The Sun.
London, England, 1863-07-21 00:00:00

NEW WRIT-CLARE.

On the motion of Mr. BRAND, the Clerk of the Crown
was asked to issue a writ in the room of Mr. Calcott, de-
ceased,

POLAND.
Mr. HORSMAN—Sir, the affairs of Poland have forai 1
long time attracted the attention of all Europe, and there s
not a Cabinet in Europe in which they have not been made
before
the subject of anxious consideration. The papers laid
Parliament show that the British Government has taken a
transactionsprominent,
w itthhe
itmuosssti
ap
and r e m itnheenst
T,
oal partp oin w
etrhse diploma-
tic
Whether
tt
ihoanta
la c
pt irvi
di toy, woirl I
ohf e rae rreecpor
01 1 e ce :he_
0d asf
pa
ride ?a u siebrof
great-
mities already too dep
services rendered, or olfe
rreehplreotaoc reproach feo r
dwelto u r paaprot
at Igreat
scat l at,
0-
nafatetironh:l
uaellsttihone,ananxidetyl
fwuilthq
bwehdieehteramttiraieehdes. I
theavae rfeeamdiltiheorsheuptappearias
closed the perusal of them with feelings of perplexity and
alarm. The interest is sustained throughout, and the tone
most moderate; but it is impossible not to see that England
has placed herself, not only towards Russia, but towards
Poland and Europe, in a position of entanglement from
which it is impossible to escape. When this war first broke
out, I avowed with feelings of apprehension the conse
quences of an irritating policy that could not be operative
without being mischievous. Poland has been diplomatised
to death, and it is cruelty to the Poles to excite them to re-
volution by implied promises of support, and then to aban-
don and betray them. It is clear from the correspondence
that the Government have gone too far, or not far enough.
If, after having been at such pains to provoke Russia and
excite Poland, our Government are to say, " We have done
our duty, and we will go no further," then, at no distant
day, I say that Parliament will turn upon them, and
say, " You have not discharged, but you have exceeded
your duty. If you mean to go no further, you have gone
a great deal too far, because you have once more deluded
and victimised Poland, and by provoking other Powers
you may have lighted a flame in Europe beyond your
power to extinguish." (Hear.) The Polish question com-
mences with the treaty of Vienna, and from the date Of
that treaty the revolution in Poland has been one great,
grand, growing event. To understand it thoroughly, we
must go back to 1815, and refer to the objections taken by
the plenipotentiaries at Vienna to the extension of Russia
(as referred to by Lord Castlereagh) by the addition of Po-
land. It was seen that that would enable her to threaten all
the other Powers on her boundaries, and to become a stand-
ing menace to Europe. It was also objected that to unite
Poland with Russia by a constitutional bond was impos-
sible. I bag the house to bear these two objections in mind,
because they lie at the root of the whole question. At the
same time, I should be guilty of a grave omission if I did
not dwell upon the despatch of Lord Castlereagh, written
during the Congress of Vienna, and which was characterised
by a vigour of language alike honourable to the man and to
the nation he represented. Tne Governments of Austria
and Prussia are both very much averse to the annexation of
Poland, but being too timid to do so through their own
plenipotentiaries, they got Lord Castlereagh to be their
mouthpiece in remonstrating with the Emperor. The right
hon. gentleman then read an extract from a despatch of
Lord Castlereagh to Lord Liverpool, dated the 19th Octo-
ber, 1814, to the effect that Lord Castlereagh, believing that
the congress afforded Austria and Prussia an excellent ex-
pedient for making representations to Russia on the sub-
ject of the annexation of Poland without actually menacing
her with war, he had desired an interview with the King
of Prussia in order to impress on his Majesty the necessity
of Prussia's opposing every obstacle short of war to the
proposed arrangement. Shortly after that, Lord Castlereagh
was applied to formally to be the champion of the Austrian
and Prussian plenipotentiaries, Prince Metternich making
the proposal to Count Hardenburg, and Lord Castlereagh
accepted the invitation. With those credentials he wrote
to the Emperor on the 12th of October, 1814 :—" I do
not hesitate to declare my solemn conviction that it
depends exclusively upon the temper with which your
Majesty meets these proposals—those with respect
to the reconstitution of Poland—whether the present con-
gress proves a blessing or a misfortune for mankind." Very
' shortly after that, a council of the three plenipotentiaries
was held at Lord Castlereagh's house, and a memorandum
was drawn up embodying three proposals, which were to be
submitted to the Emperor, and of these the first referred to
the reconstruction of the old kingdom of Poland. If the
Emperor would accept none, it was agreed that the pleni-
potentiaries should take their stand upon the first. Well,
the Emperor peremptorily rejected all three, and Lord Cas-
tlereagh found himself abandoned by Austria and Prussia.
The congress then became a scene of discord and entangle-
ment. However, the final triumph of Russia was shown by
the signature of England to the arrangement which she had
so strongly denounced. At the same time Lord Castlereagh
did not take leave of the congress without placing upon re-
cord his views as to the annexation of Poland ; and the lan-
guage which he then used might be taken without the
change of a single syllable, as the faithful history of the last
50 years. Prince Talleyrand states the views of France, and
he wrote to Lord Castlereagh on the 7th Jan., 1815, that
France shared the wishes of Great Britain for the indepen-
dence of Poland. To be sure, all this occurred so far back as
50 years ago; bat, at the same time, things in Poland had
gone on from bad to worse, and from that day to this she has
been a standing reproach and an increasing difficulty to
Europe. The earnest warnings of Lord Castlereagh, there-
fore, instead of being weakened, gain authority from time
and solemnity from great events. The right hon. gentle-
man then read an extract from M'Neile'a work on " The
Progress of Russia," to show how enormous had been the
growth of Russia in recent times, and in order to justify
the apprehensions of the statesmen of 1815. I know (con-
tinued the right hon. gentleman) that some say the strength
of Russia has of late considerably diminished. Yes, at pre-
sent the vast distance of the extremities of the empire from
the centre of Government is a source of weakness ; but in a
short time, when steam and iron diminish those distances,
Russia will stand forth more formidably than ever. The
right hon. gentleman then went on to show that by gaining
her point in 'Bl6.1-tussle had in reality reduced Austria and
Prussia to the position of second-rate Powers, and prevented
them from exercising any iuffuence in Europe except that of
a perplexing character. And in the next place ho recalled
the house to the events of 1831, to prove that what was now
happening was but a repitition of, those events ; in a word
that history repeated itself. Then, too, there was a joint
intervention on behalf of Poland ; but how did the Emperor
meet the remonstrance ? Why, with the cold assertion that
' Poland by insurrection had forfeited her right. Poland was
then incorporated with Russia. That, however, did not
satisfy Lord Palmerston, who pressed hard upon the Russian
Government. Bat, thus pressed by the noble lord the Rus-
sian Minister replied, utterly repudiating the Treaty of
Vienna, and closed thevorrespondence with the somewhat
startling and arrogant assertion that the Emperor was
thoroughly determined to admit no foreign intervention in
the question, and he hoped it would be the last time he
give explanations upon a subject
needh to
himself alone. The right hon. gentleman'
twwhhoeultnchdde°°bteallc
detailed how
neon
the negotiations were finally brought to
a close by Lord Palmerston s declaration that remonstrance
was useless, unless the Powers were prepared to support it
by war. Well, the events of the present year are merely
the repetition of the events of '3l. Either of these courses
the Government might have adopted, and either of them
could be intelligible or even safe.
(Hear.) Have the Go-
vernmentadopted the first, because diplomacy has been renewed, and,
adopted either of these courses P They have not
therefore they have abandoned the position they took in
1831. But they have taken up the other policy,t that they
should not speak unless they were pre
it was not a new policy which they
have prepared d a
d to o
strike. But,
But I will
old policy which had been formerly abandoned. Bu
a
adopted
but the
let the despatches tell their own story. The precedent
of
1831 was for some time longer continuously adhered to, and
the English Government were determined to protest, and
they appealed to Russia to respect the treaty of 1815. The
noble lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs could be at no
loss for the best form in which to convey the determination
of the Government to Russia. He had only to look in the
pigeon. holes of the Foreign-office,would find his
predecessor'
and sent off to where he
s despatch of 1831, which need only be copied
. _ St. Petersburg. Prince Gortschakoff, on his
side, had the despatch of Count -
Well, after ringing the eh
con-
grass pledges, the corms
request from the RussianP°Mn
Secre-
tary of State would be so
busi-
ness, and put down insurrection at home
encou-
raging it abroad. So the noble lord too
spondence, for in the end he found •
chief was landed 31 years before.
noble lord had everything but originality ;butguide.despatches of
they failed to
accomplish any good for Poland ; and instead of English
diplomacy being more respected, the Pole found the
rope
circled more remorselessly about his neck at every fresh t
Was this English policy or English levity ? If levit
afrn u.
Y
what happened in 1831, it amounted to a crime. Do
we
at eo
..r
cuse the Government for it ? I am glad to say that a closer
inspection of the correspondence shows a meaning and de-
sign sufficient to acquit the Government of levity, and at the
same time warns the house that there is danger to be &ppm..
hended from the opposite direction. A joint intervention
with France was declined in February by the Government
refusing to take action; and then they adopted a proceeding
which appeared to be a deliberate policy, and which was the

