The Sun.
London, England, 1864-07-09 00:00:00

BANKRUPTS.

The following are the only bankrupts of commercial irn •
portance in the Gazette:—
Edward Abbey, grocer, Oxford
Philip William Perfitt, lecturer, Hornsey
Joseph Calie, licensed victualler, Rotherhithe
John Henry Richards, musicseller, Twickenham
John Williams, coal merchant, Ilfracombe, Devon
Andrew Fortes, grocer, Liverpool
Charles H. Hamilton, auctioneer, Hanley, Staff9rdshire
Thomas Darlington, watch maker, Bursletn
Henry Day, grocer, Stoke-upon-Trent
Thomas W. Eld, silk throwater, Derby
Frederick S. Mower, innkeeper, Taunton
George Natt, beerseller, Chatham
Mathew Jones, coal dealer, Liverpool
Enoch Evans, tobacconist, Wolverhampton
Samuel Levick, general dealer, Sheffield
William Chisnall, grocer, Sutton
Richard Carr, cheesetuorr,er. Stepney
Andrew Black, builder, Peckham
Robert Inglis, fishmonger and poulterer, Kensington
John H. Jones, painter, Soho
John G. Kuhu, tavern keeper, Hanover-street
John Wilson, clerk, Belvedere-road, Lambeth
BANKRUPTCIES ANNULLED.
John Atkinson, innkeeper, Misson
John Ridgway, silk warehouseman, Hurdsfield

SCOTCH BANKRUPT.
James Morrison, grocer, St. Andrews

Course of the Exchanges—Yesterday.

Imsterdam
Ditto
Rotterdam ..
Antwerp
Brussels
Hamburgh
Paris
Ditto .. 3 Months;
Marseilles
Frankfort on Maine
Vienna
Trieste
Petersburgh
Berlin
Madrid

11 171 11 171
12 01 12 Of
- 12 01 12 Of
- •25 521 25 571
25 521 25 571
13 81 13 8f
25 171 25 221
25 571 25 621
- 25 571 25 621
1191, 120 k
- 11 871 11 921
- 11 874 11 921
- 311 311

Cadiz
Leghorn
Milan
Genoa
Naples
Palermo

48k 48'1
25 621 25 67}
25 65 25 70
25 671 25 72}
25 671 25 72i
25 671 25 721

Messina — 25 674 25 72i
Lisbon -51 a
0p0rt0....
Foreign Gold in Bars (Standard), per 0z.... £3 17
Mexican Dollars z 0 0 0
Silver in Bars (Standard)

Foreign Mail Packet List.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

`‘,IIOITSE OP LORDS—Zast Evening,
The LORD CH4NCEILOR took his seat on the woolsack
at the usual hour.

There was a very large attendance of ladies present this
evening in the galleries around the house, and the space
before the throne was well filled. All the ministers were
in :their seats, but that ..usually occupied by the Earl of
Derby on the opposite side of the house was vacant, owing
to the indisposition of the noble earl.
Just as the Earl of Malmesbury commenced his speech
the Prince and Princess of Wrdes entered the house. The
Prince took his accustomed scat on the cross bench, and the
Princess occupied a place in the gallery on the left of the
throne.

THIRD READINGS.
The following bills were read a third time and passed :
Wensurn Valley Railway—Pembroke and Tenty Railway
—Belfast Improvement—Somerset and Dorset Railway_
London and Blackwall Railway---Llanelly Railway and
Docks (No. 2)—Tottenham 'and Hampstead Junction Rail-
way—Aylesbury and Buckingham Railway.
BARBARITIES BY THE PRUSSIANS.
Earl RUSSELL, in reference to a question put to him
the other evening by the Earl of Shaftesbury, relative to
the alleged bayonetting of 400 wounded Swedish volunteers
by the Prussians, said he had received a telegram from her
Majesty's Minister at Copenhagen and another from her
Majesty's Ambassador at Berlin, and the elect of those
communications was that there was no truth whatever in
the reports circulated.

THE VOTE OF CENSURE-DEI•TMARK AND
GERMANY.

The Earl of MALMESBURY moved with reference to
the Conference, that it is the opinion of this house that
while the c iurse pursued by her Majesty's Government
has failed to maintain their avowed policy of upholding
the integrity and independence of Denmark, it has lowered
the just influence of this country in the councils of Europe,
and thereby diminished the securities for peace. He
regretted the absence of a most distinguished member
of their lordships' house, because by that circumstance it
became his duty to move file resolution now before their
lordships, which he felt certain would have been done with
greater effect by his noble friend. He would commence
his observations with taking notice of a circumstance which
had occurred in another place, viz., that it had been stated
that the noble earl (Russell) had only carried on the
negotiations on the subject of Schleswig-Holstein in con-
currence with the opinions contained in a number of
despatches written by him (Earl Malmesbury) when he had
the honour to hold the seals of the Foreign Office. All he
could say was that if that correspondence was in existence
he thought it nothing but right that Parliament should be
made acquainted with it, and that copies of it should be laid
upon the table of their lordships' house. (Hear, hear,
from the Opposition.) The subject he was about to bring
under the attention of their lordships was one of the greatest
importance, and he had to ask their forbearance while he
addressed them, but he would endeavour to compress his
observations into the narrowest limits. Referring to the
question as to what was the Conservative policy, he said it
was difficult for them to define what they would
do, when it was impossible to say in what cir-
cumstances they would be placed. He might with
just as much fairness ask another question, and that was,
What would the present Government do if they were in
opposition ? (Hear, hear, and laughter.) It would be quite
as fair. (Laughter.) He would tell what they would do—
they would endeavour to turn their opponents out as soon
as possible. (Laughter) He did not say that it would be
wise now to go to war ; but he was prepared to say that there
was a moment when, if the Government had taken a strong
tone and made a strong stand war would have been avoided.
(Hear, hear.) That was not his opinion alone. He had
heard such opinions by Germans, and they, it would at
once be admitted, were competent judges; and he trusted
before he sat down he should be able to prove that such
was the case. He was prepared to show that the Govern-
ment had brought about this state of things by their own
faults. (Hear.) All municipal differences in Schleswig
and Holstein were totally and distinctly marked off from
international questions. With the municipal questions
foreign Governments had nothing to do. It was with the

international questions that interference should be justified.
That distinction the Government had failed to keep in
view. All through the question the noble earl (Russell)
acted too much as a partizan; he had failed to keep himself
independent, and thus he had cut the ground from under
his feet—(Hear, hear)—all the ground that would have
enabled him to be looked upon as a fit statesman
to arbitrate upon the difference between the parties.
One instance of his conduct was shown on the 29th of
April, 1861, when the noble lord proposed to Denmark a
new constitution for itself in connection with the Duchies.
The next point he touched upon was the statement made
by Lord Palmerston, when he said that if certain events
came to pass Denmark should not stand alone. There was
only one interpretation to be put upon that. It meant that
if Denmark were molested, England would stand at her
side—(hear, hear)—and, of course, defend her. (Hear,
hear.) There could be no other construction put upon
such a declaration. lie believed he should be asked, what
policy the Opposition were prepared to adopt—but that
question was both monstrous and unfair. The Opposition
had no access to information with regard to the means
which had been at the disposal of the Government for
carrying on a war, the state of the relations of the country
with other powers, and other matters which were exclu-
sively in the cognisance of Ministers, who were responsible
for the conduct and policy they had pursued. There had
been two courses open to the Government. Whilst the
Danish army was still unbroken they ought either to have
joined with Sweden and assisted in placing 100,000 men on
the Eider, in which case not a German soldier would have
attempted to cross that river—or ',they might have frankly
warned Denmark that whatever was the result of their
diplbmatic efforts they could not give her material aid—but
it was clear that up to a very recent period Ministers
could not make up their minds whether they would assist
Denmark or not, and to that uncertainty and hesitation was
to be attributed the failure of their diplomacy, the downfal
of their influence, and the undignified position in which
they now found themselves. Vigorous action in the first
instance might have averted the war; but so indecisive
had been the policy of the Government that :they had
not only not displayed vigour, but had so involved
the country that it could only avoid war by
a tardy and an unworthy retreat. Reviewing
the correspondence of the Foreign Office, and the oral de-
clarations of Lord Palmerston, the nob:0 earl contended
that they had encouraged Denmark with hopes which were
doomed to disappointment, and irritated the German Powers
with empty threats, He concluded by contrasting the un-
embarrassed position of France and Russia in reference to
both belligerents with the baffled policy of the Cabinet, and
the undignified situation in which the country had in con-
sequence been placed.
The motion was opposed by the Duke of ARGYLL, who
spoke at considerable length in defence of the Ministerial
policy,
Lord BROUGHAM said that he had attentively studied
the correspondence, and had come to the conclusion that the
Government had not menaced Germany. He felt that they
could not have stood silently by and seen the Danes over-
whelmed without remonstrance and protest. At the same
time it could not be expected that England should take up
their cause single-handed against one •third of continental

