The Sun.
London, England, 1864-07-27 00:00:00

BILL.

Tii3s bill passed through committee,
CIIIIIINAL JUSTICES' ACT (1855) CONTINUANCE

BILL.
Tb is bill passed through committee.
ARMAGH ARCHIEPISCOPAL RENENUE BILL.
Tb is bill passed through committee.
CONSOLIDATED FUND (APPROPRIATION)

BILL.
Tilia bill was read a third time and passed.
NEW ZEALAND LOAN BILL.

Preis bill was read a third time and passed.
PUBLIC WORKS (MANUFACTURING DIS-

TRICTS BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
POOR REMOVAL BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
EXPIRING LAWS CONTINUANCE BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
PIER AND HARBOURS BILL.

The revolt of amendments to this bill was brought up
and agrf.led to.

HIGHWAY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.

The amendments to this bill were agreed to, and the bil;
was then read a third time and passed.
RAILWAY COMPANIES PO WERS BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
FOREIGN AFFAIRS.

The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH, on rising to call the
attention of the house to the changes which have taken
place in the state of foreign affairs since Parliament met,
said that he took that opportunity to endeavour to draw at-
tention to our present position. There had been a change,
which affected not only the integrity of the Danish domi-
nions, bat the sacredness of the obligations of the treaties
by which the States of Europe were bound together, the
security of the smaller States, and the steady progress of
constitutional government on the continent of Europe,
which for some years we had witnessed with the greatest
satisfactic ,n. When he last addressed them he had no hope
of doing good; he had no hope now, and only spoke because
he felt it , right to do so. Her Majesty's Government de-
clared that they would afford no assistance to Denmark,
after t'h a failure of the Conference. At the commencement
of the, session the Opposition declared that it was not their
duty to find any foreign policy; and they had ended by
slop' Ing the foreign policy of the Government, while they
had commented severely upon the mode in which it had
been. •carried out by the Foreign Secretary. He regretted
this-determination of the two great parties in the State;
nor did he think that such a course would have been

ad• Ipted by the great statesman whom England declined to
h. mow. He believed, moreover, that there was not more
ti inn one reign—that of James I.—in which such a policy
• oreuld have been acceptable to the country. Let them ob-
D erve in what state Denmark was now. She lay prostrate
nit the feet of her despoilers, and had none to protect her,
except, perhaps the Emperor of France, who might have,
perchance, come forward to defend her. At the beginning
of the present year Denmark possessed all the provinces
secured to her by the treaty of Vienna ; and would have
continued to do so had it net been for the lawless inva-
sion of the German Powers. In the first place, they
called their invasion a Federal execution, and based it
upon certain letters patent issued by the late King.
Before, however, Federal execution was levied, those
letters patent were withdrawn. Austria and Prussia
then declared their intention to occupy Scbleswig as a ma-
terial guarantee for the fulfilment of a certain diplomatic
en gagement entered into by Denmark in 1850 .51—and they
d'.d this, although they had made no objection, until it was
Tossed, to the constitution of November, 1863, which united
Schleswig to Denmark. But after that constitution had
been agreed to, end the Parliament dissolved, Austria and
Prussia desired the King to repeal that constitution, which
he could not do without violating his oath. M, Bismark,
indeed, observed that he might do so by establlshing a state
of siege. But had he done so, the King of Denmark would
have d eserved to forfeit his throne, and have lost the cha-
racter which he had hitherto maintained. The constitution
was *lot repealed, and first Schleswig and then Jutland were
ocee.pied. He inferred from this that this war was not
con anenced uno intuitu by Austria and Prussia, but that

