The Sun.
London, England, 1854-04-01 00:00:00

14 ITN,& LoNnow, sATYTII,DAY EVNING, APRIL 1, 188.4.

abolish. (Hear.) I remember that in the year 1841 Lord
Stratford de Redcliffe asked for the abolition of some tax
of that kind, and after a great deal of argument the pacha
who was then Minister for Foreign Affairs gave way.
Lord Stratford de Redcliffe was then going away, but the
pacha stopped him, and said, " We have been asked to in-
terfere with your Government on the part of the poor
People of England, who state they cannot eat their bread
without paying a tax for it." (Laughter.) The document
to which the pacha, referred was signed by various persons,
and amongst them by the hon. member for the West
Paling, and it asked for the intercession of the Sultan on
behalf of the people of this country, requesting of him to
use his influence with her Majesty's Government to abolish
the tax upon bread. (Laughter.) I ask all those who have
the interests of the Christians in Turkey at heart to let
the Turkish Government have its way at present and they
will got these concessions. (Hear, hear.) But do not, while
you talk of defending Turkey and are making arrangements
to defend her terrritory, be running after Reschid Pacha
and bullying the poor man until you drive him to tears,asking these concessions. Is it, I ask, generous or politic
to do so? I think we have been misled by our feelings
with regard to Austria. She never can embark in the po-
licy we are embarked in. Her interests are substantially
population.
amongst same as Russian interests. She must have a ulation
amongst whom she can intrigue. She may assist in getting
back the status quo ante bellum, blit she will go no further.
I cannot go, with respect to Austria, to a greater authority
than the noble viscount before me (Viscount Palmerston),
and I beg to refer you to what that noble lard said with
respect to Austria in 1849. The noble viscount said :

"It is not as the ancient ally of England during war—it is
not as the means of resistance in the centre of Europe to any
general disturbance of the balance of power—it is as the for-
mer(though I trust it is no longer so)—the former symbol of
resistance to improvement, political and social—it is in that
capacity that Austria has won the affections of some men in
the conduct of public affairs. There are persons who see in
the relations of countries nothing but the intercourse of Ca-
binets—who value a country not for its political weight, but
for its political opinions—and who consider that the relations
between countries are sufficiently intimate when the personal
intercourse of their Governments is placed on a complimen-
tary footing. Sir, there are men who, having passed their
whole lives in adoring the Government of Austria, because
they deemed it the great symbol of the opinions they enter-
tained, at last became fickle in their attachment, and trans-
ferred their allegiance to the Government of France, because
they thought that in that Government they saw an almost
equal degree of leaning to the arbitrary principle, and be-
cause they, forsooth, suspected that Government of designs
hostile to the interests of freedom. We have heard of persons
of that sort making use of the expression ' old women.'
Public men ought not to deal in egotism, and I will not apply
to them the expression which has fallen from their own
mouths. I will only say, that the conduct of such men is an
example of antiquated imbecility."

•
If the description which the noble lord gave of it was given
merely in reference to its juvenile days, or its days of indis-
cretion, we might hope that during the few years which have
since elapsed it might have been improved ; but it is evi-
dent that Austria is labouring under an incurable malady,
and that, instead of improving, it is only getting worse.
(Hear, hear.) I could also quote the speech of the noble
lord the member for London on the same subject, when he
told us of the noble viscount being an English Minister and
not being a French Minister, an Austrian Minister, or a
Russian Minister. (Hear, hear.) These are vital questions
to consider, and if any right hon. gentleman on the Treasury
benches does not think that we are entering into this war
tomaintain g,reat principles, let hi mretire at once. (Cheers.)
