The Sun.
London, England, 1864-07-09 00:00:00

butt am not sure that it would not be to the advantage of
Denmark, which has long been crippled by the people of
Schleswig,who have been long discontented with her,as was
shown at the time of the Royal marriage, when they refused
to contribute to the dower offered by the King, in order to
show their dissatisfaction. So the parties were brought to-
gether; and they' agreed to a ditislon of Schleswig, a part to
be united to Holstein; and the only question at last was
where the line was to be drawn. It was found impossible to
bring them to an agreement. We then proposed arbitration,
If the parties accepted it, and if the:arbiter was empowered
peremptorily to decide the points and that the two parties
agreed to it, instead of a vote of Censlife, ineteed of con-
demnation so lavishly bestowed upon us in this debate, all
would agree that our exertions had been crowned with suc-
cess, and that we had made an honourable arrangement
between the two parties, and that the peace of Europe was
secured. (Cheers.) It was not our fault that the two parties
objected to the arrangement. The proposal was a most
reasonable one. It has been said that our Minister pro-
mised Denmark that if she agreed to the line of the Schlei
he would not propose another line. He did make that
promise, but that was not to fetter his hands when he
found it was impossible to bring Germany down to the
Schlei, nor to bring Denmark up to the Apenrade, But if
the Conference had broken up, would it not be said to us,
" Why did you not propose arbitration ?" I say it was
proper, and our duty as a last resort to propose arbitration,
which if accepted would have restored peace. (Cheers.)
The French plenipotentiary proposed another solution—
namely, an appeal to the population of the disputed
districts, but it was not acceptable to Denmark or to
Prussia; and that proposal, although honourably made,
was not acceded to. Well, then, I say when hon. gentle-
men, not looking to the main features of the transaction,
only pick otit sentences from the blue books and found upon
them a vote of condemnation against the Government, I say
that such a proceeding, although it may suit the purposes
of a party who want to blacken and disgrace the Govern-
ment, I am persuaded that the country will not think this is
the way to treat great European questions (cheers), and
that it will not approve the condemnation which is proposed
by gentlemen opposite. Now, let us examine a little what
is the resolution which the right hon. gentleman proposes.
I speak not of the first and second sentences, but the last.
He proposes that this house should affirm that the influence
of England is lowered in the eyes of the world—(cheers)—
and that thereby the security for peace is diminished. That
is supported by a great number of gentlemen who maintain
that we are never to interfere in anything beyond our own
shores. What is the use of our influence if we are not to in-
terfere ? (Cheers.) And how is the peace of Europe to be
endangered by the loss of our influence if that influence is
to be confined within those walls. (Cheers.) This doctrine
is altogether unsound, for our interests are affected by mat-
ters which happen in every part of the world, and a coun-
try like ours cannot be passive or indifferent to what passes
among other nations; that she has interests which require
vigilant watching, and that we must interfere in some way
or other in transactions in which we are not directly or ab-
solutely concerned. But then we are told that the balance
of power is exploded. Why, the balance of power is
founded upon the nature of man. (Hear, hear.) The
balance of power means that, in the community of nations,
no nation should acquire such a preponderance of
power as to endanger the security of the rest; and it is
for the ad vantage of all that the smaller Powers should
be respected in their independence (Opposition
cheers)—and not swallowe I up by their more powerful
neighbours. That is the doctrine of the balance of power,
and it is a doctrine worthy of being acted upon. I say we
have done our best to rescue Denmark from the dangers to
which she was exposed by counselling her to set herself
right upon those matters where she was in fault; advising
her aggressors to adopt a more moderate course ; and by
inducing the neutral Powers to join with us in advising the
same course. But what said the right honourable
gentleman upon the subject? He said if England had a
policy, and that England and France were upon cordial
terms, war would be very different; but if Russia, France,
and England had come to a good understanding, war would
be impossible. Well, we tried to make it impossible, but
France and Russia would not combine with us, and there-
fore war became possible, and took place. The right lion
gentleman had therefore pronounced a panegyric upon our
policy, and he ought to vote against his own resolution.
