The Sun.
London, England, 1864-02-05 00:00:00

', FRIDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 5, 1864.

hb.olll.

open one fit iger at a time. The Emperor of the French
treats his p eopte in mu ch the same way—he opens one finger
at a time, ' out in doia' ; so it is for the benefit of his people,
and I hop a his Government will be maintained, and that,
with his sagacity at al his skill, it will be found possible
with out a revolution, to give the French people greater
liberty and more ;.n accordance with that which other coun-
tries, enjoy. Thee a are, however, difficult and great problems,
"We in this count ry are free from them. We have long set-
tled. ou: constit-ation, but I believe there will be serious and
great conflicts 'al Europe. lam happy to say that in France,
in Russia, and in this country, there is the greatest desire
to maintain peace, and if three such powers are disposed to
peace, I cannot believe that any long war is likely
to occur in Europe. It will be the object of the Govern-
me not ra 3hly to commit themselves to any policy which
may entail evils upon this country. But at the same time I
mu;-t, accenting what the noble earl said, state that it is
the duty of the Government not to look to Parliament
for sugge etions or seek advice from parliament, but to look
seriously- at the situation of the country, and to avail them-
selves of all the light which they can obtain; but having
so :wailed themselves, and then made up their minds to state
to pozliarrient what is their policv, and to stand or fall by
the result—that is their duty. (Hear, and cheers.)
Earl GREY said the question for the Government to de-
cide was whether they would protect Denmark or abandon

her. We re we to permit a gross act of injustice to be done ?
After what had fallen from the noble earl he (Earl Grey)
could not help entertaining a suspicion that it might be the
opinion of her Majesty's Government that Denmark was
oppressed unjustly. If so, the oppression ought to be re-
sisted. It was a most serious thing on the part of Govern •
ment t o determine that they would look on quietly while an
unjust act was being perpetrated. (Hear, hear.) He thought
the Powers of the civilised world had a clear interest in pre-
venting injustice being inflicted upon any of their number,
and the best security for the peace of Europe was the un-
derstanding amongst the great nations that if any one of
them were treated unjustly the other nations would stand
forward in its defence. He feared that the Government had
too long deferred coming to a definite conclusion on this
subject, and that the advice we had given Denmark had
crea,ed an impression that when the time arrived our aid
would not be wanting. If we had intended to withhold our
aseietance we should have made that determination known
to Denmark at an early period. If the Government had
intended to interfere in the matter they ought to have
called Parliament together at an earlier time—(hear,
hear)—and asked for its support. That might have been
followed up by the despatch to Denmark of a British
force. Such a course would have had an enormous effect.
As it was her Majesty's Government had either done too
much or too little. With regard to America, he acquitted
the Government of all blame whatever, and he thought also
that the arguments for not engaging in a war on behalf of
Poland were perfectly conclusive, France naturally felt
that we had lett her in the lurch, and was offended accord-
ingly. He thought the Government were right in rejecting
the Emperor Napoleon's plan of a congress,:but that the
manner in which they did so was needlessly offensive to
that sovereign. The premature publication of the despatch
in which they announced their intention was also calculated
to wound his Majesty's susceptibhities. It was a matter of
the highest importance that our relations with foreign coun-
tries should be conducted in such a manner as would, while
maintaining our own dignity and honour, conciliate those
Powers, and prevent the country from falling into the state
of isolation in which she was now placed. Nor is it imma-
terial to observe upon the drain upon the resources of the
empire which was going on in distant dependencies at a
time when, looking to the critical state of Europe, a demand
might be made upon our energies nearer home. Having
expressed his deep regret at the war in New Zealand, the
noble earl complained of the terms in which the Queen's
Speech referred to the operations in Japan. Contrary to
practice, it expressed a decided opinion that the Japanese
were to blame, and that we were not responsible for what
happened. Now, he for one looked with the utmost horror
upon the destruction of Kagcsima. The cruelty of the
proceedings of the Federals of Charleston were as nothing
to the burning of an enormous town, the inhabitants cf
which were innocent of all offence against us. He felt
sure, moreover, that unless there was a change in our
police- in Japan, a costly and bloody war with that coun-
try would soon commence. In China, also, there was a
state of things entirely unsatisfactory. So far as her
jesty's Government were concerned, it was a mere
matter of accident that we had not been involved in the
'atest responsibility in regard to the Government of
Was it wise to involve ourselves in so many of
aese affairs in different parts of the world, while Europe
was in its present critical state ? He knew he should be told
that it is not our fault. But that is not so. No doubt the
barbarous people to whom we were opposed had become like
barbarians; but we had in tee first instance placed our-
selves in a position in which we were certain to receive
treatment which we should then be called upon to resent.
Oar whole course of action with regard to these distant na-
tions had been marked with complete want of foresight.
Earl GRANVILLE did not intend to prolong the debate,
which had been very satisfactory to her Majesty's Govern-
ment, as it had, he thought, shown that the house generally
approved their policy. He wished, however, to refer to one
or two principles laid down by the noble earl who had just
concluded. One of the principles to which Earl Grey always
appeared most attached was a love of peace, and that he
frequently carried to an injudicious extent. But he (Earl
Granville) must protest against the doctrine which he now
appeared to lay down, that because we had large armaments
we were bound to redress all it-justice, without regard to our
own interests or treaty obligations. The noble earl's speech
showed that' he did not himself regard this principle as
sound, for as soon as he came to New Zealand or Japan,
when operations were necessary for the protection of the
lives and property of ourfellow subjects, he protested against
war. But with regard to Schleswig-Holstein he said that if
the representations of his noble friend in regard to the con-
duct of Germany were correct, the Government should have
called Parliament together in December, and told both
parties to the dispute what they meant to do. Bat he (Earl
Granville) thought that we should never threaten what we
could not carry out. Now, from December three months
:nest have elapsed before we could have been of any use to
the belligerents whose cause we espoused. And it was not
prudent, therefore, to announce our intentions then, when
we could not know what might be the position of the belli-
gerents, or the intentions of other Powers, at the time
when the opportunity for action arrived. The noble earl
had accused the Foreign Secretary of acting discourteously
towards the Emperor of France in the publication of hie de-
spatch declining to attend the Congress before it was actually
delivered to the Emperor. No discourtesy was intended,
nor did it ever enter the head of his noble friend to publish
it before its delivery. But it was at that time very desir-
able that it should be published as early as possible, in con-
sequence of the anxiety that was felt as to the course that
England would take. And its delivery to the Emperor hav-
ing been accidentally delayed for two days in consequence of
some misunderstanding with Earl Cowley, it happened that
it was published before the Emperor formally received it.
No discourtesy was, however, intended, and at the earliest
possible period an apology was made to the Emperor for the
apparent, but quite unintentional, discourtesy which had
occurred. He hoped, he would say in conclusion, that it
was quite understood that the Government took on them-
selves the full responsibility of the affairs now in haod.
What they requested was that, if the house had not confi-
dence in them, let them say so, and dismiss them ; but if
not, let them not bind the hands of the Government, but
leave them that freedom of action without which they could
not satisfactorily conduct the affairs of the country.
Earl GREY, in explanation, remarked that what he in-
tended to say was, that if this country was going to inter-
fere, the sooner the decision was made known the better,
The Address was then agreed to, and the house adjourned
at twenty-five minutes to ten o'clock,

