The Sun.
London, England, 1853-02-19 00:00:00

PRIVATE BILLS.

Mr. SOTHERON moved that so much of standing
order, No. 160 as requires that there shall be no more
than ten days between the first and second reading of
any private bill be suspended, as to all railway and
canal bills, but that no such bill be read a second time
later than the 14th of March next, except by special
order of the house.
The motion was agreed to.
The Swaffham and Bottisham Drainage Bill, the Teign-
mouth Harbour and Teign Navigation Bill, and the
Whitechapel Improvements Bill, were read a second
time, and ordered to be committed. .
Mr. WILCOCKS presented a petition from a life as-
surance society, complaining of the inequalities of the
income tax in respect to annuitants.
Several petitions were presented from letter carriers,
praying for an increase of wages.
Mr. SPOONER presented a petition from a place in
Warwickshire, praying that the grant to Maynooth may
be discontinued. _ _

Mr. K. SEYMOUR presented a petition from a
Wesleyan body, praying the house not to sanction the
opening of the Crystal Palace on Sunday's.

RELATIONS WITH FRANCE.
On the order of the day for the house going into com-
mittee of supply,
Mr. DISRAELI said—l wish, before the house goes
into Committee of Supply, to make some inquiries of her
Majesty's Government with respect to our relations with
France. This is the most important subject of modern
politics. We, have now, for nearly forty years, had the
blessing of peace between Great Britain and France.
During that interval the social relations of the two coun-
tries have become various and multiplied. Our commercial
transactions during that interval have gradually and pro-
gressively and considerably increased ; and at the right
opportunity, and under favourable circumstances, no
doubt with enlightened legislation, those commercial tran-
sactions are susceptible of considerable and perhaps indefi-
nite development. (Hear, hear.) There are two countries
which may be esteemed first-class powers, between whom
all questions of high policy are so identical ; and it is
somewhat strange, when we-have so many guarantees for
a permanent good understanding between the two coun-
tries, so many securities for that peace which we desire—
when the past, by the long interval of tranquillity that has
occurred, proves that practically these are sources of secu-
rity which are valid and efficient, it is extremely strange
and startling that, under such circumstances, an idea
should seem to have entered almost into every man's brain,
and an expression into every man's mouth, that wo aro on
the eve of a rupture with that country. I don't think it
unreasonable, therefore, that in going into committee of
supply, when we are about to vote large sums to sustain
the armaments of the country, I should make some inqui-
ries of her Majesty's Government on a subject of such ab-
sorbing interest, and offet a few remarks to the house with
respect to it before they go into committee. All must feel
that on such a topic it is of the utmost importance that no
false opinion should take possession of the public mind,
because in a free country opinion is one of the securities of
peace, as it is also sometimes the causes of war—(hear)—and
it is by discussion, which is the life and soul of a society
like ours, that we arrive atthetruth on subjects which often,
to the danger and peril of the community, become perplexed'
and obscure. I know there are persons in both countries
persons born and bred probably during the last great struggle
—who are of opinion that there is a natural hostility be-
tween the French and the English nations. They are per-
sons who may probably be placed in the same category
with the persons who think or used to think that five per
cent. was the natural rate of interest. At the same time
they are persons influenced in many instances by very sin-
cere and patriotic feelings, and their opinions, though they
may be inveterate prejudices, are not to be despised at a
conjecture like the present. I know that to persons influ-
enced by such a conviction it is in vain to appeal by any of
those economical considerations which are often mentioned '
in the present day. I know it is in vain to impress on them
that, in an age favourable to industry, ancient and civilised
communities aro diverted from thoughts of war. I know
it is in vain to appeal to the higher impulse of that phi-
lanthropy which many of us believe in such communities,
in societies under such conditions of great antiquity and
advanced civilisation, to be mitigating the heart of nations.
But I think it right to' appeal to stern facts, which cannot
be disputed—to the past conduct of men, which, according
to the theories of these individuals, is the best test of
what their future behaviour will be ; and I must say that
I don't see that the history of the past justifies the too pre-
valent opinion at
to between England and rance there is a
natural rivalry and hostility. (Hear, hearF.) I know very
well, if you go back to ancient history, or rather to the
ancient history of the two countries, that you may appeal
to Cressy, to Poictiers, and to Agincourt, and believe there
has always been a struggle between the two countries, and
that that struggle has always redounded to the glory of
England ; but, it should be remembered that, these were
not wars so much between France and England as between
the King of France and the King of England as a French
fightinginfaefto,rithwisaspnroovit
ancesof
Picardy Aquitaine,e rand a s
that,
strug-
gle between the two nations. I take
it for granted that,
in considering this point, our history need not go back to a
p rin cei,y—otrh att h e latt
delivred over for ever th
more distant period than to that happy hour when the keys
of Calais were fortunately and,e when we take thatto view,e
care of a French Monarch ;
which is the real point of our modern history, as one that
should guide us on this subject, we shall observe that the
most sagacious Sovereigns and the most eminent statesmen
of England, almost without exception, held that the
French alliance, or a cordial understanding with the
French nation, should be the corner-stone of our diploma-
tic system and the key-note of our foreign policy. No one
can deny that both Queen Elizabeth and the Lord Pro-
teeter looked to that alliance as the basis of their foreign
connections. No one can deny that there was one point on
which exen the brilliant Bolingbroke and the sagacious
Walpole agreed—and that was the importance of cultivat-
ing an affiance and good understanding with France. At a
later date, the most eminent of the statesmen of this coun-
try, Mr. Pitt, formed his system on this principle, and en-
tered public life to establish a policy which, both for poli-
tical considerations and commercial objects, depended on
an alliance and good understanding with the French nation
It, therefore, is not true that there has been at all times,
with ther ech people or at most times, this want of sympathy in England
le
alliance; but,
andon thegoo
d contrary,understanding th
reverse
is the truth
Fn
;and the pthat
has prevailed between us has, in my opinion, been a source
of great advantage to both countries, and has advanced the
civilisation of Europe. Even what has occurred in our
time proves, I think, the truth that the natural tendency
of the influences that regulate both countries is to peace,
because the fact that, after such extraordinary events as
the European revolutions at the end of the last and begin-
ning of this century, the great struggle that occurred, and
the singular characters that figured in it—that all should

terminate in a peace of so permanent a character as that
which has prevailed, proves that the tendency, the opera-
tion, of all those causes which influeice the conduct of na-
tions leads to peace, from a convictio4 of its advantages to
both countries. (Hear, hear.) I wilt not, therefore, dwell
upon that point, 'except to express miprotest against that
dogma, which, I am sorry to see, has,. een revived of late,
not merely in England, but too previlent in this country,
that there is a feeling of natural hostility between the na-
tions of Great Britain and France. , (Hear.) There are
undoubtedly more novel and more important causes which
may be imputed to the present unfortunate opinion that is
prevalent on the subject of our relations with France; and
the first, and the most important unquestionably, is in the
increase of the armaments of this country. (Hear.) Thera
are many who say, whatever, may be the assertions of
statesmen, whatever may be the public declarations of per-
sons in authority, whatever may be the judgment formed
by sensible and unimpassioned men of the circumstances of
the hour, no one can deny the stern conclusion that the
Government of this country feels thci responsibility de-
iolving upon .it of increasing its armaments; and with
what object can it be increasing its armaments unless it is i
from a fear of some imminent and impending danger from
a foreign foe, and, if from a foreign foe, of course the near-
est
and the most warlike of those that can lie'our enemies?
Now, there is a great deal very plausible on the face of
this position ; nevertheless the real truth is, that there is
not in the circumstances of those arimplents the slight:6St
fOtnidation:roi• the belief that they have been occasioned by
recent transactions in France, or by tl4.'appearance of any
particular characters who have taken a leading part in the
transactions of that country. (Hear.) The origin of the
increase of our armaments for the defence of this country
is of a date much more remote than the incidents which !