(Cheers and laughter.) We adopted the beat means of ren-
dering war impossible, and the failure was not our fault.
At the time I answered the quetition of the right hon gen-
tleman opposite we had reason to believe that Sweden was
going to conclude a treaty offensive and defensive with
Denmark, but it was not carried out. Well, then, I deny
utterly that the influence of England has been lowered, I
say that there is no proof of it. The assertion must belong
either to the period before the Conference or to the period
afterwards. But to the period before the Conference it could
not apply, because by the influence of England that Confe-
rence was assembled in the capital of this country. It can-
not apply to any thing subsequent to the Conference, because
nothing has taken place, (Hear.) Well, then, I say that
it is a gratuitous libel upon the country. (No.) It is a
libel by a great party upon the country which they wish to
govern. Why, such a resolution being recorded, foreign
Governments would say to that party, you have put itupon
record that your country is degraded, and whether it is or is
not, you are not the parties to restore it. (Hear.) I say
therefore that is a most unpatriotic course, which I trust
will not receive the support of the house. It would be
a libel upon the country to which we all belong to record in
the votes of this house that which is not a fict---that the
influence of England had been lowered, (Hear.) Sir, the
influence of a country depends upon other things than pro •
tocols and despatches, (Hear, hear.) The influence of a
country depends upon its power to defend itself, its wealth,
its prosperity, its intelligence, and upon the cultivation of
mind and the development of arts and sciences, and upon
all those things which make a country great and powerful,
So long as England retains these conditions, so long I defy
any one to prove that her influence has been lowered or
degraded. (Hear.) Well, then, I contend that the reso-
lution of the right hon. gentleman is not one which is fitting
for this house to adopt. Reference has been made to the
amendment of the hon. gentleman the member for Bridg-
water, and it has been said by some that it was an escape
from voting upon the resolution of the right hon. gentle-
man. (Hear.) Well, I have no hesitation in saying that
for my part I regret that the hon. member (Mr. Kinglake)
has moved that amendment, because I should have been
better pleased to have come to a decision on the resolution
of the right hon. gentleman the member for Bucks. But
we were told just now by the hon. baronet (Sir S. North-
cote) that that resolution, with the amendment of my hon.
friend, embodied entirely the statement which I made to the
house not long ago in stating the results of the Conference.
Surely if that is the case, gentlemen opposite cannot be sur-
prised that we should accept that amendment, and be pre-
pared to vote for it. No man can say that by voting for that
amendment we are shirking the resolution of the right hon.
gentleman, At the same time I did express to my hon. friend
a wish that he would n,`_'t put his amendment, so that we
might vote on the resolui,;;:_n of the right hon. gentleman.
He, however, declined to withdraw it, and we are now pre-
pared to take the vote upon his amendment (Hear.) In the.
lit
course of this debate the real character of the
gentleman's motion has been more plainly dilated upon
some who have taken part, more especially by the hon.
member for Tipperary, It has been fairly avowed that this
is not simply a censure upon one individual act, but upon a
course of action. It is fairly an issue to test a vote of con-
fidence in the Government. It has been intended to oust
the Government. Ida not complain of that object, but I
complain of the mode, because I think it would have been
more manly, open, and straightforward, to have .put the
issue in the constitutional mode of a resolution, rather than
to endeavour to wrap it up in the 1,500 pages of a blue
book. (Hear.) It would have been much more consistent
to say, We have borne this Government for five years ; it
is too much for human endurance ; everything must have
its limit; the time is come when we wish Parliament to
declare plainly, aye or no, will they retain the present Go-
vernment, or not ? I have not the slightest reproach to
make to them, except that they have not fairly avowed and
put their object in plain language. They complained of our
despatches not being in plain language ; but I think their
resolution is not in plain language, and it would be much
better, and more according to usual custom, to put it in the
plain way. (Hear.) Then the member for Tipperary said
very truly that this being the case, the house ought to look
not simply to this limited action of the Government on the
Danish question, but to look to their general conduct on
other matters. That would be quite proper and fair, because
if a vote of no confidence had been moved, of course it would
lead to a discussion of all the measures of the Government.
