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

FOG SIGNALS.

t ions.

Mr. DAWSON asked the President of the Board of
Trade, whether, in consequence of the numerous marine
disasters that have taken place at the entrance of the Gulf
of St. Lawrence, any plans for the erection of powerful fog
signals in the vicinity of Cape Race,Newfoundland, had yet
been approved of by the Board of Trade; and whether any
expectation may be held out that such precautionary beacons
may be in early operation.
Mr. M. GIBSON said that the Trinity Corporation had
for some time been anxious to establish fog signals at Cape
Race, but up to the present time had failed in discovering
any invention by which sound could be conveyed from land
to vessels at a certain distance at sea that would be avail-

able.

THE RUMOURED DISSATISFACTION AT
COPENHAGEN.
in reply to Mr. PEACOCX_E,
Lord PALMERSTON said he had seen a statement in
the papers that great dissatisfaction prevailed in Copen-
agen as to the retreat of the Danish troops, from Dane -
wirke ; and although the Government had no official in-
formation on the subject, there was no doubt the
inhabitants of Copenhagen felt great dissatisfaction
in regard to the event in question. " Gentlemen
at home at ease" no doubt might feel dissatise
fled with the conduct of those who were suddenly called to
decide cn an emergency. It was not for this country to
decide on the propriety of the ground which induced the
Danish general to retire from the Danewirke.
THE ALEXANDRA AND ALABAMA.
Mr. PEACOCKE asked the,Under Secretary of State for
Foreigea Affairs, whether the Government would lay upon
the table of the house copies of their correspondence with the
Government of the United States, and more especially that
portion of it relating to the case of the Alexandra, and the
claim by the United States Government for compensation
for the losses inflicted by the Alabama and other Con-
federate cruisers ?
Mr. LAYARD said as regarded the Alexandra, as the
case of that vessel was under judicial consideration, it would
not be advisable to lay any documents relative to the same
on the table. With reference to the Alabama, papers had
already been laid on the table.
SALMON FISHERIES.
Mr. DUTTON asked the Secretary of State for the Home
Department whether it was his intention to introduce any
bill amending the Salmon Fisheries (England) Act of 1861,
and giving extended powers for the preservation of salmon
in fresh and tidal waters
Sir G. GREY said the subject was being investigated
by a commission,
DANISH PAPERS.
In reply to Lord R. CECIL,
Mr. LAYARD said that these papers would not be ready
for presentation to Parliament before three weeks. (Oh, oh.)
SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN.
Mr. D'ISRAELI—I wish to make an inquiry of the noble
lord the First Minister with respect to an answer which he
gave yesterday, which has occasioned some perplexity. It
was with reference to an inquiry as to whether the Court of
Berlin had notified to our Government that in consequence
of the war between Prussia and Denmark it no longer held
itself bound by the Treaty of 1852. The noble lord, as I
understood him, seemed to say that no such communica-
tion had been received by cur Government from the Court
of Berlin ; but at the same time he expressed the opinion
of the Government upon such a course of conduct had it
been pursued by the Prussian Government. The noble, lord
said that he should lock upon such a proposition as most
unjust and monetrous. (An hon. member—" Prepos-
terous.") Preposterous—a word of nearly the same sig-
nificance. The question asked yesterday was not as to the
morality of that conduct, but as to its legality. Having
heard the noble lord's opinion of such possible conduct, I
wish to know whether he is of opinion, or whether we are to
conclude that her Majesty's Government are of opinion,
that, in consequence of the war between Prussia and Den-
mark, Prussia may be relieved from the undertakings which
by the Treaty of 1862 she has entered into with this coun-
try, and with the other signatories of the treaty, or whether
those engagements on the part of Prussia are not totally
independent of any relations which :nay subsist between
Prussia and Denmark. (Hear, hear.) There is another
matter referring almost to the same subject, and certainly
to the answer given by the noble lord yesterday, on which I
should like to have some information. The noble lord
seemed in that answer to intimate that the German Powers
had announced that, when the invasion of the Duchies had
Leen completed they should be prepared to evacuate those
Duchies as soon as all the causes—the avowed causes—for
which the invasion had taken place were removed and their
object effected. What I wish to know from her Majesty's
Government, as a second inquiry, whether before the inva-
sion of the Danish Duchies tcok place, an event of which
no notice was given to the world, her Majesty's Govern.
Yaztat obtained from the Governments of Austria and Prus-
sia any undertaking that when these Duchies had been in-
vaded and occupied, if the avowed objects of the invasion
were obtained, they would restore the Duchies to the King
of Denmark. (Hear, hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON—I think that what I stated—at all