aro appealed to as the cause of those increased armaments.
The origin of increasing and completing the defences of
this country finds itself in those great changes which have
occurred in most of the affairs of life, which have prin-
cipally been occasioned by the application of science to the
business of life, and which application of science has not,
among many circumstances and subjects, spared the art
of war. (Hear, hear.) Those who from their position
were responsible for the defence of this country, who from
their character and their talents were best calculated
to observe the great changes that in this respect were
occurring, long and' many years ago called the attention of

the executive Government of this country to that impor-
tant subject. But we all know, especially in free and po-
pular communities, that the few are sensible of the neces-
sity of change before the multitude are convinced of that
necessity, and that it is extremely difficult to bring the
great body of a community to agree to a change of the ne-
cessity of which they are not convinced, and the Govern-
ment of this country many yeari ago attempted to adapt
the position of the country, with respect to the means of
defence, more to the resources for that object which now
prevail, but they found of course extreme difficulty in ad-
dressing the House of Commons for their support, when
increased expenditure was a necessary condition of the
change—(hear)—and therefore a long time the efforts
were few and feeble, although the convictions of the Ca-
binet of the day were deep and earnest upon the subject.
There then happened, some ten 'years ago, a very unex-
pected incident, under the Government of Sir Robert Peel,
that startled even the two nations themselves at the possi-
bility of a war occurring between the two countries. The
cause was almost a contemptible cause when we think of
the stake at issue ; but there is no doubt, without now
inquiring into the peculiar circumstances which brought
the crisis to such a fine position, that for a short time even
the possibility of war between England and Prance was
not entirely out of question. (Hear.) Well, the Govern-
ment of that day, ten years ago, took advantage of the
course of the public mind being somewhat startled and
alarmed upon the subject, and endeavoured, even when the
immediate danger had passed, to lead the public Mind to

the consideration of the important question which never
slept in the councils of the Cabinet, and there were some

efforts, and not contemptible efforts, by the Government of
Sir Eobert Peel at least to commence a new system with

regard to the public defences of the country. The people
of this country learnt for the first time that a great revolu-
tion had occurred in the art of war, that that revolution
had deprived them of their ancient and, as it were, natural
sources of defence, and they began generally to entertain
the idea that they must adopt other means for their de-
fence. So far the question advanced ; but, ps the fulfilment
of what was necessary was, of course, attended with large
and increased expenditure, and as there .02. s a.,natknral ob-
jection always to, increasing our expenditure for the sake
of armaments in the House of Commons, the otuestion,
though it becaine, as the countrOyis letieerned,
from that time a question that never entirely slept, yet
advanced but slowly. There was a 'efmtroversy still
whether the country was sufficiently defended or not,
whether the ancient means were so completely superseded
as was represented. There still was a lingering superstition in
reference to the "wooden walls of old England." Suddenly
we had a series of revolutions on the continent, a period of
great alarm and of great disturbance. The people of this
country were at last convinced that the dream of perpetual
tranquility and of material improvement might be closed.
That was a time when again an opportunity•was offered to
the Government of the day to lead the popular opinion in
the direction which it wished, as far as the defence of the

country was concerned. The words of one of the greatest
of our men were then prevalent round every hearth, and

public opinion at last assumed the form of an earnest de-
sire to complete the defences of the country. (Hear.) I
have no doubt that whatever Government existed, they
would loyally and completely have fulfilled that which
was necessary. It fell to the lot of the litte Government
to meet the requirements in 'this respect of England. I
claim no merit for the late Government more than that

to which they are fairly entitled in having earnestly en-
deavoured in this respect to do their duty. (Hear, hear.)
When they acceded to office the question of national de-
fence was ripe. No doubt, if the Government of the
noble lord had continued, they would have done all that

was required ; it fell to us to fulfil that duty, and briefly
I would place before the house what we did in that respect.
During the time that wo were responsible for the admini-
stration with regard to national defence, we established a

whenE country,out
hl y , _ . ,
militia upon a popular principle—a principle which at the
time was much derided, but which, notwithstanding the
opposition that we received, we adhered to, and which has
succeeded in producing a body that commands, as far as a
new force of that character can, the confidence, and I may
ytryinTglhnotcribiersfastfeh_ldeefateeridtioef
say the respect of the country. (Cries of " near, hear.")
We secondly placed the artillery of the country—that im-
portant arm—in an efficient state. Thirdly, we introduced
measures, or we prepared arrangements, which would have
completely, and will completely', fortify the arsenals of the
and some iinportant strong posts upon the coast.
we increased our navy by a proposition which,
carried into effect, will add to it 5,000 sailors, and
1,500 marines ; and, fifthly, we made arrangements which
I have no doubt will be well completed by our successors,
which would have established, or rather will establish, the
ancient garrison in the form of a Channel fleet, an efficient
Channel fleet of 15 or 20 sail of the lino, with an adequate
number of frigates and smaller ships, and which, when
those plans are completed—and I trust they will be i
speedily completed— will allow a Channel fleet of that I
force to rendezvous at a very short notice at three or four
ermealtehheinerlans which we thought
approbation of Parliament—plans
ports, introducing into that fleet all those modern im-
provements
the approbation of Parliament,
which now are avail-
able.pai
tnr odovuwermh
id(enucnhtteysarr tooe.cf) e
sisuv Thesee
received
demn itttihfiwetc
which, in our opinion, when completed, will fulfil all
that is necessary for the complete defence of the coun-
try. I was very glad to hear from the noble (the Se-
cretary of State) on the first night of our meeting, that
her Majesty's Ministers do not propose any increase of the ,
army. That was a subject which we felt it our duty well
to consider, and it certainly was our opinion that no such
increase was necessary.. (Hear.) I have noticed this point
in some detail, because be remembered that one of the
principal grounds for believing that the friendly relations 1
of France and England are about to be broken is the in-
crease of the armaments of this country. Myself, how-
hihr saatriesnef9tethlitili twttuhhueei r' duty t o place
however e
ebf ee enns i tvnheo tranquil
form
how-
ever humbly, in a certain degree responsible for that in-
pointing out the
ucrtetaesref,alllwiacyshoftothtaakt
ceothielsmsoipopno.rtunityn
(Hear,) Whoever might
sit upon the throne of France, whether it bo a Bourbon or
aot
the Be
Government,o
stateu ap a
r to
fe Bonaparte—(hear)—whatever
Europe,( hehaorw)
- -et
vhweohrs ae
disturbedt
whoeve r
, therefore,
administrationwwhoua selected—
would d party
sooner o rofror from
later
effwra
country in a state of defence —(hear)—that
thereduty arising
sainng,
pera-
and that is,
fwttlrihooafiann ar
find
s theadEna .
nclgeo
England
dvar as
tohcencaoahsnfnaod snru bgc
increased
e whicheihntnhs
moment
sahfft
roeemtntac
ashlmivecnneeuknmoptrl
ssat edaf
that ;
authority for the too prevalent belief to which I have al
luded. (Hear.) There is one other cause, also of a novel
character, which has been alleged—which is daily alleged
—for the belief of this impending rupture, and which no
troubles
which have terminated in the revival of what I think is
ususly styled a military dynasty. Now, there can be
extremelybled stprevalentateof France
duringan influential
latter
y e a r 8 _
fallaciously
aholl
aeu btertiooi
no doubt that the founder of the dynasty that now pre-
vails in France was one of the greatest conquerors not only
of modern but of all ages ; but it does not follow—and
history,' indeed, contradicts the position—that the descend-
ants of a conqueror are necessarily his rivals. Generally
speaking, those who follow a conqueror are inclined to
peaceable pursuits—(hear)—and when we find that the pre-
sent Emperor of the French, who in a certain sense must
be said' to owe his throne to a great conqueror, is not even
by profession a military man, we find gicircumstance which
rather inforces the truth of the observation that I have made.
But then it is said that there is in Franne a military Govern-
ment, and that that country is at tffis moment regulated
by the army. But there is a great error also, I appre.,
hend if history is to guide us, in assuming that, because
a country is governed by an army, that army is ex-
tremely anxious to conquer other countries. When armies
are anxious for conquest it is because their position at
home is uneasy, because their authority is not recognised,
and because their power is not felt. It is the army return-
ing from conquest that attempts to obtain supreme power
in the State. But if an army finds that, it does possess su-
preme power you very rarely find that restlessness of
foreign aggression which is supposed to be the inevitable
characteristic of military force. Now, there is one re-
markable characteristic of the present military Govern-
ment in France, that that Government has not taken place
by the ambition of the army, but by the solicitation of
classes of civilians, of large bodies of the industrial popu-
lation, who, frightened, whether rightly or wrongly, with
a state of disturbance, and as they supposed of menacing
anarchy, have turned to the only disciplined body at com-
mand which they thought could secure order. (Hear.) I
am led, therefore, to the belief that in the circumstance
that there is a military dynasty which is not a warlike
dynasty, and that France is governedoay the army, not in
consequence of the military ambitionlof the troops, but in

