The Sun.
London, England, 1863-02-28 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 28, 1863.

upon treaties which had been so frequently violated with
impunity. He thought that a protest in the name of the
principle of non-intervention, endorsed by the unanimous
adhesion of the English people, would not be in vain. It
could not fail to be of real service to the gallant Poles, and
would be a step gained towards the practical recognition of
the principle of non-intervention as binding upon the na-

ions of Europe.
Lord R. CECIL, alluding to the speech of the hon. gen-

tleman who had sat down, said that, as he should be found
in the same lobby with that eloquent and accomplished

pupil of Mazzini and others with whom he did not generally
agree, it was necessary that he should state his reasons for
the vote he should give. He referred to the extraordinary

unanimity of feeling in that house for the sufferings of
Poland, and his detestation of the conduct of Russia. Eng-
land, by the treaty now in existence, had a locus standi in
all the events that occurred in Poland. It had been said
that those treaties had been too often broken to be now put

forward ; but that was an argument insulting to the dignity
of England. England could look neither to the right nor
to the left when she was bound by solemn covenants to a
definite course. He quite agreed that it would be an ab-
surdity for a maritime country to make war in behalf of
Poland ; still, whatever might be its use, they were bound
to record their protest against the violation of the public

law of Europe. -
Sir H. VERNEY declared that if England abstained
from interfering on behalf of Poland, she, to a certain ex-
tent, became a party to the atrocities inflicted upon her.
Not only was it our duty so to interfere, but it was our
policy, and if necessary in a material degree.
Sir M. FARQUHAR expressed his regret that the
House of Commons had by their words and acts so en-
couraged the Poles to look forward to a day when they
might regain their liberty, and throw off the Russian
yoke, which had borne them to the dust, and then laid
itself open to the reflection of not having acted up to its
statements. The Polish question had now become one of
European importance, and it depended upon the course
which the Government might take, whether we should
be at last able to intervene so as to raise that country
from the difficulty in which it was placed, and from the
oppression to which it was subjected ; or whether we
might not eventually be led into a dreadful European
war. He trusted some steps would be taken to show that
we are really in earnest. The revolution was one of de-
spair, and he trusted it would lead to the joint interference
of Europe.
Mr. G. DUFF hoped, in the name of the Scotch mem-
bers, that the Government would take a strong line in this
matter. He was glad to find in the debate which had
taken p lace, that there had been a just discrimination be-
tween the conduct of the Prussian people and that of
their Government in reference to the recent alleged con-
vention with Russia. The King of Prussia had not al-
ways been the friend of the oppressor against the oppressed
—but since succeeding to the throne he had gone into the
heads of a military clique, called by the people of Berlin
" The Anti-Intellect in uniform," who used the powers of
the Government for their personal advantage.
Mr. D. GRIFFITH said that the revolting cruelties of

Russia which had been referred to were only a part of the
Russian system. The hon. member referred at some
length to the proceedings of the Congress of Vienna, and
came to the conclusion that the stipulations of the treaty of
Vienna were worth nothing at all to the security of the
Poles. Nothing would satisfy that gallant people but the
restoration of Poland in its entirety, as it had existed be-
fore the partition of 1772.
Mr. H. SEYMOUR said that of one fact there could be

no_ doubt, that if the Government acted as the honour and
interests of this country demanded, they would receive the
unanimous support of the house and the people. He could
not agree to the last part of the resolution, because it re-
ferred to the treaty of 1815, and " a bas le traitd do 1815"
had been the motto on the Continent for many years. He
would propose to substitute for it a vote of confidence in the
noble lord at the head of the Government.

Mr, MAGUIRE fully concurred in the whole resolution
as it stood, and thought that if ever there was a case
where interference was not only justifiable but demanded
it was that of Poland.

