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

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 10, 1864.

the house, instead of meeting at two o'clock to-morrow,
should adjourn till Thursday. (Hear, hear.)

SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN,
Mr. S. FITZGERALD—I cannot avoid ta':' g the op-
portunity which this motion gives me to addreee a few
words to the house upon the extraordin oy answer which
was given with reference to the Danish papers by the hon.
gentleman the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs. That
is a question upon which the heart of this country is set,
which agitates nearly every portion of the Continent, and
upon which this house and the country are agreed in de-
manding the most complete information, not only as to the

facts that are passing, but as to the conduct pursued from
day to day by her gsfajesty's Government, and the course
they have pursued for weeks past. (Hear.) The hon.
gentleman being asked when we may expect information
en those points quietly tells the house that no papers at all
can be given before a period of three weeks. (Cheers.)
Three weeks I why, what may have happened In three
weeks ? In the space of three days we have seen the Duchy
of Schleswig overrun, we have seen a gallant people beaten
down by an overpowering force. (Loud cheers.) And yet

on such a question as this the Government tell the House

of Commons that they are to remain contentedly in the dark
for a period of three weeks I Now, I beg to point out to
the house that as regards Japan papers were promised in
her Majesty's Speech; but respecting Denmark complete

silence was observed, and no information was promised to
the House of Commons. And as to the difficulty of pub-
lishing these papers the noble lord at the head of the Foreign
Office when he chooses to do so is at no loss for means of

giving information to the public about his policy and the

course which he is going to take. We know very well tbat
in the course of the autumn the noble lord, bofore the ink of

a particular despatch was dry, hurried it off to the Loden
Gazette, and in the columns of the Gazette it was published

even before it reached the Power to whom that despatch was
addressed. (Cheers.) I think the house will eonceive from
the answer of the hon. gentleman and from the course taken
by her Majesty's Government on this subject that they fear
discussion. (Hear, hear.) They know very well, with the
feeling which always prevails in this house, that there will
be no discussion until the house has had ample means of
forming an opinion ; and they hope by delay to tide over
the critical time, and to avoid a discussion of their policy,
and of the course they have pursued. I therefore appeal to
the noble lord at the head of the Government to rectify what
I may alrsost call the tortuous policy of the Foreign-office,
and to give, at the earliest moment, the moat complete and
most ample information to the House of Commons. (Cheers.)
Mr. LAYARD—I think the hon. gentleman has wasted

a good deal of virtuous indignation. (Cries of No, no.)
There is no desire on the part of the Government either to
avoid discussion or to waste time in this matter. The hon.

gentleman has filled the office which I have the honour to
fill at present, and ought to be aware that there is great diffi-
cul'y in publishing a complete set of papers upon transac-
tions of this kind. In the first place, the hon. gentleman
knows we cannot lay on the table of the house documents
communicated by foreign Powers without first consulting
them as to whether or not they wish them to be published.
That is a matter of courtesy, and it is a rule which is always
followed. I can only say that I saw the printer to-day,
and also communicated with the clerks at the Foreign-
office. Tho other night I stated that I hoped these papers
would be speedily produced, and I then hoped that they
would be produced next week, but they are so voluminous
that I am assured this is impossible if we wish to present the

papers in a perfect form. I have no doubt if the house desires
to have them in instalments portions can be furnished, but
I doubt whether the house will thus obtain the exact infor-
mation which it desires. I can assure the house that every
possible speed shall be wed in expediting the production of
the papers. They shall be laid on the table at the very