consequence of the disquietude of the citizens. I find no
reason for that great anxiety which is now prevalent.
(Hear.) I know there is another cause, notwithstanding,
which may occasion extreme embarrassment and dispute.
Although I think I have shown to the house, if it were in-
deed necessary—(hear, hear)—that the increase of our ar-
maments has not been occasioned by any circumstances but
the inevitable necessity of placing this country in a state
of safety and defence, and not by any of the changes in
foreign countries, and although I hope I have shown the
house some cause to believe that the state of affairs in
France does not necessarily, as some suppose, load to mili-
tary aggression, I admit that there are reasons at this
moment which should make' men uneasy, and that there
;are causes of misconception between the two nations, which ;
!cannot be watched too narrowly, and which, if neglected,
'may lead to disastrous consequences ; and I proceed now
!to advert, to them. (Hear.) There is no doubt that there
iis a considerable prejudice in this country against the pre-
sent ruler of France—l say it without reserve—for two
reasons. It is understood that in acceding to power he has
terminated what we esteem a Parliamentary constitution,
'and that he has abrogated the liberty of the press. (Hear,
hear.) I wish to put the case—l think it best to put the
case as fairly as I can before the house, as the object of
these observations is to put an end to what I think, what
hope, is a very mistaken feeling, and to elicit from her
Majesty's Government explanations which I trust will
substantiate that belief on my side. (Hear, hear.)
I have no doubt—we know—there is a prejudice against
,the present ruler of France on these two grounds. (Hear.)
It is unnecessary for me to say that it is not probable
I shall ever say or do anything which shoUld tend to
depreciate the influence or to diminish the power of Par=
liament or the press.- (Hear, hear.) My greatest honour
'is to be a member of this house, in which all my thoughts
and feelings are concentred—(hear, hear)—and as for the
,press, I am myself a gentleman of the press—(hear, hear)
—and have no other scutcheon. (Cheers.) I know well
the circumstances under which we have obtained in this
country the invaluable blessings of a free press. It is only
a century and a half ago since we got rid of the censorship;
and when we had got rid of the censorship we had a law of
libel, which, for nearly a century, rendered that freedom
of the press a most perilous privilege. Until Mr. Fox's
great act upon the law of libel, no public writer could have
been said to be safe in this country. (Hear.) I mention
that to remind the house how very recent is the date of
our real enjoyment of the press in this country, because we
are mainly indebted to Mr. Fox for that great privilege ;
and the house will recollect that during the interval—not
a very long interval, little more than half a century—that
liberty of the press has been often modified, often interfered
with, by British Ministers; and that modification and that
interference have always been sanctioned by British Par-
liaments. I hope we live in happier times than those
which preceded us in that respect. (Hear, hear.) I hope
we have arrived at a conclusion in this country that, if the
press is free, it should enjoy a complete freedom—(hear,
and cheers)—that the best protection against the excesses
of the press is the spirit of discussion, which is the prin-
ciple upon which our society at present depends—(hear)—
and I think that all parties in this country have come to

the conclusion that the liberty of the press is the most

valuable of our public privileges, because, in fact, it secures
the enjoyment of all the rest—(hear, hear, and cheers)
—but, at the same time, it is always advisable, when we
make observations on the conduct of foreign nations, that
we should be perfectly satisfied that the circumstances in
those countries to which we are applyinc, the opinions pre •
valent in our own are identical with the circumstances in
which we ourselves are placed. (Hear.) Novs, with all
my love of the liberty of the press, with all my confidence
that we have arrived at a state of society in England
which will prevent any Minister at any time ever again
attempting to interfere with that liberty of the press, I
am still conscious that we enjoy it in this country on
certain conditions, which do not, in my opinion, prevail in
other countries ; namely, of a long-established order, a
habit of freedom of discussion, and, above all, an absence
of all those circumstance and of all those causes many of
which are disturbing society in • other countries. Now,
I will take a case as an example. Suppose that in
England at this moment we had tho greatest
:of all political evils let us suppose that, instead
of our happy settlement, we had a disputed succes-
sion. (Hear, hear.) Let us suppose that there was a young
Charles Stuart, for example, at this moment at Breda, and
a young Oliver Cromwell at Bordeaux, publishing their
thanifestOes, and sending their missives to powerful parties
of their adherents in this country. We may even suppose
other contingencies. Let us suppose that we had had, in
the course of a few years, great revolutions in this country
—that the form of our government had been changed—that
our free and famous monarchy had been subverted, and
that a, centralised republic had been established by an ener-
getic tyranny—that the tyranny had been unsupportable,
and that the army had been called in by the people- gene-
rally to guard them from the excesses which they had ex-
perienced. Do you think that, under -any of these circum-
stances, you would be quite sure of enjoying the same
liberty of the press which, you enjoy at this moment ?
(Cheers froin the Opposition benches.) Do you think that
in the midst of revolution, with a disputed succession, se-
cret societies, and military rule, you would be quite certain
of havinar your newspaper at your breakfast every- morn-
iner `Sr, these are considerations which ought to guide
us when we are giving an opinion upon the conduct of rul-
ers and of nations. (Hear, hear.) • There is no doubt the
circumstance of the present ruler of Frince has stopped
that liberty of the press which we so much prize has occa-
sioned great odium to him in this country, and has arrayed
the feelings of the powerful press of England against too
French Government. I myself speak upon this subject
with no other feeling towards the Emperor of the French
than that feeling of respect which we ought all to entertain
for any sovereign whom her most gracious Majesty has re-
cognised and admitted into the fraternity of monarchs.
(Cheering from both sides of the house.) I am not ashamed
or afraid to say that I for one deplore much that has oc-
curred, and sympathise with the fallen. Some years ago I
had occasion frequently to visit France. I found that
country then under the mild sway of a constitutional mon-
arch—of a prince who, from temper as well as from policy
was humane and beneficent. I know, Sir, that at that
time the press was free. I know that at that time the
parliaments—or rather the Chambers—of France were in

