acted at the instance of other Powers also, there is
not the slightest force or value in his statement, because
the concession made by Denmark was at the recommenda-
tion of all, and therefore there is no separate responsibi-
lity, as the right hon. gentleman would endeavour to show.
I think it is pretty clear, first, that the advice to the
Danish Government was common advice; and, secondly,
that it was advice in regard to which they were dis-
tinctly informed that her Majesty's Government could
not be responsible for the consequences of the decision
Denmark might take with respect to Federal execution,
It is just the same with regard to the new constitution.
The right hon. gentleman says that England was selfishly
silent upon the subject of the new constitution. He gave
the House to understand that when good might have
been done by remonstrance—England left Denmark to
take her own course; and subsequently, when it became
difficult for Denmark to recede, then England came with
inopportune advice, and desired that the new constitution
might be revoked—selfishly silent at that critical moment
when the King of Denmark had just come into his too
burdensome heritage, and even with this unhappy and ill-
omened bill waiting his decision. I think it was on Nov,
15 that he came to the throne, and on the 17th my noble
friend (Earl Russell) wrote to Lord A. Paget, unwilling to
force advice upon the King at that critical moment, but
indicating that his advice would be that the new constitu-
tion should be suspended. The right hen, gentleman
quoted the despatch in support of his statement, and con-
tinued—Unhappily that advice was not acted upon. Un-
happily, the position of the King, in the face of: the popu-
lace of Copenhagen, appears to have been such as to make
it impossible for him to take the course which, in the
opinion of her Majesty's Government and in the opinion ot
the other neutral Governments, international obligations
strictly interpreted required. Consequently the complica-
tions which existed underwent great and serious aggravation.
Unhappily, the revocation of the constitution, like the other
concession, although made, was made too late. (Cheers.)
On ov. 17 Earl Russell suggested suspension of the con-
stitution ; the Danish Parliament was still sitting, and
would have had power to revoke it, but unhappily the
D,nish Minister, who, I fear, has unintentionally been one
of the worst enemies to Denmark, permitted the Parliament
to be dissolved withou, touching the constitution, and so
let the King into a state of hopeless embarrassment. At
last, on Jan. 19, when Federal execution was far advanced
in Holstein, and when the Prussian and Austrian forces
were about to enter Schleswig, then it wis that for the
first time an offer was made by the Danish Minister, Bishop
Monrad, to call together the Rigsraaci, and revoke the con-
stitution. The statement thcrelore of the right hon. gen-
tleman is either wholly :allaeious, if it be not directly the
reverse of truth. These are the specific allegations made by
the right hun. gentleman, and I will now, with soma diffi-
dence and apprehension, venture to explain what I take to
have been the principles and policy ot the Government in
this matter. The right hon, gentleman stated with truth
that a considerable change was effected in the position of
this question by the death of the King of Denmark. The
death of King Frederick VII. altered the position of affairs
in respect to the treaty of 1852. It immediately laid the
whole strain upon that treaty and upon its construction. As
long as Frederick VII. was alive there was nothing but a
question of international engagenaent. The matter in dis-
pute was whether international covenants had been fulfilled
or not. There was no question of disputed title; but when
Frederick VII. died, and King Christian IX. came to the
throne, the question of succession, connected with various
constructions of the treaty, immensely
aggravated the pees.
tion. The policy of her Majesty's Government under Fre-
derick VII. had been to endeavour to bring the Danes to
fulfil the treaty of 1852, and to bring the Germans to be
moderate in their views. But the right lion, gentleman ap-
pears to make it a charge against the present Government
that they should have taken, as it were, gratuitously, and
needlessly, a prominent part in the settlement of those
matters. He says truly that England has no peculiar in •
terest in these questions. It has been said by my noble
friend (Earl Russell) more than once in these despatches,
that the interests of England in the Dano-German question
are the interests ot Europe. We can conceive that France,
for traditional association, and also for her peculiar relations
with Germany, might have a special and direct interest in
any such questions as would be involved in
the absorption
of Denmark into Germany ; we can conceive that Russia,
principally dependent upon the Baltic for access to the great
o
cean ocean countries of the world, might feel a very strong and
peculiar interest in the question whether Denmark and
Sweden were to be united into one Scandinavian kingdom;
but England has no special and separate interest. Why then
did she take—it was certainly a prominent—Part in these
negotiations ? She took part on account of what I hope will
ever be dearer to England than her interests,—viz., on ac-
count of what she thought her honour and her duty.
