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

tion. Franca was not, his excellency said, indifferent to the
maintenance of the integrity and independence of Denmark
and it was not from any indifference that he disapproved of
your lordship's suggestion. (Opposition cheers.) Well, sir,
that was the intention of the noble lord with respect to
the change in the relations between England and France.
That was significant. (Opposition cheers.) I think it
was ono which the noble lord ought to have duly weighed,
when he remembered the position which this country occu-
pied with regard to Denmark—that It was a position under
the treaty which did not bind us to interfere more than
France itself; and, conscious at the same time that any co-
operation from Russia for the same cause, though by dif-
ferent means, could hardly be counted upon, I should have
said thot a prudent Government would have well consi-
dered their position, and would not have taken any ceurse
which committed them to any decided line of action. But,
so far as I can judge from the correspondence before us,
that was n.et the tone taken by her Majesty's Government,
because we have ‘x.trects from the correspondence of the
Secretary of Stute, with the Swedish Minister, the Diet of
Frankfort, and Lord Bloomfield—all written in one fort-
night which elapsed alter the receipt of that despatch of
Mr Grey which notified the change in the feeling of the
French Government. It is highly instructive, and we shall
see what eff,ct it produced on the policy of her Majesty's
Government, Immediately after the receipt of that despatch
the Secretary writes to the Swedish. Minister in the follow.
ing terms :—" Her Majesty's Government set the highest
value on the independence and integrity of Denmark. . . .
Her Majesty's Government will be ready to remind Aus-
tria and Prussia of their treaty obligations to respect the
integrity and independence of Denmark." Now this is to
Sir A. Malet, the Minister at Frankfort, on Sept 29, that
is, nine or ten days after the receipt of the French de-
spatch. " Her Majesty's Government, by the Treaty of
London of May 8, 1852, is bound to respect the integrity
and independence of Denmark. The Emperor cf Austria
and the King of Prussia have taken the same engagement.
Her Majesty could not see with indifference a military
occupation of Holstein, which is only to cease upon terms
injuriously affecting the constitution of the whole Danish
monarchy. Her Majesty's Government could not recog.
nise this military occupation as a legitimate exercise of the
powers of the Confederation, or admit that it could pro-

perly be called a Federal Execution. Her Majesty's Go-
vernment could not be indifferent to the bearing of such
an act on Denmark and upon European interests. Her Ma-
jesty's Government, therefore, earnestly entreat the German
Diet to pause, and to submit the question in dispute between
Germany and Denmark to the mediation of other Powers
unconcerned in the controversy, but deeply concerned in the
maintenance of the peace of Europe and the independence
of Donmark," (Opposition cheers.) My object in reading
these despatches is to show that, after the first intimation of
a change of opinion in France, the sincere policy of the Go-
vernment was not modified. (Cheers.) The Secretary of
State, on the 30th of Stptember, 1863, writes thus to Lord
Bloomfield, at Vienna :—" Her Majesty's Government trust
that no act of Federal execution to which Austria may be a
party, and no act of war against Denmark on the ground of

the affairs of Schleswig, will be allowed to clash with this
primary and essential treaty obligation. Her Majesty's
Government, indeed, entertain a full confidence that the
Government of Austria is as deeply Impressed as her Ma.
jesty's Government with the conviction that the indepen-
dence and integrity of Denmark form an essential element
in the balance of power in Europe." And now I have
brought the case to the end of September, and I hope the
house has clearly understood the course of circumstances.
There is nothing in the month of October to call for remark
at this moment; but we now arrive at the month of Novem-
ber, and approach a very important and critical state of
affairs. The month of November was remarkable for a re-
currence of two great events, which completely changed the
character, and immensely affected the aspect, of the whole
relations between Denmark and Germany, and which may
bave produced consequences that only can be felt when one
sees the end of it. Early in November the Emperor of the
French proposed a European Congress. His position, as he
himself described it, was a very painful ono from various
causes. He therefore proposed a congress. When Parlia-
ment met on the 4th of February I gave my opinion as to
the propriety of her Majesty's Government refusing to be a
party to that congress. As a general principle I think
that a Congress should precede action, If you wish
any:happyand permanent results from a Congress, it should
rather callow the great efforts of nations, and, when they
are somewhat exhausted, give them an honourable relief•
And, sir, I did not think it my duty to conceal my opinion
when her Majesty's Government had felt it their duty to
refuse a proposal of that character. But lam bound to say
that, had I been aware of what has been communicated by
these papers—had I been aware, when I spoke on Feb. 4,
that only a week before the Parliament met—only a week
before we were assured by the speech from the throne that
her Majesty was continuing to carry on negotiations in the
interests of peace—that her Majesty's Government had
made a proposal to the Government of France which must,
if accepted, inevitably have produced a great and enduring
European war—l am bound to say I should have given my
approbation in terms much more cautious. But, whatever
difference of opinion there may be as to the propriety or
iwprnpriety of her Majesty's Government not acceding to
the Congress, I thine there was not then, and I am sure
there is not now, a second opinion as to the mode and man-
ner in which that refusal was conveyed. (Opposition cheers.)
The noble lord, when he vindicated that curt, and, as I con-
ceive, most offensive reply, dilated on the straightforward-
ness of British Ministers, the candour of their language,
and the clearness with which they were determined to con-
vey their meaning. I wish that that straightforward lan-
guage and that spirit had dictated same of the despatches
and declarations made to Denmark. (Opposition cheers.)