I contend that if the house take that view of the matter, they
will find in the five years that we have been honoured by the
house, and have carried on the Government of the coun-
try this country has been in an unexampled state of
prosperity—(cheers)--that more has been done in everything
connected with the material interests of the country than
perhaps ever was done in the same space of time before,
(Hear.) On that ground at least we may stand unscathed,
and defy any attack which may be made upon us from any
quarter whatever. I know that details applicable to this
argument would be encroaching too much on the time and
patience of the house : but I now ask leave to state one or
two minor facts which bear on this question, to show what
has been the conduct of the Government, and what have
been the improvements in the country during our adminis-
tration. (Cheers.) Between 1859.60 and 1864—(cries of
"Question" and cheers)—wo have listened very patiently
to the abuse of hon. gentlemen opposite. I think now it is
but fair that they should listen to the reasons that we think
may be fairly stated in our general justification. (Hear.)
We have reduced, between 1860 and 1864 twelve millions
of taxation, We have concluded, with the assistance of the
hon. gentleman opposite (Mr Cobden), that treaty with
France which has so wonderfully increased the commercial
relations between the two countries—(hear, hear)—for
whereas in 1859, the imports from France were in value 16
millions, in 1863 they were 24 millions. The exports also
have increased in a greater degree, for while in 1859 they
were only 91 millions, in 1863 they were £22,900,000. It
must be obvious that this great development of the corne
merco of the country must have been of the greatest advan-
tage at a time when we were suffering so severely from the
failure of the supply of cotton from America. (Cheers.)
In the meantime we had reduced the national debt by
eleven millions, that is to say, five millions had been
actually paid off, and six millions had been converted into

terminable annuities. The private personal income of
the country has increased to such an extent that the assess-
ment to the income tax has increased by 27 millions in
the course of that time. Between 1860-61 and 186465, the
expenditure has been reduced by 3 millions, Meanwhile we
had not been unmindful of interests and considerations very
important to the country, viz,, the national defences; our
primary object being to make the country unassailable from
any quarter, I willingly give hon. gentlemen opposite the
credit of originating the volunteer movement, but that sys-
tem of defence has been wonderfully developed under the
present Government. (Hear.) Our dockyards are now in
course of being made secure; so that we no longer hear of
pamphlets about the perils of Portsmouth. Portsmouth and
our other naval stations will soon be in a position to defy
attack. The foreign trade of the country has increased to a
very groat degree, having risen from 377 millions in 1861 to
444 millions in 1863. An increase of 67 millions in two
years! It is not necessary for me to go into the details of
the improvement of a savings' banks, although those are
matters which are of deep interest to the working classes.
(Hear.) We have got through that great calamity, as it
was expected to be, of the cotton famine without any of the
disturbance which might have been expected through the
losses and privations of. those who suffered by it. We
have not beep solely occupied with the concerns of the
United Kingdom ; so: my right hon. friend who has the
management of India has &PIZ.? great things in regard to
that cottntry. And an important me.:ter that is, because
I recollect it was said when a change took pia,:° in the
Government of India, that although India was Indek:ted
to England then, the time might come when England
would be indebted to India. In 1858, the deficit in
the Indian revenue amounted to £14,000,000; beet it
1864 there was a euplus of £813,000; so that, in con-
sequence of the instructions of my right hon. friend, a
large deficit in the Indian revenue has been converted
into a large surplus. The contentment of the people of
India was known to everybody. Railways, telegraphs, and
every improvement which modern times have produced
have been introduced into that country. The exports from
India in 1858-9 were £29,000,000 ; in 1862-3 they amounted
to £46,000,000. (Hear, hear.) Well, then, I say that all
the indications of national prosperity that now exist—(An
hon. member: In Ireland f)—amongst the subjects of the
assn have g ood foundation, and that the Government of
the Queen during the five years they have been charged
with the conduct of the affairs of the country have not been
inattentive to any interest to which their attention ought to
be directed, but we have been the promoters of general
improvement in all the matters which constitute the gene-
ral interest of the country. Well, but we have during that
period of office preserved this country from war. (Hear.)