t
(Cheers.) Gentlemen must look to the previous stages of the
quest, ion if they wish to appreciate the position of England
during the recent complications. At the period of the
war, in 1819, the mediation of
Eno
contending parties—(hear)—odelland was invited by the
ally at the suggestion
of Prussia, and adopted by Denmbark, and forwarded to my
noble friend (Earl Russell), Who was then Secretary of
State, and by him undertaken, That was a great responsi-
bility, but was it a barren one? On the contrary, it ended
in the cessation of the shedding of human blood, being in
terms of pacification, in treaties which were deemed by both
parties honourable and satisfactory. The right hon. gentle-
man quoted the expressions of thankful acknowledgment to
Lord Palmerston from Denmark for the successful result of
hrs efforts, and continued: After proceedings of that kind
so beneficial to both parties, and so honourable to this coun-
try—(cheers) —it was not possible for the representative of
England to recede from the prominent post in which he had
been placed by no act of his
own but by the obligations re-
sulting from former transactions Of the most satisfactory and
beneficial kind. Here, I think is a full and ample explana-
tion of the conduct and
general' position assumed by my
noble friend with regard to the
Danish negotiations.
(Cheers) I really wish the ri
ght hen, gentleman, in attack-
kg his opponents, would remember his country. (Laughter.)
The right hon. gentleman says that it was to Russia that
settlement was due. I have quoted the authentic words
which show that my noble friend
was the person who was
regarded by Denmark as the principal. Upon the acces-
sion of the new King the duty and endeavour of the Bri-
tish Government was to maintain the treaty of 1852. Was
that right or wrong ?Now is it honourable to Parliament
that the right hon. gentleman should come down here, and
in mimic voice hold up to ridicule the conduct of the Ad-
ministration, because they instruct their representatives
abroad to apply to France and Russia— co-signataries—for
effect to a great treaty ? Why, the right
assistance in giving
hon. gentleman in one of his declamatory bursts towards
the close of his speech, totally forgot the argumentative
part where he exhibited it as preposterous meanness on
the part of England that she should apply to France and
Russia. Ina the declamatory part ho came round to better
sense than he exhibited in the logical and argumentative
part, for he said that with England and France united
war is difficult, and with England, France, and Russia
united, war is impossible. (Cheers, and counter cheers.)
Well, but the whole of the steps taken by her Majesty's
Government, almost without exception, were steps taken to
endeavour to bind' together the powers.of Europe for the
fulfilment and maintenance of an important European en-
gagement. (Cheers.) For some time after the death of the
late King there was no great reason to suppose that the
Treaty of 1852 was in serious danger. It was only at the
end of November that the new doctrine was coined in Prus-

sia and Austria that the treaty of. 1852, by nearly which all
Europe was bound, was nothing more than a part of the
same transactions with the special conventions of 1851-2
between Germany and Denmark; and that unless those
covenants were Waled the treaty of 1852 would be null
and void. That was the formidable doctrine which at that
time into view. On the 28th of November, I think it was,
that language began to be held by the German Powers
Which greatly altered the position of the case. As long as
they recognised what we have always held to be their obli-
gations under the treaty of 1862 there was comparatively
little danger; but when they held themselves free to make
the treaty of 1852 dependent upon the condition of fulfil-
ment or non-fulfilment of which they were competent to
pronounce—for it was a separate engagement between them
and Denmark—then it became obvious that the dangers
were greatly thickening round us, and that it was a ques-
tion whether the treaty of 1852 would be fulfilled in its
loyal and intended sense. Undoubtedly it was at that pe•
riod that her Majesty's Government undertook the gretsj:nt.