Europe.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE agreed with the Earl
of Malmesbury that it was the weakness and vacillation of the
policy pursued by the Government that had brought on the
war, placed this country in its present unpleasant position,
and almost swept Denmark from the map of Europe.
Whilst, however, he was of opinion that the Government
had deplorably mismanaged affairs, he could not concur in
the terms of the motion, which not only did not set forth the
real facts of the case, but pronounced an opinion which the
house ought not to place on its journals. He did not believe
that the influence of England had been lowered. For that
influence rested upon hes power, and her power was nor"'
greater than at this moment. He moved as an amendment,
to omit the latter proposition in the motion and insert in lieu.
thereof the words--" That this house regrets that Denmark
was allowed to expect from the English Gevernment
,mate-
tial aid in support of the objects of the treaty a 1852. '
The Earl of CLARENDON had not shared the respon.
and in ths they would have
sibility of the Government during the most "Live part of
the negociations, but in his opinion from the outset Mini-
sters had exhibited both foresight and appreciation of the
gravity of affairs. They had shown a sincere desire to bring
about an emicable settlement, i
succeeded had they been met in a corresponding spirit by
the parties more immediately interested, as well as the other
Powers who were signitaries to the treaty of 1852. The
n regarded the intricate questions in
position of the Government had all along been a most dit-
a
I:.
nicgsupluhtn e
dispute
ew to d between
note,a onlywith those questions after France and
Denmark and Germany, but in decid-
ing
Russia had declared their unconcern and indifference. The
eshwahnodleinofeffGeecrtumaaln.
nlatnmduisat halalvueroba.
cenerse recommended by the proposer of the motion would
pro-
biCivai kivt eyed ;I
iedel pear
aoe:t withuhae l l
rye tarhlai sation of the phenomenon of German
unity. A war between England and Germany would have
extended to Italy and the Danubian Principalities, to
Poland and Turkey. No wise statesman would have in-
cured the responsibility of kindling a European conflagra-
tion for the sake of Denmark, with France and Russia not
indifferent, bnt waiting on the course of events. After
France and Russia had slunk away from their engagements
no impartial Englishmen could blame the Government
because their honest efforts had failed, and that not through
any fault of their own. Much as he loved peace he loved
honour more, and it he did not believe that peace was con-
sistent with the honour as well as the interest of the country,
he would have been the first to counsel war, although he.
had far less means of interfering with effect than the powers
who had declined to do so. He insisted that not crate- had
Ministers warned Denmark that they would not give her
material aid, but they had done their utmost to. convince
her that she was labouring under a delusion in supposing
that the sympathies of the nglish.people would compel
there to go to her rescue. Although p
the Government had
failed in their chief object in the conference, they had re-
duced the question in dispute to one of frontier, in which a
few leagues of territory only Was concerned ; and they had

the consolation of knowing' :hat they had saved Europe from a few newspapers on the continent furnished any proof to
the horrors of a general wa r. the contrary; and he trusted that that house would not
Lord CHELMSFORD sup! ?orted the original motion, and proclaim the degradation of the country.
Lord WODEHOUSE oppos( ;e1 it, and explained the circum- The house then divided, when there were—
stances under which he hr 4d undertaken the special mission Contents.
to Copenhagen, and the course which the negotiations took.
He also stated that the Government had never given
through him any promise of material support to the Danes,
and that the advice they tendered had always been sound,
and offered in conjunction with the other Powers.

The Earl of CARNARVON argued that the conduct of
the Government had, from beginning to end, been charac-
terised by failure, and that it was the duty of Parliament to
pass its judgment upon a policy so indecisive, feeble, and
humiliating.
Earl RUSSELL said that it would be most difficult to
discover the foreign policy of the Opposition. The other
night Lord Derby told them it would be wrong to contem-
plate war for Denmark under any circumstanees. But Earl
Malmesbury had intimated that when the German troops
were about to enter Schleswig he would have preferred a
declaration of war, which he thcught would have been at-
tended with little or no risk. The noble earl who spoke last
had said that the Government were in favour of peace at
any price. But he (Earl Russell) had more than once said
that if the honour or the paramount interests of the coun-
try were involved, we must go to war at once. But if there
was only a minor interest to be attained, or if the interests
was only that of another nation, we had a right to weigh
the advantages against the disadvantages of going to war.
The noble earl who had opened the debate was fortunate in
not having had to encounter the difficulties of recent nego.
tiations. The treaty of 1852 was no doubt a good, but at
the same time it was a very artificial engagement; it de.
pended for success upon both Denmark and Germany reli-
giously fulfilling their engagements. Unfortunately this
was not done. The Danes governed Schleswig and Holstein
in such a manner as to make the German subjects of the
King of Denmark in those duchies feel that they were op-
pressed ; while on the other hand. the Powers of Germany
asked for much more than they were entitled to. That
being so, it became a matter of the utmost difficulty to
maintain the arrangements established by that treaty.
It was said that the Government had constantly threat-
ened Germany. But that was not so. All that the Eng-
lish Government had said, in the first instance, was, that
they had not the slightest objection to a Federal execution
in Holstein, if that was directed merely to the Govern-
ment of Holstein ; but that they would object to it it it
was directed to bring about the Government of Denmark
by a German majority in Copenhagen. At that time it was
proposed that each of the Duchies should send an equal
number of deputies to a Parliament in Copenhagen, the m-
oult of which would be that Denmark Proper would be
governed by the German population of the Duchies. This
pretension had been abandoned, and that was, so far, again,
although Holstein, Schleswig, and Jutland had been occu-
pied. And so many of the despatches had been read, he
would refer to as few as possible. He thought it clear that
no promise of material assistance had been given to Den-
mark, because if Denmark had thought the contrary, her
Minister would not have failed to say so, when, in March
last, Sir A, Paget read to Bishop Monrad a despatch in
which he (Earl huisell) repudiated the notion of having
given any promise of aid to Denmark. Again, when Lord
Wodehouse went to Copenhagen he was met by reproaches
on the part of M. Hall, that no promises of support were
given. He could not help observing upon the different sort
of judgment which was passed upon the conduct of Eng-
land and France in this matter. During last year we were
engaged with Austria and France in remonstrating with
Russia on behalf of Poland. Austria and England refused
ultimately to agree to a step proposed by France, because
they thought it would lead to a war. Thereupon the Em-
peror of France said, that although he was ready to go to
war in concert with the other Powers, he would not do so
alone, dear as the deliverance of Poland was to France. No
one blamed him for that course. Why, then, should the
English Government be blamed because, having been wil-
ling to go to war on behalf of Denmark in concert with
France and Russia, they declined to take the responsi-
bili of acting alone ? They had acted in the case of
Denmark exactly as France acted in the case of
Poland. Prussia and Austria had certainly departed
from their original promise only to take Schleswig as a
material guarantee; but her Majesty's Government had
never promised to make a casus bells either of the invasion
of that province or of Jutland. He thought it would have
led to far fewer complications if they had taken the
bold c mrse adopted by the German Confederation,
declared for the treaty of 1852, and avowed their intention
to dismember Denmark. Neither of these Powers had ad-
hered to their promise to respect their engagements. For
their first proposition in Conference was that the Duchies
should have a separate government, under a sovereign of
their own, and that the Diet should decide as to who that
Sovereign should be. It was perfectly notorious that the Diet
would never choose the King of Denmark, and this proposi-
tion, therefore, plainly involved a breach of the treaty of
1852. It would have been far better if they had not begun
by professing to adhere to it. The noble earl who had intro-
duced these resolutions had objected to any deference being
paid to the principle of nationality in making territorial
arrangements ; but in the present state of opinion in Europe,
it was impossible to disregard that principle, especially con-
sidering that it was favoured by so powerful a Sovereign as
the Emperor of France, He did not think that the Germans
were inspired by a merely selfish desire to possess themsele es
of Kiel. fie believed that they had a genuine sympathy for
the people of the Duchies, who they believed to be oppressed.
After these duchies had once been occupied by the German
troops, it was perfectly impossible that England could go to
war, or could even take steps for restoring Holstein and the
Germans to Denmark on the old footing. It was clear that
even if the Austrians and Prussians had been driven out,
the Diet of Holstein would have declared for independence,
and we should have been redacecl to the necessity of govern-
ing them by military force. That was impossible. It was
said that if the Government had threatened the Germans
with war if they invaded Schleswig, the threat would have
been effectual, and no war would have ensued. But he did
not think that England, acting by herself, would have been
justified in taking the chance of such a threat proving futile,
and involving us in war. Nor did he believe that it would
have been successful ; for the fact was, that Austria and
Prussia were driven on by a popular force which they
could not resist. The cabinets of Berlin and Vienna did
not, he thought, in the first instance desire to break the
treaty of 1852 for any ambitious projects ; but they
were powerless to resist the impulse to which they were
subjected—they were determined to prevent the minor Ger •
man princes from gaining additional power, by becoming
the representatives of the public feelings ; and they were
determined also to check the progress of democratic feeling
in Germany by enlisting it in favour of an attack on Den-
mark. The latter desire had also influenced Russia, and
had inclined her of late to act in accordance with the German
Powers. The noble earl opposite said the Government had
no principle in their foreign policy; but they certainly had
one—that of non-intervention in the internal affairs of
other countries. They had declared soon after entering
office that the people of Italy should be left free to decide
their own destinies;
...and that declaration following on (no
victories of the Emperor of the French, had beer. so far
effectual, that no attempt had been made to 0
Italian unity which the Government were ..sturb that
established. On that side of the house the- 'ale glad to see
ewa s the greatest
disposition to favour the Confederates 'in
the civil war which
had arisen in America. The Go:ernment determined that
no such offer should be m1"..1-et to the Confederation. In
conclusion, the noble lorlle said if the Government had been
guilty of anything, it nad been guilty of advocating peace,
mainsmintaining justine, and promoting freedom in Europe and
world (Loud cheers.) •
Earl GP:EY said that the influence of the country did not
depend solely upon its material strength, but in a great de-
gree upon the opinion of neighbouring nations, Now, did
England at the present time enjoy the respect and goodwill
of all the nations of the earth so largely as she formerly did ?
For his part he thought she did not. He would not detain
their lordships by entering into an examination of the volu-
minous correspondence which had been laid'on the table; but
be must express his opinion that the neg aiations terminated
indeed the Government themselves now admitted—in
the triumph of might over right. Tine noble duke had told
them that the treaty of 1852 could no longer be considered as
a living question. That was so; but if there had been a
little foresight on the part of the Government they ought
to have seen at an earlier period that that treaty could not
be
maintained. (Haar, hear.) Her Majesty's Government
had represented those who differed from them as being in
favour of war, but this he denied. The Government, how-
ever, had diminished the securities for peace, and had
admitted that they were diminished. The noble earl the
Foreign Secretary had said that no threats, but only warn-
ings, had been addressed to the German Powers. But he
did not think that it was possible to draw a practical dis-
tinction between the two things. He thought that if the
ountry had been lowered by the course taken by the Go-
vernment, the best way to wipe away the stain upon our
honour was to show that that conduct had not the approval
of the country, and on that ground he should support the
resolution.
Earl GRANVILLE believed that the debate had shown
how unfounded were the charges bought
Government. He denied that any brought the
aid bad
been held out to Denmark. When LordrniisPalme f
Palmerston' made
the speech which had been so often referred to, ha rent, AT
preased a conviction that Franco and Russia
would-lovin:
in supporting Denmark. He never promised that
,v
uld
g) to war alone; he had never given Denmark any advice
which was not shared in by the other Powers ; nor had the
Govorinneut ever asserted that any promise of aid
'gin been given to them by England. The resolution wale a
vote of censure, and as such the Government accepted it.
Bat it did not lay down any principle or indicate any policy
on the tart of the Opposition. It only amounted to a
declarati m on their part that they were willing to take the
place of the Government. The Government had been
charged with inconsistency, and with blaring hot and cold.
But the same thing could be said of Conservative speakers,
and especially of the Eitel of Derby, who had said last year
that the integrity of Denmark was of vital interest to Eng •
land, and that he should be prepared to go to war in her
favour, and had said this year that it would be insanity to
go to war with Germany. He denied that we had lost our
influence in Europe; and the proof of this was that we had
acted in. entire harmony wile the neutral Powers in the
recent Conference. He did not think that the language of