This is not a case for sham. (Cheers.) If men enter into
a war of this kind, they have a right to de it heart and
soul. (Cheers.) The vessel of the State ie in danger, it is
tossed to and fro by the waves, and if there be an unsteady
hand at the helm, or some person who has mistaken his
mission, or who is treacherous to the cause—(hear, hear)—
I say, throw your Jonah overboard. (Loud cheers.) If
you do not, your vessel will be wrecked. (Hear.) Let us
know what you are going to do. I do not ask you to let
me know what your plans of operations are. If you wished
to answer me you could not, for I conscientiously believe
you have no plans at all. (Laughter.) I do not think any
man should ask to have the plan of operations disclosed to
the:enemy, or that we should tell them what we are about
to do, I do not want to know what boundaries you are
going to make, or what treaties you are going to sign; the
result of a war like this must be in the hands of God, and
God alone can determine what will be the end of it. (Hear,
hear.) But what I want the Government to say is, that if
with the help of God, and with the help of strong hearts,
We shall carry the war to such an issue as will prevent
Russia hereafter from returning to its oppressions and from
shaking the tranquillity of Europe, you will take care to
keep her within limits beyond which she will not hereafter
be able to go. (Hear, hear.) I think we are fairly entitled
t.,° say to the Government that if they go to war merely to,
cefend the territory of the Ottoman empire, and to restore
old treaties and the status quo, it will not be a war well
worthy of the occasion ; but it will be worthy of the
occasion if the war shall be carried on with the inten-
tion of repressing for ever these dangerous aggressions.
(Hear, hear.) This is not a little war. (Hear, hear.)
It might have been made a short war if it had
been taken up last year. (Hear, hear.) If, after the
affair of Sinope you had sent your fleet into the Black Sea,
and destroyed the Russian fleet, as you might have done,
You might have made a peace at once. (Hear.) But now
you have got into a great war. (Hear.) It is not easy to
Meet the Russians in Turkey. You do not know what
Turkey is, or what are the resources of the country for the
Maint mance of an army. (Hear, hear.) The troops may
become infected with the worst of fevers, and you do not
know how many of those men who are now going to that
country will return, unless you make some preparations
More worthy of the occasion than you have done. (Hear.)
I am told that this is not a period to bring on a discussion
of this nature. I am not insensible of the resonsibility I
have taken upon_myself. I have thought night and day
upon the subject ; but I felt I had a duty to perform, and
I would not flinch from performing that duty. (Cheers.) I
ask, is it not better for us now to sutler ae
affairstemporary e
this
country in-
convenience, but if possible to havet h
in the hands of a strong Government, who will
carry on this great war in a manner that will be worthy
of the country. (Hear, hear.) Is it better to make a sacri-
fice, and have a united mind and feeling on the subject, or
is it better to evade that inconvenience and allow the state
of things at present to go on until, from divergence of opi-
nion, vacillation, and doubt, we shall be involved in disas-
ters from which we shall not be able to extricate ourselves I
(Rear.) Shall we then say it is better to have a weak than
a strong Government? (Hear.) So far from this country
doubting of the propriety of going into this war, it has
been able to force the Ministers into it. (Hear.) No Mi-
nister could oppose the popular seeling on the subject, and,
with the exception of a small section in this house, we have
one united feeling on the subject. (Cheers.) If compro-
raises should be proposed, that would be unworthy of the
dignity and character of the country ; there is pnolic feel-
ing, and there is public opinion, and there are statesmen
that are able to resist all those attempts, and carry the
country triumphantly to the position in which it should be
laced. (Cheers.) I know I may weaken my own position ;
!Put, however inexperienced a man be, yet if he undertakes
ml.O discharge a conscientious duty, however humbly, and
44ving credit for being influenced by no personal or party
Motives, or by the desire to impede the Government, or to
Pat anything in the way of the great interests of the
cOuntry, though he may have failed, or incurred any dis-
pleasure on the part of members of the house, he must be
satisfied with his own conduct if he has, as have, the
conscientious feeling that he has raised his voice on two
easions against those calamities which are, unfortunately,
pending over this country. (Hear, hear.)