earliest moment—l cannot give any other answer. But

assure the house there is no intention on the part of the Go-
vernment to retard even by one day the publication of the
documents.
Mr. DISRAELI—I think we have not yet received a
satisfactory answer on the part of the Government. The
affairs of Germany and Denmark were of so grave a chara-
ter some time ago that it might have been a question for
the Government whether they should not have advised the
Sovereign to assemble Parliament at an earlier period.
(Cheers.) That was the feeling of men of very different
political opinions. But there are, I know, very grave reasons
which might operate to restrain the Government from giving
that advice, except under most urgent circumstances. How-
ever, if Parliament were not summoned earlier than usual,
I think her Majesty's Government were boon the moment
it assembled—(cheers) --to place in our hands the documents
necessary to form an opinion on this all engrossing and all
important subject,—a subject upon which the question of
peace or war, or even of a general war, may ultimately have
to be decided, and with regard to which at this moment we
are completely in the dark. The technical answer of the
Under-Secretary is most unsatisfactory. He tells us he went
to the printer to-day. Well, but the Under-Secretary ought
to have gene to the printer long before; he ought to have
gone every day and, it necessary, every hour before Parlia-
ment met to the printer for these papers. (Cheers and
laughter.) Ho ought to have insisted on these papers
being ready to present to Parliament the first night, I took
occasion on the opening day to notice the strange omission
from the Royal Speech of any promise that papers on the
subject of Germany and Denmark would be produced.
What was the answer of the noble lord ? He said his ob-
ject was that the Speech should nor be too long. (A laugh.)
Yet he found space to insert in that Speech a promise that
the papers respecting Japan—no doubt, an interesting and
important subject, but contrasted with the European ques •
tion of Germany and Denmark, a matter of comparatively
trifling importance—should be forthcoming. There was
room for that in the Speech. But when I pressed the noble
lord for these papers, he, treated the matter with derision,
and said, " You shall have papers ; you shall have plenty
of :hem, and I hope hon. members will study them. I have
read a good many of them (said the noble lord) and I have
got a surfeit of them," It was clear to me at that time that
her Majesty's Government had no settled determination to
present these papers to Parliament—(cheers)— and, coup-
ling the tone of his address with the omission of any pro-
mise of the documents in the Royal Speech, I must say
the non-production of papers on such an important subject
was a great inadvertence, and one which I think it would
be difficult to vindicate. Practically, I take it for granted
that the mass of these papers, either in manuscript or
in proof sheets, are now prepared, and that permis-
sion to print them has been obtained from all the
foreign Powers. That is a mere mechanical affair. Tho
printer of the Foreign-office was rubbed up to-day for the
first time, and, frightened at the mass of documents before
him, no doubt made the same sort of calculation which he
would have done if an ordinary thick pamphlet on the
Schleswig-Holstein question—and we have seen many of
them—were brought to him. He said they would require
three weeks to print. But if you have all the materials
ready, and the credit of the Foreign-office be at stake, you
mast endeavour to compensate for former //ekes by die-
, tributing these documents into the hands of several
printers—(hear, hear)—and I will be bound to say, with
proper diligence, that you ought to produce these papers
to Parliament in eight and forty hours. The house ought
to insist on these papers being placed in their hands in 48
hours, or otherwise to relinquish the fulfilment of their
highest duty. (Hear, hoar,)
Lord PALMERSTON said—Sir, I think that the right
hon. gentleman is taking a leaf out of the book of the Prus-
sian and Austrian Governments, who called on Denmark to
revoke a constitution in 48 hours, when that could only be
constitutionally accomplished by the instrumentality of a
parliament not then assembled. (Laughter.) I can assure
the right hon gentleman—he can believe me or not as he
likes—(a laugh)—l took it so much as a matter of course
that papers on so important a matter as Denmark and Ger-
many must necessarily be presented to Parliament, that it
was totally unnecessary to mention them in the speech-4f
it was an omission I am sorry for it, So far as its arising
from any doubt whether the papers should or should not be
presented, I might as well have doubted my own existence
as the obligation of the Government to lay them before Pare
'lament. There was no doubt about it. The hon. gentle-
man is perhaps not quite so well aware as the hon. member
fer Horsham of the labour of preparing an accurate print of
a vast mass of documents ; it is not only the printing of
them, but they must be looked over after by a competent
person to see that there are no mistakes of the press and
that all has been accurately done. The Under Secretary
stated to the house that if it is desired these documents may
be produced in parts, and perhaps this might be the most
convenient manner ; and if hon. members desire they may
have Part I. and then Part ll.—(a laugh)—before they
come to the matter they intend to discuss; but no delay
shall take place in laying before the house the whole of the
papers.
Lord J. MANNERS said—l can quite believe the noble
lord that there will be no unnecessary delay for the
future in the course of delivery of these papers; but,
certainly, a great and unnecessary delay had occurred in
the presentation of the papers up to the present time. It
was impossible to listen to what fell on a former occasion
and not see that however necessary it may be for the
noble lord opposite to lay these papers on the table at
the same time there was not that energy to lay these papers
before the house that was to be expected in a matter of such
vital importance. (Hear, hear.) No doubt these papers
have been kept back in the Foreign Office, and have not
been brought forward in the state of preparation they should
have been. (Hear, hear.) I presume now we shall have these
papers brought before us in a much less time than that in
which they were promised ten Mutes ago, and I hope we
shall not be disappointed.
(Hmear,
Mr. HENNESSy said he
askedpromised
h se
eatdrh.)
sae to Governmentp o lan
d Nv
otuwl d
contain the despatch from two
nights ago whether the
papers
Earl Russell to Prince Gortscha-
koff, to which great importance was athtteacDni
hedjhust now
..oat
Berlin and Vienna for its bearingon
It was sent in the autumn, recalled by telera h,q altered,e
o.
and re-sent, When that despatch arrived it ;a:understood
that Count Rechberg and M. Bismark called n
attsn t'l to
p
the declaration made by Earl Russell in his s
htat Bolarr
gowrie, to the effect that the dominion of Russiaeea over Po-
land wee forfeited by reason of the non-eomplianee of
Rus-
sia with the treaty of Vienna; and the German iceversn
state that that principle would in some degree apply tot°hwe
case of Denmark. They gay that the treaty of London had
not been fulfilled by Denmark. and therefore the treatl of
London was void. Now it was very important to get that
despatch. He wished tie ask whether the Government wain

produce that original despatch sent from the Foreign Office
with the sanction of the Queen, signed by the Secretary of

State, but which was afterwards withdrawn and altered.

Sir H. CAIRNS said—l wish also to ask a question
relative to papers we had printed this morning, some
papers on American affairs containing despatches, some
from the other side of the water, some from the American

Alinister here. But there has been one despatch of very

great importance and of a peculiar character which has
been printed in America, and reprinted in the ordinary
channels of information in this country. It was dated, I
think, 11th July last year. If I understand, this despatch,
coming from the American Minister of Foreign Affairs,
was to be read to Earl Russell and a copy of it left with
him, and it is evidently far more material than any yet laid
on the table. I wish to ask her Majesty's Government
whether they are prepared to communicate that despatch to
the House of Commons, and at the same time the answer
that was returned either to Lord Lyons or sent directly,
or whether they are prepared to state that no answer was
sent. (Cheers.)
Mr. LAYARD—When that despatch is communi-

sated to her Majesty's Government it will be published.
It was never presented to her Majesty's Government, and

her Majesty's Government have no knowledge of any such
despatch. I do not quite understand to what despatch the
other hon. gentleman alludes to in reference to Poland. If
there is such a despatch—and I think there is not—if he
will communicate with me privately on the subject it shall
be produced.
Lord R. CECIL—Do I understand the secretary to

say that no despatch from Mr. Adams to the Foreign-office,
conveying the demands which Mr. Seward made, has been
forwarded to the Foreign-office, and if thereis no despatch,
is there any memorandum of any verbal application con-
veying the same insolent demands ?
Mr. LAYAR have stated that although that de-
spatch appeared in the newspapers, we have no knowledge
of it; it was never communicated, and we cannot pro-
duce it.