most judicious and effective proceeding they could have
adopted, by which an entirely new aspect was given to the
Polish question. They addressed a circular to all the Powers
who were parties to the Treaty of Vienna, inviting them to
address communications to Russia, and suggested that they
should be of the same spirited character which were before
addressed by them. And this was the most important point
in the whole correspondence, and was the turning point in
the policy of the Government, The right hon. gentleman
then read portions of the despatches No. 138 and No. 140,
which were written by Lord Russell to Lord Cowley on the
9th of April, 1863. The two despatches may be taken as
one, for the second only contained an explanation with re-
gard to the first; and more especially the purport of a con-
versation which he had with Baron Brunnow ; and the
house will agree with me that in this is to be found the real
ei csyp ofat c
ht ht eo
LGoorvde rnm
Cowleye nt t h La
to
Br darßo
nu sßs er 10l
intnhoewn
states
o n the
his p odl
called on him, and asked if the invitation addressed by her
Majesty's Government to the Powers of Europe was of a
pacific nature. To this Lord Russell replied that the inten-
tions of the Government were not otherwise than pacific;
and that, in like manner, their concert with foreign Powers
was no other than pacific; but still circumstances might
change, the present overtures might be rejected, the insur-
rection might continue, and if Russia adopted no measures
of a conciliatory nature, dangers and complications might
arise which were not then contemplated. (Hear.) In the
course of the conversation Baron Brunnow said that the
intentions of Russia were most kind and benevolent towards
Poland—(a laugh) —that there was a project for altering the
map of Europe; Russia wanted no territorial changes, and
wished to preserve the present map of Europe; to which the
noble lord the Foreign Secretary replied that Russia herself
was a party to carrying out territorial changes. (Hear.)
Did not the tendency of that policy imply, on the part of the
noble lord, " We begin with diplomacy, but if this fails,
there is something behind of which the Government of Russia
should beware." There is a profession of peace, but there
is also an unmistakable indication of war under certain
contingencies, every one of which has come to pass as if
inevitable and predetermined. I have no doubt, as the noble
lord writes, that Baron Brunnow found this the most inte-
resting conversation he ever held. For at the end of every
pacific assurance the noble lard introduced the portentous
" but," which must have left a profound impression on the
mind of the Russian ambassador that Poland became a ques-
tion not to be trifled with. (Cheers.) The gravity of the
despatch was greatly increased by its immediate publication;
for before an answer could be received the despatch was
placed in the hands of the parliamentary printer and pub-
lished to Poland and the world. The early publication of
that despatch challenged our opinions upon it. We may
assume in dealing with the act of a Cabinet of sagacious
men that the effect produced was the effect intended ; for it
would be an insult to common sense to suppose that they
committed the puerile blunder of not meaning what was ex-
pressed. I have no hesitation in declaring my conviction
that the circular to the European Powers has been a diplo-
matic victory over Russia ; for it is virtually an universal
condemnation of the cruel and aggressive policy of Russia
towards Poland. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman,
after referring to the great part taken by Lord Palmerston
in the historical proceedings embraced in the despatches,
said that the circumstances of Russia greatly changed since
1831. For example, in 1831 the despots of the North were
sure friends, and it was because of their then attitude that
France and England were compelled to fall back. But since
then great changes have taken place, which may bring the
present policy of the Cabinet into harmony with the policy
of 1831. That Holy Alliance of the North was dissolved.
Prussia was divided ; the nation on one side and on the other
the King, of whose abdication any telegram may bring in-
telligence. (Cheers.) In 1831 Russia was a colossal power,
with a large army, a powerful fleet, a numerous population,
and flourishing finances. Now her army was demoralised,
her fleet gone, her people in the throes of social convulsion,
and her finances disordered and embarrassed. Again, in
1831, Poland, though agitated, was not united. The in-
surrection was the insurrection of the nobles ; but the
middle classes were now in in arms against Russia ; and if
the combination holds together and is well directed, it will
be impossible for Russia to it. (Cheers.) Under these cir-
cumstances, continued the right hon. gentleman, what
alternative had Russia but to submit ? But he was mis-
taken. Russia had a friend that stepped in at the critical
moment to rob Europe of its wise policy, and to secure for
Russia immunity for the past and endless future opportu-
nities of committing her worst designs. Austria stepped in
—Austria, that was itself the despoiler of Poland—Austria,
that had been the chief sinner against the liberty and en-
lightenment of Europe—Austria, the theatre of whose
crimes had been Italy, Hungary, and Poland, and whose
modern political history was the blackest in Europe. (Hear,
hear.) And yet this was the Power that now claimed equal
voice with England and France in the cause of justice and
freedom. They were told that that was all changed now,
and that the Government of Austria was a wise Govern-
ment, and was overflowing with sympathy for Poland. If
so, why did she not give play to her sympathies nearer
home, and give to Venetia and Hungary what she seemed
to wish for Poland? (Hear, hear.) No, he should tell his