responsibility which has been laid upon them at any stage
of this difficult question. They did make application to
France and to Russia on the sth of January, on the 10th,
and on the 18th, which applications contemplated the for•
natation of an alliance to give aid and assistance to Den-
mark, to uphold it in the Duchies against foreign force and
intrigue. The right hon. gentleman, who has found
it necessary to censure everything done by the Go-
vernment, felt it necessary to censure also this. He
said that on the 18th of January' you wrote a letter
which would have put Europe in a blaze. Sir, the letter to
bring about the concert and co-operation of France and
Russia with England, he says, would put Europe in a blaze,
though 15 minutes afterwards he maintained that France,
England, and Russia being united, war was impossible.
(Cheers and laughter.) I must say I was surprised, con-
sidering the disproportionate weight which the right hon.
gentleman laid upon a point of trifling moment, that, when
he came to this great passage of European policy, he satis-
fied himself with breaking out into ill-considered reproach
of her Majesty's Govekent. We did write this letter.
We believed that it was for the interes s of Europe that the
treaty of 1852 should be supported, and we stand here re-
sponsible for having acted on that belief. (.lheers.) Has
the right hon. gentleman an opinion on the policy, or has
he not? (Cheers.) I wish we could dive into the recesses
of his mind. (Laughter.) I complain of the reserve of the
right hon. gentleman. He is as bad as a miser with his
money—one cannot get out of him the smallest inkling of
what is to be the future policy of the country He talks a
great deal of the policy of the Government, but when it
touches a question of policy he will not give an opinion.
(Cheers.) He has brought forward a motion which aims at
giving a mortal blow to the Government. Here is by far
the most iinpoz tent proceeding which the Government has
taken, this letter of Jan. 18, the proposal for the co-operation
in support of the treaty of :852, and yet the right hon. gen-
tleman aho asks the House of Commons to condemn the
Government in the capital article of their conduct, passes
this by in silence because he cannot give an opinion with-
out intimating something about his policy. (Cheers.)
The Government have no desire to have that passed over.
Thsy thought it their duty to make those efforts to obtain
co-operation for the purpose of preventing that which has
happened—from a treaty being set aside by external force
—and they invite a verdict upon their conduct. (Cheers.)
I am not here to blame the Governments who declined to
concur in that proposal. I think that in the case of
an engagement like the treaty of 1852, the persons
really responsible for the failure, and all the consequences
of failure, are those who recede from their plighted faith,
(Cheers ) The Emperor of the French was entitled to say,
when one party had abandoned the treaty, "I must look
at the interests of France." He did look at that, and we
cannot and do not blame him for the resolution which he
took. Although we freely and frankly admit that the
peculiar position of Russia with reference to Prussia some-
what impairs her independence and dignity, and the
strength of her position in all European questions where
the German Powers are concerned, yet we do not accept.it
as a matter of charge or blame imputable to us that we
made a serious effort to rally the Po llers of Europe in sup-
port of the treaty of 1832. I may be wrong, but it seems
to me that this singlehanded intervention of England in
European questions is a course of proceeding which can be
justified. A system has grown up of late, of which the
treaty of 1852 was a notable example, where the Powers of
Europe have formed themselves, as it were, into a police,
for the maintenance of the general peace, apart from all
separate and selfish objects, and with the single view and
purpose of putting down the wrongdoer, whoever he may
be. This in one sense was the meaning of the treaty of
1852. I think that was as honourable course, that the
community of interests should be recognised in the form of
these great international facts and conventions, which aim
at keeping peace by the use of the cillective forces of the
civilised world, which is the best guarantee that it can pus.
