The Sun.
London, England, 1865-03-18 00:00:00

SUPPLY-POLAND.

On the motion for going into committee of supply,
Mr. P. HENNESSY rose to move the following resolu
tion :—" Whereas the Russian Government shows its de.
termination to set at nought the engagements it contracted
in
engagements was the condition on which the Powers of
Europe consented to recognise as lawful the possession by
the Russian Czar of the
abstain,part ofr ancient
Poland, this house cannot any longer
claiming that the violation of those engagementsfrom
impliesom
the forfeiture of the Czar of all right to such dominion,
and also of all right to any further payment by this
country of the annual sum conceded to Russia under the
name of Russo-Dutch Loan, that payment having been in
1815 undertaken to bo paid during the space of 100 years
in consideration of Russia faithfully co-operating in the
maintenance of the stipulations of the same treaty of 1815."
Sir H. VERNEY, in seconding the motion, characterised
the conduct of the European powers on this question as
culpable in the highest' degree, and he was firmly of
opinion that until justice was done to Poland, here
would be no permanent peace or tranquillity throughout
Europe.
Mr. CAVE hoped that the latter part of the motion,
especially that which referred to the remission of the
money-payment to Russia, would not be acceded to, be-
cause it would not only be taking a low view of the ques-
tion, but would preclude this country from interfering in
any way on behalf of Poland.
Lord PALMERSTON regretted that the subject of
Poland had been again brought under discussion
in that house. The matter had already been frequently
discussed, and as far as eliciting an opinion from the
house with respect to Russia, it had somewhat weakened
the effect of former discussions then strengthened it.
He
had far better, at all events for the present,
to have let matters rest. The hon. gentleman's recom-
mendations had all failed, but nothing daunted, he had
now come forward withe a
a third motion, and that was that
k
that house should declaration in favour of Poland,
of
certain
and a withholding
money payments from Russia,
but no good could come out of
such
regard to the second there a proceeding. With
were two ways in which
the Government, acting upon the
i zomptings of the house,
might have interfered in the affairs of : the one
was diplomatically, the other the employment of force.
But, as to the latter, the mover of resolutionthe himself
disclaimed any wish to go to war, and hadal
possible diplomatic
reemn-
mended the Government to use every
eant
action in behalf of Poland, and induce other Governments
to join them in persuading Russia to execute her treaty
engagements faithfully. Well, the Government had y
re-
sorted to negotiation, and negotiation had failed, not simply
when exerted by the British Government,-but when it had
been supported by the representations of almost all the
non-Polish powers of Europe. Not deterred by his own
disclaimer and the failure of what the Ikon. member had
recommended, he now proposed, as a third measure, that
the house should make a declaration of forfeiture, and with-
hold a payment which had been expressly stipulated by
treaty with Russia. What would be the value of a decla-
ration of that sort ? The House of Commons was not a
treaty-making power. And if any treaty which the Crown
had contracted had been broken by the Power with which
it was concluded it rested with the Crown to represent

that, and, if necessary, to make war in vindication of a
violated right. But it did not belong even to the Crown,
nor to any one Power, to disengage itself from ti eaty obli-
gations contracted with another power. Th 3 hon. member
proposed that, in consideration of the violati( n by Russia
of her treaty engagements of 1815, th.o payment of the
annual sum on account of the Russo-Dut,3'l Loan, stipulated
not by the Treaty of Vienna, but by that of the May pre-
ceding, and therefore not connected with the Polish ar-
rangements, should be discontinued. That engagement
having no reference whatever to Poland, to say that, be-
cause Russia had misconducted herself in Poland and
broken her engagements under the Treaty of June, 1815,
we were therefore to break our engagements founded on
a different treaty and relating to a different transac-
tion, was a lame and impotent conclusion. Moreover, any
such course the house and the government should be utterly
ashamed even to contemplate adopting, for it would be
equally unworthy of Parliament and unbecoming the
country.

Mr. DENMAN thought every opportunity ought to be
seized by the house for expressing its disapprobation of
the scandalous manner in which Russia had violated her
engetinits*ith respect to Poland. He recommended,
however, the withdrawal of the motion.

Mr. B. JOHNSTONE said that now the struggle was
over, and England had refused to draw the sword in sup-
port of a gallant nation, there would be something humi-
hating if the house were to content itself with putting on
record a fruitless motion of sympathy. The diplomatic
action which the Poles had required from this country was
an endeavour to induce Austria to permit the Gallician
provinces to go free. In that case, with Gallicia and Po-
land in revolt, it was hoped that they would be strong
enough to achieve their independence. The diplomacy of
our Government, however, had been humiliating to Eng-
land, whilst it had been useless to Poland.
_ _ _

Mr. GRIFFITH scouted the idea of resorting to mere
diplomatic action without backing it up with a display of
force. Such discussions as the present were not only use-
less, but calculated to aggravate the feeling of Russia
against the Poles.
The motion was withdrawn.

Mr. W. E. FOSTER inquired what steps, if any, the
Government had taken, or intended to take, to carry out
the recommendations of the committee appointed to in-
quire into the arrangement between the Foreign-office and
the Board of Trade in reference to the trade with foreign
nations. He contended that there ought to be such arrange-
ments between the two departments that the Minister at
home and his representatives abroad should be able to seize
every opportunity of increasing the trade between the two
countries by possessing themselves of a full knowledge of
the principles of political economy on which that trade was
based, and putting themselves in communication with
various merchants and manufacturers, so as to become
acquainted with the special interests of the trade.
The question elicited a discussion of some length, in the
course of which Mr. Horsfall expressed his approval of the
manner in which the Foreign Office, without the interfe-
rence of the Board of Trade, had discharged its functions
in connection with commercial affairs; Mr. Lowe con-
demned the revival of a disposition to conclude commer-
cial treaties, and called on the President of the Board of
Trade to state what advantage he conceived the public
derived from the Government meddling in any way in
matters of commerce ; and Mr. White, who would be satis-
fied with nothing short of the abolition of the Board of
Trade.