hon. and learned friend the member for Sheffield that so
long as Austria continued to play the tyrant and tormentor
wherever she had the power to do so—(cries of " Oh, oh,"
and " Hear, hear")—we could not believe her to be the
sincere friend of Poland, and that in allying herself with
England and France she must obey and not pretend to dic-
tate; far Austrian Ministers knew that independent action
on their part in Poland, or a declaration on the side of
Russia, would be followed by revolution and the dismem-
berment of their own empire.
Mr. ROEB UCK—That is all rubbish, (Cries of " Oh,
oh," " Order," and laughter.)
Mr. HORSMAN continued : Austria was unfortunately
admitted to an equal voice in the council, and the result
was the production of a document on her part which he could
not but characterise as a mischievous combination of politi-
cal imbecility and hypocrisy, and as to which it was diffi-
cult to say whether the House of Commons should regard
it with shame or humiliation. There was nothing in the
smallest degree practical in the points which she submitted,
and had they been adopted by England arid France they
would have been as delusive to the Poles as ruinous to
Europe. It wastherefore fortunate that Earl Russell added
a postcript, and insisted upon three other conditions—the
acceptance of the six points, the proclamation of an armis-
tice, and a conference of the Powers that signed the Treaty
of Vienna, These last conditions made England safe, and
not only preserved her the vantage-ground in the negotia-
tions, but were a protection to Poland itself, They had now
the Russian answer, which was an unqualified rejection of
everything that England had proposed ; and accordingly
the question they had to decide was brought within the nar-
rowest possible compass. They made the Emperor of Russia
King of Poland under the conditions of the Treaty of
Vienna. They recognised no title to sovereignty but what
that treaty gave him ; and if he were not King of Poland by
treaty, he was not King of Poland at all. The Emperor, on
the other hand, claimed to be king by conquest ; but, as he
was no more king by conquest than was the Pope of Rome
King of Italy by marriage—(laughter)—the result was
that there was no King of Poland at all. It would
be impossible for the Emperor of Russia to draw a dis-
tinction between his Russian and Polish subjects ; for
were not the landed proprietors and townspeople of
Luthuania, Podolia, and Volhynia as much Polish as the
Polish kingdom, and would they not remain in a chronic
state of insurrection unless the same advantages were given
to them as were given to Poland ? And so far from the
papers and protocols settling the question of Poland, he
looked upon them as dishonest invitations to Europe to per-
petuate her calamities and dangers. Indeed, they might
save themselves a great deal of trouble, for the Emperor of
Russia had told them that he would not have their con-
gress kingdom, and he had told them what they all knew,
that he could not and would not rule Poland different to the
rest of his kingdom. By telling the Poles they were justi-
fied in taking up arms against the sovereign we had given
them, they had irritated Russia. They had advised the
Poles to treat the Russian amnesty with the same con-
tempttTiehne,Majesty'spa
noa s
etsd thhwGes
eoyErveh
Government
napdgerafrhooetl
lir:
not of
gwf
iefßndo
truei shdi
their
rnh
da
nationality
ohtl
olrowe wat t ehtd he taahts ekaai
nredd c
dni sd t i
her
u-
e r
o
dvinceothuipng
lees, and did they mean to give it to them by applying to
Poland the principle they proclaimed in Italy—but which
had not been brought to light in 1815, when the crowned
heads disposed of nationalities by divine right, but with
this distinction—that the latter was made over absolutely to
Austria, while Poland was only entrusted conditionally to
Russia. The Government considered they did a good work
with reference to recent events in Italy, and the Chancellor ,
,if the Exchequer always referred with pride to his belong-
ing to a Government that came in at the eleventh hour to
secure Italy for the Italians. No doubt they did a good
work then, and they deserved and had obtained a lasting
gratitude for it; but could he not inform them that the case
of Poland was much stronger than that of Italy, which
was delivered by foreign armies, and not by treaties ?
Poland was, indeed, a theme sufficient to inspire the elo
quence of a just and generous statesman, who united a
love for freedom with respect for laws. He believed there
was not a Minister whose conscience had not told
him what every reflecting man feels, that Poland was the
ward of Europe, and England her legally constituted guar-
dian; and how then, he asked, could they as a Christian
Legislature, without committing a fresh crime—greater
than any that had preceded it—deliver up Poland to h
to thead
hands of that Power whom their expert
told them no oaths could bind, or justice for
committed towards
what they,
had our Government should efface ey,
fsourffbeirdingthactoubldy moveato
omriemrcey. (Hear, hear.) God
assuch
h in add onfetailny,lataalyhi.
pas, and
aspiring lethistoric
though
ohoe
gmhr aftahneern recognise
nation,
suffering, elevated by patriotism, taught by the
aspiring to a new and better future ; and as they had gained
some credit to themselves and done some service by pro-
claiming Italy for the Italians, so let them not be wanting
now in courage, virtue, and wisdom to proclaim Poland for
the Poles, and so make some reparation to her in her
rising by welcoming her back into the brotherhood of nat-
tions. (Hear.)
Much, however, as he desired it, and ar-
dently as he advocated it, he should not have ventured to
su"est anything so bold if her Majesty's Government had
not led the wa
Y. The manner in which they had expanded
our alliance with France into a great European combina-
tion
had been most able and masterly ; but the despatches