Lord R. CECIL—And was there no verbal demand P
Mr. LAYARD—No verbal communication in that seise
was ever held.

The motion for adjournment was ultimately agreed to.
K AGOSIMA.
Mr. BUXTON moved the following resolution : --" That
this house, while only imputing to Admiral Kuper a
misconception of the duty imposed on him, deeply
regrets tho burning of the town of Kagosima,
as being contrary to those usages of war which
prevail among civilised nations, and to which it
is the duty and policy of this country to adhere."
In the course of a long address he cited several authorities
on international law to show that the bombardment of
Kagosima was directly opposed to the dictum of the most
celebrated writers on maritime law.

Mr. AYTOUN, in seconding the motion, condemned the
arrogance of the English merchants and residents in Japan
as having been the real cause of enmity felt towards us by
the natives.

Mr. LONGFIELD proposed, as an amendment, to omit
from Mr. Buxton's resolution the words " while only im-
puting to Admiral Kuper a misconception of the duty im-
posed on him." His object was to free a gallant and meri-
torious officer from the grave imputation that was sought to
be cast upon him by the terms of the resolution. He con-
tended that Admiral Kuper had done no more than execute
the commands with which he was entrusted, and there had '
been no cold-blooded cruelty, misconception of orders, or
terrible mistake on his part. He understood his instructions
well. He obeyed the orders that were given him, The
measures he concerted were within both the letter and the
spirit of his instructions ; and what he conceived prudently
he had executed bravely. The orders given to him by
Colonel Neale, ber Majesty's representative in Japan, in
accordance with instructions received from the Foreign-
office, included the burning of the town of Kagosima and the
palace of Prince Satsuma, which he performed with the
knowledge and in the presence of Colonel Neale himself,
who. having given the orders, knew the consequences, and
expressed his satisfaction at the result. The resolution of
Mr. Buxton was nothing else than an attempt to offer up
Admiral Kuper as a scapegoat to save the Government
from the censure of the house.
Sir J. HAY seconded the amendment, and said that the
imputation thrown upon Admiral Kuper did no credit either
to the Government or those persons who had thus assailed
a brave and worthy inrin. The duty be had executed was
imposed upon him by the barbarous orders of the Foreign
Office, and the attack on Kagosima, following upon the
affair in Siam last year, was but the culminating point of
the policy which the Government had of late adopted in the
East.