There were many people ready to urge us to take an active
part in the war in America. (Hear, hear.) We were not
without motives which might have been supposed to in-
duce us to take part in the contest going on in that country.
We abstained from it. (Cheers) No doubt there are some
who thought we ought to have leant more to one side, and
others who thought we ought to have leant more to the
other, but our conduct has been that of rigid neutrality, and
we have saved the covntry from the calamities of that war.
(Cheers.) There are many gentlemen in this House who do
not entirely approve of the policy that we pursued in China.
(Hear, hear.) That may be a subject of discussion, but
there is certainly a great development of our trade with
China, and we have a good understanding with the Go-
vernment of China. Therefore, whatever may be thought
of the steps by which we have arrived at that conclusion,
no man can deny that the result and conclusion have been
advantageous to the country. We have preserved pacific
relations with all the countries of Europe. It
has been said that in the last speech from the
Throne for the first time was omitted the s,ntence, " I con-
tinue to receive friendly assurance of peace from all foreign
Powers." Gentlemen who make that assertion are but little
read in Queen's speeches, because this is not the first time
that foolish and unmeaning passage has been left out, and I
trust it will never appear again, because those "friendly
assurances" never were given er received. (Laughter.) The
only meaning of the passage was, that the Sovereign was on
good relations with foreign Powers. We could not say that
entirely here—(hear)—because we had differences with
Austria and Russia, which rendered it impossible to make
that assertion; but when those differences are over—(a
laugh)—l hope.that it may be shown in the Queen's Speech
that it is owing to the way in which for a great many years
the affairs of the country have been conducted. Although
that is the case, I quite admit that the hon. gentlemen
opposite are perfectly entitled to make a great struggle and
a great fight for power. That is an honourable feeling,
which 1 do not mean to reproach. I think that a great party
comprising a great number of men of influence and ability
in the country, are perfectly entitled—when they think the
prize is within their reach—to strive for it. (Hear, hear.)
But, on the other hand, I do not think we have done any..
thing to deserve that that prize should be taken from us.
(Cheers.) I think we have conducted the affairs of the
country, during the five years we have had these seats, with
honour to the country, with advantage to the country, and
with credit to ourselves, and deserving the approbation of
the house and the confidence of the country. (Cheers from
the Ministerial side, followed by counter-cheers by the Op-
position.) Although hon. gentlemen meet that assertion with
" No, no," I am inclined to think whatever the decision of
this closely packed assembly may be to-night, the country at
large will answer in the affirmative—(cheers and counter-
cheers)—and will re-echo the assertion I have taken the
liberty of making. (No, no, from the Conservatives.) Well,
then, I say there has not been any special ground made for
the motion now before us. It evades and shirks the objects
of the movers. They ought to have come manly forward
with a vote of want of confidence. I think that is not a
motion which is founded upon justice and facts; and 1 am
confident, whatever may be the decision of the house this
night—and I trust it will be a rejection of the motion and a
substitution of that of my hon. friend, which will in fact be
a negative—whatever the decision may be, I am satisfied and
believe it will be in our favour, and I am sure that if it is
not in our favour, it will not be in accordance with the gene-
ral feeling of the people of this country. (The noble lord, on ,
resuming his seat, was loudly cheered.)