thely proceeded step by step from ono wrong to another
w hen they saw that the.r aggressions met with no resist-
fence. Although he believed that there was no treaty of
lioly Alliance, he thought that there was an understand-
ing—not only one—between Austria, Prussia, and Russia,
which was indeed far worse than the Holy Alliance. The
Sovereigns of the former alliance declared, and they kept
to their word, that they would not check territorial aggran-
disement for themselves, but would limit their action to
giving assistance to any sovereign who might be threaten-
ened by the revolutionary party, and might ask their aid
in maintaining his authority. But Austria and Prussia had
not been content with this. Not confining themselves to
snpport the authority of the King of Denmark, they had
forbidden him to extend constitutional Government to
Schleswig. It was not merely the declarations of her
Majesty's Government which had given these German
Powers an insight into the pacific policy of the Govern-
ment. Reduced estimates were introduced at the com-
mencement of the year, and they were ostentatiously de-
scribed as peace estimates. Now he quite admitted that
we were not entitled to demand success in all his under-
takings from a British Minister—but we were certainly
entitled to ask that he should not take measures which
rendered success impossible. Now a Government which
declared that its strength should never be used, did in
the most direct manner deprive itself of all influence. He
thought it of the deepest importance that the several sove-
reigns of Europe should have decided not to maintain the
Treaty of 1852 as the basis of their policy, He saw no
reason for such a departure. The only ground that could
be given was founded on the new doctrine that nations were
to de6ide on their own tate ; but this doctrine had no appli-
cation to Schleswig- and Holstein. In the case of a large
hOM ogenPous population, like that of France, no doubt the
doctrine of nationality was well founded. Nor did it affect
the balance of power in Europe by whom that race might
b© ruled. Under any dynasty their policy and their action
would be the same. But when the people of a particular
province desired to withdraw themselves from a State to
which they had belonged they disturbed the balance of
power in Europe by bringing about the dismemberment of
the State to which they had belonged. He did not see how
or why any treaty should be respected after that of 1852
had been set aside. There would in future be no such
thing as international right in Europe, and there would be
to securin-• for any State in Europe except that which de-
pended on her strength. There was not a weak State in
Europe which did not feel that l'!,s security was sensibly
diminished by what had taken place in regard to Denmark.
If Kiel might he claimed and taken possession of by Austria
sad Prussia, what was there to prevent other Powers from
seizing the Texel, or France from marching upon Bel-
gium ? What had recently occurred must sensibly
diminish the sense of independence of all secondary States.
But, besides the regret and indignation which he felt on
this score, he regarded the conduct of the German Powers
A 3 a declaration et war against constitutional government.
No doubt their behaviour towards Denmark was pert of a
wickedey-laid plot to destroy liberty in Prussia and
Austria also. lie dreaded this, not because it would
last, but because it would interrupt the peaceful progress
of constittit:onal freedom, which, but a few months ago,
Penned goiag- on in those States. A darn had been thrown
across the stream!), which was certain to rise and over-
wnelne the Governments which had interrupted its course.
It was because these things could not be done without re-
tribution, and a terrible retribution too, that he viewed
them with so much alarm. Then comes the question,
what are we to do ? We could not disguise from ourselves
that there was much mystery in these recent transactions
—that there was something behind which we could not see
—that there was :something we could not explain in the
conduct of Austria, Prussia, and Russia. We must look,
then, to our own strength, We must increase that etrength