sibly receive. (Hear.) Therefore let.it be clearly understood
that, if the right hon. gentleman were to challenge the con-
duct of the Government in their endeavours to enlist
France and Russia for the preservation of European peace,
let him say ao. (Hear, hear.) We are ready to abide by
the judgment of the house and of the country upon that
pbue. Then, says the hen, gentleman, having got into
Conference, you provided for the integrity of Denmark
by cutting off Holstein and part of Schleswig, and placing
it under the tutelage of all the Powers of Europe. There
is a great deal of weight in that description; but we do
not at all disguise that, after the failure of that application
to France and Russia, our tone was lowered. If you
find fault with the tone of my noble friend before this,
my answer is, that language wbich we held at first was
uniform with the language of France at the some period—
and that it was in contemplation of the contingency which
afterwards was not maltsed—,viz that the Powers would
find themselves in a condition to co-or Orate for the main-
tenance of the treaty, Where does the right hon. gentle-
man find the language of menace after the date at :.'hich
we became aware that menace could not be practically car-
ried into effect ? lam not aware of a single word which
has been ascribed to my noble friend as being likely to be
construed into a menace by ,the German Powers after we
once became aware of the fact that a European com-
bination could no longer be relied upoc in support of the
treaty of 1852. The right hon. gentleman, I think, said we
were right in declining to go to war single-handed. In the
Conference, having found that it was impossible to give full
effect to what we conceived to be the spirit of the treaty of
1852, we did the best we could for Denmark. (Cheers.) No
doubt, gentlemen would have done better, but we did as
well as we could, as well as France could, as well as Russia
could, as well as Sweden could. As long as we can show
that the proceedings which we took were proceedings of
the neutral Powers who represented the public sentiment
of Europe, and the impartial judgment of the world, I do
not think the righ,t hon. gentleman will succeed in driving
home the deadly weapon which he has aimed at our breast.
(Cheers,) The treaty of 1852 contemplated securing a com•
bination under the Crown of Denmark, after a new accession
to the throne, of all the territories that were attached to the
Crown under Frederick 11. Now the treaty of 1852 would
have been perfectly satisfied by what is called a personal
union. If we had advised Denmark to pursue the phantom
of literal compliance with the treaty of 1852, we should
have advised her to do that which she was deter-
mined not to do. Therefore, if the right hon. gentleman
charges us with having been parties to proposing in the
Conference a reduction of the Danish territory, 1 say we
did that which was not only most in accordance with the
interests, but that which was also most agreeable to the
wishes of Denmark, for if she could not have a virtual
incorporation of the whole of Schleswig, she wanted to have
an incorporation of a portion of Schleswig. The proposal
of the line of the Schlei was first made by us with the con-
currence of the other neutral Powers; and I think that
proposal was more agreeable to Denmark than any other
which could have been made with the slightest hope of bind-
ing the German Powers. The house is aware there are
ample reasons why England should not undertake what
might fairly be called the Quixotic enterprise of waging
single-handed the war which offered itself to us under the
circumstances. (Ministerial cheers.) The tax upon the Eng-
lish energies would have been totally disproportioned to the
object in view. The want of support 'and special interests,
in the absence of positive engagements, was a matter which
it was the absolute duty of the Government to consider.
But if England were to make that war, and to make it with
effect, it was aware that it could not be confined to Denmark
only. Its limits must have been vastly extended. It must at
once have gone down to the Adriatic—(cheers)—it must
have become a general war in Europe. And although there
might be objects which the Government might believe would
be among the possible results of such a war, and which
might be of groat value to humanity, yet that responsibility
was a responsibility from which the boldest man would
shrink. (Ministerial cheers.) And then England might,
more than any other nation, have found this a most deplor-
able position, for she might ultimately discover that the
judgment she had taken of the justice of the case was a
different judgment from that of the population of the
Duchies themselves. (Cheers.) What British House of
Commons would have sustained a Government who endea-
voured to thrust down the liberties of a people ? (Cheers.)
The right hon. gentleman has, with marvellous adroitness,
contrived to avoid every possible topic or issue involving the
slightest question as to what ought or what ought not to have
been our line of policy. The right hon. gentleman has put
to the house a motion which I will now proceed to examine.