existence, and distinguished by their eloquence, and by a
dialectic power that probably even this house has never
equalled. I know that under these circumstances France
arrived at a pitch of material prosperity which it had
never before reached. I know also that, after a reign of
unbroken prosperity, of great duration, when he was aged
—when he was in sorrow, and when he was suffering under
overwhelming indisposition, the same prince was rudely
expelled from his capital, and he was denounced as a pol-
troon by all the journals of England because he did not
command his troops to fire upon his people. Now,
other powers and other princes have occupied his seat,
who have asserted their authority in a very different
way, and some are denounced as tyrants because they did
order their troops to fire upon the people. (Hear, hear.)
I said, Sir, that I deplore the past and sympathize with
the fallen. I think every man has a right to have his feel-
ings upon these subjects ; but what is the moral I presume
to draw from these circumstances? It is this,—that it is
extremely difficult to form an opinion upon French politics,
and that so long as the French people are exact in their
commercial transactions, and friendly in their political re-
lations, it is just as well that we should not interfere with
their management of their domestic concerns. (Loud cheers
from both sides.) I am glad to find that the house is of the
opinion which I have ventured to express upon this impor-
tant subject. I don't say that is not perfectly the privi-
lege of the English press, or of any foreign press, to make
any observations they may please upon the conduct of
foreign rulers and upon the conduct of foreign nations. It
is an affair of discretion ; it is an affair of public wisdom.
Our constitution has intrusted the writers in public jour-
nals with the privilege of expressing their opinions ; they
have a very responsible position—(hear, hear)—they must
consider what is the tendency and what may be the conse-
quences of their acts ; they have a right to act, and no
British Minister, and no foreign potentate, can question
the power which they exercise. (Hear, hear.) Well, Sir,
what was the feeling of the Government of the noble lord
opposite (Lord J. Russell) upon the subject to which I am
alluding ? It is important to know what was the feeling
and what were the opinions of the noble lord when he him-
self was at the head of the Government. It is a pleasure to
turn to Hansard, not to twit and taunt an hon. gentleman
with some quotation which may impugn his consistency,
but to refer to a statemant of views becoming a person fill-
ing the noble lord's exalted position, and expressed with
which
noble ldoirsdt
gua
sthh at
nap r.o p r ilehtiys
wasand the res edneeeslsa
roaftlaion nguage
e
in
1852, about a year ago, almost immediately before he quit-
ted office. These expressions were delivered in another.
Parliament ; there are many gentlemen present who did
not listen to them ; they are peculiatly apposite to the pre-
sent moment. An acquaintance with the opinions of a
great Minister at such a period must be interesting to all,
and therefore I shall make no excuse for bringing before
the house the views which the noble lord then professed,
and which I most sincerely believe he now entertains.
" This, however," said the noble lord, on the 3d of Feb-
ruary, 1852,

" I am bound to say, that the President of France, with
the largo means of information which ho possesses, has no
doubt taken that course from a consideration of the state of
the country, and that the course which he has taken is that
best fitted to secure the welfare of the country over which he
rules. Let me re-state what I have said upon the subject."

The house will observe that the noble lord spoke with per-
fect calmness. It was not a speech in reply. It was a
speech delivered on the first night of the session. It was a
statement well matured and voluntarily made, and, that he
then
pvlveue
have no
nttnioconfirmsyno
ngisa.ae noblepoasntp
ht.
oerllannoostbdrstadoo2tt,poi,doi
and
opinion,
tobNe what
thala
nhte. teh
aenacte:
abolition
unlivhcdetautoirvlone
neeti
may not be mistaken, the noble lord begs permission of the
house to give a summary of his views, and to, re-state them.
said upon this subject :
" Let me re-state,"
hunet saidao
Irtdhag
toohfpitnnhgileownsPti;rfteeeshdtidhlenheclr;esident of France the three things which I
mentioned—namely,
shotfaivttuehtemioplelliamentary constitution, were all measures condu-
cive, and perhaps essential, to the welfare of France. But I
have something to state further, because I confess that I have
seen with very great regret the language which has been
used by some portion of the press of this country with respect
to the President of France and the affairs of that country. I
remember something as a boy, and I have read more, of that
which occurred during the peace of Amiens, which rendered
that peace of so short a duration, and which involved these
two great nations in the most bloody hostilities which ever
mangled the face of Europe. I believe that temperate dis-
cussion, temperate negotiation between the two countries,
might have averted the calamity of war with England, but
that the language of the press at the time was such as greatly
to embitter all negotiation, and to prevent the continuance
of that peace. Sir, I should deeply regret if the press of this
country at the present time were to take a similar course.
We have, indeed, the great advantage over the time to which
I refer, which is, that the First Consul of France, great as
were his abilities, was totally ignorant of the means and of
the Constitution of this country ; the present President of
France has that advantage over his uncle, that he is perfectly
aware how much liberty—nay, how much license of discussion
prevails in this country, and that the fiercest and most un-
measured invectives of the press do not imply any feeling of
hostility either on the part of the Government or on the part
of the nation. I am convinced of this, that there never was
a time in which it was more essential that these two great
countries should preserve relations of peace and amity with
each other. There never was a time when the peace of Eu-

which that improved art of war bas provided. _But really, to
hear or read some of the letters—some of the language used
by some portions of the press, one would imagine that these
two great nations, so wealthy, so similar in enlightenment,
were going to butcherone another, merely to try what would
be the effect of percussion shells and needle guns. That feel-
ing is, I am confident, but partial and limited, for I am con-
rrinced that the solid and deliberate opinion of this country is
in favour of the continuance of the most permanent and solid
peace, and which I• think is the greatest blessing which the
nations of Europe can enjoy."

I preferred, instead, of giving -my own representations of
'NOM the noble lord said, appealing to his own terse and
perspicuous language. Sounder sentiments, more clearly
expressed, I have never listened to, and I beg the house to
understand why I am pressing this important declaration
upon their attention at this moment. It is because this is
the speech of. the noble lord when he was at the head of a
Government, and I aiu anxious to ascertain to-night whe-
ther his opinions, since he has taken a distinguished, but
subordinate, part in a Government headed by another may
be modified, and whether we may count upon a unanimous
similarity of opinion on the part of his colleagues. There
can be no doubt that upon the subject of our relations with
France at the beginning of 1852, there was a perfect unison
of opinion between the noble lord and his then colleagues,
because in the other house the country was favoured on
the same night with a declaration of opinion on this im-
portant subject, made by another person who was for a
long time a member of this house and of her Majesty's Go-
vernment, but who no longer occupies either of those po-
sitions—a noble lord who; whatever may be the difference of
our opinions, for his great abilities, his great capacity for
public labour, and his unimpeachable integrity, will always
in this house be mentioned and remembered with honour
I mean my Lord Grey. I won't apologise to the house for
reading an extract—it is the last I shall read—from the
speech of Lord Grey, because lam sure that on this im-
portant occasion, when it is of the utmost advantage that
accurate ideas upon this subject should prevail, the house
will be glad to learn what Lord Grey, who cannot be
doubted as a lover of public liberty, thought of the situa-
tion of France a year ago, for it may be a very efficient
guide to us as to his opinions of the state of France at this
moment. Lord Grey said :
" I have the pleasure of being able to express my unquali-
fied concurrence in, I believe, every word which the noble
earl who preceded me (Lord Derby) uttered. I entirely agree
with him as to its being the duty of this country, as a coun-
try and a nation, and the duty of each individual in his indi-
vidual capacity, to abstain from any interference in the inter-
nal politics of that great and powerful nation which lies near ,
to us. I, like the noble lord, observe with the deepest con-
cern, and, I may say, with the indignation which the noble
earl has expressed, the tone which has been taken by a large
portion of the newspaper press of this country. I think that
the denunciation of the person at the head of the Government
of France, coupled with those more than exaggerated—l will
lay, untrue—representations of the defenceless condition of
this country, do not only savour of imprudence, but of some-
thing worse than imprudence ; and I rejoice that the noble
earl, in the position which he occupies, has come forward to
assert, in the emphatic manner in which it has been done,
his utter repudiation of language such as I have described.
And I do trust that when, with the full assurance that I have
the concurrence of my colleagues, I join in that repudiation,
and when I am convinced every one of your lordships will
echo the same sentiment, I do believe and hope that the mis-
chief, the incalculable evil, which might otherwise have re-
sulted from language thus held by a great part of the news-
paper press of this country, will to a great extent be neutra-
lised,•and that it will be understood in foreign countries that,