il7,j c

China.

EOU3E OF COMMONS--Last Evening,

The house assembled shortly before four o'clock.

NEW MEMBERS.

The following new members took the oath 3 and their

Beata :

Sir ROUNDELL PALMER (Attorney-General), on his re-
election for the borough of Richmond, Yorkshire.
Sir R. P. COLLIER (Solicitor-General), on his re-election
for the borough of Plymouth.
Mr. It. BATESON HARVEY, for Buckinghamshire, in the
room of the lion. W. G. Cavendish, now Baron Chesham,
in the House of Peers.
The Hon. F. LIGON, for the western division of Worces-
tershire, in the place of Viscount Elmley, now the Earl
Beauchamp, in the House of Peers.
Major WATERHOUSE, for the borough of Pontefract, in
the room of Mr. R. Monekton l'fiiines, now Baron
Houghton, in the House of Peers.
Sir COLMAN O'LoOHLEN, in the room of Mr. F, M.
Calcutt, deceased.
The
Hon. `-" D, H. TRACY, for the Montgomery-
shire burghs, in
the room of Captain IV. Johnson, de-
Nased.
Sir Wm. FRASER, Bart., for the borough of Ludlow, in
the room of Mr. Beriah Botfield, deceased.
Mr. J. PEEL, for the borough of Tamworth, in the room
of Viscount Raynham, now the Marquis Townshend, in
the House of Peers.
Mr. MORGAN TREHERNE, for the borough of Coventry,
in the room of the Right Hon. Edward Ellice, deceased.
Mr. LLOYD, for the i
borough of Barnstaple, in the room
of Mr. George Potts, deceased.
Mr. G. S. LETEVRE, for the borough of Reading, in the
room of Mr. Sergeant Pigott, now one cf the Barons of her
Majesty's Court of Exchequer.
Colonel WYSE, for the borough of Windsor, in the room
`lr. G. W. Hope, deceased.
C. :N.TEATE, for the city of Oxford, in the room of Mr.
..i.,.3.ngston, deceased.
Mr. W. HUMPHREY, for the borough of Andover, in the
of Mr. William Cubitt, deceased.
NEW WRITS.

IL 1

Oa the motion of Mr. BRAND a writ was ordered to issue
for the election of a member to servo for the city of Dur-
ham, in the room of Sir W, Atherton, deceased.
On the motion of Colonel TAYLOR, a writ was ordered
to issue for the election of a member for Tewkesbury, in the
rdom of the Hon. Frederick Lygon, who had accepted the
Stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds.
On the motion of Lord HOTHAN, a writ was ordered to
issue for the election of a member for Winchester, in the

room of Sir J, B. Earl, who accepted the Chiltern
Hundreds.

ENTRANCE OF LORD PALMERSTON.

On the entrance of Lord Palmerston, about 20 minutes
past 4 o'clock, his lordship was greeted wan loud cheers.
Immediately after taking his seat, the nib .e lord walked
vigorously down the floor, and then returned and laid on
the table different certain treaties of convention which had
been entered into by her Majesty during the recess, and
which are specified in the Royal speech.
NEW BILLS.

Mr. BRAND gave notice of bills to be introduced by the
Secretary of State for the Home Department relative to
insane persons—(cheers)—and by his noble friend the
Secretary of the Admiralty on naval affairs.
Mr. 0' HAGAN gave notice that he would move for leave
to bring in a bill relative to the conveyance of land in Ire •
land, and with respect to county courts in that country.
Mr. M. GIBSON gave notice that he would move for a
committee to inquire into the metropolitan railway schemes
now proposed to be entertained this session; and as an
arrangement was likely to be effected between this house
and the House of Lords relative to such schemes, he would
lay on the table a bill relating to private bills.
Mr. S. FITZGERALD gave notice that he would ask
certain questions relative to the capture of British vessels.
Mr. L. KING gave notice that he would introduce a
bill for the extension of the franchise in boroughs.

THE QUEEN'S SPEECH.

The SPEAKER having read the Royal Speech,

Lord RICHARD GROSVENOR, on moving an ad-
dress in reply to the Royal Speech, alluded to the do.
mestic event referred to in her Majesty's Address, and next
adverted to the Danish question. He said it was much to
be regretted that after the experience of the German coun-
tries in 1848 and 1867, they should have adopted a bully-
ing tone towards Denmark. (Cheers.) He thought it was
the duty of this country to maintain the balance of power in
Europe, and to adhere to international treaties. (Cheers.)
The next paragraph in the speech related to Japan, and he
denied that the Government was blameable far the disaster
that had occurred in that country, and defended the policy
of the Government. He expressed a hope that the natives
of that oountry would be made to feel the power of England
when exercised in the right. With regard to New Zealand,
the disaffected were confined to the northern parts, and
he made the same observations as with regard to
Japan. Having referred in terms of approval to the other
portions of the Royal Speech, he concluded by moving the
address, expressive of grateful solicitude relative to the in-
terests of her Majesty and the royal family, particularly
the marriage of the Prince of W ales and the birth of a
prince. (Cheers.)