Having met his charges, and I hose fairly challenged
the judgment of the house on the subject, I hold myself free
to take my turn as a critic and a judge. (Hear, hear.) This
is in many resp-cts a remarkable motion. (Laughter.) It
is a motion the production of which has been heralded, like
the birth of Julius Caesar and other great men of old, by
omen and prophecy. On an early day in the session the
right hon gentleman came out as a prophet and said, " We
will question the foreign policy of the Government." On
another day the member for Huntingdon took up the para-
ble of the right hon. gentleman, and at a late hour one even-
ing he announced--" I give you my word you shall have a
motion on the foreign policy of file Government." And a
third solemn announcement was made, which is interesting
because it proves that since the commencement of the ses-
sion—that is, for about five months —this motion has been
in the course of incubation, and the terms of it have had the
advantage of being revolved oyes and over again in all the
brains of all the wisest gentlemen in the country, namely,
those who are sitting opposite. (Cheers and laughter.)
The right hon. gentleman has made a motion of which we

quite understand the meaning and purport. Iwill show

that it is not so plain spoken as it ought to be; but still it
is intended to put an end to the existence of the present Go-
vernment. And now perhaps the house will pardon me if
I relate an anecdote. There is in a beautiful churchyard in
Kent an epitaph which commemorates a lady and gentle-
man who were murdered by a domestic servant, and the
writer of the epitaph, in his anxiety to give it a pious and
Christian tone, has written that it was a very great advan-
tage to them, after all, to be got rid of by this summary
method of proceeding, as they were freed from the incon-
veniences and discomforts that usually attend dissolution in
the ordinary course. (Loud laughter.) When I read this
it occurred to me that the right hon. gentleman was about
to perform for the Government the kind office which the
domestic servant performed for the old lady and gentleman.
(Renewed laughter.) But, looked at from another point of
view, the right hon. gentleman has raised a purely per-
sonal matter. We have heard the tone of the right hon,
gentleman to-day. He looked at the noble lord, and spoke
of hi: miserable incapacity. Again, I find the memory of
the right hon. :entleman a short memory, because by and
ibe what had been the foreign policy
bye he went on to des:
of this country since the peace -f lBl5, and he described it
as a successful policy. Did he recoliec.,' that the man whom
he accused of miserable incapacity had been tt; main agent
in conducting that policy for more than half the time u-luch
has elapsed since the peace of 1815 ? (Ministerial cheers.)
What is the meaning of this motion ? It is to get us out
of our places, and to let them come into them. But when
that issue is raised without reference to policy, it is a dis-
agreeable motion for discussion by those who still have
clinging to them any remains of the modesty of their youth.
The right hon. gentleman, however, has no such difficulty.
(Laughter.) He has applied to us the term " miserable
incapacity."
Several HON. MEMBERS —He said "intense incapacity."
Mr. DISRAELI—What I said was "utter incapacity,"
(Opposition cheers.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—WeII,
utter incapacity, intense, or miserable, or whatever it may
be, he at all events challenges a comparison with those who
may succeed them. He says, "By your gross mismanage-
ment you have offended all your allies," (Opposition
cheers, and counter-cheers from the Ministerial benches.)
He seems to think that that is true because we have failed
in averting a war. The right hon. gentleman might have
a little compassion from a recollection of his own career.
(Laughter.) Thera was a war when he was a Minister,

which the then Foreign Secretary, Lord Malmesbury, did
net succeed in staving off. On the 18th of April, 1859,
the right hon. gentleman told us that he was well satisfied
there would be no war ; but on the 22d the Austrians
commenced the war. (Ministerial cheers.) I appeal to
the memory of their own transactions as a justification
of what was done in the case of Denmark.