Lord STANLEY—I quite understand the reluctance o:
my hon. and gallant friend to pass any censure on persons
who, whether in a civil or military capacity, are perform-
ing a very responsible duty at a great distance from home,
and labouring under disadvantages in respect to receiving
instructions. I share in that feeling, and I shall be glad if
I hear from the hon. gentleman the member for Southwark
(Mr. Layard) a better defence for these proceedings than
appears in the papers which have been laid before us. Ido
not intend to go again over the pound covered by the
speech of the hon, member for Maidstone ; but I will call
the attention of the house to one or two points, and I will
do so in order that an answer may be given by the Under-
Secretary. Ida not understand what justification can be
alleged for the double claim made by her Majesty's Go-
vernment—first, the claim made on the Tycoon ; and next,
that made on the Prince of Satsuma, I cotild Understand
either if the other were not put forward. (Hear, hear). I
could understand your treating the Prince as entirely inde-
pendent, and then ycur course might be obvious, You
might have applied to the Tycoon in the first instance, and
if he replied, " I cannot punish the Prince of Satsuma,"
you miglat have said, " Then we give you fair notice that
we shall take the of eir out of your hands and punish
him ourselves." But if the Prince of Satsuma is re-
sponsible for the murder, then this demand of £lOO,OOO
from the Tycoon, who is not responsible, who did not
order the murder, and could not have prevented it, is
simply unjustifiable. (Hear, hear.) On the other hand,
if the Prince of Satsuma is to be treated as a subject, no
doubt we have a right to come on the Government of Japan
for compensation; but then we ought to leave it to the
Government to settle matters with the Daimio. (Hear,
hear.) But the responsibility of the one, from the nature
of the caae, seems to exclude the responsibility of the other,
and therefore those who have conducted the negotiations
on the part of this country have put ns in the wrong. It
also appears to me that the amount of the demand is altoge-
ther exorbitant and excessive, No doubt it is very painful
and difficult to have to value human life ; but one can only
judge of what would be done if such a ease occurred in
Europe. If the murder of a British subject took place un-
der anything like similar circumstances in a European
country, you would insist on the punishment of the offen-
der, and demand compensation ; but it appears to me that
you would not do anything analogous to what you have
done in this case by demanding £lOO,OOO from the Tycoon,
who was net responsible for the murder, and making a
further demand of £25,000 of the Prince of Satsuma, whom
you hold to have been responsible. (Hear.) There is ano-
ther point to which I think the house ought to look. The
hon. member for Maidstone spoke of the inhumanity of
those proceedings. I look at the matter in another way,
and say that their irepolicy is greater than their inhu-
manity. (Hear.) You know the Tycoon is in great diffi-
culty between the Daitnios and the foreign merchants and
diplomatists. You have, then, to deal with a Government
which may be taken to be neutral between the two ; you
have the great chiefs, who undoubtedly are hostile to
foreigners; and, lastly, you have the people, of whom we
we do not know whether or not they share the preju-
dice of the chiefs against foreigners, but who, at all
events, have nothing to lose by the country being open
to foreigners, and may have a groat deal to gain. I think
it clear, then, that your policy ought to be to lessen the in-
fluence of the Daimios on the people, and to conciliate the
latter. (Hear, hear.) lam afraid your proceedings in
reference to this murder will have a contrary effect. All
they will know about the affair is that the foreigners have
had a quarrel with the chiefs and destroyed a town. That
will place the Daimios in the position of being the natural
protectors of the people, whereas your object ought to be to
separate those two classes, and to show the natives that
though you may take a part against the chiefs, you do so in
the interest of the people. (Hear, hear.) lam afraid it
will be a long time before the impression created in the
minds of the people by those proceedings will be obliterated.
I also think it is very questionable whether what you have
done will have very much effect on the chiefs. I do not
say anything as to the destruction of batteries, because as
you treated the Prince of Satsuma as an independent per •
son no objection could be taken to your destroying his forts ;
but when your doing that involved the destruction of a
town, it is another matter. I do not expect that much moral
effect will be produced on the Daimios by such an opera-
tion as that. It reminds me of the story of an Irish ab-
sentee landlord whose agent sent him over a threatening
letter which he had received. The landlord, in reply, said
" Tell those follows they are great fools if they think that
by shooting you they will intimidate me." (Much laughter.)
I very much fear that the same is the case with the Daimios.
They are not likely to be intimidated by punishments which
fall on the people. (Hear, hear.) You will not frighten the
class on whom you wish ti make an effect, but you will
make enemies of the class whom you want to have your
friends. (Hear, hear.) In these same papers I see a trans-
action, of the earneelate, which bears on this case. It seems
that in October of last year there was a good deal of anxiety
felt among the traders because the trade in silk was falling
off. What was the reason of this falling off? Col. Neale,
writing to the Japanese Minister, says :
" The matter respecting the restricted arrivals of silk being
now well known to be caused by no accident or want of the
material, but by a systematic arrangement. of a few of the
principal silk dealers, or monopolisers, at Yeddo ; great un-
easinese and alarm prevail among the mercantile community
of Yokohama."
Upon that assumption, becluso those dealers in silk at
Ycddo are doing that which dealers in Manchester and
Liverpool sometimes do—because they are holding back
produce for high prices—(hear, hear) -cur representetive
writes a very peremptory letter, and the Japanese Govern-
ment is called upon to explain. (Hear, hear.) That is not
the way you would act towards any European Government.
That letter throws light upon whatever may be doubtful in
k other transactions, and how what 'our feelings and bear-

ing have been in dealing with the Government of Japan.
(Cheers.)
Admiral WALCOTT supported the amendment, and ex,
pressed an opinion that the papers on the subject justified
him in declaring that no b:ame could be imputed to Admi.

ral Kuper.
Lord R. MONTAGU argued that the Government had
no course before them but to enforce the demand for redress
for the murders and acts of violence committed by the

Japanese on British subjects.
Sir F. CROSSLEY lamented the great loss of life that
had ensued from the bombardment of Kagosima, and con-
demned the adoption of such a high-handed policy in our
communications with Eastern nations. The time had
arrived when it behoved the Foreign-office to endeavour to

uphold the honour of the country, without resorting to these
wholesale sacrifices of human life.

Mr. LIDDELL deprecated the system of hastily con-

eluding treaties, under the guns of our ships, with nations

of whose babite, customs, and laws we had no knowledge.

Ho w we could expect a treaty to be faithfully observed which
had been obtained under such circumstances passed his com-

prehension. Our proceedings in Japan had been marked
by a violence that was deeply to be deplored, and he held
that the treaty made with that country ought to be revised,

if possible, in conjunction with those who were acquainted
with the laws and customs of Japan.
Mr. KINGLAKE reminded the house that when the
official account of the bombardment of Kagosima reached

England, Earl Russell at once wrote a dispatch to Colonel
Neale, expressive of the regret he felt at the destruction of
that town. He did not believe that the noble earl had given
an imperative order to destroy the residenc3 of the Prince
of Satsuma, whether it were situated on a bare hill or in
a populous city ; but he hesitated not to say that our treaties
had broken up the political system of the state in Japan.

. . _____
In the present state of their information with regard to the
details of tho late engagement at Kagosima, he thought it
would be unjust to throw any blame or seeming blame upon

Admiral Kuper.