Mr. GOSCHEN, in seconding the address, re-echoed
the strong feelings of love and loyalty towards her Majesty
and the Royal family it expressed. He defended the policy
of the Government in regard to Schleswig-Holstein. Her
Majesty had been unremitting in her endeavours
to accomplish what was the object of all parties,
namely, peace. He trusted that object would be
eventually adopted by other countries, although there
might be some difference as to the mode of carrying it out.
This country had not made up its mind with regard to the
doctrine of non-intervention. This country was not to
isolate itself from the events of Europe on selfish grounds, or
to repudiate her own interests. A notion, however, prevailed
in Germany that this country would not interfere under
any circumstances, and that our sympathy with Denmark
merely resulted from selfish considerations as regarded our
commerce. He asserted that the present shostilities in
Europe developed the fact that war was undertaken for the
purpose of breaking treaties, which war had before been
commenced to maintain. (Cheers.) The hon. member
then referred in terms of great gratitude to the commercial
prosperity. The country had developed its elasticity by
rising superior to a failure of one branch of its industry by
its energy in others, and the only cry from Manchester
was not to interfere with this blockade which had interfered
with her local prosperity. With regard to the imports there
was a falling off in only one article, namely, wheat, to the
amount of £11,000,000, while there was an increase
which would go a great way to meet the deficit of
£18,000,000 arising from the increase in the price of cotton.
He then alluded in terms of approval to the state of India,
and expressed a hope that the principle c f free trade would
be extended.

Mr. DISRAELI, whoj rose amid cheers, said—Mr.
Speaker, my first impression when I read the Speech of the
Royal Commissioners was that it was a document not ad-
dressed to the times in which we live, and that it really did
not bear a true relation to the circumstances of the day ;
and, after having listened to the interesting addresses of
the mover and seconder, I still retain the first impression.
Indeed, if it were not for one paragraph in which an ap-
peal is made to the unaffected loyalty of the nation, by re-
minding us of the birth of an heir to the Prince of Wales,
I really see no reason why this document should not have
been composed in any other year than the year of our Lord
!Sl4, (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) And yet, sir, sinee we
last met in this house a great deal has happened. indeed,
I can hardly recall more numerous and more important
subjects on which the House of Commons would have been
grateful to have been enlightened by the Crown. We are
certainly assured, and we receive the announcement with
pleasure. that, in the opinion of her Majesty's Government,
the condition of the country is, on the whole, satisfactory,
and that the distress in the manufacturing districts is in
some degree diminished. But, sir, I cannot but believe
that there are other parts of her Majesty's kingdom in
which very great distress has for a long period prevailed
and still prevails ; the condition of which is by no means
on the whole satisfactory, and where the amount of dis-
tress since last we met has certainly not diminished. If,
therefore, the sympathy of the Sovereign and of Parlia-
ment be, as I believe sincerely it is, an expression of
sentiment highly valued by the nation, I think it
would have been as well if her Majesty's Government
had taken this occasion to refer to the present con-
dition of Ireland. (Hear, hear.) Last year we were all sen-
sible of the sufferings of the agricultural population of Ire-
land. They were then sustaining the unfortunate results of
three consecutive bad harvests. In England we have been
favoured with exuberant and abounding crops, but I fear
that blessing has not been extended to the sister country.
The distress in Ireland must, therefore, now be greatly ag-
gravated, and I think it would have been wise, I am sure
it would have been true, and I hold that it would have been
politic, to acknowledge not merely the existence of the dis-
tress in Ireland, but that it has been borne in a mann r
which for patience and endurance is as exemplary as that
which has been shown by our fellow-subjects is the manu-
facturing districts. I know that there are philosophers at
present who look upon the increased emigration from Ile-
land as a proceeding which need not occasion any anxiety
to the State. I have no doubt that emigration has been
caused by blended causes, that it may not entirely proceed
from the agrarian distress which has so long prevailed, yet
I do not think that any sagacious Minister, particularly in
the times in which we live, can view the flitting of large
numbers of her Majesty's subjects with indifference—a race
too on which in the hour of trial and emergency we have so
much depended, and whom we have always found a gallant
and gifted people. (Cheers.) But that is not the only omis-
sion I and others have remarked in the speech of the Royal
Commissioners. We have been assured that the condition
of our fellow-subjects in Lancashire is, on the whole, some-
what improved; but I should like to have seen some refe-
rence to the country to the convulsions in which the distress
is entirely attributable. (Hear.) It seems to me somewhat
strange that the United 'States are not noticed in her Ma-
jesty's Speech. Our relations with the United States are
very intimate and have been very active, and some expres •
sion of opinion on the part of the Government as to the pro-
bable duration of that eventful struggle—(a laugh)—would
have been received with great satisfaction. It is said thatthe
Government have received official communications on that
subject, and we should certainly have been extremely obliged
if they had given us the results. But if they could not
venture to give an opinion as to the probable duration of the
struggle, they might have assured us that the policy they
have adopted with regard to the contest,and which has been
sanctioned by Parliament, is at least unchanged..(Hear.);lt
would have been satisfactory to know that the principle of
strict neutrality is still the rule of our policy, and that dur-
ing the recess it has been rigorously observed and severely
and strictly enforced. I say so, because much has occurred
during the interval to occasion great suspicion in the public
mind ; and though I freely own that these circumstances
may be susceptible of a satisfactory explanation on the part
of the Government, still I do not doubt that the subject is
one which will require the attention of Parliament, and I
think it would have been wiser if, at the commencement of
the Session, there had been some notice of our relations with
the United States in the speech of the Royal Commissioners.
(Hear, hear) There are some other subjects which Ido not,
but which most hon. members expected to, see noticed. I
should like to have seen something about China. (Hear.)
Our relations with China, and particularly with the Chinese
Government, form a topic of great interest to the English
people. When we remember the extraordinary announce-
ment made last year of what was to be our policy towards
China, and the engagements then made by officers in our
service, with the enthusiastic sanction of the members of the
Government, and when we remember what we have recently
heard as to the result of those engagements, I think some
light might have been shed on the state of affairs in the
Speech. (Hear, hear.) In the period which has elapsed since
we met here last the subject of Poland has not been forgotten.
I believe there have been very active communication with
foreign Powers on the subject, and we all know the extreme
interest felt by her Majesty's Government in Poland. It
would haee been satisfactory, therefore, for us to have had
some official declaration of the views of her Majesty's Go-
vernment on the subject of the Polish insurrection. (Hear,
hear.) It is only a few weeks ago since one of the most
powerful sovereigns of Europe, who, when Parliament was
prorogued was still our cordial ally, proposed a great scheme
for the consideration of her Majesty's Government—which
no one will deny, looking to its probable consequences and
the quarter from which it came, was a political movement
of the highest character. (Hear.) It would have been as well
if that proposal had been noticed in the Speech, and in
noticing it, perhaps an opportunity might have been offered
to remove some of the irritation which, it is understood,
exists, and to explain some of the misapprehensions which
are said to prevail. (Hear, hear,) Notwithstanding all the
omissions which I have pointed out, there is yet in her
Majesty's Speech one still more significant omission. The
country is in a state of profound peace; and this is the first