however those newspapers niay express the opinions and the

feelings of those who write in them, they do not express the

opinions or the feelings of any great and powerful party in
this country, or in the houses of Parliament."
Now, the house will understand that Lord Grey, on that
occasion, entirely coincided in opinion with the noble lord

who was then at the head of her Majesty's Government in
this house. I think it will be observed that, on that

occasion Lord Grey answered for the complete agreement
of his colleagues as to the evil, not of public characters;
but' of anonymous writers in the press, denOuncing the
ruler of France. We are clear, therefore, that on that
-occasion the whole of the colleaguei.of the nobtertard in
his Government were of opinion that the criticisms of the
press of England—a lawful and legitimate organ—were to
be deprecated, and that there was a most anxious desire
and determination on the part of the noble lord and his
Government to maintain between this country and France
the most friendly relations. Well, that was the state of
affairs between the two countries a year ago. Perhaps I
may be permitted to say, that (hiring the period for which
we occupied office nothing took place that at all impaired
that cordial understanding between the two countries
which I may say wo inherited from our predecessors. I
know well that there are some gentlemen—some in this
house—who, though they may highly esteem a friendly
understanding between this country and other powers, are
apt to speak in a tone of great disparagement of the duties
and the influence of diplomacy, and do not attribute to

such intimate connexion any great, or permanent, or
advantageous influence on the general course of human
events. I can only say—l feel it my duty to say—that
during the period, however brief, in which we occupied a
responsible position as regards the Administration of this

corintry, we found a cordial understanding with France to
be of great advantage to the welfare of the world,—that on
several occasions we found that cordial understanding com-
ing to our aid to maintain peace, to advance civilisation,

and to promote the general welfUre of mankind. (Hear,
hear, from the Opposition.) I don't wish to take refuge
in vain declamation, but of course upon such a subject I
am bound to exercise considerable reserve. I shall not

now pretend to give to the House a catalogue of the many
instances in which we found the advantage of that cordial

understanding and sincere co operation- on the part of
France, but I noted down last night some instances which
I am permitted to state to the House, and I shall place
them before you with the conviction that when unbiased
and unprejudiced persons consider the transactions to which
they refer, and the brief interval in Which all these trans-
actions-,which are only a part of the transactions that did
occur—took place, they will see • the great importance of
the consideration that I am endeavouring now to impress
upon them. Let me mention some cases, to which I can
without impropriety allude, in which during the time that
we occupied office we found the advantage of having a
cordial understanding with our neighbours. There was a
misunderstanding between France and Switzerland on a
subject which disquieted Europe, and which many sup-
posed at one moment might greatly disturb the peaceful
relations of the world. Our advice was accepted in that
case. Our good offices were tendered and accepted, and
that cloud was completely dispelled. Take another case—
the case in which France joined with us in the negotiation
for the opening of the South American rivers. What was
an operation tending to increase the commercial relations
of the world, and to advance that cause of progress which
all are so anxious to foster. Then there was the case of
Prussia and Neufchatel, when a violent course might have
been anticipated on the part of Prussia against Neufchatel,
but the united representations of France and England,
made in the most friendly spirit to the enlightened mo-
narch who governs Prussia, led to the happy result of that
affair. A fourth case is one in which France joined with
us in pressing upon the United States the tripartite renun-
ciation of Cuba. It is true we did not succeed in the im-
mediate object of that interference, but the moral effect of
the step has been very considerable, and at least indicated,
on the part of France, a total absence of that anxiety to
keep alive subjects and opportunities of public embroilment
which is so liberally imputed to her. We succeeded, also,
in cordial union with France, in preventing the war which
was about to break out in Hayti. But I will take another
case, which is greatly to the reputation and honour of
France. I will take the case when the peaceful relations
of the Levant were threatened last year, with regard to the
tanzimat in Egypt, which was instituted by the Sultan of
Turkey. We had entirely failed in inducing the Sultan to
modify that tanziment. Now, although France has always
regarded with jealousy the subjection of the Pasha of
Egypt to the Porte, when affairs assumed an aspect which
seemed to threaten a disturbance in the Levant, we ap-
pealed to the cordial feeling of France ; she joined with
us, and, by our united influence, the question in dispute
was amicably arranged. I might state another instance.
I might appeal to the conduct of France in reference to the
revision of the Greek Succession Treaty, which secured to
the Greeks the fulfilment of their constitutional law. I
might also appeal to the conduct of France and to her
threatenedcor-
dialco-worchtion
have stated eight instances in which the cordial union of
France assisted us in preventing great evils, not only to this
remember
mtlircht
with
Tunis.t distu-
rbancesld
over the Fo-
reign-office, and who had had such scanty justice done him
—(hear, hear)—but to whose indefatigable. application and
duringct oou nhter ya,
llb
creditu thist
ot oft
itmthheee, world
noble
while
loalrld generallythwiwho
ow
sp butretas
ik
taking
egplace,
determined energy this country is much indebted—(hear,
hear)—remember that all this time, while France quietly,
tranquilly, and diplomatically is working with our Govern-
ment for these great objects
painted as a corsair
.our
e
coasts without the slightest cause. (Hear, hear.) Well,
and of bandit public
watchingb ne
to fit,
at Francetack is
then, I have shown that the cordial understanding between
England and France was the great principle, as far as our
foreign policy was concerned, of the Government of the
noble lord opposite, and of the Government of Lord Derby.
I doubt not, especially considering the much more pro-
tracted term of the noble lord's Government, he has ex-
perienced from that cordial understanding greater benefits
than even the Government of Lord Derby ; bu we shall
always remember that the conduct of France, while we
were in office, was conduct which entitled that nation to
the respect, sympathy, and good feeling of the people of
this country. Now, in the portion of the speech of the
noble lord opposite which I just read, the house perhaps
noticed one of those remarkable phrases and fine observa-
tions which often distinguish the remarks of the noble lord.
The noble lord pointed out to the house the advantage
which the present Emperor of France has over his illustri-
ous relative, in the fact that, instead of being ignorant of
the laws and constitution of this country, he had long been
a resident here, and was familiar with our language, our
habits, and our customs. No doubt that is a most bene-
ficial circumstance in the position of the present Emperor
of the French ; he has lived long in England, he has known
English society in very various classes—(some laughter)—
his education has not been deficient in the most important
element—adversity, and it is not likely he would miscon-
ceive, however much he might be annoyed at, the character
of the English press. No doubt the present Emperor of the
French must have been perfectly aware that the attacks of
the press on him were attacks for which neither the Go-
vernment nor the nation is responsible ; and if he has, as I