It is a great pity we did not have a little of that rude frank-
ness when the fortunes of that ancient kingdom were at
stake. But there was another great event happened, let
me remind the house, in the month of November. The
King of Denmark died, and the death of the King of
Denmark entirely changed the character of the question,
both as regards Germany and Denmark, and es regards
this country and Germany. The question had been a
Federal question before, when the noble lord in his de-
spatches threatened to have recourse to arms ; but, after
the death of the King of Denmark, it became an inter-
national question, because the controversy was with the
Diet of Germany, which had not recognised the change in
the succession to the various dominions and states of the
King. It was an international question of magnitude and of
a menacing character, and it was under these circumstances,
and when the question became European, and immensely
magnified and multiplied, that the offer of a Congress was
made on the sth of November. The King of Denmark died
on the 16th November; and on the 27th of the same month
England declined to accept the invitation to the Congress
It was, therefore, with the complete knowledge of the in-
creased risk, and the increased dimensions of what was at
stake, that the noble lord sent that refusal to the Emperor of
the French. (Opposition cheers,) It became her Majesty's
Government at this moment to consider seriously their po-
sition. "With the Congress offered, with the death of the
King, it is my duty to remind the house of the manner in
which the Secretary of State addressed Europe. Neither of
these events appeared to have modified his tone. On Nov.
19th, the King having died, the Secretary of State wrote to
Sir A, Menem On the 20th he wrote letters of menace to
the Governments of Sexony and Wurtemburg, setting forth
that, as a matter of course, they would recognise the King of
Denmark as the heir to all the States which were comprised
in the Treaty of 1852, and which were held under the
sceptre of the late King. On the 23d November, four days
before Lord Russell refused the invitation to the Congress,
he wrote—" Her Majesty's Government expects that all the
Powers who signed the treaty of 1852 will acknowledge
King Christian as the King ot Denmark ; and if the troops
ot the Confederation entered Holstein, the Powers who
signed the treaty of 1852 would have a right of interfering."
(Hear, hear.) On the 30th of November he wrote again to
Sir A. Paget, proposing she sole mediation of England. He
wrote another letter to Sir A. Buchanan, saying that he
would leave to Germany the responsibility of raising a ge-
neral war in Europe, which the Diet appeared bent on pro-
voking. That was the tone which her Majesty's Govern-
ment, after due consideration, atter refusing the Congress,
after the death of the King of Denmark, which changed the
Federal question into an international question—that was
the menacing tone which her Majesty's Ministers adopted
towards every Court of Germany, (Opposition cheers.)
Now, after the death of the King of Denmark, it became
her Majesty's Ministers, instead of following that course, to
have maturely considered their position. There were two
courses open to them, both equally intelligible and equally
honourable. It was open to them, after the death of the
King, to have acted as France did—France, that occupied
a position in this matter so dignified and satisfactory that
she has received the compliments of our batted Minister.
(Cheers and laughter.) It was open to the Government to
have adopted the same course as the other neutral Powers,
and that course was frankly announced to the English
Minister by the Minister of France. On Dec. General
Fleury stated to Lord Wodehouse, in Copenhagen, that the
only instruction which he had received from the Emperor
wet, not to take part in any negotiations there, but that he
was to tell the Danish Government explicitly that it Den-
mark became involved in war with Germany, France!
would not come to her assistance. (Cheers.) I say that it'
England had adopted that course it would have been inter-
ligible and honourable. (Cheers.) We were not bound b
y
the Treaty of 1852 to go to the assistance of Denmark she
became involved in war with Germany. No one overf pre-
tends. that we were. (Hear, hear.) As a wetter of high
policy, much as we may regret any distnrbanfce o.
the to
policy o this un.try
riterial arrangements of Europe, the
peace, there. were no high
being one of tranquillity and
expense of a great considerations of policy which would justify England in
going to war, and incurring the
Euro-
pean war without allies that we could have counted upsn.
(Hear, hear.) There was another
Icourse equally intelligi-
ble and equally honourable. But am bound to say that 1
would have recommended this country to take the same
course as France adopted. If the noble lord and his col-
leagues aro of opinion that the balance of power was
by quarrel between Denmark and Germany,
they en-
dangered
were pe
rfectly justified is threatening Germany,
and taking upon them the general management of the
terfectlY
affairs, of Denmark; but they were bound, if war did ta1,.5
place, to support: Denmark. (Opposition cheers ) Instead
of that, they invented a process ot conduct which 1 hope le
not enEily to be eman3pled in the history cf this country, and