THE SUN, LONDO

time when England, in a state of profound peace, has not
been assured by the Sovereign at the commencement of the
Session of Parliament that her Majesty has received from
all foreign Powers expressions of amity and goodwill.
(Cheers.) The singular omission of that passage renders it
necessary that the House of Commons on the first night of
its meeting should not allow the eircumstance to pass un-
noticed, and forces us to consider the nature of our foreign
relations. I confess myself that, taking a general view of
our external relations at the present time, what strikes me as
their principal feature and characteristic is that they are in a
state of utter confusion. (Laughter.) I see everything in an
inconsistent condition—sometimes approaching even to the
incoherent. (A. laugh.) Everything appears to be done
with a total want of system, and we are forced to ask our-
selves daily this question—what are our objects, and who
are our allies ? (Cheers.) I take an instance—because an
instance is always stronger than an argument—the instance
of Russia. It is very possible that her Majesty's Ministers
might have been of opinion that the power of Russia was
menacing to the tranquillity of Asia and the independence of
Europe, and that it ought to be checked and guarded. I give
no judgment on that opinion—l deprecate to-night any un-
necessary discussion on any controverted points ; but it is an
opinion which has been held in this age of eminent states-
men, and it is an opinion which might without extrava-
gance have been held by her Majesty's Government. Had
it been the opinion of the Government, their conduct last
year when the insurrection in Poland broke out would have
been perfectly intelligible. An insurrection in Poland,
accompanied as it perhaps might have been by an insurrec-
tion in Circassia—sanctioned, stimulated, and perhaps sup-
ported by the great Western Powers, would, no doubt, have
brought about results not insignificant. If that were the
opinion of the Government, their conduct was unintelligible ;
they excited the movement, they fanned the flame, and then
in the midst of the tumult and conflagration they suddenly
drew up. (Hear, hear,) Their conduct was involved in
perplexity and ambiguity ; they never once relaxed into
frankness, except at last to declare that on no consideration
whatever would they ever go to war in favour of a policy in
which, in justice to Poland, they never should have engaged
unless they were in reality prepared to carry it out. But it
may be said by the Government—and I give them the fair
advantage of the objection—" We repudiate the hypotheti-
cal policy which you attribute to us with regard to Russia ;
we believe that it is the interest of Russia to maintain the
empire of Russia in its strength and integrity as a necessary
portion of the political balance, and as a bulwark against the
aggressive ambition of another European Power." Be it so,
But if that be really the opinion of the Government, if that
be their policy, how can they account for those mysterious
months of last autumn when the question of peace or war
was absolutely a struggle between the capitalists of Europe
and the secret societies—two very strong bodies, no doubt ?
W hat we wanted then was some Prince or potentate, some
Sovereign or Minister, some of those individuals who affect
to guide the destinies of nations, should, under the circum •
stances, come forward to enlighten, strengthen, and direct
the public opinion of Europe. (Hear, hear•.) Take the case
of Greece. Do we not see in what has happened in Greece
the same confusion arising from inconsistency of conduct
produced by a total want of system ? Last year gentlemen
on this side of the house—and I shared the feeling—viewed
with reluctance the surrender by her Majesty of the lonian
garrrisons—(hear, hear)—but I will freely admit that I
could conceive a British Minister in a position in which to
obtain great results and to favour a bold policy such a ma•
terial sacrifice might have been justified. To establish a
strong Greek people, to obtain the gratitude and confidence
of the Greek people, that was an object so paramount as to
justify the proposal of that sacrifice, But then your policy
ought to have been complete. When the sacrifice had been
made, that was not the time to talk about the conditions to
be attached to it. And yet what is the state of the case ?
No sooner does the King of Greece arrive in his kingdom
than these conditions crop up. One day his fortifications
are to be raised— and another day he hears to his astonish-
ment that a portion of his new dominions is to be neutralised.
The neutrality of a portion of a kingdom is almost unpre-
cedented, and is always perilous. Instead of a magnanimous
policy, we find there is a policy of suspicion; instead of a
policy which would make the Greeks more powerful, we
find a policy which would make them more subordinate. In
what a position, in respect to his subjects, have we placed
that ingenuous youth, who, so tar, I may be permitted to
say, has shown no deficiency of energy and spirit. The
Greeks must consider him either as absolutely incompetent,
or as guilty of bad faith. I have seen many Greeks—and
I dare say other hon. gentlemen have also seen many—who
would say he was guilty of duplicity. (A. laugh) Against
bad faith you may guard, but no human sagacity can
Lafile the unconscious machinations of stupidity. (Loud
laughter.) When we parted we were under the impression
that a gcod understanding existed between England and
France. Notwithstanding many rebuffs, notwithstanding
Mexico, notwithstanding our refusal to mediate between the
contending powers in America, notwithstanding other in-
cidents and causes which will be fresh in the memory of
every member, there was a general impression that a good
understanding between England and France existed. A
good understanding between England and France is simply
this--that, so far as the influence of those two great Poe era