/,,1
-N%'-')._------f:.
'-'-7.4
--I\).'2l'n,:tse 4
,;:;:i: r----!•
. • \ N."/
. suppose it is pretty well known he has, hoth'inesess -,
official notification and other sources, expressed indignathi
..,and annoyance at those attacks, it must have been because
slm was of opinion that when they became known to his sub-
jects, the latter might not form of the circumstances so
accurate an opinion as himself. It is, indeed, not likely,
when those attacks are made on his country, his subjects
and himself, that those who read them abroad could com-
prehend, what few but Englishmen can comprehend, the
surprised
that he felt alarm and indig,nationatthese attacks
though I agree with the noble lord, that a person who had
journals
a relationsisinthis
country.between
(Hear,the readers
hear.)
Therefore
writers ofl
am public
bnlei et
resided so long in England as the present Emperor of France
could not for a moment misconceive the authority of the
what is the feeling of the present Government, of which
Firstai
nt offeredech,statements
tesentiments
ewhttrdieoi housetoeth nfht
eetei ntshhnooeoqfubAu permit
ts
lheed:s question.
lordGoi n
arnoa.
Government
whatwte
Admiralty-
to pursue
Bearing thathiyini
inquiry,
a iin iry, n da n
d, I ask
ask
the noble lord the member for the city of London is a
member, on the subject of the relations between England
and France ? (Hear, hear.) We know well what were the
feelings of the Government of the noble lord on this sub-
tration, and we also know well, both from my statement
and from the reference to past transactions which I have
(Loud cries of
s‘mg:Tainrseltrio,Luohnredcatroi.
and his colleagues on this important matter. But I now
wish to ascertain, for after all that is the most important
himself,
)mrnt eah:strtenteshitteofhAae,ooernfdf,behui
yehlaei
il
ea diyfi
hra:
:tier,L;;:tf,y acceptanceto h.
from,tfa h
aLAe
fo Adminis-
tration,
fl,
i l iidteitoenei Derby
Aberdeen?
snii.
question, what, upon this subject, are the views, opinions,
of that Government a declaration of opinion on this sub-
ject was made by one of its most eminent members, the
oriciieteinoannu4l betyTheteaereturn to those councils he had previously
adorned—(a laugh)—in one of the most responsible of posi-
tions in which an English Minister at the formation of
a Government can find himself- upon the hustings, before
his constituents, in the face of the whole country, with the
people watching for the expression of his opinions, in
order that they might form some idea of the policy of the
new Government, and, I may say, with the whole of
Europe, not less anxious as to the result, listening to hini.
(Hear, hear.) What, then, was the statement of the right
hon. gentleman with . eespeet-te-the- -Ante-sof • affairs-Ih' '-'-----
ralr,'lttear.) The right hon. gentleman described
the ruler of France, and he also described those whom he
ruled in one of those pithy sentences which no one pre-
pares with more due elaboration. (Laughter) In the
same sentence the right hon. gentleman contrived to give
the character not only of the Emperor of the French, but '
of the French themselves. He described the Emperor of
the French as a despot who had trampled on the rights
and liberties of 40,000,000 of men. (Hear, hear, from the
Opposition, followed by cheers from the finisterial side.)
Nothing demonstrates the evil of making such declarations
more than hearing them cheered in the manner the house
has just witnessed. (Hear, hear.) Well, according to the
right hon. gentleman, one of the most distinguished mem-
bers in the Cabinet of Lord Aberdeen—which Cabinet, we
hoped, was to maintain that cordial understanding with
France which was the cardinal point of the policy of the
Government of the noble lord opposite and of the Govern-
ment of Lord Derby, the present ruler of France is a
despot, who has trampled on the rights• and liberties of
40,000,000 of human beings. Therefore the French
people, according to the right honourable gentleman, are
slaves ; and a desdot and slaves are those with whom
we are to have a cordial understanding in order to
prevent those dangers and to secure those blessings
which in a previous portion of my observation I
have referred to. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) Well, if
I had to form an opinion of the policy of the Cabinet from
the first declaration made by so eminent a member of it as
the First Lord of the Admiralty, I should certainly be in-
duced to suppose that some great change was about to oc-
cur. How are we account for such a declaration ? I will
not be so impertinent as to suppose it was an indiscretion. '
(Hear, hear, and laughter.) An indiscretion from " all
the talent ?"—impossible. (Renewed laughter.) Can it,
then, be design ? I will not misrepresent the right hon.
gentleman—l will not commit the mistake I made the
other day. I understand, from what the noble lord oppo-
site then stated, that you may call the French-slaves if
your are speaking illustratively of politics in general—
(laughter)—but you must not call the Emperor of France
a tyrant or his subjects slaves if you are formally treating
of the foreign relations of the country. (Continued laugh-
ter.) Now, I frankly admit that the right hon. gentleman
was not treating of the foreign relations of the country ;
he was offering arguments against extended suffrage and
vote by ballot- arguments which I trust have had a due
influence on the mind of the President of the Board of
Works. (Cheers and laughter.) The right hon. gentle-
man made significant observations on the subject. I do
not allude to his promise of considering a measure of re-
form, because I know that on the hustings there must be
allowed a large license ; but there can be no doubt that,
whatever liberties you may take with your constituents,
a Councillor of her Majesty ought at least to be careful
when he speaks of a foreign potentate. (Cheers.) I must,
therefore, suppose, until in the pursuit of my investigation
I can arrive at a different conclusion—l must suppose,
for the moment, that this was a declaration made with de-
sign. Some people aro uncharitable enough to suppose
that the present Government have neither a principle nor
a party; but, in Heaven's name, why are they a Ministry
if they have not got discretion ? (Hear, hear.) That is
the great point on which this Cabinet
,was established.
Vast experience, administrative adroitness—safe men, who
never would blunder. (Laughter.) Mese were the men
who not only took the Government without a principle-and
without a party, but to whom the country ought to be
grateful for taking it under such circumstances ; mot, as
the very first outset, we find one of the most experienced
'of these Illustrious and consistent statesmen acting in the
teeth of the declarations of the noble lord opposite, and of
Lord Grey, made in .1.5•.), ; and holding up to public scorn _ _ .;:
and indignation the ruler and the people a good and cor-
.„
dial understanding with whom are the cardinal points of
all sound statesmanship. (Hear, hear.) Well, another
Minister has also given his opinion on the politics of France.
(Hear, hear, and laughter.) Parliament had not resumed
its sittings before two of these experienced men had ex-
pressed publicly sentiments which startled the country,
alarmed Europe, and which were apologised for, in one
instance, by the noble lord opposite. lam not going now
to say a single word on the observations of the Presidentof
the Board of Control as regards their offensive character to
the Emperor of the French. The right hon. gentleman
has explained iu a letter that ho may have said unprcuse-
ditately that the Emperor of the French gagged the press
of France, that he gagged the press of Brussels, and that
he hates our press because it speaks the truth, and he can-
not gag it ; but still he did not mean to say anything at all
offensive to the Emperor. (Laughter.) I know the right
hon. gentleman is in the habit of saying very offensive
things without meaning it. I know he has outraged the
feelings of many individuals without the slightest intention
of doing so, and, therefore, in reference to his peculiar or-
ganisation, I can only say that that is a very awkward ac-
complishment. (Cheers and laughter.) But this speech
at Halifax, in which the discreet President of the Board of
Control followed the experienced First Lord of the Admi-
ralty with a wonderful harmony of conduct and sympathy
of sentiment, contained far more important allegations than
the personal words to which the letter of the right hon.
President of the Board of Control referred the other day.
What does the right hon. gentleman mean by the press of
Belgium being gagged? Ido not know whether the hon.
gentlemen opposite are aware of the position of Brlgium.
Do they not know that it is an independent country, go-
verned by one whom I believe I may fairly describe as the
wisest'and most accomplished of living princes ? (Hear.)
What a description there'is given of the position of the
King of the Belgians, to say nothing of the Belgian people,
when a Minister of Queen Victoria publicly announces to
Europe that the Kb:4'of the Belgians is in a state more
humiliating than the slaves, who, according to the state-
ment of the First Lord of the Admiralty, are the subjects
of the Emperor of France, and he permits the press of his
country to be gagged by a foreign power ? (Hear, hear.)
Now what are the facts ? Is the press of Belgium gagged?
Is the Prince, in whom England must always take an in-
terest, irrespective of his great talents and accomplish.
ments, is he in the humiliating position of having his press
gagged? Let us look into the facts of this important case,
and let us see whether they have been correctly stated by
the President of the Board of Control, who, from his po-
sition, ought to be acquainted with some of them. Bel-
gium is a country the independence and neutrality of
which are guaranteed by treaties to which England is a
party, and that independence and neutrality are not. to.
lish the authority of that country. There is no slight
question at stake in this matter ; because, if the press
withhe impeachedo
of Belgium be gagged by a foreign power, where is
peworerstlatedvindwileattehouttheEnrigglhantsd,
ainntedrefesritg
the independence of that country ? and
.when and at what
cannot
tnhde beevadcallede:l
to emancipate
mmanceoinfpa7Biteylgiwumith
file neednhseognu.
egneeentleefmtehnetosttaatkee.
consideration, in
from Cabinet Councils, who must be supposed to have a
mtfhrrooeeuranmttistemahsmade on the high authority of a gentleman fresh
clear idea of the state of Europe. (Laughter.) There was
this difference between the press of England and that of
peiinwsythtranineohtetldeoemns.
Belgium in reference to French affairs, that the newspa-
pers published in Brussels against the Emperor of France
that
were printed in the language of his countrymen, and that
they openly incited to and recommended the assassination
of the ruler of France. Of course, under these circum-
stances, it is not remarkable that the ruler of France com-
plained of such flagrant outrages. It is impossible to say,
if no redress could be offered, what might not have been the
consequences. It is very possible that ,Belgium might have
become involved in invasion, because no protection against
such outrages towards a neighbouring sovereign could be
giveia. It is also very possible that the great powers might
not AD.ve conceived it to be their duty, under the circum-
stances, to assist in the rescue of that country, and perhap
England alone would have been left as the champion of
Belgium, because it is not likely that she would have de-
serted it. What then did the King of the Belgians do 1
He acted like a wise and able sovereign. He did not sub-
mit to his press being gagged—he made no humiliating con-
cessions—but he felt that the appeal against the outrages
published was just, and he went to his ownfree Parliament
and said that it was an intolerable grievance that a neigh-
bouring prince should be held up to assassination by news-
papers in Belgium, and in language read by his subjects ;
and he appealed to that Parliament to do what was pro-
per. And what was the course of the free Parliament of
Belgium ? They passed a law that papers in the French
language, or any language, should not be published in Bel-
l' gium that recommended the assassination of neighbouring
princes, and thus in the mostconstitutionaland ablest man-
ner that consummate sovereign terminated a difficult Y
which threatened his country in a manner most honourable
to all parties. And yet it was not newspapers, it was not
the statement that the press of Blgium is gagged,
statesman,
councillor of Queen Victoria, an experienced
selected to sit in the councils of the Go
is Government
of se-
condthere is no regard to principle, as thet.s a q.
admirable discre-
tion,one of those vile prints counselling assassination,tthmuadt
ae
rate importance) on account ofhr
that under no
unfailing judgment, and the certainty,
his colleagues. (Cheers and la nte
ug
gentleman made
' on the day when the right honourable
Cabinet met and sat four
his speech at Halifax, the f
hours the subjects con-
hours. When a Cabinet sits
eor h
The right on. gentleman (the
sidered must be weighty. T
smiles, if the
asCabinet was
Chancellor of the Exchequer)
the
o ! I am sure Cabinet could
sittiag on him. Oh, n him.
It is fully avowed and
been sitting upon
circumstances he would do anythingr.)thalt ceohulsedr,c,eomthmistt
not have
inte-
rest are to be suspended—adjourned
for aught we know—and, therefore, it is clear it could not
been about any question of domestic policy the
have Kalends,
frankly acknowledgedithatallstitoonsthoef
odrooemkestic
Queen's servants met that day and. sat so long. It is not,
therefore, too rash a supposition to imagine that something
connected with the foreign relations of the country may
have occupied their thoughts. It is not difficult even to
conceive the subject which attracted their attention, for
the newspapers were teeming with accounts of the arrival
of the Government messengers with dispatches from the
Turkish empire, a portion of which was at the time greatly
disturbed. That problem which has perplexed the minds
-and occupied the anxious thoughts of statesmen for more
than half a century—the state of the Turkish empire—was