Mr. LAYARD said no one who had attended to his hon
friend the member for Maidstone would be surprised tha,

he considered it his duty to submit to the house the question
which he that evening brought before them. (Hear.) His
hon. friend's well•known sympathy with the human race
every one who knew him would agree in acknowledging,
and all would be ready to do him justice in feeling that he
he was right in bring the question before the House of Com-
mons. (Hear, hear.) If he could not agree in all that his
hon. friend had said, it was not that he could not agree in
the principles which he had laid down, but in the manner in
which he had tried to establish his facts. He entirely
agreed with his hon. friend that it was most deplorable and
deeply to be regretted that a town should be bombarded and
laid in ruins, as Kagosimawas reported to have been.
(Hear, hear.) He agreed with him, that nothing but the
greatest, the most extreme provocation could justify such a
course ; and he entirely agreed with him that it was a ter-
rible sight to witness the condition to which the inhabi-
tants were reduced, and upon those matters there was no
difference of feeling and opinion between himself and his
hen. friend, who, he was sure, would not charge him with
want of sympathy with E Astern nations. He (Mr. Layard)
was known to have expressed his regret on several occa-
sions at the manner in which those races had been treated.
Now, such being the general principles laid down, let him
see whether they applied to the present instance. But be-
fore he did so he must say he could not concur in the blame
cast upon so gallant and meritorious an officer as Admiral
Kuper. (Hear, hear.) And here he must say that it had
been too much the habit of some parties in this country to
blame officers in their absence for alleged transactions before
inquiry haa taken place to ascertain whether the charges
were correct. (Hear, hear.) He must say that he did not
think Admiral Kuper could be charged with shedding
blood wantonly; and he must further say of that gallant
officer that a more humane men could not be than he had
always shown himself to be. (Hear, hear.) The hon.
member here proceeded to draw a sketch of the relations of
this country with Japan previous to the occurrence in ques-
tion. This country was not the first, he said, to enter into
a treaty with Japan. An American commodore was the
first, and having made the .American treaty, Russia then
stepped iu and made a treaty with the Japanese on ber own
account. Was it, then, matter of surprise—seeing that Ame-
rica and Russia, two great commercial nations, lead made
treaties to advance their commercial interests, and thus
opened up new markets for themselves—that England, on
her part, followed the example, and with a view of availing
herself of the new markets, made a treaty:of commerce with
the Japanese. (Hear, hear.) They were condemned for, and
charged with, having forced a treaty upon the Japanese,
which the authorities of Japan, it was said, had no power to
make. They understood the Tycoon to be the head autho-
rity of Japan at the time, and they entered into the treaty
with him. They ascertained that there were three parties
in Japan at the time, and that a great part of the natives were
ill-treated and kept in a state of slavery by the Daimios. Of
the three parties one of them, he understood, was known by
the name of " Toree"—(laughter)—and that party were
most hostile in their acts and feelings against foreigners,
particularly against the English. Another of those parties
was called " Litter d 'Trees"—(laughter)—and the third
were known as the party Who Were for keeping to themselves
all the good places, and sticking to them. (Great laugh! er.)
There was also a party who were for the maintenance of
the " conneßion between Church and State.•' (Laughter.)
Much outrage and injustice had been committed against
foreigners, particularly those from England, and the re-
monstrances of the Government against thcse outrageous ex-
cesses were not attended to, It had been :mid that the Lri-
tish Government was unfriendly to and did not like the
Japanese. Now, so far Loth that being the case, they bad
in this country made great concessions to the Japanese, ana
not only did they do so themselves, but they actually in-
duced other Powers to make concessions to them, (Hear,
hear.) He could assure the house that in Mr. Richardson's
case neither he nor his friends were in fault, He (Mr.
Layard) was not in the habit of defending the excesses of
his countrymen; and he was sorry to say that they were
often guilty of excesses that no man ought to defend. (Ilear,
hear.) In Mr. Ri.lardson'a case that was not so. A most
unprovoked murder had been committed on that gentleman
and other members of his party by a number of men who
hod been set on to commit it by their leaders. Mr. Richard-
son and his party were proceeding quietly along a high road
that was open to them by treaty, and were most wantonly
and without any provocation whatever attacked. Murder
was committed, and the party, when remonstrated with,
tried to excuse themselves by saying that it was 0 "casual',
murder. He had never before heard of a casual murder.
A more deliberate murder, ho repeated, never was com-
mitted. The English Government remonstrated, and de-
manded satisfaction, but their remonstrance! wen disre-
warded, and their demand was treated with contempt. Was
it then to be a matter of surprise that they insisted upon
proper redress being given by the Japanese Government for
ouch an outrage ? (Hear,) The Government made demands
upon the Tycoon Governrneni, and also upon Satsuma. In
the first place they demanded £lO,OOO from the Japanese
Government--not for the murder, but for allowing the mur-
der en a road which was open by treaty, on a road on which
it was their bounden duty to protect lite. (Hear.) That was
entirely irrespective of the murder. Then they had de-
manded from the person who committed the murder what
they considered to be a fair sum to be divided amongst those
who were sufferers, That sum was £25,000. Some might
think that sum too much, others might consider it too little.
Mr. Richardson, who was murdered, was a wealthy mer-
chant, and his death was a serious blow to his family. Ile
did not, therefore, consider that the sum was an unreason-
able one. The other persons concerned were merchants in a
good position in life, and for them the sum demanded he
could not consider was too much. Besides that, her Ma-
jesty's Govet nment asked for the execution of those who had
been concerned in the affair. Now, it had been stated that
evening as a matter of fact, that her Majesty's Government
had asked for the execution of Satsuma's father. So far
from that being the case, they had stated over and over
again that nothing of the sort was done. In the first place,
they did not know that it was Satsuma's father who had
committed the murder. Their first impression was that it
was his uncle. (Laughter.) They asked for the trial and
punishment of the retainers of the chief who had committed
the act. If hon. gentlemen would refer to page 94 of the
Blue-book they would fled that the Government demanded
the speedy arrest and bringing to capital punisherrent the men
among the Prince'; retinue, and not the Prince himself.
Satsuma had stated that no order had been given for this
attack. If no order had been given them surely the Govern-
ment had a right to ask for the punishment of those who
had committed so grave an offence without an order, and
that was all they did ask for. (Hear, hear.) He thought it
would be admitted that those demands, under the circum-
stances, were perfectly just; but if they had accepted the
excuse of the Tycoon, that Satsuma was beyond his power,
and that he had no control over his retainers, the Daimios,
under the shelter of that excuse, would have committed all
sorts of outrages. If, on the other hand, they had exacted
the punishment of the Daimios alone, in all future cases the
Tycoon would have said that the crimes had been perpe-
trated by the Daimios, and that they alone were responsible.
So that the Government had no alternative but to make a
double demand, and he thought that was the right course
to pursue. Was the English Government alone amongst
those who hod punished the Daimios for outrages against
foreigners ? If hon. gentlemen would turn to the Blue-
book they would find that joint representations had been
made by the English, French, Dutch, and American Mi-
nisters, that they held a Prince who had fired upon a ship
responsible for that cot, and would proceed to punish it if
the injury were not redressed, Thoy did punish him by
destroying his batteries and forts. Now, Admiral Kuper,
on receiving his instructions, proceeded to carry them out,
It had been stated that the instructions of her Majesty's
Government were not sufficiently explicit, and thatit was on
that account that the admiral committed the act ho
and that consequently the responsibility must fall upotn
the
Government. Now, when the instructions. werek senwleod,e,
her Majesty's Government had not the slightefst.t
knowledge
of the palace in which Satsuma dwelt, otrho
shore, that that he.
They had heard that he had a palace neafri
0, andff that
h e
t washe
Government gave instructions to the admiral. founded upon
this imperfect knowledge. Ecarl Russell, in his instructions,
stated that he had heard that Satsuma's territory was a
fiapt.tow coulderful getlr tonc Prince,
those having
vessels vesselse d o
carruy: toshwe no;
peninsula, but that the admire' would be able to form a bet-
ter judgment whether it would be possible to take his port.