Present

....
Proxies 5B
—177

Non-Contents.

Present

Proxies
-168

Majority for the resolution 9
The resolution was therefore ca-tried.
The result was received with considerable applause.
Their lordships adjourned at 20 minutes past two o'clock.

HOUSE Or COMMONS—Last Evening.
The SPEAYIEx took the chair shortly after 4 o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The following bills were read a third time and passed :
Helston and Penrhyn Junction Railway Bill (Prince of
Wales's Consent, on behalf of the Duchy of Cornwall, to
be signified)—Wandsworth Bridge Bill.
ATTENDANTS AT THE BRITISH MUSEUM.
Mr H. LEWIS asked the member for the University of
Cambridge whether an order had been issued (to take effect
trom Sept. Ist next), prohibiting the attendants at the Bri-
tish Museum from leaving the Museum during the ordinary
dinner hour, or at any time between the hours of nine
o'clock in the morning and six o'clock in the evening; and,
if so, why has such order been issued; and whether any
and what provision has been made to enable the attendants
to procure their dinner on the premises at a moderate
charge.
Mr WALPOLE expressed a hope that any alterations
which might be required would be made.
THE ALTERATION IN THE UNIFORM OF THE
POLICE.

Mr A. SMITH asked the Secretary of State for the
Home Department why the dress of the police had been
altered, and whether it was intended that the whole metro
politan poliee should assume a military costume and ap.
pearance. He thought constables should have as little
of a military appearance as possible.

BRITISH OFFICERS AND SOLDIERS KILLED
IN NEW ZEALAND.

Sir F. SMITH asked the Under Secretary of State for
War whether he had any objection to lay upon the table of
the house a statement showing the number of officers, and
soldiers of the regular forces, as well as of the militia and
volunteers, who have been killed or wounded, up to the last
returns, in the New Zealand War?

The Marquis of HARTINGTO g. replied in the negative,

MAJOR GORDON.

Mr LIDDELL asked whether any official information
had been received of Major Gordon's retirement from the
command of the Anglo-Chinese disciplined force, in com-
pliance with the Order in Council in Match last, or whe-
ther any secret orders, or reservations, or discretionary
powers were conveyed to Major Gordon or any other English
officer in China along with such order in council—and, if
so, whether there be any objection to state the nature of
such secret orders or reservations, and under what circum-
stances such discretionary powers were to be exercised.

Mr. LAYARD said that there would be no objection to
employ Major Gordon by the Government, but it would be
on the condition that he gave up his connection with the

Chinese.