Mr. WALPOLE—I have never heard a debate in which

there has been greater unanimity upon the facts—(hear)—
but there appears to be great diversity of opinion as to the
nature of the practical resolution which we should adopt
under present circumstances. (Hear: hear.) We are pain-
fully unanimous in deep sympathy for the much oppressed,
much suffering people of Poland. (Hear, hear.) We are in-
dignantly unanimous at the terrible oppression which has
now been brought to bear upon that people more violently
than ever, crushed as they are under the iron heel of Russia,
more cruelly even than in former years. (Hear, hear.) We
are, I think, sadly unanimous in thinking there is another
Power, with whom we are nearly allied, and who has been be-
trayed into what I may almost call mean and infatuated con-
duct—(hear)—towards a people over a portion of whom she
herself reigns, and with whom she should sympathise.
(Cheers.) Thus far we are unanimous, and then comes the real
question, how are we to deal practically in this case ? What
is the practical test to which we should bring it 1' Hare there
arises an amount of diversity equal to the unanimity ex-
pressed by the house upon the first point. My hon. friend, in
a speech which does him infinite credit in every way for the
ability, the information, and the knowledge which it evinced,
as well as for the extraordinary temper and moderation in
which it was expressed.—(hear, hear)—has concluded his
resolution with a paragraph respecting which two of his
supporters are so little agreed as to its meaning and pur-
port, that while one of them, the hon. member for Tiverton

(Mr. Denman), thinks it weak, and requires amendment, the
other, the hon. member for Berkshire (Mr. Walter), thinks
it is so strong that if acted upon—and I confess I concur
in that opinion—it must, if not necessarily, at least, pro-
bably, lead to war. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. DENMAN—I did not say that I considered the re-
solution weak, but I objected to it that it was a resolution
which ought not to be placed upon the records of the house
without we meant almost immediate war. (Hear.)
Mr. WALPOLE—Then the speech of my hon. and

learned friend, together with that of the hon. member for
Berkshire leads to this important question, "Are we pre-
pared to adopt a resolution which will inevitably lead you
step by step into war ?" and I think before we arrive at that
conclusion we should pause. (Hear, hear.) My hon. friend
the member for Horsham (Mr. S. Fitzgerald), in a speech
which has gone home to the heart of every one—(hear, hear)
—for the generosity of feeling and the ability it displayed,
has recommended us to press upon the Government to con-
cur with France and Austria in immediate remonstrance
with Russia. Perhaps that might be the most effective
course, but I apprehend that if this resolution would be
likely to lead to war, the concurrence of three such Powers
so remonstrating with such a Power as that remonstrated
with would lead you into a war that might not attain the end
of freeing Poland, but might end with a war which you do
not at present intend to begin—a war in the Rhenish Pro-
vinces. (Hear.) The hon. member for Halifax made a stout
speech, but he ended with a conclusion so tame that I could
hardly believe he meant to press it upon the house—that
we should act upon the principle of non-intervention.
My noble friend the member for Stamford urged an argu-
ment that ought to lead us immediately into action. He
told us there is such a violation of treaties and engagements