left only one logical deduction to be drawn from them, viz.,
the restoration of Poland as the adopted policy of the Cabi-
net, which would be speedily and gladly accepted by the
people of England. The question whether it was possible
to accomplish it without having recourse to war was not
difficult of solution, nor was it discouraging. It, however,
in his opinion, depended solely on Austria, and whether she
would or would not make restitution of Gallicia was the one
question on which every other eventually depended. If she
would come forward boldly, wisely, honourably, and freely
and make restitution of Gallicia, Russia must, on the same
grounds, relinquish Poland. (Hear.)
Mr. ROEBUCK—That's not very likely.
Mr. HORSMAN—His hon. and learned friend said that
was not very likely, and no doubt he would say, How could
they expect Austria and Russia to give up territory without
equivalents ; but what could they require better as equiva-
lents than being placed in safety ? Was it, he asked, no
gain to a monarchy like Austria to have her territory mme
guarded and secure, her commerce freely and uninterrupt •
edly developed, to have the constantly recurring danger of
the Eastern question diminished, and her status resumed
as an independent power in Europe. On the contrary,
he thought the advantage to Austria, politically, commer-
cially, and nationally, arising from her being relieved from
the Russian incubus, would be so great that, instead of
asking for equivalents, Austria would be only too glad to
purchase them by the relinquishment of territory acquired
by sucu crimes. No Government in the world had more
interest than England in maintaining Austria as a strong
power in Europe ; but that could only be acquired
by her becoming liberal and progressive. (Hear, hear.)
But if Austria refused to do so, what then ? There were
some papers in the despatches which he grieved to say led
them to that view of the question; and there were others
frum which they might infer that the English Government
might think that Austria would be justified in doing so,
and to some extent in countenancing her in that o urse ;
but, if so, would England adhere to Austria and leave
France to follow her own councils? (Hear, hear.) So
long as Austria holds her grip on Gallicia, so long she for-
bids the solution of the question. And should England
falter by the side of Austria, what France would do no
one could venture to say, for the best of all reasons, be-
cause perhaps the Emperor of France did not know
himself what he would do—(hear, hear)—but in that very
uncertainty consisted the danger. (Hear, hear.) No one
could possibly tell what public opinion in France might
require the Empercr to do. It was our Ministers who
had fanned the flame, for Europe would never have
moved in the matter if England had not given her
countenance to the movement ; and he besought them to
remember that the Polish question united all parties in
France; for their love of Poland they would make it a
holy war, and they would unite all liberal Europe in
support of that champion who came forward to battle
in behalf of Poland. The combination against Russia was
the work of England, and he hoped her Majesty's Govern-
ment would keep their position at the head of the movement;
but if England abandoned Poland they might rely upon it
that, when the time came, France would he compelled to
take it. The answer to the question could only be given by
the noble lord at the head of the Government, who had
made it especially his own property, and the old spirit of
1831 unmistakeably pervaded the despatches. It was to the
noble lord that they must look to correct that feeble utter-
ance, and to counteract the mischievous hallucinations
which appeared in high places. A saying had lately been
attributed to our Foreign Secretary, of so ignominious a
character that those who knew that noble lord when he was
in that house deemed it to be incredible, viz., that, however
much the honour and interests of England demanded it, or
the safety of Europe required it, England would on no ac-
count draw the sword for Poland. (Hear, hear.) Another
statement, equally incredible, was attributed to a noble earl
who had been, and might hope to be again, Prime Minister
of England, that if Poland obtained her independence it
would not only be without the goodwill, but contrary to the
judgment, the wish, and the desire of England. (Hear.)
The first observation was so unstatesmanlike that it must
be a libel on the Cabinet; and the second was a libel on
that nation whose generous character he was believed to
represent—(hear)--and therefore he must look to the noble
lord at the head of the Government to vindicate the national
policy and the English character, by publicly repudiating,
in the name of the Cabinet and the country, these ignoble
sentiments. (Hear, hear.) Thenoble lord's career as a Mini-
ster of the Crown had been one of unexampled duration,with
a constantly acquiring popularity,and he called on him to act
on this occasion in a manner that would crown his career with
laurels rather than a wreath of cypress. (Hear.) No doubt the
question was surrounded with difficulties and complications,
but there was no true-hearted Englishman who did not wish
the noble lord success, and there was no lover of freedom in
the world who would not bless him for his exertions in
establishing the nationality of the Poles. If, therefore, to
advance was difficult and surrounded with danger, to re-
treat was absolute ruin, for there was no middle course, and
the Government could not halt between two opinions.
(Hear, hear.) Knowing as they all did the difficulties, the
responsibilities, and the anxieties that surrounded the task
her Majesty's Government had undertaken, he felt bound
to do his utmost to support them in it. After a most care-
ful and critical examination of the papers, he had come to
the conclusion, which was shared in by others whose
opinions were more valuable than his own, that the nego-
tiations, taken as a whole, had been so conducted that, if
her Majesty's Government did not now abandon them them-
selves, they ought not to be and would not be abandoned by
Parliament or the country. (Hear, hear.) He moved " That,
in the opinion of this house, the arrangements made with
regard to Poland by the Treaty 'of Vienna have failed to
secure the good government of Poland or the peace of
Europe; and any further attempt to replace Poland under
the conditions of that treaty must cause calamities to
Poland and embarrassment and danger to Europe."
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—My
right hon. friend has addressed the house in a speech to
which I have listened with deep interest, and on behalf of
her Majesty's Government I may say that, except in the
short but very emphatic references, towards its close, to the
language he supposes was uttered by Earl Russell in ano-
ther p ace, I think we can have no reason to complain, so
and, therefore,
ot
fhehrieefoerpee, speculativeeocfhtotoherighth ona.
gentleman grappled with the question What is Poland,and
what it ought to be ; and that if Austria only surrendered
Gallicia,
tfahrieasquweemairoenc. onßceurtnietda,
popfetahres stpoi rmiteinthwathioc has
on the
the dwishcoulseseidt
else would follow. In another
ep
ha
ar
rt oaoekt e or
.f t olonstahneg
right honourable friend re-
ferredeyffect of the monosyllable "but"
iolsle-tvPshelirewYmeetlicrihdfiundim: of a sentence. There was another
introducedportion
t tothfhieenhnat luiatntee;
monosyllable which, it occurred to me at the time, would
be just as omnipotent, and that was when he spoke of the
surrender of Gallicia by Austria. But, supposing that
happy expectation were realised, then, says my right hon,
friend, the surrender of Posen by Prussia would follow as a
matter of course. That may be clear to the mind of my right
hon. friend, but I confess it is not at all certain that it is so
clear to the mind of Prussia—whether by that name we re-
fer simply to that King of Prussia whose abdication the
right hon. gentleman again—somewhat sanguine, as I
think—expects from day to day, or to the whole Prussian
people. (Hear, hear.) But I think my right hon, friend
is equally sanguine when he supposes that upon the sur-
render of Gallicia by Austria and of Posen by Prussia there
would be a reconstruction of the Polish nation. (Hear,
hear.) It seemed to me that there were parts of the speech
of my right hon friend, which, able and eloquent as he was,
did not cohere with other parts. When he spoke of the strug-
gles of Poland and the wrongs done to the Poles by the
Russians, he seemed to limit his views to the portion of
Poland within the duchy of Warsaw ; but when he spoke of
the reconstruction of Poland he seemed to speak of all those
portions of Europe inhabited wholly or in part by the Polish
race, I confess when I look to the whole of his speech I
am amazed at the sanguine expectations of my right hon.
friend. To detach Ciallicia from Austria, Posen from Prussia,
to sever the whole masa of the Polish provinces from Russia,
would be a task so gigantic as to be not only beyond the
scope of the powers of any Government, but bey ,nd even
the scope of political speculation as understood in this
house. My right hon. friend has given us an interesting
review of the history of Poland; but, however that picture
may rouse our feelings of horror, shame, and indignation,
I we must also consider that the position of the Emperor
kwtleei r
yt:he
force.
Russia
of Russia deserves some consideration. (Hear, hear.) I
cannot think that the house has forgotten the words of my
noble friend at the head of the Government on another
oc-
casion, who said that we ought to feel some consideration for
the Emperor of Russia, who had had the misfortune to in-
herit an empire of triumphant wrong. (Hear, hear.) When
we look at the courage with which he has faced political
problems of the highest order, and the success which had
attended his efforts, we cannot but feel regret that he should
have been brought into a position so unhappy as the pre-
sent. But when the historical review of my right hon. friend
reached 1831, he put a construction upon the policy of Eng-
land which, I think, was not altogether just. We did pro •
test against the annexation of Cracow, but without the aid
of armies. However, if I understood my right hon. friend
rightly, our course should have been war or nothing. Now,
when he gave us his opinion about Austria, he should re-
member that upon Austria and the German Powers we must
depend, if we wished to force from Russia what we believe
to be just and right. I have also heard what he has said of
the Emperor of the French and his intentions ; but I think
I have heard him allude to the Emperor, in this house, in
somewhat different terms. If France is a Power dangerous
from her ambition, is it not dangerous for him to recommend
a great combination of the Powers of Europe, in which our
chief dependence must be upon Austria,Prussia, and France?
It is only by combination such a war can be carried on, and
be
nocasews.
ade
Tnowet
mental
The giving
Francelvdgiogafs
utwtaphna
erd
of
ontvohewe
it must bo prosecuted in perfect unity of purpose and une-
ew
quivocal abnegation of selfish purposes. That was the un-
derstanding during the Crimean war, and it was honour-
ablyhwut
h.
fpr eoadheredadnhimself
Poland
?mt oa by France.
by
wartFia:
lor
uta
take
all Europe, and it would require the courage of my right
dan-
gers that beset the very first stage in the course of re-esta-
blishing Duchy of Warsaw by Russia would not much help the
cause of Poland ; but if the right honourable gentleman
meant that Russia should give up all herßusso 'Polish pro- I
vinces, then I say his intellectual boldness alarms and con-
fuses me. (Hear.) The social amalgamations produced by
several generations of alliance lead to relationship so close