probably the subject under the consideration of her Ma-
jesty's Ministers. Every one knows how much is at stake:'
in the solution of that problem. It is a question not only,
of the place of Europe, but of the civilisation of the world.
(Hear, hear.) And how have English statesmen hitherto
dealt with it ? In what manner have they attempted
to grapple with the difficulties of this ever-reverting sub-
ject of
.perplexity and peril? Only in one way. They have
recognised but one means by which a temperate, wise? and
successful issue could be insured. And what is tha
T A
cordial understanding with France. (Hear, hear.) he
traditionary policy of that great empire has led it always
to feel that it must not sacrifice a high interest of State
for any temporary success, or any petty and partial acqui-
sition which it might be able to secure. As long as
France and England thoroughly understand each other on
this great question the peace of the world and the inte-
rests of civilisation and humanity are not in peril. I will
assume the Turkish question to have been the subject of the
Cabinet Council of four hours, and I cannot well conceive
any subject more worthy of such prolonged deliberation. I
can conceive her Majesty's Ministers quitting the Council-
chamber deep in thought and fully impressed with the
awful responsibility of their decision, and I can also con-
ceive the feeling of these same Ministers when next morn-
ing the read the speech at Halifax—(cheers and laughter)
—and, found that their absent colleague had designated in
terms of ignominy the sovereign power with whom they
were to act as an ally, and treated—as I will presently show,
the nation he rules over as the lowest, in point of civilisation,
which it is possible to conceive. As regards tho First Lord

Of the Ade7iiralty, he has had a great deal of experience, to
be sure, but then he has been a long time in opposition,
and something might be said for him in the way of excuse
on that account, if, indeed, so great a personage could con-
descend to an excuse. (Laughter.) The right honourable
baronet might say, or some one might say for him, that he
had been a good many years without attending a Cabinet
Council, that no new council had been summoned before