In point of fact, the motion means this : " Let
the noble lord and his colleagues get out of the
way, and let us get in, and then everybody will be
well-behaved, and all will go on smoothly." It reminds
me of the appearance of eEneas amongst the shades of the
old Greek heroes, when they began to run away from him :
" At Danaum proceres, A gamemnoniceeque phalanges,
Ut videre virum, fulgentiaque arma per umbras,
Ingenti trepidare meta; paro vertere terga."
(Laughter.) Then the right hon. gentleman gets on the
high horse, and refuses to give us the slightest idea of his
policy, beaause that, he says, would be accepting office on
conditions. (Cheers.) He has contrived a motion which is
full of animosity and poison towards thee life of the G wern-
ment ; but look at it as a declaration bearing on the public
policy, and it is pale and colourless as a ghost. The chief
allegation is that the just influence of England has been
lowered. Now let me deal with that. In the first place I
deny it; and in the second place I hold that, if it were, it is
not a seemly declaration to be recorded by Parliament.
(Loud Ministerial cheers.) Why is the just influence of
England said to have been lowered ? Is it because we have
failed in averting war ? If there has been a failure there
have also been honest, upright, generous efforts made to
prevent great masses of mankind from injuring and destroy-
ing one another. (Cheers.) Ministers who in vain endea-
vour to calm troubled waters may at the time reap no other
reward than in resentment and disapprobation ; but yet the
recollection will abide that the voice of England was raised
for moderation and justice. (Cheers.) The effort of the Go-
vernment was to teach wisdom to those who were obstinate,
and mercy to those who were tyrannous and strong. It is
said that this case is without parallel, Let me, however, go
back to the case of Mr Canning. Never was there a more
conspicuous failure, so far as the judgment of the moment
was concerned, than that of Mr Canning in the case of the
invasion of Spain by France, but there is no more honour-
able chapter in the whole history of the foreign policy of
England. (Ministerial cheers.) Let us therefore look a little
beyond the present moment, and let us discard if we
can the Epicurean temper which is so strong in its
vision of those things which lie near, but is blind as
a bat to everything that pertains to the future.
I repeat that I do not believe the just influence of this coun-
try has been lowered. (Cheers.) By whom is that lan-
guage held ? Why, by a certain portion of the foreign
oress ; and when I read the motion of the right hon. gen-
tleman, it seems to me to be an echo, and nothing better
than an echo, of the almost ribald language of a few obscure
journals on the continent. (Ministerial cheers.) It is from
them that this intending Minister draws his inspiration; it
is from that quarter that the lessons of English policy are
to be learned. I have denied that the just influence of Eng-
land has been lost, and, as far as my knowledge goes, this
is the first occasion on which the British House
of Commons has been called upon to record, for
the Purpose of displacing a Government, the degradation
of their country. (Loud cheers.) Why cannot the right
hon. gentleman speak plainly ? Why cannot ho adopt the
language used by our forefathers on these occasions, and
move an address to the Crown that the Government did not
deserve the confidence of the house ? The right hon. gen-
tleman was afraid to raise that ie.sue. He did not dare even
no,:- to resort to the old and constitutional form of a vote of
want of confidence. And because he Was not bold he
thought he woe wise. (Laughter.) All I ca.7l say is that
the right hon. gentlee;e'lan has never so poisoned the minds
of any combination of gentlemen iu this house as to induce
them to place on record that which must be regarded as cLitit-
honourable to their country. Go back to the times of Sir
Robert Walpole, of Lord North, and of Mr. Fox, and
never will you find a sterile, jejune affair like this proposed
to the House of Commons. Whatever was then raised by
the Opposition was spoken outright in the good old Eng-
lish manner. (Cheers.) I think I have now detained
the house long enough. I have endeavoured to avoid lead-
ing them into the almost innumerable Oases of this long
correspondence, and I have followed the rigiet hon. gentle-
man on every point he chose to submit. And Ijo not know
that there is any portion of it which he might have com-
mented upon, where it would not have been equMY
practicable to follow him. Whatever may be his argu-
ments, I am confident that the house will not be led
astray by the motion. Let him, if he pleases, shelter
himself under the irresponsibility of Opposition ; but that
doctrine will not bear being pushed to extremes, and never
has it been pushed to such an extreme as it has been to-
night by the right hon. gentleman, In vain does the right
hon. gentleman say, " You must place me on that bench,
and then let me tell you what I propose to do." Ido not
think the country-will consent to a change on these condi-
tions. Nay, more, I feel the most confident conviction that
the house and the oountry will approve of the course taken
in these difficult negotiations by her Majesty's Govern-
ment I and that the house will reject a motion which both
prudence and patriotism emphatically reject. (The right
hon. gentleman was loudly cheered as he resumed his seat.)