that a severance becomes extremely difficult; so much so,
that I do not think this Government, nor any which may
succeed it, would attempt to bring it about. Then comes
his other alternative, that if we did not go to war we ought
to have done nothing, and said nothing. That would not
have been consistent with the policy of England since 1831,
and would have been altogether impossible, having regard
to the state of public feeling both in this country and in
France. The right honourable gentleman said that the time
taken by Russia for her reply showed the importance at-
tached to the message ; but that very circumstance, I think,
justified the action. We have adopted the policy of Mr.
Canning when the French invaded Spainin 1823, and when
ho confined himself to diplomatic interference. It has been
admitted that every party to a treaty may interpret it in the
way most conducive to his own interests. But my right hon.
friend likewise adverted to a despatch of Earl Russell dated
the 10th of April, as making a great change in the policy of
the Government. He took that as a starting point from
which the contingency of war was first brought into view.
My right hon friend describes the despatch as a menace to
Russia ; but to my mind it bears no such interpretation.
My right hon. friend draws a very broad conclusion from
very narrow limits ; what my right hon. friend calls a
menace of war, I call a wise reservation of discretion, ab-
solutely necessary under the circumstances. Who was to
answer for it that the Polish question could be confined
to the limits of Poland ? Who was to answer for it that
the festering sore should not spread over a much larger
portion of the body of Europe ? (Hear, hear.) We
had to consider the attitude of Prussia, and it was im-
possible not to see that the attitude assumed by Prussia
might involve other Continental Governments in the
struggle. Under these circumstances. was it not wise, in
giving a pacific assurance, to assert that that assurance had
reference to the then limits of the question ? Still my right
hon. friend thinks that great results have followed in Poland
rrom the diplomatic action of her Majesty's Government,
and that the anticipation of the Poles of aid from without has
been altogether founded upon the proceedings taken by the
British Government. (Hear, hear.) Well, but that inter-
pretation of my right hon. friend is unsupported by anything
in the nature of evidence; can he produce any authorita-
tive authentic declaration to connect the prolonged resist-
ance of the Poles with the proceedings of her Majesty's
Government ? On the other hand, he knew that the expec-
tation of foreign aid is the very first feeling to propagate
itself on the weaker side in all struggles. For example, he
knew that it influenced the outbreak of the great struggle.
But, so far as that species of vague encouragement went, it
did not depend upon the Government to decide whether such
encouragement should be given. We saw committees
formed and subscriptions made; we heard of motions—nay,
debates took place in this house—which were much more
calculated to stimulate hopes of foreign intervention than
anything said or done by her Majesty's Government. With
regard to the position in which we now stand, my right
hon. friend has not pressed the Government for any declara-
tion of our future intentions. I think he has felt that, an
important despatch having been laid upon the table thit,
evening, it is obvious that any further development of our
future policy at such a moment would be inappropriate.
Acting as we have done, in concert with other Powers, it is
the absolute duty of the Government to take counsel with
those other Powers as to what should be our decision in
the matter. But my right hon. friend invites us to make
a solemn renunciation of the treaty of Vienna. Well, to
condemn the treaty of Vienna may be the first step on the
road on which we are invited to travel. Still, it is
a very lame, impotent, and inadequate declaration on the
part of Parliament. Limited as the motion is, it is not one
which it is desirable for this house to adopt. Whether the
case of Poland is parallel to that of Italy, I will not under-
take to say. All I will say is, that her Majesty's Govern-
ment have pursued the same course with regard to Poland
as they did with respect to Italy ; that is, by intervention
strictly diplomatic, we used our good offices to serve the
cause. But whether the possibilities of the case are the
same, that is another matter. What we have in view with
respect to Italy has been this :—We felt that no Govern-
ment ought to commit itself in a cause except where it was
righteous, and that no cause was really righteous in regard
to its being taken up by a Government unless its objects are
practical and attainable. That is a most important modifi-
cation; and, in the case of Italy, I do not think that the
Government recommended anything which was not strictly
practical. But would any benefit be conferred upon Poland
by condemning the treaty of Vienna ? Are we to regard the
treaty of Vienna as something injurious to Poland ? If we
were to surrender the treaty of Vienna, the result would be
to leave the Poles subjects of Russia by conquest; and we
should depart from the only ground according to which we
have a right to address Russia on the subject of Poland.
For that reason I trust the house will be disposed not to
adopt the motion. It may be little that can be hoped for in
this question from any intervention, diplomatic or other-
wise. Its intrinsic difficulties, which my right hon. friend
seems to regard as light, are, I fear, enormous. The con-
sequences of former misdeeds dog and follow not only those
who have inflicted the wrong, but those who have suf-
fered it. To undo and repair political crimes—especially
after long subsistence—is in many cases beyond the
power of man. If in Italy there might be redress for
wrongs inflicted through a long course of generations,
that might be perhaps a happy and peculiar case. In
the case of Poland, I trust that no British Government
will ever shrink from any effort to obtain by practical and
legitimate means whatever is possible for that gallant, un-
happy, and long suffering people. (Cheers.) But, with
these feelings, it would be a betrayal of our duty were we
to accede to a motion which, brought forward as it undoubt-
edly is by one of the ablest and most enthusiastic advocates
of Poland, would really rather t= nd to weaken her position,
by depriving friendly Powers of the only basis of right to
warrant future efforts in so righteous a cause. (Cheers.)
Mr. HENNESSY said it might not be fair to ask the
Government what their intentions were with regard to the
Russian reply ; but it would be fair to ask what the wishes
of the people of England were with reference to the ques-
tion of Poland. Upon very many questions of foreign
policy that house was often in advance of the people of Eng-
land ; but the case was very different as regarded Poland;
for iu everything that concerned the prosperity and inde-
pendence of that country, the English people were more in-
terested than Parliament. This was known by the nume-
rous petitions sent to both houses, and by the speeches and
resolutions at public meetings in all the large towns of the
kingdom. He would turn to Austria, and upon this point
he was compelled to differ from his right hon. friend who
opened the discussion. He denied that the Austrian people
and Government were opposed to Poland. There was a
party there, no doubt, unfriendly to Poland ; but a large
portion of the Government and people, and he believed he
might include the Emperor with them, were favourable to
Poland. But it was necessary that Austrian statesmen
should act with caution, for he could inform the house
upon reliable data that there were no leas than 100,000
Poles in the army of Austria, including infantry, cavalry,
artillery, and miscellaneous corps. The hon. member then
showed, by reference to official documents, that it was a
mistake to suppose that the treaty of Vienna only included
the Duchy of Warsaw ; the Russian provinces of Poland
were also comprised within the terms of the treaty. He
believed that no war in the present century would be more
popular in France than a war for the independence of Po-
land, and he equally believed that the Emperor of the
French would not make such a war the pretext for terri-
torial aggrandisement. He could not agree in the praises
lavished by his right hon. friend upon the noble lord at the
head of the Government for his policy in 1831 with regard
to Poland. At that time Louis Philippe applied to the noble
lord to mediate in favour of Poland, but the noble lord re-
fused to do anything but write despatches. The hon. mem-
ber then read passages from the last reply of Prince Gorts-
chakoff, in which the prince tauntingly refers to the foreign
element in the Polish insurrection—but he denied the as-
sertion, and showed that the Russian Gazette itself stated
that the movement in Poland was made up of small far-
mers, the lower class of officials, students of the universi-
ties, and the artisans in towns. The hon. gentleman then
defended the Polish national Government, and after dis-
claiming the cruelties which were laid to the charge of the
Polish insurgents he claimed for that nation justice and
freedom.