that we are bound in honour and public faith to take up the
question immediately ; but have not these engagements and
treaties been violated for the last 45 years ? And if the
same arguments have been impressed on us for all that time
without impelling us to us action, what new phase has the
question now assumed to lead to immediate action ? Well,
then, the last two hon. gentlemen who spoke have said,
" Do let us bring the question to a practical conclusion."
Now, I believe the most practical conclusion you can bring
the question to is not to destroy the unanimity of this house
in the eyes of Europe and of the world by anything which
would even seem to approach to division among us. (Hear.)
The question, therefore, does seem to resolve itse If into this,
—Are the Government prepared to echo the sentiments ex-
pressed by the house, and, if they are prepared to echo those
sentiments, is the house prepared to leave to them the re-
sponsibility of enforcing them? I will add no more. I
think there is a danger in this house adopting a responsi-
bility which it cannot execute for itself. I think there is no
danger that 1 can see in leaving the responsibility to a Go-
vernment who have expressed themselves already on the
question in terms as cogent as any that have been used in
this debate. I for one am prepared to support the Govern
ment, and leave to them the responsibility if they assure
the house they will honestly exercise it. (Hear, hear.)
Lord PALMERSTO N, who rose amid loud cheers, said
it was natural, on a subject which excites PO MU° h feel-
ing, not only in this country but on the Continent, and
especially in a neighbouring nation, that this house should
re-echo the sentiment which prevails so strongly out of doors;
and I must do the hon. member who moved thew resolu-
tions the justice to say that in the manner in which he
brought the matter forward there was nothing, I think,
of which anybody bad a right to complain. (Hear, hear.)
With regard to myself, who have been quoted by the hon.
member, both as to what I have said and what I have writ-
ten, I have only to say that I don't stand here to unsay
anything which I may formerly have said, nor to retract
anything which I may formerly have written. (Cheers.)
The Governments of which I have been a member have
always entertained the opinion which it was my duty
to express, that in this matter of Poland the engagements
of the Treaty of Vienna, especially as regards Russia, have
been systematically and long violated. (Cheers.) It is im-
possible not to feel the deepest sympathy for the Polish
nation. (Cheers.) They have for a century been most singu-
larly unfortunate. They were unfortunate before the par-
tition in having a Constitution which, whatever some of
its merits may have been, was tainted with the gravest
possible defects. They were unfortunate in the successive
partitions which deprived them of their nationality. They
were unfortunate when the First Napoleon entered the
Polish territory on his way to Russia, because he did Lot
then think it expedient to take advantage of that occupa-
mtioondifif for thena tpurposeonai
uty
.o f
T restoringhey
were Poland
unfortunate
ato t
tehnet i
Conre o r.
anxious Poland
t e a
tghreesszorftVtisiehnnra,lebnecipaeutseentiaatry wasthat t
to restorehowever
considerable degree of nationality, the power of Russia
prevented it, and when Lord Londonderry (then Lord
inie
Castlereagh) urged certain conditions the answer of the
Emptror of Irussia was—" I have 200,000 men in
Poland, and I cannot agree to the proposal you make.'
They were unfortunate afterwards, inasmuch as the good