extends, the affairs of the worLt are to be conducted by their
co-operation instead of by their rivalry. But co•operation
requires not merely identity of interest but reciprocal good
feeling. In public as well as in private matters a
certain degree of sentiment is necessary for the happy con-
duct of affairs, A kind thing, for instance, ought to be
done in a rough manner, and if possible a rough thing ought
to be done in a kind manner. (A laugh.) The feelings of
nations must be considered. Now the position of the Em-
peror of the French at the end of last year was, as every-
body knows, a very distressing one. He had held out ex-
pectations which he could not fulfil, and he had been
worsted in a diplomatic encounter.:lf a Sovereign was ever
in a situation in which he might count on the sympathy of
an ally, in such a situation the Emperor of the Frenchlwas
placed, especially if he counted on the sympathy of an ally
who had very much encouraged him in the erroneous course
which he had taken, (Hear.) I look upon the proposition
for a Congress to have been an adroit manoeuvre. Amid
the burst of martial music and the peals of artillery the
Emperor of the French would have retreated with flying
colours; but I at the same time look on the proposition as
one deficient in soundness. There have been it is true very
great modifications of the Treaty of Vienna, but the scope
and tendency of the policy established by the settlement of
Vienna has not been changed, Whenever a settlement
takes place in Europe meant to be comprehensive and per-
manen t,it is in the nature of things that there should be pe-
riodical variations in its conditions, but unless the scope
and tendency of the policy of such a settlement undergo a
change, no one, as experience proves, is likely to call for an
abrogation of the treaty itself. In the course of the 250
years which form diplomatic history, and the crowd of
conferences and congresses which have taken place,
we find only three settlements of a permanent
and comprehensive character—those of Westphalia,
Utrecht, and Vienna. if you examine the condition of
Europe 50 years after the settlements of Westphalia and
Utrecht respectively, I will be bound to say you will find
as numerous and as important modifications of those settle-
ments as have occurred during the almost 50 years which
have elapsed since the settlement of Vienna. But the scope
and tendency of the policy fixed at Westphalia and after-
wards at Utrecht was never changed, and no Power, not-
withstanding the many disturbances on the Continent,
called on Europeeo advocate such a change. As it was with
the settlements which I have just mentioned, so it is with
the treaty of Vienna—there may have been great modi-
fications of it, but its scope and policy have not altered.
Under these circumstances, far from disapproving of her
Majesty's Government for declining to attend the proposed
Congress, I give them credit for the valid reasons which
induced them to take that course. I cannot, however, ex-
tend the same approbation to the manner and mode in
which their refusal was conveyed, (Hear, hear.) The
position of the Emperor of the French is peculiar lie has
publicly—almost ostentatiously—proclaimed that position
to Europe, and there can, there ore, be no indelicacy in re-
ferring to it. He is not, he has told you, like other Em-
perors. He is not, for example, like the Emperors of
Austria or Russia. He does not stand on traditions. He
is not hedged round by the magic of prescriptive rights.
He has been created, and can be maintained only, by the
sympathy of his people—a people proud, imperious, and apt
to ba discontented. A considerate ally ought to have re-
membered this; but an ally which had encouraged the
Emperor of the French in the very policy which had in-
volved him in his difficulty—an ally which had been a par-
taker of his projects, and had fully shared in his diplomatic
discomfitures—ought not to have received his proposition
for a Congress in a spirit of cynical criticism. Sarcasm is,
undoubtedly, a great ornament of popular debates (laughter)
and has been recognized as an efficient rhetorical weapon
since the days of Quintilian ; but the natural language of
diplomacy is, I contend, conciliation, and it is, in my
opinion, to be regretted that a Secretary of State, when he
conveys to foreign Powers the decisions of his Sovereign and
Cabinet, should find no happier medium of expression than
a sneer. (Cheers.) What makes the conduct of the Go-
vernment so much to be deplored in the present instance
is that when this refusal couched in this spirit was given,
the Government must have been sensible that the time was
approaching for the solution of one of those European diffi-
culties in which the cordial sympathy and assistance of our
ally must prove of the greatest utility. This brings me to
the subject which absorbs the most important part of the
Speech which we heard from the Royal Commissioners to-
day. It cannot be said that in that Speech the affairs of
Schleswig and Holstein are passed over without notice.
They are, however, I maintain, only noticed to bewilder,
and if anyone reads the three paragraphs to which I am
about to call attention he will find that they do not place
the real state of the case before the house, and that they
not only do not do that, but that they place the real question
in such a position that her Majesty's Government have
altogether evaded giving an opinion upon it, (Hear.) I
have shown the house that in the general conduct of our
affairs, whether with regard to Russia, Greece, or France,
there have been exhibited by Ministers a confusion and in-
consistency which can be productive of nothing but injuri-
ous consequences, and that there is in their policy an ap-
parently total want of system. Last year the house expected
an explanation of a despatch which had been written by the
Secretary for Foreign Affairs, on this very question of the
relations between Denmark and Germany, and on the merits