THE ADJOL•RNED DEBATE ON THE FOREIGN
POLICY OF THE GOVERNMENT.
_

Mr B. OSBORNE resumed the adjourned debate. He
said that the question had not been rendered more clear
and interesting by the speech of the Attorney-General last
night. He considered that there had been some very
curious unions of different members of the house in regard
to this subject. For instance, the hon member for Hunt-
ingdon and Mr Bright, with their different opinions,
appeared to kiss each other. He deprecated the con-
duct of the honourable member for Sheffield in the
attack he had made on Lord John Russell, and when
he made the observation that the noble lord would have
been a schoolmaster if he had not been a statesman. But
the hon. member forgot the services which the noble lord,
the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, had rendered to the
country, or the lessons he had taught in regard to civil
and religious liberty which were not easily forgotten.
(Hear, hear.) With regard to the sneers of the hon, mem-
ber for Sheffield at schoolmasters, it must be remembered
that there were very distinguished schoolmasters, and one,
Dr Arnold, might rank with the lion, member for Sheffield,
(Great laughter.) He by no means endorsed the foreign
policy of the Government in its different details,
but he did not like the injustice that had been done to the
noble lord (Earl Russell), for which the whole Cabinet was
responsible, including the noble lord the First Minister.
(Laughter.) Having referred to the proceedings at the
Conference, in the course cf which he described the pro-
ceedings
,as
,a, combination of blarney and bluster, and
ridiculed the statement that had been made as an inter-
change of ideas between the plenipotentiaries at the Con-
ference, but what these ideas were which rendered an inter-
change he did not pretend to understand. (Laughter.) He
said that this country was most fortunate in being relieved
from the responsibility of the guarantee proposed by the
obstinacy of Denmark. (Laughter.) In referring to
the Conference, ha said that the only unanimity
in the members of the Conference was a vote
of thanks to Lord John Russell—(great laughter)—and a
statement that they left England with great pleasure. (Re-
newed laughter.) He denied that the treaty of 1852, on
which so much was said to depend in the solution of the
questions of the Germans and Danes, was anything more
than an emanation from the subtle policy of Russia. He
drew the attention of the house to tne discrepancy which
prevailed between the sentiments expressed in 1848 by
the First Lord of the Treasury in reference to the question
of the succession to the Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein,
and the sentiments that he had expressed on the subject.
The noble lord had said in 1848 that the,son of the
Duke of Oldenburg should be named in the succession,
(Hear, hear.) He denied altogether that the treaty of July,
1852, so important in this matter, had the sanction of Aus-
tria and Prussia, and he asserted that the latter power had
entered en actual protest against it. (Hear, hear.) He
repeated that this protocol was a mere dictation of Russia,
acceded to by a doubtful policy which invested it with its
political value. The fact was that Russia, in the protocol
of 1851, promoted the views of King Christian IX, in re-
gard to the Duchies. He contended that the King of
Denmark had as much right to the Duchies as he had to
the throne of England—(hear, near)—and they must
remember that the rights q'j those duchies had been
guaranteed. He said that the claims of the Duke of
Augnstenburg could not be voided, merely by the fact of
his having been in pecuniary difficulties, and accepting
some pecuniary ceimpensation for his claims. He repudiated
the idea of going to war on this question, and merely
for the purpose of forcing on the Duchies a
disagreeable dynasty—(hear, hear)—as the ratepayers of
this country had not the slightest interest in the matter.
He said that the policy of the Government tended to drift
this country into war, With regard to the late Conference
on the Dano-German question, the only thing he had been
able to make out of its proceedings was the diplomatic defi-
nition of the difference between a suspension of arms and an
armistice; and that was all it was possible the most assi-
duous reader could collect. Credit had been taken by the
Government for having preserved the peace of Europe, but
it could not be denied that they had been in league to go
to war to put an unwelcome sovereign on the throne of
Schleswig-Holstein : and he believed that the real credit of
reaintaining peace was due to the Emperor of the French.
If it had not been for hlm, if the designs of ministers had
been followed out, we should have been at this moment in
the midst of an awful war with Germany. As to Den-
mark, in his opinion she would have made a better
fight of it had she been better served by her
own ministers ; but they had lectured and blustered
in true Palmerstonian style; whilst they omitted
to arm their people to repel the invader, He had no doubt,
however, that the Danes would now come to terms directly 1
with Prussia ; and he should not be surprised if he heard
the Prime Minister stating in the course of the evening that
England was about to agree to some convention to prevent
a Scandinavian confederation. It has been a question,
how far the just influence of this country has been lost, and
it oanuot be denied that England does not occupy the
position she should do with reference to other nations
owing to the bungling policy which has been pursued.
But I think it would be easy to redress that, and to plo- ,
the country in a proper position. What should we
the noble lord and gentlemen on that bench ar- 4°' It
.
—I think they have great capacity, but the not skilful
their time, and they bungle--(laugh, -'y are a little past
ificialdsoni: 1,13 ya imitating
est.)—if it be wished to
place England in a proper condi
that custom
este; and to restore its in-
fluence, I think it might bi...
'exercise in a modiPfialledTot7htalaughter)
which is obligatory on c:
the' nk they would place the emmtry int " ha:3'
if they would only
despatch"—l
(Lear, hear.) Ido not suspect however, that
position, (
they will 'cake that advice. There sits the noble lord, sedet,
Pe "debit, and I was
I mic'eat almost say de e:ternum
ab'..ait to add—but that would not be true--infelix. (Loud
laughter.) But what is the position of what is jokingly
called the Liberal party—that is the nom de guerre,
There is no such thing, though that is between our-
selves—(loul Opposition cheers, and counter cries of
Oh, oh.) There are people out of the house who imagine,
when we go to the hustings with all our fine professions,
that we mean it, and that we shall stand by our colours in
this house. As an election is very near, let us consider
what is the position of the Liberal party. The old Liberal
watchwords were "peace, retrenchment, and reform."
(Hear, hear.) It is delightful to see that as to one question
we are all agreed—even the noble lord the member for Stem-
fluorednt,mbou,.:ol:l.y Coce:Loionisalleyn.thusiastic upon it, that is, the
question of peace, And occasionally we all nibble at retrer,eh.
I do not go so far as tele hon.
member for Lambeth (Hr. Williams), but I thilik he will
agree with me that both sides do not want reform—(hear)--
that is the end of " peace, retrenchment, and reform." And
what is the position of the Liberal party ? The hon. mem-
b-r for Sheffield (Hr. Roebuck) has
nopreferences ; he only
dislikes one side rather less than the other, and curiously
enough ho dislikes the people among whom he sits more
a
than acno
comp
ayrbios
odny elset
w.
e(
eßne ntehwee dt
wlaou laughter.) tneer
he
8. ) liel hasalm institutedos t
think
there are as good fish in the sea as ever were caught—and

if we lost the present Ministry I do not know that we
should have to record it with inconsolable regret, for I think
it might be possible to replace them. (Hear, hear, and
laughter.) Let us see how this Ministry is constituted.
Let me take the noble lord—and I would speak of him with
every respect, because a more active and able man has sel-
dom existed in this country. (Cheers.) I might say of
him that " panting Time toils after him in vain," Cer-
tainly he is facile princeps, and he is certainly the liveliest
if not the youngest man on the Treasury bench. The
noble lord deserves great credit for his admirable manage-
ment of affairs during a long course of years. He has
acted with all sorts of men, and has been associated with
men holding all classes of opinions. Why, sir, he has
contrived—and it is a most extraordinary feat—to con-
ciliate both the Low Church party and the High Tories ;
the _Record acknowledges his inspiration, and the hon. mem-
ber for North Warwickshire (Mr Newdegate) bows to his
influence. These are great feats. But what is his policy?
His domestic policy seems to be to remain stationary. His
foreign policy up to this day has been pugnacious and pro-
gressive. But now he is about to achieve the most wonder-
ful feat of his life, He is about to go to the country as ',lle
apostle and minister of peace, and will be supper...ad by my
hon. friend the member for Birmingham. That is the most
extraordinary feat of the whole. (Laughter.) Well then, sir,
as to the cabinet, it is a museum of curiosities. (Laughter.)
There are some birds of rare and noble plummage both alt've
and stuffed—(much laughter)—but there is ad, culty in
keeping up the breed of those sweet birds, and it was found
necessary to cross the Whig treed with the famous Peelite
breed. I will do them the justice to say that they have a
very great and able minister among them in the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, and it is to his measures alone that they
owe the little popularity and the little support they get
from this Liberal party; but it cannot be said, either by
their enemies or friends, that their supply of measures has
been prolific. Then there is my right hon. friend who is not
connected with the Whigs by family (Mr Gibson). (Laugh-
ter.) He seems like a "fly in amber," and the wonder is
how he got there ; and the hon. members for Rochdale and
Birmingham must, I think, have been disappointed in this
"young man from the country." (Loud laughter,) When
he married into the family we expected some Liberal
measures from them, but the hon. gentleman seems to have
become indolent and less quarrelsome under the guidance
of the noble lord. Well, sir, what is there to be ? We
know by the traditions of the great Whig party that they
will cling to the vessel, if not like shipwrecked sailors, at
least like those tastaceous marine animals which adhere to
the bottom, thereby clogging the engines and impeding
the progress. (Laughter.) Should a vote of this house dis-
place the administration, what are the Liberal party to do ?
Well, sir, if I might advise the Liberal party I should say
they may be perfectly happy as to the issue of this great
duel. They are somewhat in the situation of lago when he
says, "Whether Cassio kill,Roderigo,or Roderigo
or each kills the other," so much they gain. (Laughter.)
Nay, sir, even should this Parliament determine on termi-
nating its own existence and that of the Government, they
will find some consolation in the knowledge that the fune-
ral oration will be pronounced by the hon. member for
North Warwickshire, and that a friendly hand will inscribe
on their mausoleum, " Rest, and be thankful." (Loud
cheers from both sides of the house.)

Mr WHITESIDE described the foreign policy of the
Government as inconsistent, capricious, and mischievous,
and declared that he had no hesitation whatever in saying
that the confusion which reigned had sprung from that
policy. He held that they had no right to give advice to
foreign powers unless they were also prepared to assist them.
He supported the resolutions of his right hon, friend, be-
cause he was jealous of the honour of his country and con-
servative of her glory and her institutions ; and because he
felt that the Foreign Minister had deeply erred, and lowered
the just influence of England throughout the nations of the
earth.
Mr MONSELL opposed the motion.

Mr B. COCHRANE supported it, urging that, were the
terms in which it was couched much stronger, they would
not have unjustly described the policy and conduct of the
Government

Lord ELCHO saw no ground for a vote of censure on
Ministers.

The O'DONOGHUE denied that there was any com-
pact among the Roman Catholic members to vote against
the Government, or that there was any truth in the rumour
that any agents of the Pontifical Government had under-
taken a mission to England to bring pressure on the Catho-
lic members. For his own part he would vote in favour of
the resolutions, because the Government had done nothing
for Ireland.