and liberal intentions which I believe animated the

Emperor Alexander at the time when the Treaty of Vienna
was signed was not afterwards adhered to and carried into
execution. It is well known that at the time the late Prince
Czartoryski was the confidential adviser of the Emperor of
Russia, and you see in the provisions of the first article of
the Treaty of Vienna the hand of a friend to Poland—a
person, interested, who looked forward to a better futurity
for his countrymen,—for in that article it is said that the
Emperor of Russia reserves to himself to give such internal
extension to the kingdom of Poland as he may think fit ;
the meaning of which, I believe, was, that the Emperor con-
templated at that time, adding to it some of the ancient pro-
. . .

vinces of Poland which had been in the Russian empire.
But it is the fate of despotic governments that much depends
on personal influence, and when personal advisers change the
policy of the Government changes too, and this intention
was laid aside. And although a constitution was given to
the kingdom of Poland in accordance with the intentions of
the Treaty of Vienna, yet that Constitution soon became a
dead letter, and in the administration of the kingdom of
Poland under Constantine there were grievances that justi-
fied insurrection. Then I say it was impossible for any man
seeing, on the one hand, the great and distinguished quali-
ties that belonged to the Polish nation, and, on the other,
the calamities which from time to time have befallen them,
not to take a deep and lively interest in their fate. We
have been reproached in some degree by the hon. member
for King's County for not having in 1831 and 1832 availed
ourselves of a communication made by France for the
purpose of inviting some action at that time in favour of
the Poles, then in arms against Russia. We had at that time
to consider a great manybalanced circumstances and motives,
and, with every disposition to do what we might think use-
ful to Poland, we did not think that particular proposal
was one which would have led to any good or useful result.
It might have embarrassed us on other questions then pend-
ing, and could not, as far as we could see, be attended
with any good practical result to the Poles themselves. But
wo have always held that the conduct of Russia towards
Poland has been a violation of the stipulations of the Treaty
of Vienna. Prussia and Austria have not been liable to
the same degree of reproach. Literally they have carried into
execution, in regard to their respective portions of Poland,
the stipulations of the Treaty of Vienna, because in the
duchy of Posen and Galicia there is a uniform representation,
the language is preserved, the religion is respected, and all
the rights and privileges stipulated have been enjoyed.
And, speaking of Prussia, I must here remark that, how-
ever we may condemn the spirit and intention of that con-
vention which we understand was signed between Prussia
and Russia, I am inclined to think, from information we
have received, that the apprehensions which we have been
led to entertain with regard to that convention are not
likely to be realised in the result. I believe that conven-
tion has not been ratified. No ratifications have been ex-
changed, and I am inclined to think, not only from what
passed in the Prussian Chambers, but also from the infor-
mation we have received, that it is not likely that conven-
tion will be carried practically into execution. (Hear,
hear.) I am speaking, however, not officially but from in-
formation we have received, for we base not yet had a copy
of the convention itself. I trust that it may be so, because
such an interference of Prussia with what is now possing in
Poland would excite, as it has already excited, great con-
demnation everywhere, and if that conventional interfer-
ence were followed by acts it would cast discredit on
the Government of Prussia. (Cheers.) Sir, the pre-
sent Emperor of Russia has, in regard to Poland, been
placed in a very critical position. It is a great calamity for
anybody to succeed to an inheritance of triumphant wrong
—(cheers)--and it is very difficult for a person so circum-
stanced to disentangle himself from the poisonous folds of
so fatal a bequest, (Cheers.) There is in the human mind
a strong passion, a determination to maintain and to vindi-
cate its own personal liberties; but there is also a strong
passion, and I doubt whether it is not as strong a passion,
which makes men sling to the power of exercising oppres-
sion on others, and when long- rooted habits have accus-
tomed the authorities of a Government to administer a ty-
rannical system it requires great perseverance and activity
on the part of the Sovereign to undo the evil and restore
things to their proper condition. I do believe that the
present Emperor of Russia, a kind-hearted and bene-
volent man, does mean, and has meant for some
time past, to improve the condition of his Polish
subjects, That would be in perfect unison with the
system on which he is governing his subjects. The Sove-
reign who has emancipated the serfs—the Sovereign who is
establishing a system of jurisprudence founded upon an imi-
tation of the best judicial codes of Europe—a Sovereignwho
is introducing into his Russian dominions a vast number of
modern improvements, cannot surely have it in his heart
intentionally and systematically to harass and oppress any
portion of his subjects, whether Russian or Polish. Well,
sir, there can be no doubt that this last act called a conscrip-
tion, but which has elsewhere been more properly designated
a proscription, was an act wholly foreign to that disposition
which I believe really animates the breast of the Emperor of
Russia ; and it accounts entirely for the outbreak which
has occurred in Poland. (Hear,) It was a most barbarous
act—(cheers)—it was a most cruel piece of political tyranny
under the semblance of a merely military arrangement.
(Renewed cheers.) No wonder that the Poles should have