The Government did not even know that thero was a large

....
town there.—
(Laughter.) He was at a loss to understand
why hon. gentlemen laughed. He repeated that in England
there was no knowledge of that town. The fleet arrived
there on the 11th, and cast anchor at the entrance of the
port. Next day they went further and anchored before the
town. What was the first thing the Japanese did ? They

invited Admiral Kuper and Colonel Neale to go on shore to
conduct negotiations with them. Many gentlemen who had
great confidence in the Japanese might think that they
ought to have done so; but Admiral Kuper and Colonel
Neale thought they had better not run any risk of being led
into a trap, and very wisely declined the invitation. (Hear.)
On the following day a person calling himself a chief, with
his retainers, approached Admiral Kuper's ship and asked
to allowed to come on board. There could not be a moral
doubt that these persons, having little knowledge of the ar-
rangements of an English man-of-war, thought they could

capture the ship by a coup de main, and when the Japanese
official found that he was outwitted he became speechless,
and went off with great rapidity. No doubt these were two
attempts to entrap the British officers; the first to entrap
the officers on shore, and the second to capture the ship.

All this time the batteries were being manned. Colonel

Neale, finding that it was no use to withhold any longer
ordered Admiral Kuper to take possession of the ships

belonging to Satsuma, and the Admiral did every-
thing he could to carry out his instructions with the least
possible harshness. A statement had appeared in some of
the papers which he regretted to find the hon. member for
Birmingham (Mr. Bright) had endorsed, that after captur-
ing the ships Admiral Kuper needlessly kept them for a
long time under the eyes of the Japanese. The truth was,
that the admiral could not have taken the vessels out of the

bay without passing under the fire of the batteries. So far
from the admiral having kept the vessels under the eyes of
the Japanese in order to draw down their fire, he took them
as far as possible to the opposite side of the bay. No sooner
were the vessels taken than the Japanese opened fire. He
_ _

_
did not deny that the Japanese had a perfect right to do so,
but what he did deny was, that it was the duty of the British