Sir S. NORTHCOTE observed that the Opposition did
not wish to rest their case upon any particular despatch or
any particular act of the Government, but that they charged
a general want of sagacity and of statesmanship in the whole
course of negotiations. The indictment was, not that the
conduct of the Government had humiliated the country, but
that she had lost a portion of her just influence in Europe.
Mr CLAY was of opinion that if the policy advocated by
hon. gentlemen opposite were adopted we should have been
landed in a European war six months ago.
Mr WALPOLE did not believe the allegation that the
population of Schleswig and Holstein were the cause of the
troubles that had broken out in the North of Europe. On
the contrary, the disturbing canoes were an importation
from a foreign land, fomented, encouraged, and
excited by a revolutionary spirit under the guise
of patriotism. He believed that her Majesty's
Ministers had adopted a feeble, inconsistent, and hesitating
policy which had led Denmark to believe that even at the
eleventh hour England wculd give her material assistance.
As in the case of the Crimean war, "too late" was written
on every act of the Government. So it had proved in re-
ference to the Dano-German question. In the former in-
stance they went on drifting and drifting until they drifted
into war. In the present case they had drifted into shame
and disgrace, They had been too late in applying to other
Powers for co-operation; too late in not protecting Den.
mark before the Eider was crossed; too late in protect.
ing the islands before they were taken ; and they would be
too late in protecting Copenhagen ; for it appeared that all
they intended to do was to reconsider their decision in the
event of the city being taken and the King made a prisoner
of war. It was therefore the duty of the house to speak out,
and throw the responsibility on the shoulders to which it
belonged. This was the constitutional course to adopt, and
as he considered the resolutions of Mr. Disraeli were framed
with that view be would support them.
Lord PALMERSTON then rose, and was received with
most enthusiastic cheering, which lasted several minutes.
When it had subsided, the noble lord said—Mr Speaker, if
any doubt could have existed when the notice of this mo-
tion was first made as to its object and importance that
doubt must have been fully dispelled by the debate which
had ensued upon it, for we are now told, fairly and plainly,
that, although the words imply simply a censure upon one
act of the Government, yet it is intended as a vote of " no
confidence"—(hear, hear)—and that the issue which the
house is called upon to determine is, whether gentlemen on
this side, or gentlemen on that side, should be charged
with the conduct of the affairs of the country, (Cheers)
Now, sir, I object to much that has passed in this debate,
but to two things mainly—first of all, to the Attempt to se-
parate my noble friend at the head of the Foreign-office—
(cheers)—from the rest of his colleagues - a most unconsti-
tutional attempt, a most unfair attempt, an attempt which
aught to have been reprobated by those who, having been
in office, know the joint responsibility atilt, Members of the
Cabinet. (Renewed cheering.) Sir, I declare on the part of
i my hon. colleagues, that we are ail equally responsible for
what the noble lord has done—(loud cheers)—and, there-
fore, I trust we shall not hear any more of these personal
attacks upon Lord Russell, but that whatever Censure any
man may wish to cast on the conduct of the Government
may be aimed at the Government itself, and not at any in-
dividual member of it. (Cheers.) Now, sir, I also regret
deeply for my country the pains which have been taken by
many of those who have takes part in this debate to vidify
and degrade—(cheers and counter-cheers)—that country.
(Cries of " No, no," from the Opposition.) Not content
with blaming the Government, Which they were entitled
to do, and endeavouring t© trove that we were wrong in
every step of these testsactions, they have maintained
that England ie edegradede-(Opposition cheers)—and
that she has sunk in the estimation of foreign
countries, And ,then I' and since when ? Since the ter-
mination of f-isse Conferences—(No, no, from tie opposition)
—whic'e, only closed a few days ago. liow, Ce
th , i deny, on
-
ee part of the country, the etaterumeed which have been
that England stands
adatid Counter cheers)—andY
made. (Ministerial
apslsinhiesteevreiraldcihd_eer,:i:ll)eeml
that those who thih.„l- thof the world e at she has fallen in the 'estiniation
ere not the men to whom the honour and
dignity of England ought to lie Confided. (Loud cheers.)
Well, air, this bill of indictment was most singularly
brought in by' he right hon. gentleman who proposed the
motion, because in the early part of hie speech, step by
step, he expressed hie approval of what GoVertilisent had
done. He began by admitting that the Mates of 1852 was,
when it was concluded, a *lee and good arrangement.
He could not deny that all the Governments who were
parties to that treaty had congratulated each other upon
having made what they then thought—and there were
grounds for the opinion—was a settlement that would en-
sure the peace of Europe. And when we have been told
that the Prussian Minister of that day, the Chevalier de
Bunsen, refused to put his name to a certain protocol, I
think I am right in saying that so eager was the Prussian
Government for that treaty, that the draft was sent from
Berlin to London with a special order to the Chevalier de
Bunsen that he was to sign it such as he received it, and
not to make any objection of his own. Well, then, what-
ever may live been the feelings of the Cheawli:,radneoßtusinlaser.n,L:
who was known to be a very enthusiastic
champion of Gee
lwen unity at that time, I say those feelings
by his Government—and it is a misrele'eeer 4 -
that because of the objections he r —colon to infer,
was not sincere in concluder-
-'Hy have felt, Prussia
equally pleased with the 6 that treaty. Saxony was
That arrangene,-Lit
vaaated arrangement that
rights. It
Iwtasstihmepnlymawdaes
.
enish Government should be invited to changey
I
that the D
the law of succession legally, which the
did—that the
been
for
ro wa n
king, by his prerogative, should be empowered to name
his successor, which he did—and that that suc-
wpe powers sw aes srheohucehl ider n t oba en d theacknowledgedhad
Danish c by the contracting
l;onagndtittrh.aat
undertbeStatthees
sway of the King of Denmark should, as fay: al'3 the object