or demerits of that document J am not now about to pro-
nounce an opinion. It was a very important State paper;
but, although I do not at present propose to enter upon the
discussion of the views which it contains on a question
which be dealt with at some future day, and which cannot
be dwelt upon in a desultory debate on the address on the
opening night of a session, yet I will say that I look upon
the policy which was recommended in that despatch,
considering the time at which it was published
and the place where it was penned, as calculated
to encourage the violent party in Germany—(hear, hear)
—and that I believe the general impression which it pro-
duced in Germany as well as Denmark was, that all the bias
of the British Government was in favour of Germany. Any
one who happened to be in that country at the time must be
aware that the despatch was for months looked upon as in-
dicative of the policy of the English Government, and that
a fresh impulse to force Federal Execution was the conse-
quence. To so great an extent did that feeling prevail that
the subject was brought forward in this house, though it
was the last night of the session, by my hon. friend the
member for Horsham. The Prime Minister made a speech
on that occasion, and I gave no opinion of the justice or
policy of the course which he recommended, any more than
on the despatch of the Secretary of State. I would, how-
ever, appeal to any one who listened to the speech in which
the noble lord declared that the independence and integrity
of Denmark was of great European interest, and in which
he declared that when the borders of Holstein were passed
Denmark would find that she was not alone in the quarrel
—to say whether the necessary effect of the noble lord's
language did not appear to be—that which we now know
was its effect—to encourage a party which certainly never
required such encouragement—namely, the extreme party
in Denmark. (Hear.) Thus you see exhibited in dealing
with this question the same confusion, inconsistency, and
incoherency which I have already traced through the whole
of the diplomatic conduct
operated--the c
aconductofatthe_
edG.otvheeronnmeetnote.nTcohaerdagesepuateceh-
and the speech
Ger-
many to take an extravagant view, the other to support
Denmark in maintaining a view equally irrational—we now
find the question discussed in the Speech of the Royal Com-
missioners. I have no doubt that these three paragraphs
are now perfectly familiar to every hon. gentleman. The
third, fourth, and fifth paragraphs of the Speech from the
Throne—the three most important paragraphs—are, in fact,
a statement of premises. They are premises drawn up with
great art, and no doubt for a great object. They were drawn
up to impress on the country and on Europe the solemn
and important engagements which had been entered into
by all the principal crowned heads of Europe. It
reads, in fact, like the .Almanach de Gotha. (Laughter.)
First of all, there is the date of the treaty ; then the style
and names of the Sovereigns; then the object is brought
forward that, for the preservation of the balance of power
and of the peace of Europe, the integrity of the Danish
monarchy should be maintained, and that in order to do so
the acknowledgment of King Christian as successor to the
Crown should be made. Having brought forward all these
premises, what is the conclusion which is drawn from them ?
It cannot be found in the Speech—(cheers)—because the
third paragraph cads only, " Her Majesty will continue her
efforts in the interests of peace." The logical conclusion of
these three paragraphs is co be found in the Speech which
the noble lord made on the last day of last Session—(hear,
hear)—that, in consequence of this treaty, in consequence
of vital European interests being involved, according to the
opinion of the Government, in that treaty, if any act of
violence was formed against Denmark (for that was the
language of the noble lord), Denmark was not to find her-
self alone in the contest. (Cheers ) But here we have
these pompous premises, and what is the conclusion ? Why,
that her Majesty will continue her efforts in the interests of
peace. The interests of peace I What would a stranger
think who had listened to the Speech of the Royal Com-
missioners, and knew nothing of public life and public affairs
until that moment? Could he believe that the Eider had
been passed, that blood had been shed, and that perhaps at
this moment a great engagement may be taking place ?
(Cheers.) And is Denmark alone ? (Loud cheers.) Be-
fore I touch on the policy of her Majesty's Government in
that respect I must make one observation on these three
paragraphs, because they containan incongruous expression
which may be found very inconvenient in future debates,
which are no doubt impending. The house will observe
that, having stated the treaty and the object to
it, which is to obtain the succession of King
Christian IX. to the kingdom of Denmark, it is said
"Her Majesty has been unremitting in her endeavours to
bring about a peaceful settlement of the differences which
on this matter have arisen between Germany and Denmark."
That is an entirely incorrect statement. There are no differ-
ences between Germany and Denmark on this matter. Not
even the Diet of Frankfort has come to any resolution to
question the succession of the present King of Denmark,
and, therefore, the differences existing between Denmark
and Germany have nothing to do with thematter,as is alleged
to be the case. (Hear.) No, sir, these pompous premises are
drawn up to prepare us for what, no doubt, in the opinion
of the noble lord, is the logical consequence to be found in
the speech which he made last year. But a new light has
fallen apparently on the Government. The convenience of
Parliament is appreciated in a free country. But there is
one advantage in Parliament which is not always under-
stood, but which it appears to me at the present time her
Majesty's Government entirely appreciates, and that is that
when the Ministry have not a policy it is convenient to look
to Parliament to find one for them. (Loud cheers,) What
I wish to impress on the house is that that is by no means
our duty. If there be a prerogative of the Crown, which no
one has ever challenged, it is the prerogative of declaring
peace or war, without the interference of Parliament, by her
Majesty alone, under the advice of her responsible Minis-
ters. (Hear, hear.) And if her Majesty's Government are
of opinion that this country ought to go to war for any
cause, or on any side, and advise her Majesty to take that
step, and her Majesty takes that step, and there is a war,
whether that war be just or unjust, no doubt Parliament
will support her Majesty, though, at the same time, they
will take the constitutional opportunity to express their
opinion on the policy of the Government, to bring in-
formation on the subject, and to throw light upon the cir •
cumstances which will be conducive to the formation of a
clear opinion upon the matter. (Hear, hear.) I mention
this, because Ido not think her Majesty's Government
are eminent for courtesy in the manner in which they treat
the House of Commons. (Hear, hear.) It is only recently
we have been reminded, not by the noble lord, but by
writers whom he recognises as great masters of the English
language, that affairs are carried on in a very satisfactory
way as far as the House of Commons is concerned ; that the
great departments are principally represented by Under
Secretaries ; that nobody much cares what they say or what
they do—(laughter)—and that the relations between the
Government and the House of Commons are fast drawing
to that satisfactory condition which subsists between mem-
bers of the French Chambers and their master. (Cheers.)
Humiliate us it you like. Degrade us if we must submit to
it. But, at any rate, do not call on us to bear responsibility.
(Loud cheers.) If the relation of the House of Commons to
the Government is fast approaching the relation of the
French Chambers to their master we have a right to look to
the Government to do that which in the language of the day
is known as " taking the initiative." (Laughter.) No doubt
there are difficulties in the way of the Government coming
with a cut and dry policy to settle all the differences of
Europe. The condition of Europe is one, no doubt, of a very
grave character, and upon the conduct of the English Go-
vernment and on the conduct of Parliament much depends.
But the noble lord must feel that it is for the Government to
frame a policy which they think they ought to recommend,
and no doubt when it is brought forward, if it be a wise and
fair policy, the House will unanimously support them; for
I have always seen that whenever foreign affairs have occu-
pied the attention of the House there has always been an
absence of party strife and feeling in dealing with matters
of such high importance, (Hear, hear.) If we believe that
this country is engaged in a just and fair quarrel, Parliament
will support the Government, of whomsoever it may be
formed. (Cheers,) But let us be sure about the policy
which we are pursuing. Let us be quite sure, if we go to
war, first of all that it is a necessary and just war, and,
secondly, if now necessary, whether it should not have been
prevented by more astute and skilful management..(Cheers.)
I think I have shown some reason why the country should
look with some suspicion on the foreign policy of the pre-
sent Government. I looked with some suspicion on it
last year. I thought I observed in it uneertainty, incon •
sistency, a variance between the courses recommended by
different Ministers, which seemed to portend the greatest of
all evils—namely, indecision in the treatment of our allies.
Her Majesty's Government, throughout this particular
business of Germany and Denmark, has been like a certain
Prince—not of Auguetenburg or Glucksburg—but that un-
fortunate Prince of Denmark who was infirm of purpose—
" The times are out of joint, oh cursed spite,
That ever we were born to set them right."