taken up arms to prevent the further execution of a mea-
sure of that kind. (Hear, hear.) I believe that, as far as
one hears, has in some degree now been stopped, and
has ceased. (Murmurs.) But, sir, the question mooted by
the resolution before us relates to the conduct of her Ma-
jesty's Government with a view to communications about to
be made to Russia. Now I cannot conceive that a Sovereign
gifted with the qualities which I believe are possessed by
the Emperor of Russia should not see that, in the contest
in which he is now unfortunately engaged with the Polish
nation, military success would be a great and signal
calamity. (Cheers.) Why, what would be the effect of
military success—what would be the result if, by the action
of his troops, by the overpowering force of the 100,000 men
who have been sent to Poland, he was entirely to suppress
and put down this extensive insurrection ? Why, he would
have a country in which the desert plains would be bathed
in blood—in which there would be nothing seen but the
smoking ashes of ruined villages and towns. (Hear,
hear.) Is that an object which any Sovereign can wish to
arrive at, and deem it an advantage to him to obtain a suc-
cess of that kind ? Sir, if the Emperor of Russia saw his
own interest—and we give him credit for being an enlight-
ened man,— he would think the course best calculated for
his own advantage—the course best adapted to secure the
permanence of his own authority as well as to promote the
happiness of his people, would be to put an end to that re-
volt by an act of generous amnesty—(cheers)—and by, at
the same time, re-establishing in Poland those institutions
which the Emperor Alexander gave in execution of the
Renewed cheers.) I cannot believe
Treaty of Vienna. (
but that if that were done peace would be restored in Poland
and might continue to exist there, and that Europe
might be saved from those disturbances which the con-
tinued misgovernment of Poland and the discontent
thereby engendered among the Poles cannot fail to reproduce
from year to year, as has been the case in years that have
gone by. (Cheers.) But with regard to the: particular
motion of the hen. member, I should hope that he would be
satisfied with the unanimous expression of opinion which has
been the result of this discussion (hear), and not press to a di-
vision the resolution he has placed, sir, in your hands. The
objections to this motion are really very great. It proceeds
upon an erroneous foundation. The hon. member assumes
that by the Treaty of Vienna we are under an obligation to
interfere in the affairs of Poland. We have a right to in-
terfere, but we are under no obligation to do so. (Hear,
hear.) And although to those who have not turned
their minds to diplomatic documents this may appear to
be a nice distinction, yet there is a real, substan-
tial, and most important distinction between treaties
which give you the right to interfere and those which im-
pose on you the obligation to interfere. (Hear, hear.) Now
in the Treaty of Vienna—in that last treaty of June 15,
there is only one obligation by which we should be compelled
to interfere in the case that might arise—namely, that article
of the treaty which stipulates that the Powers guarantee
to Prussia the continued possession of the portion ;of
Saxony which was allotted to Prussia by that arrangement.
Bnt there was no guarantee whatever in the engagement
which relates to the kingdom of Poland, nor in any other
part of the treaty, except, indeed, that which concerns
the independence and integrity of Switzerland. There-
fore I eay that the hon. gentleman throughout his resolu-
tion proceeds on the assumption that we are under an
obligation to interfere ; and, consistently with that as-
sumption, in the concluding passage he calls upon the
Government to interpose and vindicate the public faith
and solemn engagements of the Crown. Why, Sir, if
in truth we were under an obligation to interfere, the
resolution would be right and fitting, and would, as has
been observed by hon. gentlemen who have spoken in this
debate, amount to this, that unless the remonstrance which
might be made in virtue of that obligation were atteneed
with success, the Crown would be compelled to call upon
this h use to give it the means of enforcing by arms thos
stipulations the just fulfilment of which was refused when
urged by diplomatic communication. (Hear, hear.) There-
fore there is that grave objection to that particular motion
of the hon. member. And if, as I think everybody must
admit, unanimity is desirable, we already see that there
have been two or three amendments proposed to his resolu-
tion, and that consequently it is not likely either one or
other of the three would secure the unanimous assent of
this house. (Hear.) There are other less material criti-
cisms to be made. The hon. member proposes that which I
believe to be unusual—viz., to record, in an address of this
house, quotations from " Hansard" of that which a member
of this house may or may not have spoken on some former
occasion. I apprehend he does me the honour—and I am sure
I am much obliged to him for it,--(hear, hear, and a laugh)—
of proposing to insert in a solemn address of this house ex-
tracts from speeches which I am supposed to have made.
But I do not think that a course which would be altogether
consistent either with the usages or the dignity of this house.
Then, sir, in the interest of that cause which the hon. mem-
ber has at heart,—which the whole house have at heart—
(cheers)—which I believe the country has at heart—(re-
newed cheers)—and which I am sure that he and all who
hear me must wish to see promoted in the best manner pos-
sible for the advantage of those whom it concerns, I should
say that the course beat adapted to accomplish the purpose
he has in view would be to content himself with that unani-
mous expression of opinion which has prevailed t9-night—
(cheers)—to let it go forth to the world, as it will go to-