events, what I meant to state, yesterday was, that a notion
had been broached in Germany and in some quarters at
Berlin that if a state of war could be established between
Prussia and Austria and Denmark, that would release those
two Powers from the engagement of the Treaty of 1852. I
stated say opinion upon that point, but I meant to say, or to
imply, that that was not the doctrine upon which Austria
and Prussia at present take their stand, inasmuch as they
have declared, by that paper which was read here and in the
other House of Parliament, that they acknowledge the
binding nature of the Treaty of 1852, and adhere to the
intention of maintaining the integrity of the Danish
monarchy, and therefore they cannot contend that their
hostilities with Denmark have released them from the en-
gagements of that treaty. But I entirely concur with
the view which I infer that the right hon. gentleman
takes that, even if that condition of things existed be-
tween Denmark and the two Powers which could be ra-
tionally called war, and which if the engagement had been
contracted simply between these two Powers and Denmark
might and would have put an end to that treaty, still the
Treaty of 1852 was not a treaty contracted simply between
Austria and Prussia, on the one hand, and Denmark on the
other— (hear)—Lut was an engagement which they entered
into, in common with the other great Powers who signed
and the Powers and States who acceded to that treaty, and
that they could not be relieved from that common engage-
ment by anything which may take place between them
separately and Denmark. That opinion I found not simply
upon the reason of the thing. there is a case precisely iu
point, The five Powers entered into a treaty with Turkey
by which they agreed to respect the neutrality of the Bos-
phorns and the Dardanelles, and that no ships of war of
any of the Powers should enter those straits without
the speecial permiesion of the Porte, and then only a
certain number at a time, The ratifications of that
treaty were exchanged with Turkey, and not among all the
Powers who signed it, just as in the case of the Treaty of
185 the ratifications were exchanged in London between
each of the Powers and Denmark, and the Powers did not
go through the unnecessary form of exchanging ratifications
with each other, When the British fleet entered the Dar-
danelles at the commencement of the Russian war, Austria
protested against that act at a violation of the common en-
e
gageme.n+ which by the treaty regulating the passage of the
Dardenelles was taken by all the Powers. An answer was
given, which in our opinion was sufficient ; but that proved
that in the opinion of Austria herself a general engagement
taken by many Powers towards one was binding upon all
who took it, not simply between each and the party con-
cerned, but as with respect to the allies with whom that
engagement was taken.
THE TOWNLEY CASE.
In reply to Sir F, KELLY.
USir G. GREY stated that the papers connected with this
case, including the certificates of the borough magistrates
and medical men upon which Townley had been removed
to the lunatic asylum, would be in the hands of members
before he moved the second reading of the bill which he had
introduced the previous night.
SCIILESWIG-HOLSTEIN.
Mr. n ISRAELI—In continuation of the question put to
the noble lerd, I wish to ask whether what was callers a
despatch the other ntgne_ea document which, .1 believe, was
considered very ambiguous, and was treated with derision
lay the Secretary of State—is the last and only evidence the
Government possess of the intention of Austria and Prussia
to uphold the Treaty of 1852? I would also take the liberty
of reminding the noble lord that he has
omitted to answer
my:second question.
Lord PALMERSTON--I had just discovered my unin-
tentlonal omission to answer the last (vacation of the rig ht
hon. gentleman, and was about to do so. The despatch
ffi
alluded to is certainly the last ecial communication re-
ceived by the Government; but I consider that it le corn_
plate in regard to the recognition of the Treaty of 1352 and
the maintenance of the integrity of the Danish Monarchy.
lVe certainly have no esaarantee on the part of Austria
and Prussia that they will evacuate Schleswig when the
Constitution is revoked ; but we have the assurance in our
own minds that they are two Powers which must think their
character for good faith of some value. The ground, and
the only ground, on which I apprehend they have entered
Schleswig- and occupied it, as a material guarantee, was to
obtain the revocation of the Constitution of November, as
tar as it relates to Schleswig, And, therefore, I think,
they will find, when that demand has been complied with,
that they are bound by honour and good faith to give up
that occupation which they undertook simply for the pur-
pose of obtaining that revocation.
ASH-WEDNESDAY.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.
Lord PALMERSTON, again tieing, said—lt is usual for
this house on. Ash-Wednesday to meet at two o'clock, in-
stead of at the usual time. I understand, however, that
there is really no business for to-morrow, the hon and
gallant member for the Queen's County having aostponed,
or consented to postpone, the motion of which he had given
notice. It will, therefore, I think, be raoro conveniorkt that