he went to his constituents—that he was called upon un-
expectedly, and without previous arrangement and under-
standing with his colleagues--that it was a strange thing
he should have made such a business of it, but still these
things would happen sometimes. (Cheers and laughter.)
But what is the position of the President of the Board of
Control ? He was hardly out of office but he was in again.
(A laugh.) He had been in office for five or six years, and
a hardish time he had of it, no doubt (a laugh) ; but,
nevertheless, he agreed again to lend his gravity to the
councils of his Royal mistress. (Laughter.) He was pro-
perly anxious that the people of this country should have
none but discreet men to administer their affairs, and,
therefore, without making any stipulations as to
ath:Ehlistz
or principles of the Government, he became
Councils before he went
again, and attended 20 Cabinett. and
down to make the Halifax demonstra(Cheers
laughter.) And yet, with this renovated sense of respon-
sibility—knowing how much depended on everything said
by a Minister under these circumstances—the right hon.
gentleman, fresh from Cabinet Councils—knowing all the
questions at issue, goesa4tais constituents, describes the
ruler of the FrenB', in bing,nage which I have more than
once referred to, and will net now repeat, and then pro-
ceeds, in a ilassa.go which I-have not yet read to the house,
to give the people ofTfalifax some idea of the conduct of
the Emperor's subjects. The right hon. gentleman felt it
necessary to vindicate the increased expenditure of the
country to his constituents, and he showed them, as it was
not difficult to do, that this expenditure had been incurred
solely for self-defence. But then the right hon. gentleman
went on to illustrate the importance of these defensive
measures, " for," says he, " I do not think there will be a
general war, but I tell you what you will have ; you will
have bodies of 5,000 men suddenly thrown upon your coast,
and how would you like that.?—how would your wives and
daughters be treated ?". This is the description given ; but
I will quote the words of a great `Whig Minister, whose
memory must be respected by every gentleman on the oppo-
site bench—l was going to say by every member of the
Whig party, but that, perhaps, would be going too far. I
remember reading the debate which took place in the House
of Lords on Pitt's great commercial treaty, and Lord Stor-
mont, I think it was, who opposed the treaty, argued that
it would be dangerous for British merchants to invest so
much money in France, because in the case of a war the
French Government would seize upon all their capital ;
whereupon Lord Shelburne—who then bore the honoured
name of Lansdowne—ridiculed the sentiment, and inveighed
against. the speaker, saying, " One would suppose, in listen-
ing to the noble lord, that he imagines the French nation to
be corsairs and bandits of Tunis and Morocco?' That is
what I say to the President of the Board of Control.
The Halifax hypothesis is, that without declaring war, and
in utter violation of the rules which govern civilised
nations, the French will land bands of men on our coasts,
to commit the desecrating enormities hinted at; and I say
that the man who conceives this to be possible must
imagine the bravest, the most ingenius, and the most
polished people in the world to be no better than corsairs
of Tunis and Morocco ; and yet, after having said all
these things, the right hon. gentleman writes a letter, in
which, after making an apology to the Emperor of France
—which is not a very handsome one, but let that pass—he
proceeds to say—" I cannot conceive that an English
Minis-ter is to be precluded from adverting to what he un-
derstands to be the state of things on the continent." I
will match that sentence against any that can be found in
any dispatch ever written. (Laughter) Recollect, the
writer of this important State memorial, addressed to the
leader of the House of Commons, is apologising, and his
object is to conciliate, and yet he says that he cannot con-
ceive that an English Minister is to be precluded from
adverting to what he understands to be the state of
things on the continent. (Hear, hear.) My opinion is
that an English Minister should not open his mouth on any
subject, and certainly not upon what the President of the
It' ,rd of Control calls " the state of things on the conti-
nent," without e grave sense of responsibility. (Cheers.)
Add,-moreover, I think that if, under the 441.0444..14.110486,
the President of the Board of Control felt it his duty to
advert to what be supposed to be the state of things on the
eutinent, he ought, as a Minister, to have been courteous
in expression and conciliatory in language. But I cannot
admit the principle that an English Minister shall take part
in the most secret deliberations of the greatest kingdom of
the world, and then leave the Cabinet to babble on a hust-
ings all that he has heard. (Hear, hear.) What Cabinet
Ministers understand to be the state of things on the con-
tinent is a great secret of State. We have no right to
ask them to divulge it in this house, much less in the
Odd Fellows'-hall at Halifax. (Hear, hear, and laughter.)
Up to the point to which I have now advanced it is evi-
dent that the sentiments of Ministers with respect to our
relations with France are by no means of a satisfactory
nature. There was no doubt as to the policy of the Go-
vernment of the noble lord the member for London on this
point. There was no doubt also with respect to the policy
of Lord Derby's Government. What is the policy of Lord
Aberdeen's? This is not only a legitimate subject of investi-
gation, but it is absolutely our duty to obtain from the
present Cabinet, if possible, something more satisfactory on
this all-important subject than we have obtained from the
speeches of two of its members. There are additional and
peculiar reasons why the Government should make a decla-
ration on this occasion. When the present Government
took office the head of it offered what is called a pro-
- gramme of his policy in another place. This programme
Vas so complete and lucid, according to the noble lord the
member for London, that he felt it quite unnecessaryto add
a single word to it. Now, this programme contained a de-
claration on the subject of foreign policy, and I beg to call
the attention of the house to it. Remember who made it.
Remember, it was made not only by the Prime Minister of
England, but by one who has „filled the highest offices of
State, and especially more than once, and for a considerable
time, that of Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. All
Ministers are bound to know something about everything,
but the house will observe that the Chief Minister is bound
to know everything on this subject, for it is one of which
he is pre-eminently master. Let us, then, recal to recol-
lection the satisfactory programme given by Lord Aberdeen.
His lordship did not dwell on the subject of foreign affairs
at any great length, but what he did say was succinct
and precise. He said it was unncessary to dilate on the
topic, because the system and principle on which the foreign
policy of this country had been conducted during the last
30 years was the same. I confess I listened to that decla-
ration with some astonishment. (Hear, hear.) I could
not but recall to mind the tempestuous debates which only
three years ago resounded in this house en the subject of
foreign policy. I could not forget that the system and prin-
ciples of foreign policy then pursued, and which had been
pursued for years by the Government presided over by
the noble lord the member for London, had been de-
scribed as perilous to the dignity of England, and, per-
haps, fatal to the peace of Europe. I could not but re-
member that this was the language used by the chosen col-
leagues of the Minister. (Cheers.) I could not but recol-
lect that Lord Aberdeen himself used, with reference to
the then foreign policy and the principles on which it was
conducted, an epithet rarely admitted into Parliamentary
debate—for he stigmatised it as " abominable." Pcould
not but recollect also that the great indictment of the
foreign policy of the then Government was opened in this
house with elaborate care and vehement invective by the
right hon. baronet now First Lord of the Admiralty.
(Cheers.) I therefore was somewhat surprised at hearing
Lord Aberdeen - say that for 30 years there bad been no
difference in the principles on which the foreign policy of
this country had been carried on. I could not but recol-
lect, too, that the noble lord the member for London de-
nounced the principal instigator of those debates as one
who did not take the foremost post, as he ought to have
done, and as being in league with foreign conspirators for
,the most disgraceful object which it was possible for a
British statesman, if it could be proved, to pursue. (Hear,
hoar.) I could not but remember the glowing and fervid
eloquence with which the noble lord vindicated his noble
friend the then Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and still a
Secretary of State, when he said, "He is not a Mnister of
Soria— (cheers.)—nor of Russia, nor of France." (Cheers.)
then was the Minister of Austria, Russia, and
France? (Cheers.) Who sat for the portrait? (Cheers
and lan,ghter.) It is the portrait of the present Prime
Minister
of England, drawn by his leader of the House of
Commons, and he has paid the artist for his performance
by degrading him from the post of which he was worthy.
facts, coupled
with cheers.) The recollection of thesell cc
with the statement in the panegyrised statement of the
Chief Minister, and the indiscretions of two of
his Cabinet,
Ministers whose conduct I have been considering, i een considering, n-
duces me to think that we require some satisfactory
assurances
from the Government on this important
subject. I give the noble lord the member for Lon-
don credit for adhering to the sentiments which he
expressed last year ; but, alas he is no longer Prime
Minister, and the country will require more formal as-
surances, now that 'the noble lord's position is changed. I
think the house will agree that I am taking no unfair or
factions course. (" Oh r from the Ministerial, and cheers
from the Opposition benches.) Perhaps the hon. gentle-
men opposite will favour us with their ideas of faction if
they think I am not justified in asking for a frank expla-
nation of the views of Ministers on a subject of the great-
est importance to the people of England. Here is a docu-
ment which has been put into my hands since I came into
the house, and UP which I would not have alluded had it
not been for the indiscreet movement of hon. gentlemen
opposite—(a laugh)—who seem to insinuate that the obser-
vations I am making with a view to elicit information are
unnecessary. They shall hear what is the opinion of the
merchants, bankers, and traders of the city of London on
the subject. The document I hold in my hand is an invi-
tation to n meeting of those classes who feel called upon at
this time publicly to express their deep concern at wit-
nessing the endeavours continually made to create and per-
petuate feelings of distrust, ill-will, and hostility between
the inhabitants of the two great nations of England and
France. I therefore recommend some of the hon. mem-
bers who attempted to disturb my observations—if they
should not favour us with their opinions to-night--to go
to the London Tavern and tell the merchants, bankers,
and traders of England that they are exhibiting a factious
feelingt towards the Government because they feel alarmed
and d. isquieted as to their commercial transactions. (Hear,
will not be deterred from asking the ques-
..i.ork a a
Ministernts tob°deutl t°
put. I say we have a right to ask
is to be conducted.
-upon what system our foreign policy
ed. Let them explain the mysterious
paragraph in Lord Aber le '
system to be one of " liberal(en 3 programme. Is their
becility (Laughter.) energy," or " antiquated im-
. s t real question. When
the noble lord opposite was dicatnag himself on the moss