Mr NE WDEGATE moved, by way of amendment, to
substitute for the second paragraph in Mr Disraeli's motion
the following words:—" To submit to her Majesty the opi-
nion of this house, that the independence of Denmark and
the possessions of that kingdom, on the terms proposed by
the representatives of the neutral Powers in the recent
Conference, ought to be guaranteed." He was not prepared I
to admit that this country stood degraded before the world,
although there would be no doubt that, by the confession
of the Government, she was isolated from her allies on the
question of Denmark. He moved his amendment to the
resolution, because the right hon. gentleman had disavowed
on his own part any intention, had he been in office, of in-
terfering in defence of the Danish monarchy; and if that
would have been the right hon, gentleman's policy the house
was right in continuing its confidence to her Majesty's Go-
vernment. He by no means intended to advocate war; and
the object of his amendment was that the house should de-
clare its readiness to co-operate with our allies before the
evils ensued which Lord Palmerston recently foreshadowed,
the bombardment of Copenhagen and the capture of the
King, events which seemed to be not far distant, judging
by the violent conduct of the German Powers.

The amendment having been seconded by Mr. GORE-
LING/TON,
Mr. KINGLAKE objected to the amendment, that inas-
much as the disputed territory north of the Sehlei was now
in possession of the German forces, to propose to guarantee
that territory was simply to propose war, and create a lia.
bility to war to all time. In the decision at which the
Government had arrived he entirely concurred ; and with
regard to the house he contended that there had been a long
acquiescence on its part in the foreign policy of the Go-
vernment up to the very period at which Mr. Disraeli had
given notice of his motion.

General PEEL, whilst disclaiming all party considera-
tions, gave his most cordial support to the motion. The
Ministry, he said, ever since they threw over the Reform
Bill, had existed solely upon their foreign policy and the
popularity of the Premier; but the only result was that
the Foreign Secretary had offended everybody, and shown
that he had one policy for the weak and another for the
strong. The Prime Minister had stigmatised the invasion
of Jutland as an outrage upon the independence of Den-
mark. There was a time when a declaration like that
would have been looked upon by all foreign Powers as bind-
ing as if it had been delivered by the most despotic
monarch. This war of words was neither safe nor honour-
able. If the policy of the country was to be peace at any
price, silence and non-interference would have become us
better. If we were too rich to be drawn into war by any
amount of provocation, it would be best to say so at once;
but what would be said of a man who declined to defend
his honour because ho was too rich to be shot at ? If this
were the language held by England we should indeed de-
setve to ba called a nation of shopkeepers; but the shop.

Lord STANLEY said that the learned lord had taunted
General Peel with inconsistency in denouncing treaties of
guarantees, while he had been a party to the treaty of 1852.
But, in the first place, Gen. Peel was not a member of the
Cabinet of Lord Derby, by which that treaty was concluded ;
in the next place, it was not a treaty of guarantee; and in
the third place, all the negotiations which led to it were
conducted by Lord Palmerston. He denied that the resolu-
tion
u,29 a war resolution. The right hon. gentleman the
member for
A.-Rucks had distinctly told the House that if he
had been in office 4..‘'e would have pursued the course taken
by France. and told 10._emark from the first that she had
nothing to hope for from us _'ithe way of material assist-
ance. The Chancellor of the Ex,:hequor had condemned
severely the terms of the resolution. He was very anxious
that, instead of it, the Opposition should have proposed
a vote of censure, No doubt that would ha. ye been very
convenient for the Government, because then, when hard
pressed on one subject, they could have fallen back upon
,
another. But he could see no reason why, if the
Opposition thought that foreign affairs had been ha,4lY
managed they should not say so. The resolution meant
that they thought the Government had blundered theirs
negotiations from beginning to end, and that they
the House to say so. Then the Chancellor of the
Exchequer charged the Opposition with striking
at the Government through the bosom of the coun-
try, and trading upon the humiliation of the country,
(Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman had' remarked
that the language of the resolution was unprecedented.