• BRIGHT wished to free himself from the responsi-
_,_ 'V
of the course which it was proposed to take. He
nould not discuss the subject on peace principles, but on
ee Principles which were generally-entertained as to the
with the of war. Remarking that we were in alliance
the power which had, though without guilt, begun
ofeCrel, he proceeded to insist upon the decaying state
falli ere
Nae „071.-" Y and the strength of Russia ; and said that, if
in the position of the latter, next neighbour to a
thinnkg Power we should interfere with her. He did not
Mend ot1;1" Le.rd J. Russell had made out a case. The de-
than he hitnnaßei, a had been treated as much more formidable
thought • been able to find it. The Sultan had not
, it so dangerous as Lord Stratford de Radcliffe,
"". had done his utmost to prevent the Porte from acced-
ga," the smallest of the requisitions of the Czar, while
monde. made made concessions in the character of her de-
t(t,_T• He condemned the occupation of the Principali-
•l did
believed it was intended to daunt Turkey and
rallies. After some sarcasms on the Vienna'note,
tacit:dm believe that any other than a fair interpretation
after the first'
been put on it by Count Nesselrode, though,
he alterations, he put another sense on it in order
,° get back to his original position. At Olmutz the Ern-
er
_r had assented to the sense of the conference, but
lafanatical council at Constantinople, at which the Chris-
Vwere unrepresented, were afraid of losing their in-
tb;e.ne,E! by peace, and hastened to declare war. And for
t,,,Y we were to
advisingr blood and treasure. Our
„teeb blunder was in the Turk not to concede any-
the and our second in supporting him on the subject of
to
have
note. The course he would have adapted was
let the Porte make concessions to the last note of
have prince Menchikoff, or to the Vienna note, or else he should
gone into war alone, and France and England might
to at least stood aloof until the war threatened to over-
-0,4 the balance of power. No real injury would have
•r:_"l.,l.loed Palmsey from concession, if she were, as stated
n"Ys,,-14 rdston, a growing power, and, if she were
bY.ay advantages given to the Christians, they would
▪ 71 elown in strength, and been able to supplant the Ot-
111 n rule and establish themselves as a Christian State
t;onstantinople which would have been far better than
Withdrawn, Europe would have been at peace forthe present,
and matters have gone on to their natural solution the suc-
cumbing of the Mahometan to the Christian
wanted to know what was population. He
kit. Burke denied that the`s the balance of power. In 1791
'l`
the balance of power inururks had anything to do with
ilsiedestructive savages ; and A.lesp.e, andtbhree denond them
on from Europe would b ad saitince that their
a a benefit to mankind. He
al quoted Mr Fox on the same
1 d • if the
the
in 1328. Then, balance subject, and Lord Hol-
had beenpreserved,
why
uad we not gone to war with France when she seized
Turkish dominions of Algiers, and
with the
unite
d States for their aggression in Ilexico? But teLeil years of this infatuated struggle, and let America
Whore a the same period of peace, and she would show us
the balance of power lay, and whether England
held retain her vaunted supremacy of industry and on
SeaSs Re ridiculed the idea of the integrity and inde-
l'e,nodence of Turkey and said that there were statesmen
Ziara believed that she would come out of this war n 0 ot„
When Power at all, and, for himself, he believed that
to take was
was signed there would be no Ottoman power
there dvantage of it. Besidesßussia would always be
, advantage
her as always powerful and watchful, and let us reduce
agere:eomay, she wi 1, as soon as recruited, recommence
errant:eof It was no business of ours to be the knight-
England,
,Ple human race. As regarded the interests of
of It
1 tue war had dashed down Mr. Gladstone's hope
as that 1 putation as a benefactor to the; but
the hat
would never consent to retraceshis steps,
land worse tax would be the great source of revenue, and
d
-Landowsuffer most severely. He congratulated the
ners, every man with a Turk on his tack. The
funds was put off, trade would diminish, and the
i• "PIU tile Maw
_ g ish I,,es ays would suffer, and 10 or 20 thousand
theof," ould be sacrificed, and the happiness of the
ttrevine theEngland destroyed, and all for the sake of pre-
pc„,tip. independence and integrity of Turkey As for
found va,,±`ritY of the war, ever and
self h " v°cates in the y war was popular,, ar,
e was am a I press and elsewhere. But for him-
orrified at the se( at the policy of the
Government, and
with a e results it•
atate in. which
owing piotur might produce. He concluded
n. which th e of the happy prosperous, and moral
gaged
in e country
kr a a wa. would have been, had we never
chaster,• lIA•LL a
h • that greed with the h
aalop,k not one 0 on. member for Man-
having
"cell uraed f the grounds he had mentioned as
14or
sots a 00 reasons for u
3 real "" ctry. ~r ndertaking the war was
,e.jaatian'und k!U. • Ball) believed, however, that
erinei(a Was t •
pon which this
-4-4 es . he nthantenan • or any other war could
tagtitand ce in civilised society of the
.141%Ce.
n9t. society
with

the hon. member that selfishness should be the ruling
principle of nations, any more than it should be the mo-
tive of individuals. He trusted that the Government
would direct the war to the realisation of those ends of
justice and right which alone the people contemplated in
sanctioning the war.