morrow, that of all the hon. members who have spoken on
this occasion there was not one who had a different opinion
from the rest in regard to his interest in the fate of Poland
or to his sense of the injuries which the Polish nation have
sustained.; but this, as was well stated by the right hon.
gentleman opposite (Mr. 'Walpole), it is better to leave it to
the responsible Government of the country to give to the
Sovereign on this matter such advice as they may think
best calculated to attain the object which all desire, and not
to take upon the house a. responsibility of detail which be-
longs properly to her Majesty's Minister, resting assured
that the sentiments expressed by the house this evening are
equally shared by those who have the honour of holding
office under the Crown. (Loud cheers.) I would, there-
fore suggest to the hon. gentleman that he should now
allow the house to go inl o Committe of Supply, and be satis-
fied with the result—which I am sure is honourable to him
and must be satisfactory to all who take an interest in this
subject—of the discussion in which so many members have
expressed opinions entirely in accord with each other.
Mr. DISRAELI—Sir, we often hear it said, in the course
of these discussions in this house, that the partition of
Poland was a great crime. If it were a great crime, it was
a crime shared by the Polish people. A population of
20,000,000 are not destroyed, their political existence is not
terminated without their being some faults on their side;
Since that partition, let us recollect what has occurred in
Europe. The greatest events which have ever happened in
Europe have happened since the partition of Poland. The
whole of the French Revolution, and all those immense re• p
sults which flowed from that great ebullition have since then
intervened. There has appeared a character on the European
stage who alone in modern times could be classed with the
Alexanders and the Camara of antiquity. All the boundaries
of the kingdom which existed when Poland was partitioned
have been altered, the laws of almost every country in
Europe have been remodelled, new codes have been intro •
duced, and new Governments called into being. In short
greater and more numerous changes have occurred since that
event than were probably ever before crowded into any
similar period of the history of man. Sir, I think it is very
much to the honour of an English statesman, and of an
English statesman who had not in his time that credit paid
to his sagacity which I believe posterity now accords to him
—(hear, hear)—l think it is much to the honour of Lord
Castlereagh that, after such immense events, called upon
to participate and take a leading part in the settlement of
Europe after these events, he should not have been blind
to the importance of restoring, if possible, the political inte-
grity of Poland ; and that, with all those arduous and
onerous duties which devolved upon him at the Congress
of Vienna, he felt that the restoration of the political
independence of Poland was a result necessary to
the ease and tranquillity of Europe. (Hear, hear.)
Let us remember what were the circumstances under which
Lord Castlereagh, as the representative of the British policy,
conceived and counselled the resto. ation of the political in-
dependence of the kingdom of Poland. He was supported
in that policy by Austria and France ; he was opposed by
Russia. Austria and France were then exhausted Powers ;
England was suffering from an immense exertion ; but
Russia, from a combination of circumstances, was in a posi-
tion of irresistible and unprecedented strength. It was un-
der those conditions that LordCastlereagh, though aided by
the sympathy of France and Austria, felt that he was obliged
to relinquish the plan which he was then of opinion would be
of most eminent advantage to the future prosperity and tran-
' quillity of Europe. But what are the circumstances under
which we are now considering the question P England is
not suffering from the consequences of an unprecedented
exertion of its energies continued for 20 years. Engfand
was never so powerful, never so united as it is now; France
is not an exhausted Power, and I am happy to believe
I that Austria is daily gaining strength and authority
' —(hear, hear)—strength and authority due not merely
to the possession of the great resources which have
always belonged to that empire, but to the prudence,
sagacity, and wisdom which distinguish her counsels. But