of the treaty went, remain united under the Danish sceptre.
And it was thought that arrangement was secured by tho
change in the law of succession in Denmark, and the re-
nunciation of the Duke of Auguatenburg's rights to the
succession of Holstein. Well, sir, we know that the reason
why that arrangement failed, was that on the one part the
Danish Government did not treat the German subjects of
Schleswig with that administrative system to which they
were entitled, and that the late king committed the same
errors which the King of Holland did with regard to Bel-
gium, namely, interfering with their language, laws, and
religion, and all that was dear to man. That has been the
constant source of expostulation on the part of Germany,
and those expostulations were not attended to in the Way in
which they ought to have been. Zhe result df tb.at Was,
that when the late king died, those dittontents which had
been smothered during his reign burst forth as to the dis-
puted succession to holstein ; and then came the execution
in Holstein, fur the purpose of compelling the king-duke to
revoke his patent ; and that brings me to the point to which
I have' .aem been referred—the answer I made to the hon.
:ember for Horsham (Mr S. Fitzgerald), at the end of
last session. IVell, it is raid that we began at that time to
threaten war in Germany. t deny that what I said was a
threat of war on the part of England. The words which
I am going to read I think will prove i t. What I said
in answer to the hon. member was, " I have said we
entirely concur with him, and with every reasonable man
in Europe, including those in France and Russia, in de-
siring that the independence, and the integrity, and the
rights of Denmark may be maintained. We are con-
, vinced—l am convinced at least--that if any violent
attempt were made to overthrow those rights, and to in-
' interfere with that independence, those who made the
attempt would find in the result that it will
not be Denmark alone with whom they will have to con-
tend." (Cheers and counter cheers.) But the contest shows
that when I talked of every man in Europe, it is quite evi-
dent I did not confine myself to this country. (Cheers and
Opposition cries of "No, no.") And what was the passage
which preceded that ? I had just said before, " It is impos
sible for any man who looks at the map of Europe, and who
knows the great interest which the Powers of Europe feel
in the independence of the Danish monarchy, to shut his
eyes to the fact that war begun about a petty dispute con-
cerning the constitution of Holstein would, in all probabi-
lity, not end where it began, and might draw after it conse-
quences which all the parties who began it would exceed-
ingly regret to have caused." (Hear, hear.) What I was
pointing to was a European war, and not simply a war be-
tween this country and Germany. But then, what was it
which the hon. gentleman, who is so much against all in-
terference and anything that militates against the rights of
Germany—what was it he said that called forth what I am
quoting ? When the lion, gentleman stated that he appre-
hended danger from the execution in Holstein, he said that
the entrance of the Federal troops into Holstein might in-
volve consequences fatal to the independence and integrity
of Denmark. And he continued, " If the Government would
say that, under pretence of Federal rights, the Confederation
were not to interfere with the rights of the Danish Crown,
and if France and Russia would hold similar language, the
danger to which he had adverted might be diverted." The
hen, gentleman therefore wanted the English Government
to say to the Diet, You shall not go into Holstein for the pur-
pose of executing Federal iawt and he said if England could
persuade France and Russia to say the same thing, the dan-
ger which he apprehended would be averted. Well then, I
say it is not for the hon. gentleman to tan us, and say that
our representations anl expostulations with Prussia, Aus-
tria, and the Diet against the outgo they were pursuing,
were justifiable, since he would have had us take a higher
measure, eft, tell the Diet that they were not to do that
which by the law of Germany and the law of Europe they
had a perfect right to do. (Ministerial cheers.) But we did
not do that ; our representations were of a different charac-
ter. When that occupation took place the Danish Govern-
ment was recommended, not by England alone, but by Eng-
land and other Powers, not to resist. They did not resist;
and when the farther invasion of Schleswig was threatened
we endeavoured to persuade the King of Denmark to take
steps to revoke that constitution which was made the
ground of that occupation of Schleswig as a guarantee of
the revocation, The heng promised to do all that he could
and as early as he could for the purpose. Well, what was
the time when, according to gentlemen opposite, who com-
plain so much, and at the bottom of whose thoughts lies the
notion that we ought to interfere by force—(cries of No, no,
from the Opposition beeches, and cheers from the Minis-
terial benches)—what wts the time when that interference
ought to have taken place? The German troops entered
Schleswig about the midcle of winter. Well that was not a
time when any naval or military operations could have been
undertaken. What did we do ? From the beginning we en-
deavoured to persuade Prince and Russia to concur with us
in every step we took. (Hear, hear.) But menacing lan-
guage is said to have beer used. (Hear.) Why, the me-
nacing language was waning the German Powers of the
danger to Europe and themselves which might arise from the
extension of the war beyond the quarter where it had arisen.
The right hon. gentleman iMr. Disraeli) in his speech ap-
proved of our conduct up to September. He said it was wise
and judicious, because was France was with us. He went on
to say, however, that after September a change took place,
and then you disgusted France. How was that ? It was on
account of Poland and the Congress—that we abondoned
France about Poland. What was our course about Poland?
Were we not told in this house over and over again that we
ought to interfere diplomatically in favour of the Poles.
(Herr.) Did not the hon. member for King'; county (Mr
Hennessy) repeatedly urge us in that direction, and was
not hir urging backed and supported by hon. members op-
posite ? Even the mode of representation was pointed out.
We were told, "Do not content yourselves with simple
remonstrances on the part of England, but get France,
Austria, Prussia, and all the Powers of Europe, to concur
in representing to Russia the expediency of dealing leniently
with Poland, and of acting in accordance with her engage-
ments." Well, we did not do that which we never under.
took—to make war for that purpose. My noble friend and
myself avowed that was not intended, but the right hon.
gentleman acknowledged the perfect justice of our course
upon that occasion ; for he said some little time ago to have
made war for Poland would have been an act of insanity.
Could, therefore, the French Emperor have found fault
with the English Government for not committing an act of
insanity ? Then, again, as to the Congress, the right hon.
gentleman said we were quite right in declining the Con-
gress. No man with acommon understanding could imagine
that a Congress could, under such circumstances, have been
attended with beneficial results. The right hon. gentleman
said that a Congress night to follow action, not precede it,
which is a very great distinction. Well,
France was influenced by such considerat
towards Denmark won to impute conduct to the French
ottil .se
inn,
ht oe r saye
Government perfectly inconsistent with what ought to be
on
dt hut:
tt
expected from a Government acting upon great and generous
principles. (Hear.) France was actuated by quite different
motives, and she never centealed them from us About
that time we were led to expect that France and Russia
would join us in Pressing strongly upon the German
Powers the impropriety of their eonduet towards Denmark.
But France very feria told ttB, " War for yolk on behalf of
Denmark would be a naval war, for us it would be a land
war; we have ilerttottY nPOti our frontier, and war, there-
fore, would be a great undertaking, costly both in men
and treasure. We are not disposed to undertake it,
especially for an of eet sejseeti is hot a trench
object—an ohjent witch interests neither the dignity, inde-
pendence, nor welfare of Frahm))
I think then *e Dad no
right to press iipori the trench Government the adoption of
the course which we most approved. .We, therefore, lost
the rupport of France, except morally and diplomatically.
Well, Russia was applied toLuc ie
ntissis gave its an answer
also declining any co-operation with us. And when one
comes to consider the union which odes between Eussia,
Prussia, and Austria With regard to the Polish question,ussia not being
one cannot be surprised at lq
up arms against her neighbours: Well, ea,y, step by step
up to September, the right hon. gentleman admits our po-
licy was wise and judicious, And
to take
And I contend that from that
time our policy was bheiViee seise and jadicious, and lib-
nourablo tO the country. (Cheers.) We laboured to per-
suade the parties tie cores f.O an aonetnent ;
•we remonstrated
witil
the
German lime" on their conduct toWards Den-
; but at last a Conference was proposed. The pro-
posal came from Prussia first, We agreed. Some time,
however, elapsed befote the Conference could assemble. and
a questfon iiioSia whether an armistice should precede the
Conference. We should h
-.4/e preferred an armistice before
the Conference; but feiling insthat
We stipulated that it
ahonld be the first subject of discussion. We found it line
possible to obtain an armistice, and then we said let us have
a Conference as soon as possible. Well, sir; our influence
was lowered—we had no inlitience in ;trope: (Opposition
cheers.) Why, first of all we were invited to take steps to
bring the Conference together, and in that Conference step
by step every proposal made by jangland was supported by
France, Russia, and Sweden, Nothing was done of pro-
posed by England which was not previously agreed upon
and previously concerted with these Powers, and therefore
am at a loss to understand what You theali,—and that
when you
accused in that Conference de having
say that England is a degraded Power—(cheers)
you have no confidence in the Government. We are
departed from the
provisions of the treaty of 1852. Those provisions
have certainly been departed from, but it was necessity that
compelled us to depart from them. When the Conference
assembled all the Powers bound themselves to abide by the
provisions of the treaty. That Wee the ettittinn-point but
we did not make it the basis of the Conference, because we
knew that there was an objection to it en the Fart of Austria
and Prussia, and t
basis we lee Gor,ati
Lesontecte
• rat; npeaceful DU
solution
the real
-
es, for the purpose of arriving at a
Was that
of the !;:::,;:ien, and of restoring peace to Europe.
was it not
an unworthy object, (Cheers.) If it was obtained,
a basis for the Conference that might lead to satisfactory
results? The parties were asked to state what the terms
were upon which they were willing to complete peaco. They
which the
proposed terms of aepereonal union, with details
Danish Government were willing to accept.
Holstein from Den-
mark They made
another proposal, which was to separate
mark and the whole of Schh That wand at last
They were induced to relax from that
Pretension,
Danes consented to
the parties were brought to till, 9, that the D
the proposal made to them, on t he part of Germany, that the
as objectionable.
question should be settled by the
separation of Holstein from
sw*
Denmark, together with the Go. rraau
portion of Schleswig,
Well, no doubt that was Ur °
from the treaty of 1852;