The Marquis of GRANBY much regretted the tone of
disrespect and personal hostility which had characterised
the language of members on the other side of the house to-
wards the Emperor of Russia, whose every word and every.,
action was treated as though it was of necessity false and
nefarious. The Emperor accorded to those who opposed
him full credit for integrity of intention ; why should
similar credit not be given to the Emperor ? All that
Russia had sought was the protectorate of the Greek
church in the Ottoman dominions, an object which Eng-
land could have no ground for resisting. The real cause
of the unfortunate position at which we had arrived was
the division which existed in the Cabinet; it was the civil
war that prevailed there which had occasioned the war
with Russia. (" Oh, oh !" and laughter.)
Lord D. STUART (who was received with cries of "oh!")
said he should be sorry if anything that fell from him or
any other hon. gentleman should have theeffect of prevent-
ing a unanimous answer from being returned to the most
gracious message of her Majesty. He thought 'it was
desirable that the House of Commons should show that
unanimity which he believed existed throughout the
whole country, in assuring her Majesty of their determi-
nation to assist her in carrying on the war, which had
been forced upon this country by the unprincipled proceed-
ings of an aggressive and ambitious power. At the same
time he could certainly have wished that they had from
he ministers a more explicit declaration of their views with
regard to the war, and particularly with regard to the
course which they had proposed to themselves to pursue,
in entering upon that war. Of course he was not so absurd
as to ask her Majesty's Ministers to explain their military-
operations to the house ; and he could not help here ob-
serving that when the government had been asked to state
their intentions, the right hon. gentlemen and noble lords
on the Treasury bench, had invariably answered that they
would be departing from their duty if they entered into
any explanation—purposely misunderstanding the object
of the querists. He (Lord 1). Stuart) did not ask what was
to be the strategetical or naval operations of the war, but
he did ask, as he had a right to ask, and the country had
a right to be told in plain terms, what it was for which
they were going to war ? (Hear, hear.) Were they going
to war for the independence of the Turkish empire ? Did
they mean to place Europe in such a state as should afford
them some security that they would not soon again have to
make the same sacrifices and bear the same burdens? He
was greatly afraid that unless thegovernment entered upon
the war with a great deal more vigour than had charac-
terised their preliminary negotiations, they would get the
country into what might be called a state of chronic war.
He hoped they would at any rate afford the house some
information as to what the fleets had been doing, and what
they were about in the Black Sea ; for, with every desire
to give both the gallant admirals of both fleets duo credit,
affairs there did at present wear a veryugly aspect. (Hear,
hear.) It was said that the fleets had been ordered to go and
sweep the Russian ships out of the Euxine so long as the
Bth of October ; but they had certainly received orders to
that effect ever since January. Yet those magnificent ships
had remained ever since strongly at anchor in Beicos Bay.
(Hear, hear.) It had been stated that the Russians had
come out of Sebastopol, had gone to the coast of Circassia,
and taken a large number of troops from thence back to
Russia. Surely those troops ought never to have been al-
lowed to return to Russia, but they ought to have been
captured by the combined fleets. It was true that Lord
Clarendon had stated so lately as yesterday that no such
information had reached him ; but, he did not say he had
reason to know that nothing of the kind had taken place.
The report had been republished in all the papers of that
day, and it was also confirmed by private correspondence
which he (Lord D. Stuart) had received from Constantino-
ple. When the news reached that city that the Russian
fleet was again in the Black Sea, what did the combined
fleets do ? Did they immediately go out ? By no means.