admiral to allow himself to be fired upon without returning
't. If he had done so, what would have been the result ?
There would have been a cry throughout the whole of Japan
that our fleet had been defeated, our settlements would have
been plundered, and probably every foreigner in the coun-
try would have been murdered. (Hear.) It was, then, the
clear duty of the admiral to return the fire. The hon. mem-
ber for Wakefield had stated that it would have been impos-
sible for Admiral Kuper to have returned the fire without
burning the town, and upon the high authority of that gal-
lant gentleman he was content to rest the admiral's excul-
pation. It had been said that shells had been thrown in the
town, but nothing was saidabout such a circumstance in the
reports, nor was anything said about bombardment, with the
exception of the second day,when shells were thrown intothe
palace of Satsuma. On the first day no shell was thrown
into the town ; on the contrary, the return of the firo from
the batteries led to the firing of the town. Let hon. mem-
bers consider what a Japanese town really was. It was
built simply of thin laths and paper—very little timber
indeed. Fires were constantly occurring in these towns,
The people constantly lived in fear of life, and were always
ready to move, He had spoken with several officers on the
subject, being anxious to ascertain the truth on the point,
and he found that firee in Japanese towns:were the commonest
possible occurrences. The officials had four days' notice of
the operations against them, and during that time they were
preparing to attack the British fleet. If, therefore, the
people suffered injury, it was the duty of the officials to
warn them to remove, and he had every reason to believe
they did so. It was possible that there was loss of life there.
If so, no one more sincerely deplored it than himself ;
but, at the same time, it would be some consolation to think
that the loss of life was very small indeed amongst the
peaceable inhabitants. (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Layard)
had resided some time in a town which was peculiarly liable
to fires ; he meant Constantinople. In that town there was
a fire almost every month, consuming as many residences as
at Kagosima, although the area over which they extended
was not so great, as the houses were higher. In Constan-
tinople a fire raged with extraordinary rapidity, destroying
many houses in the course of a few hours, and yet he never
heard of a single loss of life by fire there. The people lived
in c.nstant readiness to move, and loss of live from fire was
consequently hardly known. Those considerations led him
to hope that few lives of innocent persons were lost at
Kagosima. No doubt there was a considerable loss of life
amongst the retainers of the Daimio. They fought against
the British fleet, they manned their batteries, and they
consequently ran all the risks which men engaged in war
were bound to run, but of the quiet peaceable inhabitants
ho very much doubted whether any, or a very few, at all
events, met their death. On the second day it was neces-
sary, according to the admiral's view, to destroy the palace
of Satsuma. Could he, after the destruction of the pro-
perty of the poor, leave the palace of the chief malefactor
untouched? He (Mr. Layard) thought not, and the admiral
very properly threw shells into the palace. There was no
proof that shells went into the town. It might be assumed
that they did, but there was not the slightest evidence of
the fact. The hon. gentleman the member for Maidstone
(Mr. Buxton), in the early part of his speech, said that he
would call evidence in support of his views, and he (Mr.
Layard) thought that he would have called witnesses of
some standing. The first was a picture in the Illustrated
News. Now, ho did not wish to say anything against that
admirable paper. Those who were in the secret would en-
tertain doubts whether that paper had on board the Euryalus
a correspondent who witnessed the town of Kagosima in
Then another portion of evidence on which he
relied was a statement which had appeared in the Aylesbury
papers. Now, he had a great respect for the Aylesbury
papers, hut he could not take evidence second-hand from
their columns, the hon, gentleman himself not having seen
the paper from which his information was derived.
Mr. BtJXTON—It was the statement of a sailor who was
an eye-witness of What he described.
Mr. LAYARD—WeII, he should like to know the sailor's
name, or what authority there was for the statement. In
the absence of that information he preferred to take the
statement of a British Admiral. (Hear, hear.) What he
had now stated was a short history of what took place at
Kagosima. The house would now perhaps allow him for a
few moments to call attention to the motion of his hon.
friend. As regarded Admiral Kuper's judgment there was
no wish on the part of the Government to cast blame upon
him. On the contrary! It was the duty of the Govern-
ment to support him, because he was entitled to support.
It was asked why the Government brad not given him the
as no honorary distinctions which they had conferred upon
Colonel Neale. The distinctions given to Colonel Neale
were not on account of what took place at Kagosima, but
for the judgment and tact which he had displayed in
conducting most difficult negotiations. Why they were not
conferred upon Admiral Kuper was because there had been
for a time a strong feeling in the country. yllear, hear,
from the Opposition benches.) Her Majesty's Government
thought it only reasonable Admiral Kuper should be enabled
to give explanations, and he had no doubt some explana-
tions would be perfectly satisfactory. It would be unwise
and ungenerous to pass such a resolution as this, which
would be tantamount to a vote of censure, before those ex-
planations could be received. He had no doubt about the
explanations, and that it would be shown that Admiral
Kuper would not have burnt down the town if he could have
avoided it. Then it had been insinuated that her Majesty's
Government had felt no regret at this occurrence. The first
think they did on hearing the news was to write a despatch
in which they expressed their regret. That regret had been
embodied in the Queen's Speech, had been re-echoed by the
house, and deeply felt throughout the country. Not only
had they expressed regret, but her Majesty's Government
had done everything they could to prevent a recurrence of
each disasters. (The hon. gentleman read extracts from
the despatches in proof of the assertion.) Not only had her
Majesty's Government end the house expressed their regret
for what had occurred, but every precaution had been taken
to prevent such a calamity in future. The resolution said
that what had been done was " contrary to those usages of
war which prevail among civilised nations." He would ven-
ture to say that this was not so. It was not contrary to
the usages of war to bombard a town provided with batte-
ries as a means of defence against ships brought into col-
lision with it. The case was otherwise where a town had
no defences. We did not in the Crimean war bombard
Odessa because it had no batteries to attack our fleet. Of
towns that had been bombarded by civilised nations he
might mention Algiers, which was bombarded in 1816,
Antwerp in 1830, Beyrout by the Turkish fleet, Acre in
1840 by the English, and Barcelona, by the Spanish Go-
vernment. The French bombarded Tangiers, a peaceful
town, and the private property of the Emperor of Morocco,
and allowed the Rabyle barbarians to come down upon it
and sack it. Rome was bombarded in June and July, 1848,
and in 1854 the Americans bombarded Greytown and
burned it to the ground. Here there were no batteries to
protect the town, yet the ships fired on it. In defence of
this conduct the President of America said the arrogant
contumacy of the inhabitants left no alternative but to break
up their establishments, or leave them under the impres
sion that they might pursue a career of lawlessness and
plunder. What was taking place now in America ? Charles-
ton was being bombarded. (Hear.) That town had batte-
ries, certainly, but then the Federals were constantly throw.
ing Greek ire and missiles into the town, We heard of
women and children being killed there, yet some persons
justified this mode of assault. (Disapprobation.) These
bombardments were not merely carried on by sea. Last
year we heard of the bombardment of Port Jackson, and
the New York papers described, with apparent satisfaction,
how the houses and public buildings were destroyed.
(Hear, hear.) That was justified. (Opposition cheers.) He
quoted these cases to prcvo that civilised nations considered
the bombardment of towns as coming within the usages of
war. (Hoar, hear.) When our ships were fired on at
Kegosime, it was our duty to return the fire. (Hear.)
No British admiral mild avoid doing so. (Hear, hear.)
In this affair the papers would show that the admiral's
conduct had met with the approval of the French. It was
stated that the English had not been sufficiently concilia-
tr ry. The papers showed that the Americana had suffered
severely by being too conciliatory. In the papers laid before
Congress the American Minister at Japan said, " I have not
been anxious until recently for the presence of a naval force,
but my opinion has undergone a great change," and then he
recornun laded the sending a naval force to Japan as neces-
sary for some time to preserve to the world what had been
gained. Ho stated alto that it was the pretence of the Bri-