(Cheers and laughter.) But you are Ministers to set them
right, and I protest against your coming to Parliament in
a critical state of affairs without a policy. If you have a
policy, let it be brought forward fairly and candidly ; but
do not come masked or visored here without our knowing
whether in your opinion the claims of Denmark are just or
the claims of Germany eau be defended. (Cheers.) Let us
know what is the opinion of the Government; and I more
particularly wish to know the opinion of the Government,
because what occurred in the recess is not such as to induce
or authorise an Opposition to give a blind confidence on a
question of foreign policy. (Hear, hear.) It could hardly
have been in our expectation when last we met—when we
were lizdening to those bold words of the noble lord on the
position of Denmark, and the determination of England to
uphold Denmark, which is the only interpretation to be
placed on the declaration of the nob!e lord—it could hardly
have been in our belief that during the six months which
have elapsed a policy so profound, so adroit, so deeply skil-
ful, should be pursued by her Majesty's Government that
they could have contrived in that space of time alike to for-
feit the confidence of Russia and to luse the cordiality of
France. (Hear.) That seems a masterpiece. But what are
are we to say of men who, having brought about
two such opposite results, should now be within an ace
of going to war with Germany ? (Hear, hear.) I say
then—l must end as I began—what are your objects; who
are your allies ? (Hear, hear.) I will not say you have
none; you have the King of Denmark, whom you are
not going to aid. But is that a position for England ?
Can we believe that our affairs have been properly con-
ducted, when, a crisis having arrived, we find ourselves

literally without allies ? (Hear.) Even if the Government
were without allies, but had a clear course formed, and ap-

pealed to the House of Commons, the House of Commons
would, I am confident, support them. This reserve and re-
ticence might be justified in the case of Ministers who with
singular ability had conducted public affairs, and, if they
were not supported by the House or Commons, might be
snpported by France, by Russia, or by Austria ; but when
the Government comes before us in as desolate a condition
in respect to our foreign relations as any Cabinet can be,
they are boiled to act with frankness, and to tell us what is
the policy which they recommend, confident that the coun-
try and Parliament will support them if their cause is just,
and I think equally sure that if, having brought our affairs
to this condition, they have at this moment no policy what-
ever, they have not fulfilled their duty as M inisters of the
Crown. (Hear.) The noble lord will say to mo —it is one of
the stereotyped passages of his speeches—" If you have no
confidence in the Ministers of the Crown why don't you tell
us so ?" I will tell the noble lord that when the opportu-
nity is fitting we will of course challenge the opinion of
Parliament. No such opportunity is given by that docu-
ment which is in my hand. Would it be becoming in me to
move an amendment to the Address because there is incon-
gruous diplomatic language in these three paragraphs? That
is not an issue upon which the questions now at stake
ought to be decided. But if the noble lord will inform us the
necessary papers which are not even promised in the Speech
—(hear)—we will form an opinion upon them. We are told,
indeed, that her Majesty "actuated by the same desire to
preserve peace" has been unremitting in her endeavours
for that object. But what evidence have we that these la-
bours have been unremitting ? I should have thought that
the noble lord would have appeared at the bar the very first
night of the session and would have placed on the table
some volume for our enlightenment. What has become of
the mission of Lord Wodehouse ? (Hear.) I cannot suppose
that we shall be met with the pedantic reply that Lord
Wodehouse had no mission but one of congratulation. We
sow that Lord Wodehouse went to Berlin, We know that
Lord Wodehouse went to Paris, We know that Lord
Wodehouse had a mission—a mission of the greatest im-
portance—which was eminently unsuccessful. And when
the House of Commons is told that there have been unre-
mitting efforts to maintain peace, and yet not a single paper
is placed upon the table, are we to be silent, and are we to
submit to the commonplace retort, " If you have no confi-
dence in the Government you ought to propose a vote of
want of confidence ?" Give us the documents that will
throw the necessary light upon the present state of public
affairs, now involved in obscurity, in perplexity, and in
mystery, and we will form upon those documents a fair
Parliamentary opinion. If the policy of the Government is
clear and well considered, they will be supported; but if
they have no policy, if they are at this critical moment
without allies, looking to the vague sympathies of Parlia-
ment to guide and support them, I say that they are taking
an unworthy course, that they are unfit for the offices which
they fill and the place which they occupy; and if it is
proved that that is the state of affairs, I believe that Parlia-
ment will not hesitate to express its opinion upon their
conduct. (Loud and prolonged cheering.)
After the right hon. gentleman had resumed his seat
there was a short interval, during which no member pre-
sented himself to address the house. There were repeated
calls for " Palmerston," and at last, as the Speaker was
about to put the question,
Lord PALMERSTON rose. The noble lord, who was re-
ceived with loud cheers, said—l should much have preferred
to have heard the opinion of other members besides the
right hon. gentleman, who is always listened to with the
deference which his abilities and position entitle him to,
but as it appears that the gentlemen on that side of the
house have given him an unlimited proxy, I shall take
leave to deal with the speech which he has delivered. The
great complaint of the right hon. gentleman seems to be not
as to what the Speech contains, but as to what he thinks it
ought to have contained, and I think that I shall have no
difficulty in explaining to the house the reason why some,
or many, or all of those topics to which the right hon, gen-