Mr. KINGLAKE thought that the bon. gentleman op-
posite (Mr. Hennessy) had not done much for the cause he
advocated by exalting the anonymoue Government of War-
saw. It was the great difficulty of the British Government
that that Government was nothing but a vast secret so-
ciety, and nobody knew who it was we were supposed to
deal with. With regard to the remarks of the right hon,
member for Stroud (Mr. Horsman) as to the history of
Poland from 1815, he seemed to forget that at that period
the Russians were the strongest party to the arrangement,
and that Lord Castlereagh used his best efforts to modify
the treaty. It had been a treaty, however, without gua-
rantees, and he thought it very unreakenable now to com-
mence a proposal for a triple alliance, by calling one of
the parties imbecile and hypocritical, and asking her to
dismember her empire. It was a very remarkable fact,
however, that the Gallicians themselves were not by any
means anxious to be separated from Austria to join
a secret society. (Hear, hear.) (The hon. gentleman
then read some extracts from a speech of Chevalier
Krocoski, the member for Gallicia in the Austrian Parlia-
ment, to that effect.) Altogether he condemned the policy
of finding fault with the treaty of Vienna just now, seeing
that was the only chance left to go upon.
Mr. PEACOCKE said there was not much in the right
hon. gentleman's resolution, but there was a good deal in
his speech, and if be had meant all he had said in his speech
about going to war he ought to have put that into his reso-
lution. The him, member then argued that some of the
conditions embodied in the six points were not such as
Russia could accept, and he called on the house not to ac-
cede to the motion, but to throw the whole responsibility of
relieving the country fsoma position of difficulty and danger
upon the shoulders of the Government.
Sir F. GOLDSMID condemned the course followed by
the Government, and went into a variety of facts to prove
that the Jews of Poland, who might be counted by millions,
were heart and hand in the national movement.
Mr. NE WDEGATE said, as a general opponent of the
Government, he was prepared to leave the negotiations in
their hands, and he came down to the house for the purpose
of opposing the resolution of the right hon. member for
Stroud. No power in Europe had done more for freedom
in the present century than Russia in the emancipation of
her serfs.