if the position of England, France, and Austria is so strong
and so promising, what is the position of Russia I The posi-
tion of Russia is not that which dictated the answer that the
noble lord had quoted, the haughty reply that 200,000 Rus-
sians were in possession of Poland, and that that was the
only answer that would be given to the politic counsels of
the English Plenipotentiary. Well, sir, Lord Castlereagh,
under those circumstances, representing with great ability
and foresight the interests not only of England, but of Eu-
rope, gave up the restoration of the independence of Poland
and had recourse to another scheme. His policy was the re-
storatioa of the independence of Poland, but it terminated
in the treaty of the Congress of Vienna, which endowed a
section of Poland in the possession of Russia with some ap-
pearance of political independence. But although England
relinquished her policy, still under that treaty she possessed
her rights and had the opportunity of standing upon them. I
cannot agree with the noble lord that the hon. gentleman who
introduced this question to-night with so much ability
laid down, or any hon. gentleman who follows this line of
argument, lays down the position that there are obligations
under the treaty of Vienna which force England into action,
but there are moral obligations which the noble lord cannot
deny, which result from the position that we occupy under
that treaty—moral obligations of the duty of fulfilling
which we may avail ourselves whenever the opportunity is
afforded. The present position of affairs in Poland is that
another revolution has occurred. The hon. gentleman who
has introduced the question has expressed in his speech,
and, indeed, in his motion, what is justly described as the
unanimous feeling of Parliament and of the country with
respect to that insurrection. The noble lord objects to
the mode in which the expression of the opinion of
the house is called for. I entirely agree with the
noble lord as far as this ; I think that, under the cir-
cumstances of the case, the great object is to elicit an
expression of opinion on the part of the house ;
but how far the hon. member ought to proceed depends
upon the conduct of the Government. If the Government,
for example had adopted a line of policy opposite to the coarse
recommended by the hon. gentleman he would have been per-
fectly justified in asking the house to support either a resolu -
tion or an address which asserted the policy that he advo-
cated. On the other hand, if the policy recommended by
the Government was one similar to that which was advo-
cated by the hon. gentleman himself, such a proceeding
would be quite unnecessary. There is, however, a position
which I think has not been sufficiently considered, that of
a Government which does not frankly communicate to the
house the policy, the general policy, which it intends to
pursue. (Hear, hear.) Because I must say that, although
I listened to the noble lord with great attention, 1 did not at
all collect from him what was the general course which her
Majesty's Government intended to pursue with regard to
this matter. (Hear, hear.) That we should become
acquainted in detail with the measures which the Govern-
ment may think it desirable to adopt at this moment would
be most unreasonable, but 1 did not hear from the noble
lord any expression of opinion as to what he thought might
be desirable or practical, or even as to the spirit in which
her Majesty would be advised by her Ministers with respect
to the present state of affairs in Poland. I think that is
very much to be regretted. The hon. gentleman must
decide for himself as to the course which he should pursue
in the matter. I am myself of opinion that it would be ex-
tremely unadvisable to have any appearance of a difference
of opinion on this subject. (Hear, hear.) At the same
time, I entirely disagree with the critics who have found
fault with the language of portions of the address. If the
house is in a position in which a resolution on an address
is necessary, there is nothing in the address of the hon. gen-
tleman which should be cavilled at. It is, of course, in the
power of any hon. gentleman to place his own interpretation
upon the words of that address. Ono hon. member smells
gunpowder in the last sentence. I should not myself, if I
thought an address requisite under the circumstances,
shrink from the adoption of this form of words. Putting
upon this address the natural interpretation of its phrased.
logy, I understand that it means this, that her Majesty's
Ministers are not to pass the present state in Poland over in
silence, that they are to avail themselves of their rights
under the treaty, and to take every other proceeding which
they think wise and expedient to carry into action a policy
favourable to the Poles. In my opinion that does not neces-
sarily mean war, and I think that we must all of us indulge
in more than the hope that great and beneficial changes
will take place in the condition of Poland without an appeal
to the last arbiter of human destiny. (Hear, hear.) I do
not presume to give counsel to the hon. gentleman ; but I
will venture to give him this advice, either to proceed with
his address, or, yielding to what I think is the general feel-
ing of this house and for the sake of unanimity, to with-
draw it—(hear, hear)—but not on Recount of false scruples
to consent to have the address which he has proposed in a
very spirited manner, and which very effectively represents
his sentiments, emasculated in its language or changed in
its expressions. I think the hon. gentleman must feel that
ho has obtained his main object, in originating a discussion
which has been sustained with great power, and which has
nu doubt made her Majesty's Ministers clearly understand
that in the lions, of Commons these are not two opinions
respecting the state of affairs in Poland. (Hear•) I alwa3B
shrink from any expression of political sentimentalism. I
do not know any people who have suffered so much from
political sentimentalism as the Poles. Year after year there
have been people living in Paris and London, some of them
in a state of comparative luxury, stimulating then. unfortu-
nate countrymen in Poland to fruitless insurrection and
to useless revolt, and all this time we have been
favoured by them with expressions of feeling,which—if ex-
pression of feeling would effect the salvation of nations—
have certainly been abundant and profuse. But what makes
me hope that in the present state of circumstances there is
a chance of the great English policy which Lord Castlereagh
counselled and recommended being carried into effect is, not
only that the position of England, of France, and of Austria
is very different from what it was in 1813 and 1815, not only
that the position of Russia is very different from what it was
at that critical period, but that in Poland we have at pre-
sent a sheer insurrection of the people against oppression.
It is a movement not originated and not stimulated by
foreign emissaries. (Hear, bear.) It has not been created
by conspiracies in other countries ; it has not been fostered
in order to promote local ambition or the objects of faction.
It is a national movement--(hear, hear)—it possesses all the
elements of a sacred cause, the love of country, the memory
of a glorious past, and, as I hope, and will believe, the in-
spiration of a triumphant future. (Loud cheers.)
Sir J. B. CLIFTON hoped the hon. member for the
King's county would go to a division. The house was en-,