tleman alluded were not introduced into her Majesty's
Speech. In the first place, he complained that no mention
has been made of the civil war in America. Why, we have
over and over again lamented and still continue to lament
the continuance of that war, and we hare declared more
than once that her Majesty's Government profess to act, and

intend to continue to ac.;, upon a principle of strict neutra•

lity in regard to that contest. Unless the house had
thought that her Majesty's Government were going to de-
part from that course, of which there is no indication what-
ever, it would have been matter of surplusage to have filled
the Speech with a repetition of the statements made on for-
mer occasions, and which ate still binding upon her Ma-

jesty's Government. (Hear.) Then no mention has been
made of our relations with China. There is no need to
mention your relations with a country as long as they are
good, and as we continue to be upon relations of confidence
and amity with the Chinese G ivernment, there is no occa-
sion to mention that circumstance. The right hon. gentle-
m en also complains that this Speech does not contain the
repetition of that statement which has been found in other
Speeches as to the nature of our relations with foreign
Powers.;Why, everybody must know that there have been
between her Majesty's Government and some foreign
Powers discussions which even until within the last few
hours were not brought to a satisfactory termination, and
that was the reason why no mention was made of
them. It was unnecessary to state anything about Poland.
Every one knew that the efforts made by England, France,
and other Governments to induce the Government of Rus-
sia to adopt some more humane and conciliatory course of
conduct towards Poland had failed ; that the answer was
that until the insurrection was put down the Emperor could
not change his conduct, but that when the insurrection
should have ceased he was prepared to do those things
which we recommended; and there was no need to repeat in
her Majesty's Speech that which was perfectly well known
many months ago to this house and to everybody in the
country. The right hon. gentleman complains of the man-
ner in which the proposal of the Emperor of the French for
a general Congress was received and answered by her Ma-
jesty's Government. I totally deny that there was anything
discourteous in the answer. The habits of this country are
perhaps more plain and simple than those of continental
nations. We state our opinions and we give our reasons,
but we do not often abound in those superfluous expres-
sions of compliment which we are accustomed to hear from
our neighbours. There was nothing in that answer which
can, with any semblance of justice, be called uncourteous,
uncivil, or unfriendly, or otherwise than was due between
two Governments which are upon a footing of reciprocal
confidence. (Hear, hear.) I don't think that the right hon.
gentleman was of opinion chat the proposal ought to have
been accepted. He quoted instances in which the general
principles which had governed Congresses were maintained
for a great lapse of years, although many of the detailed
conditions of the arrangements had been changed. So it is
with regard to the Treaty of Vienna. A. Congress can only
with advantage take place under circumstances such as those
which existed in the year 1815, (Hear, hear.) At tha t
time the course of conquest, proceeding from the banks of
the Seine, had flowed to Moscow, and had overturned all
the previously existing arrangements in Europe. The re-
flux of the tide had swept away everything that French
conquest had established in lieu of what had existed before,
It was necessary that Europe should be rearranged, and
there was power to rearrange it, because the Congress which
assembled consisted of the Governments commanding those
armies which were then in military possession of Europe.
(Hear, hear.) Nothing similar to that exists at the present
moment. You might assemble a Congress representing all
the Powers of Europe, and if the members of that Congress
were agreed upon any particular proposal, that proposal
would naturally be adopted. But if there was a dissen-
tient voice there would be no authority in the majo-
rity to bind the minority, and therefore the result of the
Congress would be absolutely nil. The Congress might
have wet for the purpose of sanctioning by a new treaty the
present state of things. Could you have expected taut the
present state of things in Italy, for instance, would have
been sanctioned by Austria ? Would yen have asked the
King of Italy to sign a treaty by which he agreed to cir-
cumscribe his territories as now existing, and to forego any
future claim on Venetia and on Rome? Why, of course,
you would not. Then, could the existing state of things
have been taken as a basis for introducing such changes as
the Congress might deem it expedient to make ? Those
changes would have involved a transfer of territory to some
new Power ; to that, of course, there would have been an
objection which could not be overruled by the opinion of
the majority. It was our opinion, therefore, that such a
Congress, instead of confirming and strengthening the
foundations of peace, would lead to the separation of its
members after rendering differences of opinion more pointed
and diversities of interest more irreconcilable. (Cheers.)
The right hon. gentleman, indeed, suggested an amendment
of our answer : whether it would have contributed to con-
firm the good feeling between England and France I do not
know, but he seemed to imply that we might have inserted
in our despatch that this proposal for a Congress was "an
adroit manoeuvre.'' (Laughter and loud cheers.) Well, we
really did not think that such was the state of the case. We
believed it to be a proposal made in perfect sincerity and
good faith by the Emperor of the French, who thought it
might lead to the good results he anticipated. We differed
from that view for reasons which we stated, and we trust
that our difference has not made any permanent or material
alteration in the good feeling between the two Governments.
(Cheers.) Indeed, I can give the house the assurance, be-
cause I have had recent communications to that effect, the
the relations between the two Governments are as cordial
as they were before the correspondence. (Loud cheers.) Oft
course, when the Governments of two great countries are in
communication upon matters of great interest to them and
to Europe, strong as may be their desire to act together,
each must have views and interests of its own ; and without
any interruption of friendly relations there may and must
often be differences of opinion as to the practical application
of principles upon which in general t hey concur. And,
therefore, if upon a particular subject the English and
French Governments may not take the same view of what
is to be done, it must not be supposed that a man is justified
in saying the relations between the Governments ate less
friendly than they were before. Mexico has been mentioned
to-night. Is that cited as an instance of an occasional coldness
between the two Governments ? A jealous English Govern-
ment might have looked with disfavour upon the attempt to
establish in Mexico a monarchy under the protection of
Franco, I3ut have wo expressed the slightest, ealousy, the