tish Elect in those waters which brought recent troubles to
a peaceful conclusion, (Cheers.) This was the recommen-
dation of the representative of a power which followed the
policy recommended by the hon. member for Northumber-
land. That Minister's house was burned, and no notice taken
of the matter by the authorities, and now he was compelled
to admit that the American policy was a false one, and that
the policy of England was the only one by which peaceful
relations could be established with Japan. (General ap-
_

probation,) Were they to do as the Dutch did ? They gro-
velled on their bellies. Did they prosper? No, their posi-

tion became so intolerable that they were obliged to give up
their trade• (Hear.) Our agents were the beet judges of
what should be done. Our trade, in consequence of the
course adopted was rapidly increasing, and of the £7,000,000

and more invested in mercantile pursuits in Japan, more
than half that amount was British. (Hear.) An attempt

had been made to interfere with the silk trade, but in con-
sequence of the firm representations of Col. Neale the Go-
vernment removed the restrictions complained of. Our re-
lations with Japan were purely commercial. Our object was
to carry out the views of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Bright)
below the gangway. (Laughter.) If that hon. gentleman,
instead of making exciting speeches in the country, would
endeavour to impress moderation on his hearers, and advise
them to give the Government credit for better intentions,
he would be much more !useful. (Hear.) From what he
(Mr. Layard) knew of the East he believed that most of
our difficulties there were created by the British traders.
A host of traders rushed into every market, rand they con-
sidered that the Government had nothing to do but to sup-
port them in their preposterous pretentious. He could not
agree with the terms of the motion. If the hon. gentleman
withdrew the words casting an imputation on Admiral
Kuper, who had no opportunity of defending himself, he
(Mr. Layard) would not oppose the motion, but if not he
would move the previous question. (Hear, hear,)
Sir J. ELPHINSTONE supported the amendment.
Mr. W. E. FORSTER believed the destruction of that
city was intentional, and ventured t) prophesy that when
the explanations came from the other sid.e the only feeling
would be one of astonishment that we had ever expected
anything else than what had happened. The idea of shel-
ling the Prince's residence was suggested by the Minister
at home, who ought to have known that it would have been
almost impossible to do that without burning the town.
He thought, however, the house should not endeavour to
apportion the blame, but content itself with a simple ex-
pression of regret; and he recommended Mr. Buxton to as-
sent to the amendment.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL defended the conduct
of the Government, and its political and military agents, in
reference to the unhappy calamity that had befallen the
city of Kagosima.
Mr. WHITESIDE attached the entire blame to the
Foreign Secretary, upon whose instructions the city had
been bombarded. The question at issue was, whether this
country itself intended to practise those principles of huma-
nity which it was ever so ready to advise all other nations
to adopt. If we maintained such acts as had been done in
this case our laurels would be tarnished, and in vain should
we represent ourselves to the world us the most humane
people on the face of the earth.
Lord PALMERSTON--The right hon. and learned gen-

tleman said that there was one point which had not been
adverted to by my hon, and learned friend—via., 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. Nettle, in which he said, "The Tycoon was
to blame when he 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 proceesions." (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 cast doubt that British subjects,
both officials and private merchatets, 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 reparatism 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 retaineala
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 hsd been ex-
pressly assigned for the use or' British subjects, in order
that they might take their exud there without molesta-
tion.e,: It was the duty of the Tycoon's Government, if they
knew that a body of the Daimio's retainer:' were going in
procession along the road on a given day, and it' they knew
and expected that any meeting between the procees.:en and
British subjects might lead to violence, I say it was iNir
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
OUT 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, hears)
Sir, I cannot compliment the hon. member upon s 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 consents's' to pay the sum
we required. 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 se 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 Dainties 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 tab 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
saytHhee
leftt‘
e‘
wG town
t andatno
dt
hbpeue
rrdtni
discretion
eedtnieegf
nei
nn
of
fe
tlt
oeh se;
admiralrtionwe
en ?"
Satsuma, No
either st such
orcbh t
at cheki
and
dge
stroy his forts and his castle if that could be ea sily done.
Admiral Kuper performed his duty as a British officer
ought to perform it. He did not begin an attack upon the
forts. He demanded satisfaction, and parleyed for two
days with the envoys of Prince Satsuma. As my hon.
friend (Mr. La) 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 °erne 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 re-
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 compelldd to burn the steamers, in order
that his shipa might be free for action, XII tlio course of