(Hear, hear.) He (Lord Stanley) had not come down to the
house with a bundle of precedents to show what had taken
place on former occasions of this kind, but he very mucf.tt
questioned whether the language of the resolution, and the
speech of the right hon. gentleman (Mr Disraeli) were not
mild and moderate compared with what had before been
used in that house in 1763, 1782, 1795, and 1796. Whatever
the resolution might be, it was not a resolution in favour of
a policy of drifting into war. If it were, he could only say
for himself, and he believed for many sitting on the same
side of the house, that no reasons would induce them- to
support it. He should at once declare that to engage in
European war for the sake of the Duchies would be an act
not of impolicy, but of insanity. He thought that a policy of
peace was compatible with being respected and honoured in
Europe, and that we might have enjoyed such a position if
we had taken the precaution of saying to Denmark that we
would give her moral support but that we would not go any
further. What he complained of was, the total want of
policy on the part of the Government. He did not believe
there had been at any time a deliberate determination to
adopt a policy either of war or peace, He did not profess to
fear that we should drift into war as in 1853, for he believed
that the common sense of the country would be too strong
for diplomatists who were disposed to do so. Still, it was
quite possible that such a policy might be adopted that we
must either support it with war or retire from it with dis •
credit. (Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) This was the
state of things with which the resolution of his right hon.
friend professed to deal ; and he thought that his right
hon. friend was justified in making the protest which he
had. (Cheers.) If an appeal was made from the decision
of this house to the country, their (the Conservative)
side of the house would face the appeal without fear.
(Loud cheers from the Opposition.) He did not think
that gentlemen on the other side would have much to go
to the country upon, except that France had been snubbed,
that Germany had been insulted, that Denmark had been
abandoned, and Poland encouraged to revolt. (Loud cheers.)
Mr Cobden and Mr Roebuck both rose at the eame mo-
ment, but there were loud cries of " Adjourn, adjourn," and
"No, no." After a brief interval,
Mr COBDEN moved the adjournment of the debate un-
til to-morrow (Tuesday), which was carried, and the majo-
rity of the members present at once left the house.
The house then adjourned at 20 minutes past one.

COUNTRY MARKETS,

•----•r-.-------

COLCHESTER—JULY 2.
At this corn exchange to-day there was a small show of
wheat, and in the few sales made former prices were about
realised. Spring corn unaltered.
Wheat, white. 42s 46s Beans, Mazagan ..28s
red 38s 42s middle & small.32s 36s
Barley . 32s 38s Peas, white 35s 38s
0at5........, 20s 25s grey 343 3es

NORTHAMPTON—JULY 2.
About the usual show of wheat to-day, and the demand
good, last week's rates being slightly nigher. Not much
doing in bmiey. Oats and beans scarce, and is to 2s up.
—White wheat, new,
,38s to 425; new red, 38s to 41w;
old. 38s to 40s per qr. Barley, new malting, 34s to 365--
grinding, 26s to 33s per qr. Oats, 19s to 30s per 24 stone.
Beans, 34s to 38e. Peas, 32s to 36s per qr.

GLOUCESTER—JULY 2.
There was a fair attendant .e of farmers at market to-day,
with a small supply of English wheat, which sold freely
at the prices of last week. Foreign wheat in extremely
limited demand, with no alteration in value. Spring corn
firm, and a fair business doing.