Lord 11. VANE approved tho course taken, by the noble

lord the Foreign Sec.etary, and he thought the Government
were justified in urging the six points upon Russia, but in
common with others he d übted whether Poland would be
satisfied with th.m.
. Mr. C. BEAUMONT, who rose amid loud cries for Lord
Palmerston, denounced the cruelties of Gen. Mouravieff,
but declined to support the motion, lest it should be re-
garded as a want of confidence in her Majesty's Govern-
ment.

Lord PALMERSTON—Sir, my right hon. friend who
has made this motion made a speech marked by Ms usual
ability, but as he went along it appeared to me that it
was not consistent with itself, and still less with the mo-
tion with which he concluded. It struck me that the
gist of the speech was that mere diplomatic representations
were unavailing unless followed by force—(hear, hear)—and
he seemed also to me to deny the power of public opinion.
Now, I have always thought, and the praise which he gave
to my noble friend for having obtained the concurrence of
most of the States of Europe in representations to Russia,
implies that he thinks also that the force of public opinion
is often almost equal to the force of arms ; and there is no
doubt that the force of public opinion is a most powerful
engine upon the conduct either of men or governments-
That which has happened is a striking proof, because in the
discussion which took place in 1831-2, the Ruesian Govern-
ment of that day denied that we had any right to remon-
strate upon the affairs of Poland. They said that Russia
had conquered Poland atter the revolution, that that con-
quest annulled all the engagements of the treaty of 181.5,
and that we were then interfering in a manner which con-
cerned the internal affairs of Russia, and had no right to
meddle with that which belonged to the empire alone. Now,
the ground taken by Russia is entirely different. Yielding,
no doubt, to the joint opinions of so many of the different
Powers of Europe, Russia says she is willing to enter into
a discussion of the affairs of Poland within the limits and
upon the ground of the Treaty of Vienna. I say that is a
great step gained in the discussion with Russia, and that it
does afford a prospect of a better condition of things in
Poland than the former ground taken by Russia entitled us
to expect. The noble lord then referred to the mode in
which Russia became possessed of Poland in 1815, and the
unsuccessful revolution of 1831, and continued : We are
told that there is no alternative now but either remaining
perfectly passive, or insisting upon the establishment of
Poland within its ancient limits. Well, if all the Powers of
Europe were prepared to immediately go to war with Rus-
sia, to compel her to restore everything which has been
taken from Poland, then I could understand that it might be
thought desirable that the object of such combination should
be the establishment of the kingdom of Poland ;
but it is quite clear that that cannot be accomplished by
persuasion, and can only be accomplished by force. But
the only ground upon which we, or any of the other
European powers, are entitled as a matter of international
right to speak to Russia in regard to the treatment of
Poland, is the Treaty of Vienna. That treaty entitles us
to require that certain arrangements shall be established
within Poland ; but the moment you go beyond it, and re-
quire Russia to constitute Poland a separate kingdom, you
throw down the Treaty of 'Vienna. You have no right
on which such a demand can be made, and it can only be
enforced by war, and successful war. But the Powers of
Europe are not prepared to take that course, though the
right hon. gentleman's speech goes to the length, as I un-
derstand it, of urging such a course, and does not tally with
his resolution. The resolution wishes us to declare that
the Treaty of Vienna is at an end, which will dispossess
ourselves of the right of remonstrance with Russia ; and
how we are by that to assist Poland I am at a loss to un-
derstand. We are now entitled to represent to Russia that
she has not fulfilled her treaty conditions towards Poland,
but the moment we say the treaty is at an end, Russia will
accept it and say that Poiand is hers by conquest, and that
she has as much right to govern Poland in the way she
thinks best as she has any other part of her great empire.
(Hear, hear.) So far from that being of any advantage
to the Poles, it would only hand them over tied hand
and foot, to be dealt with according to the pleasure of
General Mouravieff. (Hear, hear.) It would therefore
be a most " lame and impotent conclusion" to agree to
the right hon. gentleman's motion. It was impossible
for her Majesty's Government to remain silent and do
nothing for the Poles. The opinion of this house, of

the country, and of Europe called for some remonstrance
to be made, and I hold it is at variance with the ordinary
transaction of human affairs to say that you will not ne-
gotiate or remonstrate unless you are prepared to have
recourse to arms if you do not obtain by negotiation the

object you are endeavouring to accomplish. (Hear, hear.)
Much, however, was to be gained without having recourse
to such an extreme course. Her Majesty's Government
had done that which was required by public opinion in this
country, and the necessity of the case. We did what we
had a right to do under the Treaty of Vienna, and obtained
the concurrence of the other States of Europe in urging on
Russia a milder course with regard to Poland. It has been
said it will be no satisfaction to Poland if that result is at-

tained, but I cannot see any great foundation for that state-
ment, because her condition must be very much improved
if we establish that condition of things which existed before
the treaty of Vienna. It has been said that we suggested
an armistice that was impracticable; but can any one look
and see the cruelties that are being committed on both aides,
and the loss of life that is occurring, and not wish to see an
end put to those hostilities ? If Russia had agreed to it, I
think there would have been no difficulty about the matter,
because the Polish revolutionary party, who wished to be
represented at the Congress could, no doubt, have been
treated with for an armistice, and I cannot but think that
if an armistice had been agreed to by Russia it would have
resulted in a cessation of the effusion of blood. (Hear, hear.)
I feel eertain that the right hon. gentleman did not expect
her Majesty's Government to state what course they may
think it right to follow in this matter, and the only thing I
can state is that, as we made our communication to the
Russian Government with Austria and France, it will be
our duty to communicate with them upon the answer which
each of the three powers has received from the Russian
Government ; and I am persuaded that the course we may
take—whatever that may be—will be such as will meet with
the approbation of the house. (Hear, hear.)
After some remarks from Mr. HORSMAN in reply, who
said he considered it would be unreasonable then, in con-
sequence of her Majesty's Government having just received
the answer from Russia, to state their intentions upon it,
and that a wrong construction had been put upon the terms
of his motion, he asked to be allowed to withdraw it.

The motion was then withdrawn.
SUPPLY. •
The report of supply was brought up and agreed to.
WAYS AND MEANS.

The report of Ways and Means was also brought up and
agreed to.

TELEGRAPHS BILL.

The Lords' amendments to this bill were considered.
Upon the motion of Mr. GIBSON, the Lords' amend.
ments to clause 9 were disagreed to, and some other amend
ments were added.

The following bills were read a third time and passed :
The Railway Clau.ies, Waterworks Clauses, Turnpike Acts
Continuance, Expiring Laws Continuance, Petty Sessions
(Ireland), and Poisoned Grain, &c., Prohibiti, ns Bills.

The Anchors and Chain Cable Bill was withdrawn.

