The Sun.
London, England, 1864-02-10 00:00:00

Lord PALMERSTON—The right hon. and learned gin•

tleman said that there was one point which had not been
adverted to by my hunt and learned friend—viz., the double
demand which has been made in Japan. Now, Sir, it is un-
necessary to travel over ground which was so ably gone
over by my hon. friend the Under Secretary, and my hon.
and learned friend the Attorney-General. But I must say,
in the first place, that the treaty with Japan was in my
opinion a wise and useful arrangement. (Hear, hear.) I be-
lieve I may appeal to the other side to bear me out in that
(Hear, hear.) It was concluded with the treaty-making
power of that country. Although there is a division of autho-
rity in Japan, there being a spiritual chief, the Mikado, as
well as the Tycoon, yet there is no doubt whatever that the
Tycoon is the treaty-making and governing power, and
that was admitted by the Prince of Satsuma iu a conversa-
tion with Col. Neale, in which he said, " The Tycoon was
to blame when ha made that treaty for not having inserted

in it a clause giving to Daimios exclusive possession of the
roads in which they might make their processions." (Hear,
hear.) Well, that treaty has been in force now for several
years, we have appealed to it in cases in which we consi-
dered its provisions not duly carried out, and it has never
been urged in reply that it was not binding because it had
not received the sanction of the Mikado. (Hear, hear.)
Therefore, I dismiss altogether the doubts as to the bind-
ing nature of the treaty as having been made only by the
Tycoon. I think no man can doubt that British subjects,
both officials and private merchants, having been subjected
to repeated acts of outrage, attempted and perpetrated in
Japan, it would have been unbecoming, unfitting, and cri-
minal in the British Government to allow those outrages
to pass unpunished without demanding reparation or redress,
We should have been exposing our fellow-subjects in Japan,
resorting thither under the stipulations of the treaty, to the
murderous caprice of these Daimios and their retainers,
who, as my hon. friend stated, exercised such undisputed
sway in the country that when they purchased a new sword
and want to try the edge, they sally forth into the streets
and cut down the first person they meet there. It was ne-
cessary, therefore, for the security of our fellow-subjects and
the honour of the country that satisfaction should be de-
manded for these outrages. But then lam asked, " Why
have you demanded satisfaction both from the Tycoon's
Government and from the Daimio, by whose retainers
these particular outrages were committed ?" The fact was
this—there was a double default. (Hear.) The Tycoon's
Government were bound to give security to British subjects
within the range of their authority. This outrage was com-
menced within the range of their authority. It was commit-
ted upon the road called the Tokaido, which had been ex-
pressly assigned for the use of British subjects, in order
that they might take their exercise there without molesta-
tion. It was the duty of the Tycoon's Government, if they
knew that a body of the Daimio's retainers were going in
procession along the road on a given day, and if they knew
and expected that any meeting between the procession and
British subjects might lead to violence, I say it was their
duty in such a case to have stationed guards upon the road
in order to protect Europeans. (Hear, hear.) We are there-
fore justly entitled to require from the Tycoon's Government
a sum sufficient to operate as a fine upon them for not afford-
ing proper protection to British subjects in a place in which
our countrymen were entitled to be. (Hear.) We were also
entitled to demand the punishment of the retainers who had
committed the outrages. But the Tycoon's Government said
"We are unable to afford this redress. These Daimios are
so powerful, that they defy our authority. We cannot get
you satisfaction ; if you want it you must go to the Daimio
and get it yourself." Then we demanded, in the first place
satisfaction from the Government for their fault in not taking
those precautions which they might have taken, and which
it was their duty to take ; and we demanded satisfaction from
the Daimio whose retainers committed the outrage by which
a British subject had so grievously suffered. And really,
when we are told by the hon. member who moved the amend -
ment that this was:a sort of chance medley, a casual encoun-
ter, which was below notice on the part of the British Go-
vernment, I do not think we should have been justified, and
I am sure the nation would not have thought us justified, in
holing the lives of British subjects so cheap. (Hear, hear,)
Sir, I cannot compliment the hon. member upon the good
taste he showed in that part of his speech. (Hear.) Well,
then, satisfaction was demanded and satisfaction was granted
by the Tycoon's Government, who consented to pay the sum
we requred. But Prince Satsuma refused. Were we
to submit to his refusal, or compel him to give us that
redress to which we were so justly entitled ? I say that we
should have failed in our duty if we had not resorted to the
means which were at our disposal for the purpose of com-
pelling this brutal Daimio to give us satisfaction for the
outrage. (Hear, hear.) It was not simply for the purpose
of punishing him—it was for the purpose of deterring others
from these murders, and were so frequently attempted, and
which had in some cases unfortunately been actually com-
mitted. (Hear, hear.) Why, the attack upon our Lega-
tion, the murder of two sentries at the door of the Legation
on another occasion—both of those atrocities were committed
by the retainers of Daimios who were specially employed by
the Tycoon's Government to protect the very people whom
they so barbarously attacked and, in some cases, murdered.
It was necessary for the protection of British subjects that
these Daimios should be taught that although they might
set at defiance the authority of the Tycoon, they could not
with impunity commit outrages upon British subjects,
(Hear, hear.) Akmiral Kuper was therefore ordered, in
case redress was refused, to use force in order to obtain it.
My noble friend at the head of the Foreign-office gave in-
structions not simply on his own authority, but instructions
sanctioned by the Government, and for which I tak3 as full
a responsibility as any that can attach to him. (Hear.) I
entirely approved at the time, I entirely approve now, of
the course which my noble friend took; and I say that it
was the only course which was consistent with his duty as
a Minister of the Crown, and as representing the interests
of this country abroad. (Hear, hear.) Did my noble friend
say "Go and burn a defenceless town ?" No such thing.
He left it to the discretion of the admiral either to blackade
the town and port belonging to Prince Satsuma, or to de-
stroy his forts and his castle if that could be easily done.
Admiral Kuper performed his duty as a British officer
ought to perform it. He did not begin an attack upon the
forts. Ho demanded satisfaction, and parleyed for two
days with the envoys of Prince Satsuma. As my hon.
friend (Mr, Lai ard)
said, they twice tried by acts of treachery
first to inveigle him and Colonel Neale ashore, and we know
pretty well what would have happened to them there ; and
next to surprise the vessel, and take it by asking permis-
sion to bring 40 armed retainers on board. This leave was
given, but a party of marines of equal force was ranged
opposite to them, and then they thought it better to re-
embark in their boat, without carrying out the object for
which they had came prepared. After two days spent in
negotiation, Admiral Kuper sent to take possession of the
steamers by
way of reprisal, and if Prince Satsuma had
yielded to our demands those steamers would have been
released, and no harm would have been done to his forts or
to the town. But while these steamers were in the pos-
session of our ships the forts opened fire upon the British
squadron. I trust there is no man in this house who will
maintain that, when a British admiral commanding a squad-
ron is fired at by a foreign battery, it is not his duty to res
turn the fire and to teach the enemy that British ships are
not to be insulted and attacked with impunity. Well, then,
Admiral Kuper was compelled to burn the steamers, in order
that his ships
might be free for action, In the course of