but I am not snre that.it would not be to the advantage of
Denmark, which has long been crippled by the people of
Schleswig,who have been long discontented with her,aa was
shown at the time of the Royal marriage, when they refused
to contribute to the dower offered by the King; in order to
show their dissatisfaction. So the parties were brought to-
gethen and they agreed to a diVision of Schleswig; a part to
be united to Holstein; and the only question at last was
where the line was to be drawn. It was found impossible to
bring them to an agreement. We then proposed arbitration,
If the parties accepted it, and if the:arbiter was empowered
peremptorily to decide the point, and that the tWo parties
agreed to it, instead of a bete cif i;enstire, instead Of On-
denanation so laVishly bestowed upon us in this debate, all
would agree that our exertions had been crowned with suc-
cess, and that we had mad@ an honourable arrangement
between the two parties, and that the peace of Europe was
secured. (Cheers.) It was not our fault that the two parties
objected to the arrangement. The proposal was a most
reasonable one. It has been said that our Minister pro-
mised Denmark that if she agreed to the line of the Schlei
he would not propose another line. He did make that
promise, but that was not to fetter his hands when he
found it was impossible to bring Germany down to the
Schlei, nor to bring Denmark up to the Apenrade, But if
the Conference had broken up, would it not be said to us,
" Why did you not propose arbitration ?" I say it was
proper, and our duty as a last resort to propose arbitration,
which if accepted would have restored peace. (Cheers.)
The French plenipotentiary proposed another solution—
namely, an appeal to the population of the disputed
districts, but it was not acceptable to Denmark or to
Prussia ; and that proposal, although honourably made,
was not acceded to. Well, then, I say when hon. gentle-
men, not looking to the main features of the transaction,
only pick out sentences from the blue books and found upon
them a vote of condemnation against the Government, I say
that such a proceeding, although it may suit the purposes
of a party who want to blacken an 1 disgrace the Govern-
ment, I am persuaded that the country will not think this is
the way to treat great European questions (cheers), and
that it will not approve the condemnation which is proposed
by gentlemen opposite. Now, let us examine a little what
is the resolution which the right hon. gentleman proposes.
I speak not of the first and second sentences, but the last.
He prOposes that this house should affirm that the influence
of England is lowered in the eyes of the world—(cheers)—
and that thereby the security for peace is diminished. That
is supported by a great number of gentlemen who maintain
that we are never to interfere in anything beyond our own
shores. What is the use of our influence it we are not to in-
terfere ? (Cheers.) And how is the peace of Europe to be
endangered by the loss of our influence if that influence is
to be confined within those walls. (Cheers.) This doctrine
is altogether unsound, for our interests are affected by mat-
ters which happen in every part of the world, and a coun-
try like ours cannot be passive or indifferent to what passes
among other nations ; that she has interests which require
vigilant watching, and that we must interfere in some way
or other in transactions in which we are not directly or ab-
solutely concerned. But then we are told that the balance
of power is exploded. Why, the balance of power is
founded upon the nature of man. (Hear, hear.) The
balance of power means that, in the community of nations,
no nation should acquire such a preponderance of
power as to endanger the security of the rest; and it is
for the ad vantage of all that the smaller Powers should
be respected in their independence (Opposition
cheers)—and not swallowed up by their more powerful
neighbours. That is the doctrine of the balance of power,
and it is a doctrine worthy of being acted upon. I say we
have done our best to rescue Denmark from the dangers to
which she was exposed by counselling her to set herself
right upon those matters where she was in fault; advising
her aggressors to adopt a more moderate course ; and by
inducing the neutral Powers to join with us in advising the
same course. leut what said the right honourable
gentleman upon the subject? He said if England had a
policy, and that England and France were upon cordial
terms, war would be very different; but it Russia, France,
and England had come to a good understanding, war would
be impossible. Well, we tried to make it impossible, but
France and Russia would not combine with us, and there- I
fore war became possible, and took place. The right hon
gentleman had therefore pronounced a panegyric upon our
policy, and he ought to vote against his own resolution.
(Cheers and laughter.) We adopted the best means of ren-
dering war impossible, and the failure was not our fault.
At the time I answered the question of the right hon gen-
tleman opposite we had reason to believe that Sweden was
going to conclude a treaty offensive and defensive with
Denmark, but it was not carried out. Well, then, I deny
utterly that the influence of England has been lowered. I
say that there is no proof of it. The assertion must belong
either to the period before the Conference or to the period
afterwards. But to the period before the Conference it could
net apply, because by the influence of England that Confe-
rence was assembled in the capital of this country. It can-
not apply to anything subsequent to the Conference, because
no hing has taken place, (Hear.) Well, then, I say that
it is a gratuitous libel upon the country. (No.) It is a
libel by a great party upon the country which they wish to
govern. Why, such a resolution being recorded, foreign
Governments would say to that party, you have put itupon
record that your country is degraded, and whether it is or is
not, you are not the parties to restore it. (Hear.) a say
therefore that is a most unpatriotic course, which I trust
will not receive the support of the house. It would be
a libel upon the country to which we all belong to record in
the votes of this house that which is not a fact-,-that the
influence of England had been lowered, (Hear.) bin, the
influence of a country depends upon other things than pro •
tocols and despatches, (Hear, hear.) The influence of a
country depends upon its power to defend itself, its wealth,
its prosperity, its intelligence, and upon the cultivation of
mind and the development of arta and sciences, and upon
all those things which make a country great and powerful.
So long as England retains these conditions, so long I defy
any one to prove that her influence has been lowered or
degraded. (Hear.) Well, then, I contend that the reso-
lution of the right hon. gentleman is not one which is fitting
for this house to adopt. Reference has been made to the
amendment of the hon. gentleman the member for Bridg-
water, and it has been said by some that it was an escape
from voting upon the resolution of the right hon. gentle-
man. (Hear.) Well, I have no hesitation in saying that
for my part I regret that the hon. membe- (Mr. Kinglake)
has moved that amendment, because I should have been
better pleased to have come to a decision on tht resolution
of the right hon. gentleman the member for Bucks. But
we were told just now by the hon. baronet (Sir S. North-
cote) that that resolution, with the amendment of my hon.
friend, embodied entirely the statement which I made to the
house not long ago in stating the results of the Conference.
Surely if that is the ease, gentlemen opposite cannot be sur-
prised that we should accept that amendment, and be pre-
pared to vote for it. No man can say that by voting for that
amendment we are shirking the resolution of the right hon.
gentleman. At the same time I did express to my hon. friend
a wish that he would not put his amendment, so that we
might *ate on the resolution of the right hon. gentleman.
He, however, declined to withdraw it, and we are now pre-
pared to take the vote upon his amendment. (Hear.) In the
course of this debate the real character of the right hon.
gentleman's motion has been more plainly dilated upon by
some who have taken part, more especially by the hon.
member for Tipperary, It has been fairly avowed that this
is not simply a censure upon one individual act, but upon a
course of action. It le thirty art issue to test a vote of con-
fidence in the Government. It has been intended to oust
the devetniont. I da not complain of that object, but I
complain of the mode, becateee I think ft would have been
more manly, open, and straightforward, to have put the
issue in the tionstitutional mode of a resolution, rather than
to endea,frour to wrap it up in the 1,500 pages of a blue
book. (hean) It would have been much more coni;!lfellf
to say, We Babe Doing this Government far five years ; it
is too much-for human endurance ; everything must have
its limit; the time is come when we wish Parliament to ,
declare plainly, aye or no, will they retain the present Go-
vernment, or not ? I have not the slightest reproach to
make to then), eicept that they have not fairly avowed and
put their object in plain latignage, They complained of our
despatches not being in plain language; but I think their
resolution is not in plain language, and it would be much
betters and there aseording to usual custom, to put it in the
plain way. (Hear.) Then the member for Tipperary said
very truly that this being the case, the house ought to look
not empty to this limited action of the Government on the
Danish question, but to look to their general conduct on
other matters. That would be quite proper and fair, because
if a vote of no confidence had been moved, of course it would
lead to ti discussion of all the measures of the Government.
I contend that if the hove° take that view of the matter, they
will find in the five years that *a have been honoured by the
hone, and have carried on the Government of the coun-
try this cotintry has been in an unexampled state of
prosperity—(cheers)—that mote has been done in everything
connected with the material interests of the country than
perhaps vier was done in the same space of time before.
(Hear.) On that ground at least we may stand unscathed, ;
and defy any attack which may be made upon us from any
quarter whatever. I know that details applicable to this
argument would be encroaching too much on the time and
patience of the house : but I now ask leave to state one or
two miner facts which bear on this question, to show what
has been the conduct of the Government, and what have
been the improvements in the country during our adminis-
tration. (Cheers.) Between 1859.60 and 1861—(cries of
"Question" and cheers)—we have listened very patiently
to the abuse of hon. gentlemen opposite. I think now it is
but fair that they should listen to the reasons that we think
may be fairly stated in our general justification. (Hear.)
We have reduced, between 1860 and 1861 twelve millions
of taxation, We have concluded, with the assistance of the
hon. gentleman opposite (Mr Cobden), that treaty with
France which has so wonderfully increased the commercial
relations between the two countries—(hear, hear)—for
whereas in 1859, the imports from France were in value 16
millions, in 1863 they were 24 millions. The exports also
have increased in a greater degree, for while in 1859 they
were only gi millions, in 1863 they were £22,900,000. It
must be obvious that this great development of the come
merce of the country must have been of the greatest advan-
tage at a time when we were suffering so severely from the
failure of the supply of cotton from America. (Cheers.)
In the meantime we had reduced the national debt by
eleven millions, that is to say, five millions had been
actually paid off, and six millions had been converted into