Several other bills were advanced a stage.
THE CHIEF CONSTRUCTOR OF THE NAVY.
Mr. FERRAND moved for returns of the age and length
of service of Mr. E. J. Reed, who has been appointed chief
constructor of the navy. The hon. member looked upon
the appointment as a gross job, and as one that was injuri-
ous to the old officers of the dockyards,
Lord C. PAGET refused the returns, and defended the
appointment.
The house divided. The motion was rejected by 23 to 14.
On the motion of Mr. FERRAND, seconded by Mr.
HENNESSY, leave was refused to the Government to
bring in a bill to reduce the duty on spirits to be used in
arts and manufactures in the United Kingdom.
A bill to provide superannuation allowances for Poor•.law
officers was brought in by Mr. Villiers.
The Appropriation Bill was also brought in, and the
house adjourned at half-past two o'clock.

WASHINGTON IRVING'S CALL TO THE BAR.—
Students for admission to the bar had in New York the
excellent habit of giving a supper to their examiners, at
which the names of successful candidates were read over.
Those who officiated at Irving's call boggled a little, con-
scientiously, when they came to his name. " Martin," said
one to the other " I think he knows a little law." " Make
it stronger, Joe," was the reply—" damned little :" with
which compliment he passed.—Quarterly Review.
[ADVERTISEMENT.]—Avoid medicines; they always aggra-
vate chronic complaints, but Du Barry's Delicious Health
Restoring Revalenta Arabica Food, which saves fifty times
its cost in other remedies, invariably cures them, restoring
perfect digestion, strong nerves, sound lungs, healthy liver,
enfeebled
w
functional regularity,
ot a fe
extra and
wout
energy
to
ourthe
eblmooods,trdiefsroershdinereg ledsorep,
of 60,000 Cures :—Cure No. 58,216 of the Marchioness de
Brdhan, Paris, of a liver complaint, wasting away for seven
years, debility, with a nervous palpitation all over, bad
digestion, constant sleeplessness, the most intolerable nervous
agitation, and dreadfully low spirited.—Cure No. 1,771. Lord
Stuart de Decies, Lord Dent. of Waterford, of many years'
dyspepsia.—No. 49,832. "Fifty years' indescribable agony
from dyspepsia, nervousness, asthma, cough, constipation,
flatulency, spasms, sickness, and vomiting.—Maria Jolly."
—Cure No. 46,270. Mr. James Roberts, of Frimley, Surrey, of
thirty years' diseased lungs, spitting of blood, liver derange.
ment, and partial deafness.—Cure No. 47,121. Miss Elizabeth
Jacobs, of extreme nervousness, indigestion, gatherings, low
spirits, and nervous fancies.— Cure No. 54,816. The Rev. Jas.
T. Campbell, Fakenham, Norfolk, " of indigestion and torpi-
dity or the liver, which had resiste I all medical treatment"
In tins, 1 lb., 2s. 9d. ; 21b., 45. 6d ; 518., lls. ; 121 b., 225. ; Alb*
405.—Barry Du Barry and Co., No. 77, Regent-street, London;
also Fortnum and Mason ; and all Grocers and Chemists in
every town of the United Kingdom.
[ADVERTISEMENT.]—HOIIoWay'S Ointment and Pills.—
Comfort and Relief.—All afflicted with outward diseases
may find their best friend in these well-known remedies.
The ointment is invaluable in akin affections, ulcers,
sore breasts, scrofulous eruptions, and the many scor-
butic complaints so apt to become hereditary. In all
chronic. and constitutional maladies Holloway's pills should
be administered internally, while his ointment is applied
externally. The one then assists the other, and as the out-
ward deformity disappears the general taint is also banished.e ar
Holloway's treatment is reliable, gentle, purfying, and
eminently restorative. In old ulcers, which are ing
out their victims, these remedies exert an almost
magical
effect. The ointment cleans the wound and braces its re.
lazed vessels; the pills invigorate generally.

Nav:9l and Military Intelligence.

THE NAVY.

Yesterday C, malnandtT Francis S. Tremlett, of
the Impregnable, 78, Admiralty inspector of train-
ing ships, made ila official inspection of the Welles.
loy, 72, training ship at Chatham harbour, in which_
he was occupied the whole day. He examined,
every portion of .the ship, and inspected the boys
and lads in the vat ious operations of splicing, knot-
ting, &c., after which they were exercised for some
time aloft. They were then inspected in cutlass
and gun' drill, and also exercised in the boats.
Commandeer Tremlett a.lso inspected the schools on:
board, undier the superintendence of the Rev. J. H.
Lang, cha plain and naval itnitructor, and expressed
himself hi3ily satisfied at Um: result. After leaving
the Wellssley, Commander Tremlett visited the
dockyard, and transacted official business vial
Capt.-Superintendent FRO sha we.
Four of the largest description of bower anchors
ever forged for the English navy having been re-
ceived at Chatham dockyard for the iron frigate,
Achilles, 50, 1,250 horse power, the operation of
testing them was completed yesterday, under the
,nperintendence of the officials of the establishment.
The anchors were forged at the establishment of
Messrs. Brown and Lennox, who are the contrac-

tors for the manufacture of all the largest descrip-
tions of anchors used in the navy. On being re-
moved o the testing-house, each of the anchors was
sted by hydraulic pressure from a slow strain,
which was gradually increased until the maximum
pressore of 72 tons to the square inch was attained.
Under this enormous pressure no signs of any de-
fects were observable, while the elastic force of
the iron did not exceed the usual allowance. Each
of the anchors weighs 5 tons 11 cwt. Before they
are finally approved they will be subjected to
another test, which will be made when the anchors
have been heated to red heat, in order to discover
any flaws not otherwise discernible.
The arrangements for the admission into basin
of the Caledonia at Woolwich will, it is feared, be
considerably retarded, in consequence of the escape
of the entire structure of the coffer-dam erected at
the entrance to protect the works. Having been
raised from its prmition, it was found floating in
one mass at high water. The dredging of the basin
and enlargement of the entrance have in conse-
quence been delayed, the latter work being practic-
able only at low tide at present. The process of
bending the iron slabs of the Caledonia will be
finished in a few days, nine only remaining to com-
plete the total number required. After this has
been done the Caledonia will be again floated into
the river, and as early as possible into basin to re-
ceive her boilers and machinery. Her masts and
rigging have been despatched. to Sheerness, where
she is ordered to be forwarded in order to be fitted
out for service.
The following appointment was made at the Admiralty
yesterday :
W. H. Sennett, assistant-engineer, to the Indus, as
supernumerary.