by fortifications, and by keeping bothour army and navy
in the most efficient condition. We must endeavour to
maintain the best understanding with France. Above all,
he looked as our best security to the revival of the ancient
spirit of the country, which did not consider lucre, bat
looked to honour. There was nd doubt that what we now
saw passing around us was calculated to fill us both with
indignation and regret. Did history record any instance of
cruelty more revolting than that of which the Poles had
recently been made the victims ? Did history record
another instance in which, as had been the case with the
Poles during the last few months—women, children, old
men, young men, the glory and pride of their country, had
been marched (without any of that assistance required by
the age of some and the sex of others) from Warsaw to
Siberia, dying on the road or destined to slavery when they
arrived at their destination? When we saw this, and wit-
nessed the wrong done to Denmark—when we saw the
Powers which had despoiled her, proceeding from one
wrong to another until they had appropriated to them-
selves a large portion of the country—when we saw
such outrages as these, which could not remain without
decisive retribution, he could only express his hope
that those who were not parties to these crimes, that
those who had not in any way participated in them,
might, by the divine permission and mercy, be exempted
from that punishment which should only be inflicted on
those who designed the wrong and assisted in its perpetra-
tion. (Hear, hear.)
Earl RUSSELL said this matter had been fully debated
in both Houses of Parliament, and both Houses of Parlia-
ment had come to their conclusion upon it. But there were
some statements made by the noble earl which appeared to
him to require so much correction in order to reduce them
to the actual state of facts, that he could not avoid noticing
some of those statements. The noble earl had spoken of
Denmark as a country that had been invaded by two great
Powers, who had invaded it for the purpose of taking from
it some of its own provinces. Now, the difficulty of this
question throughout had been that while Denmark was a
small country there were at the same time two different
races—indeed, more than two different races in that country
—and that one race, which possessed the power of directing
and controlling the Government, were at issue with another
race, which occupied part of these provinces. But there
was another difficulty still. While the majority might
exercise unjustly, and could exercise oppressively if they
chose, all their power over the minority, that minority had
the power of appealing to a nation on its frontier, close to
its boundary—a country of more than forty millions of in-
habitants, whose feelings, whose position and sympathies,
would be with the provinces. In that state of affairs the great
powers of Europe made a treaty, but that treaty depended
upon the temper, upon the discretion, and upon the good
sense of one party, as well as upon the mercy and forbearance
of the others, Now, they should remember always that the
beginning of this contest was in 1848, when Prussia in-
vaded the provinces of the King of Denmark. They con-
tended that they were justified in invading Holstein by an
article of the Germanic Confederation, and that they were
justified as respected Schleswig by a special engagement
that had been made. Therefore there was a dispute and
discussion between Denmark on the one side and the Ger-
manic Confederation on the other, and it could not be said
that Denmark was entirely blameless in that matter, or
that she had fulfilled all the promises she had made. He
was told that he had looked into the subject of the
treaty of 1852 more than it was necessary to do, but he had
thought it was absolutely necessary to look into it, and he
could neither say the Government of Denmark was blame-
less, nor that they had fulfilled all the promises by which
they had bound themselves to the Germanic Confederation
or to Austria. Therefore the question came to this. Were
the Powers justified in dividing Denmark in order to compel
her to fulfil her promises, and to keep her treaty engage-
ments ? The question was a complicated one, and no one
could say that in going to war purely and simply for Den-
mark, without asking anything for Denmark, we would
have been taking the right course. This was not a question
of whether you should go to war or should not go to war;
but the main difficulty in a question of this kind was that
you should not draw the sword without being convinced
that you were in the right. If you were to go to wares if
you were to ask the people of England to contribute large
subsidies to that war—if you were to ask them to subject
themselves to all the evils of war, you should at least be sure
that you were in the right course when you drew the sword.
Now when he said that Denmark had not taken a perfectly
upright course in this matter, he did not mean to defend
the Powers of Germany against the accusation the noble earl
had brought, but he would say if they had been willing to
submit the matter to the decision of the Powers of Europe
who were not immediately engaged in it, if they had listened
to both sides, all this difficulty might have been settled by
negotiation. But unfortunately, while Denmark for 11 years
continually and persistently put herself in the wrong, Ger-
many had determined that she would listen to no reason, and
as Denmark would give no promises of redress, she would
settle the question by the arbitration of war. He blamed that
conduct, and he blamed it the more because it was not the
judgment of Austria and Prussia which led them to this;
but perhaps together, and perhaps separately, they wished
to have popular feeling in Germany in their favour, and it
was rather in consequence of that feeling that they felt the