itled to some more definite answer from her Majesty's
Government.

Mr. \VYLD held it to be the duty of every free citizen of
a frree state to protest against the atrocities committed by
the Russian Government.

Mr.HENNESSY thought he should onlybe acting in ac-
cordance with the general wish if, after the debate which
had taken place, he withdrew his motion. (Cheers.) He did
so, however, with the object of enabling any other gentle-
man to bring forward the same or a similar motion on a
future occasion if necess ,ry.
The motion was then by consent withdrawn.
THE lONIAN ISLES.

Lord W. GRAHAM called the attention of the Secretary
of State for War to the increased expenditure on the lonian
Isles, as propesed in the army estimates of this year (being
£189,000 as against £158,000 last year), and asked the reason
thereof. He also referred to the cession of these islands to
Greece, and asked for information relating thereto.
Sir G. C. LEWIS replied that the expenses for last year
were not based upon precise data, and in that way the esti-
mates fell short of the actual expenditure. However, the
estimates for the coming year had been rectified by the in-
formation which had been received from the controller-
general of military accounts. No alteration had been made
in the number of the battalions stationed in the islands, and
the expense that might be incurred in the present would be
the same as last year.
Col, DUNNE asked what was going to be done with the
Islands ? Unless it was desired to aid Greece in a policy of
aggression upon Turkey, Corfu ought not to be ceded to
Greece, with the fortifications now existing upon the island
Had the Government entered into any negotiations with the
other powers to the treaty respecting the cession of the
islands to Greece.

Sir G. C. LEWIS— Her Majesty's Government have not
entered into any negotiations on the subject with the other
Powers.

Sir G. BOWYER expressed astonishment at the state-
ment of the right hon. gentleman.
Lord PALMERSTON—My right hon. friend has stated
that we have had no communication with any of the powers,
because the case anticipated in the speech from the throne
has not yet occurred. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. ROE UCK—I must state that lam rather sur-
prised at the noble lord's answer; for, happening to be in
Vienna at the time the question arose, I made inquiries of
the Austrian Government, and they told me distinctly
that the noble lord's Government had communicated with
them, and one of the Austrian Ministers read the reply
which he sent to the noble lord. (Loud cries of " Hear,
hear, and laughter.) I saw the reply ; it was exceedingly
well reasoned; and I should like to see it upon the table.

(Cheers.)
Lord I'ALMERSTON—The hon, member saw a despatch
which was read to my noble friend, but not given to him
(Laughter,)