terminable annuities. The private personal income of
the country has increased to such au extent that the assess-
ment to the income tax has increased by 27 millions in
the course of that time. Between 1860-61 and 1864.65, the
expenditure has been reduced by 3 millions, Meanwhile we
Ile not been unmindful of interests and considerations very
country, viz., the national defences; our
riinitan
tiptrioarri,otttfe:e being
tomake
the country unassailable from
gb2tlemen opposite the
any quarter. giye hon.
credit of originating the volunteer movement, buy that sys-
tem of defence has been wonderfully deVeloped Moe,' the
present Government. (Hear.) Our dockyards are now in
Course of being made secure; so that we no longer hear of
pamphlets aim& the perils of Portsmouth. Portsmouth and
our other naval stations will soon be in a position to defy
attack. The foreign trade of the country has increased to a
very great degree, having risen from 377 millions in 1861 to
444 millions in 1863. An increase of 67 millions in two
years I It is not necessary for me to go into the' details of
the improvement of a savings' hanks, although those are
=Were which are of deep interest to the working classes.
(Heat.) We have got through that great calamity, as it
was expected to be, of the cotton famine without any of the
disturbance which might have been expected through the
losses and privations of those who suffered by it. We
have not been solely occupied with the concerns of the
United Kingdom; for my right hon. friend who has the
management of India has done great things in regard to
that country., And an important matter that is, because
I recollect it was said when a change took place in the
Government of India, that although India was indebted
to England then, the time might come when England
would be indebted to India. In 1858, the deficit in
the Indian revenue amounted. to £14,000,000; but it
1864 there was a suplus of £813,000; so that, in con-
sequence of the instructions of my right hon. friend, a
large deficit In the Indian revenue has been converted
into a large surplus. The contentment of the people of
India was known to everybody: Railways, telegraphs, and
every improvement which modern times have protNced
have been introduced into that country'. The exports from
India in 1858-9 were £29,000,000; in 1862-3 they amounted
to £46,000,000. (Hear, hear.) Well, then, I say that all
the indications of national prosperity that now exist—(An
hon. member: In Ireland P)—amongst the subjects of the
uean 113,70 g ood foundation, and that the Government of
the Queen during the five years they have been charged
with the conduct of the affairs of the country have not been
inattentive to any interest to which their attention ought to
be directed, but we have been the promoters of general
improvement in all the matters which constitute the gene-
ral interest of the country. Well, but we have during that
period of office preserved this country from war. (Hear.)
There were many people ready to urge us to take an active
part in the war in America. (Hear, hear.) We were not
without motives which might have been supposed to in-
duce us to take part in the contest going on in that country,
We abstained iron it. (Cheers) No doubt there are some
who thought we ought to have leant more to one side, and
others who thought we ought to have leant more to the
other, but our conduct has been that of rigid neutrality, and
we have saved the country from the calamities of that war.
(Cheers.) There are many gentlemen in this House who do
not entirely approve of the policy that we pursued in China.
(Hear, hear.) That may be a subject of discussion, but
there is certainly a great development of our trade with
China, and we have a good understanding with the Go-
vernment of China. Therefore, whatever may be thought
of the steps by which we have arrived at that conclusion,
no man can deny that the result and conclusion have been
advantageous to the country. We have preserved pacific
relations with all the countries of Europe. It
has been said that in the last speech from the
Throne for the first time was omitted the s:ntence, " I con-
tinue to receive friendly assurance of peace from all foreign
Powers." Gentlemen who make that assertion are but little
read in Queen's speeches, because this is not the first time
that foolish and unmeaning passage has been left out, and I
trust it will never appear again, beepe those "friendly
assurances" never were given ar received. (Laughter.) The
only meaning of the passage was, that the Sovereign was on
good relations with foreign Powers. We could not say that
entirely here—(hear)--because we had differences with
Austria and Russia, which rendered it impassible to make
that assertion; but when those differences are over—(a
laugh)—l hope,that it may be shown in the Queen's Speech
that it is owing to the way in which for a great many years
the affairs of the country have been conducted. Although
that is the case, I quite admit that the hon. gentlemen
opposite are perfectly entitled to make a great struggle and
a great fight for power. That is an honourable feeling,
which 1 do not mean to reproach. I think that a great party
comprising a great number of men of influence and ability
in the country, are perfectly entitled—when they think the
prize is within their reach—to strive for it. (Hear, hear.)
But, on the other hand, I do not think we have done any-
thing to deserve that that prize should be taken from us.
(Cheers.) I think we have conducted the affairs of the
country, during the five years we have had these seats, with
honour to the country, with advantage to the country, and
with credit to ourselves, and deserving the approbation of
the house and the confidence of the country. (Cheers from
the Ministerial side, followed by counter-cheers by the Op-
position.) Although hon. gentlemen meet that assertion with
" No, no," I am inclined to think whatever the decision of
this closely packed assembly may be to-night, the country at
large will answer in the affirmative—(cheers and counter-
cheers)—and will re-echo the assertion I have taken the
li ben: of making. (No, no, from the Conservatives.) Well,
there has not been any special ground made for
then, I sari
the motion now before us. It evades and shirks the objects
of the movers. They ought to have come manly forward
with a vote of want of confidence. I think that is not a
i
motion which is founded upon Zstice and facts; and lam
confident, whatever may be the decision of the house this
night—and I trust it will be a rejection of the motion and a
substitution of that of my hon. friend, which will in fact be
a negative—whatever the decision may be, I am satisfied and
believe it will be in our favour, and I am sure that it it is
not in our favour, it will not be in accordance with the gema-
ral feeling of the people of this country. (The noble lord, on
resuming his seat, was loudly cheered.)
Mr. DISRAELI—Mr. Speaker, on Monday last I moved
an address to the Crown,thanking her Majesty for the papers
of the late negociations which had been placed on our table,
and at the same time in that address I made three state-
ments which I wished the house to accept. The first was,
that her Majesty's Government had failed in their avowed
policy, wLich was to uphold the integrity and independence
of Denmark, The second point was an expression of regret
that the last influence
of this country in the councils of Eu-
rope was lowered: The third proposition was that, by that
lowering of the just influence of this country in the councils
of Europe, the securities of peace were diminished. In in-
troducing that address to the consideration of the house, I
had, as is inevitable under such circumstances, to quote con-
siderably, though in as small proportion as I conk) arrange,
from a great many diplomatic correspondence that had been
placed on our table. I have observed always under similar cite
cumstances when the opinion of the house has been asked, as
on the affairs of China, in which Sir Sames Graham took part,
there are always accusations of both sides of extracts being
garbled. lam not conscious of being guilty of anything of
the kind. I have listened with great attention to the present
debate, which has lasted four days, and having read the
despatches referred to by members an both sides of the House
who have drawn from extracts quite different inferences, I
am bound to say I did not observe any quoted in any unfair
manner, and it is my belief that fair quotations is the inva-
rible practice of this House. Indeed it appears to me one
of the most silly things in the world, totally irrespective of
any other consideration, for any person who attacks her
Majesty's Government on occasions of this character, wil-
lingly to managle or misrepresent these documents, What
could be the position of such a member, when he knows that
hon. gentlemen opposite, having the eriginal documents, are
in the possession of the means of correeting him ? Every
gentteoan has the papers, and can refer to the page from
which the des;attch is quoted ; and therefore it is absurd to
suppose that any g,,,:ttleman would attempt to misquote or
misrepresent any docume.?t. (Hear, hear„) I was impressed
with the weakness of the ease of the Governnient when the
most distinguished orator' of the Treasury bens hex rose to
answer me at once—l wilt not say vulgarly. hut cartcauly
with a taunt which ought not to receive the sanction or the
approval of the House. (Hear, hear.) He ivameci:aiely
accused me of misquoting—(Opposition cheers)--with mfg.-
repitsenting ; which was as much as to say,—You are a
person totally incompetent, and you must be a very silly
person to attempt to address ,the House ou this occasion,
and bring forward a case founded on misquotations. (Cheers.)
I should not have said this, but I thought it due to my-
self. (Hear, hear.) With reference to the despatch which I
was from Earl Russell to our charge d'affaires at Paris, I
copied it myself, and quoted from the copy. I read as much as
lithought sufficient to prove my case, and what I omitted was
only to save the time of the house; but, in fact, that part
whisk I did omit went to support my case. (Hear.) The
Chancellor of the Exchequer and other gentlemen assumed
that my object in quoting from Mr Grey to Earl Russell,
giving the conversation with M. Drouyn. de Lhuys, was, to
show that the Emperor of the French would not act with
the English Government. But I never supposed that any
Government would have acted from a feeling of pique, and
I should think that the Emperor of the French was the last
person who would so act. But I again say that the part
which I omitted would, if given, have further proved my
case. (Hoar.) The Chancellor of the Exchequer accused
me of falsifying a statement. (Hear, hear, from the Oppo-
sition.) However, after the gracious manner in which the
Chancellor of the Exchequer recalled that epithet, I do not
desire to give him the slightest pain or annoyance, (Hear.)
It is true that I may have inadvertently described the de -
spatchas referring to Federal execution; I may have said
that the menace referred to Federal execution ; but what if
I did ? (Hear, hoar.) It was an insignificant passage, and
yet upon the strength of it a charge was made against me
of misquoting. Again, the Chancellor of the Exchequer
says that in the first place I make out that the English
Government was acting in an irregular and impolitic man-
ner; that they were menacing here and cajoling there;
Germany threatened one day and Denmark the other, and
we (the English Government) did nothing but what was
done by the other great neutral Powers, by France and by
Russia. This was broadly stated by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, and since repeated. But not a tittle of proof
was given cf it. (Hear, hear.) We have had plenty of
proof that England menaced and cajoled, but we have
had no proof, lAotwithstanding the short declaration

Births.

HANILEY..-013. the 7th inst., at 8, Albert-road, Regent's-
park, the wife of John Allers Hankey, jun., Eaq., of a
daughter.
HORNE.—On the 6th inst., at Maida-vale, Mrs. William
Horne, of a son.
LEGOATT•—On the 6th inst., at Enfield, Middlesex, Mrs.
, Henry Leggett, of a son.

Marriage&
CAMPBELL—CA.RRINGTON.—On the 7th inst., at White-
hall Chapel Royal, Lieut.-Col. Archibald Campbell, of
Blytheswoad, to Augusta Clementina, daughter of Lord
and Lady Carrington. _ _ .

. _
CoriouzvE—Cust.--On the 6th inst., at Saint Thomas's,
Msrylebone, Charles Henry Congreve, EN., to Etheldred
V. F. Cust, third daughter of Lieut.-General the Hon.
Sir Edward Cust.