cause to be right that they again participated in that war.
He did not agree that in that case we ought to have taken the
part of Denmark, and that, although France and Russia
refused to be our backers in it, that we should ourselves
have proceeded, and by our means have defended the cause
of Denmark. He had said the question had been discussed.
He held in his hand the resolution that had been arrived at
by the House of Commons, the address which they had
presented to her Majesty, after considering this matter, he
thought, for four nights together, and knowing, as they
must have known, that if it had been a case of war the
appeal must have been made to them, as the only nmsti-
tutional body, for the means to carry on that war. After
thanking her Majesty for laying before them the papers,
and expressing the regret of the House of Commons that the
Conference had been brought to a close without accomplish-
ing the important purpose for which it was called, they
went on to express their satisfaction that at this conjuncture
her Majesty had been advised to abstain from armed inter-
ference in the contest now going on between Denmark and
the German Powers. Therefore, if they had called on the
House of Commons to carry on a war of that kind, the
House of Commons would not have supported the Govern-
ment in that war. The noble earl had supposed that the
honour of England had been impaired. Now, in what re-
spect had the honour of England been involved in this
contest? Was it bound by treaty to assist Denmark?
There was no treaty since 1852, and there was no proof
whatever that it was to the honour of this country to assist
Denmark in this war. He was convinced there was no such
obligation, and he was fully convinced also that if any
cause should arise in which the honour of England re-
quired her to go to war, they would have the House of
Commons deciding, not by a small majority, but by
overwhelming numbers, in support of fulfilling the obli-
gations in favour of which the honour of England was at
stake. They might repeat now what Burke said in an
eloquent speech made ninety years ago in relation to
America. He said, " Slavery is a weed that grows any
where. They may have it in Spain, they may have it in
Prussia." Now he was loth to think that the people of
Prussia, in the course of these 90 years, had not learnt
both to value and to understand liberty. His belief was
that neither on the part of the Crown, on the part of the
House of Lords, nor on the part of the House of Commons,
had they yet arrived at a true understanding of what a
constitutional monarchy should be, It required no aid and
no assistance from us, but after this question of Denmark
had been settled, as it would be without any interference
of ours, he believed the best prospect for the future to
see liberty and constitutional monarchy established in
Germany, was to leave that intelligent people to establish
what should be the terms of government between the So •
vereign and themselves, and there was no reason why
England should interfere in any way in the settlement of
that dispute. He was far from thinking that, were we to
compare Europe with what it was 40 years ago, at the
time of the Holy Alliance, that the people of Europe had
not made great progress in political feeling, because he
believed that feeling was in abeyance at that time. He
believed no sovereign, looking at the signs of the times,
would think otherwise than that; but, on the contrary,
they would find the sympathies of the people of England
to be with the government of a constitutional monarchy.
That was his belief, and he was far from thinking if we
had been thrust into war, and the States of Etuopo had
been pitted against each other in bloody contest, that we
should have promoted the cause of liberty any more than
we should have promoted the cause of peace. He believed,
on the contrary, that by leaving it to the people and the
sovereigns of Germany to settle this question among them-
selves, the Government had acted not only for the honour
and interest of England, but they had done that which was
best for the honour and interest of Europe.
Lord STAT FORD DE REDCLIFFE said his noble
friend had asked where anything could be found to justify
the expression that the honour of England had been
lowered. He thought a justification was to be found
for it in the manner in which the negotiations had been
cenclncted. The great object of her Majesty's Govern-
en was theinstead of p
mainetaecnea,nce of peace in the north of Europe.
Govern-
ment
we now had war. Then we had
been told that the treaty of 1852 was to be maintained ; but
that treaty had been given up by the English Government
itself. The hopes which were raised in Denmark had been
destroyed. It was, in a word, impossible not to perceive
facts which justified the expression that we had Buttered a
certain degree of discredit as a nation. Ho regretted the
blame which had been imputed to the Danish Government,
who throughout all the proceedings had been placed in a'
moat critical and di cult poettion. The cenduct of the
Danes ought to elicit feelings of the strongest admiration,
and it was a matter of regret that we could not show our
sympathy with them in a more effective manlier.
The subject then dropped.
SEARCHING FOR ARMS IN IRELAND.

The Earl of LEITRIM drew attention to a search for
anus which had been made in April last, under a warrant
of the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, in the parish of Clonda.
vadock, in the barony of Kilroacrenan, county Donegal;
and asked the Lord President if there were any law to au-
thorise the police in Ireland to enter the dwelling-house of
any of her Majesty's subjects without a warrant and to
search it, or carry off any property of any kind whatsoever
from such house without any written authority.
Earl GRANVILLE said that all the proceedings in the