Mr. DISRAELI—Mr. Speaker, on Monday last I moved
an address to the Crown,thanking her Majesty for the papers
of the late negociatione which had been placed on our table,
and at the same time in that address I made three state-
ments which I wished the house to accept. The first was,
that her Majesty's Government had failed in their avowed
policy, which was to uphold the integrity and independence
of Denmark. The second point was an expression of regret
that the just influence of this country in the councils of Eu-
rope was lowered. The third proposition was that, by that
lowering of the just influence of this country in the councils
of Europe, the securities of peace were diminished. In in-
troducing that address to the consideration of the house, I
had, as is inevitable under such circumstances, to quote con-
siderably, though in as small proportion as I could arrange,
from a great many diplomatic correspondence that had been
placed on our table. I have observed always under similar cir-
cumstances when the opinion of the house has been asked, as
on the affairs of China, in which Sir James Graham took part,
there are always accusations on both sides of extracts being
garbled. lam not conscious of being guilty of anything of
the kind. I have listened with great attention to the present
debate, which has lasted four days, and having read the

-etches referred to by members on both sides of the House
desk. lrawn from extracts quite different inferences, I
who have r did not observe any quoted in any unfair
am bound to say ' lief that fa'r quotations is the inva-
manner, and it is my Indeed it appears to me one
rible practice of this House.
Id, totally irrespective of
of the most silly things in the svm.
who attacks her
,
any other consideration, for any per,sot...his
(21
aracter
Majesty's Government on occasions if
wil
llngly to managle or misrepresent these document:' What
could be the position of such a member, when he knows that
hon. gentlemen opposite, having the original documents, ar,q
in the possession of the means of correcting him ? Every
gentleman has the papers, and can refer to the page from
which the despatch is quoted ; and therefore it is absurd to
suppose that any gentleman would attempt to misquote or
misrepresent any document. (Hear, hear,) I was impressed
with the weakness of the case of the Government when the
most distinguished orator of the Treasury benches rose to
answer me at once—l will not say vulgarly, but certainly
with a taunt which ought not to receive the sanction or the
approval of the House. (Hear, hear.) He immedia,ely
accused me of misquoting—(Opposition cheers)—with mis-
representing ; which was as much as to say,—You are a
person totally incompetent, and you must be a very silly
person to attempt to address the House on this occasion,
and bring forward a case founded on misquotations. (Cheers )
I should not have said this, but I thought it this to my-
self. (Hear, hear.) With reference to the despatch which
was from Earl Russell to our charg4 d'affaires at Paris, I
copied it myself, and quoted from the copy. I read as much as
lahought sufficient to prove my case, and what I omitted was
only to save the time of the house; but, in fact, that part
which I did omit went to support my case. (Hear.) The
Chancellor of the Exchequer and other gentlemen assumed
that my object in quoting from Mr Grey to Earl Russell,
giving the conversation with M. Drouyn de Lhuys, was to
show that the Emperor of the French would not act with
the English Government. But I never supposed that any
Government would have acted from a feeling of pique, and
I should think that the Emperor of the French was the last
person who would so act. But I again airy that the part
which I omitted would, if given, have further proved my
case. (Hear.) The Chancellor of the Exchequer accused
me of falsifying a statement. (Hear, hear, from the Oppo-
sition.) However, after the gracious manner in which the
Chancellor of the Exchequer recalled that epithet, I do not
desire to give him the slightest pain or annoyance. (Hear.)
It is true that I may have inadvertently described the de-
spatch as referring to Federal execution ; I may have said
that the menace referred to Federal execution ; but what if
I did? (Hear, hear.) It was an insignificant passage, and
yet upon the strength of it a charge was made against me
of misquoting. Again, the Chancellor of the Exchequer
says that in the first place I make out that the English
Government was acting in an irregular and impolitic man-
ner; that they were menacing hero and cajoling there;
Germany threatened one day and Denmark the other, and
we (the English Government) did nothing but what was
done by the other great neutral Powers, by Franco and by
Russia. This was broadly stated by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, and since repeated. But not a tittle of proof
was given cf it. (Hear, hear.) We have had plenty of
proof that England menaced and cajoled, but we have
had no proof, notwithstanding the short declaration