One would have thought that the admirals would have
been anxious to capture this audacious Russian fleet which
had come out, as it were, to beard them ; but, instead
of that, they merely sent out two steamers to see
what had happened. The steamers accordingly did go
out, and did see what had happened—namely, that the
Russian troops had been removed from the littoral of Cir-
cassia. (Hear, hear.) No one would be more glad than
himself to learn that there was no foundation for the
opinion, that the commanders of the two fleets were not
so ready as they might be expected to be to seek for the
Russian enemy ; and, therefore, it was that he insisted so
much upon information upon this point. (Hear, hear.)
This war had been described as one of great importance.
If properly conducted andidirected to proper ends, it might
prove to be one of the most beneficial that had over taken
place in our history. Still he thought too much was
said about peace. He would yield to no one in his ap-
preciation of the blessings of peace ; but what he wanted
was a war that should end in the establishment of a
lasting peace. (Hear, hear.) He did not want a war for
a mere status quo, and if the Government had any idea of
that kind,, they might rest assured that the country would
never be satisfied, but would deem that it was governed by
men who had no proper appresiation of their position, and
were unfit to direct the councils of a great nation.
(Hear hear.) War was a state of transition ,• and
its object was to bring about another state of things.
It might be compared to a surgical operation. It
might afford opportunities for the display of great skill,
courage, and fortitude ; but it was not to be resorted to
except in cases of the last necessity and for the sake -of
placing the subject of it in a more healthy condition. He
trusted the war would have the effect of placing Europe in
a much better condition than she had been for some time.
It'was their duty to seize the opportunity of doing this,
or posterity would not pardon them. (Hear, hear.) They
ought to expiate the partition of Poland, and take from
the haughty Muscovite the possessions which he had only
obtained by fraud or wrongful force. (Hear.) He trusted
that Europe would be placed iu a position of safety for all
time to come, and that the independence of Turkey would
be preserved. He rejoiced to learn that no convention had
been entered into affecting the internal concerns of Turkey.
By all means let the Sultan be urged to make all necessary
reforms, and give freedom to his Christian subjects; but
let them not do the very thing they were taking up arms
to prevent, by requiring from Turkey stipulations which
were inconsistent with her independence. (Hear, hear.)
We could not with any grace demand such stipulations of
Turkey ; for she might ask if we placed other religions on
the same footing as the Christian. We had no Mahomme-
dans here, but we had Jews, and so long as the odious dis-
tinctions were maintained in their case, we could not make
such a demand of Turkey as had been referred to. (Hear.)
The house ought to have an assurance that this war would
not be concluded without the door being closed upon Rus-
sia, so that she should no longer be in a position wantonly
to disturb the peace of Europe. (Cheers.)
Lord PALMERSTON.—I might indeed have wished, upon
an occasion of such importance as the present, when her Ma-
jesty has appealed to her Parliament for support in a great
contest, the magnitude of which, and the importance of which
it is impossible to deny, that questions arising out of detailed
matters connected with the conduct of negotiations should be
postponed to another and more appropriate occasion—(hear)
—and that this house might have looked simply to the appeal
which the Sovereign has made to it, and have responded
unanimously, as I am sure it will, and not only unani-
mously, but without mixing up in the assurance of
loyalty and devotion to the Crown any topics of a minor
and subordinate description. (Hear, hear, hear.) At the
same time, I know full well that it is the privilege of this
house, when any questions are brought under its considera-
tion by the Government, to discuss freely and minutely any
topics which they may think properly connected with the sub-
ject under debate. I shall, however, be excused, I trust, if,
not folio wing the example of some of those who have gone
before, I de not pursue the steps of my hon. friend the member
for Aylesbury (Mr. Layard) in all the detailed examination
which he has thought it right to enter into of the conduct of
the Government in the course of the long negotiation, which
has ended in the unhappy rupture that has now arrived.
There* however, one topic to he which adverted • which I
cannot allow to pass over in silence. My hon. friend has
quoted divers passages from the Times newspaper—(hear)
taking it as an unquestionable organ of the British Govern-
ment, contrasting the opinions expressed in certain leading
articles of the Times, and opposing them to the deliberate
course and the general principles which her Majesty's Go-
vernment have followed and established. Why, sir, I do not
presume to inquire from what sources the newspapers of this
country may take their inspiration; but, if any inference is
to be drawn from the identity of opinion expressed in these
articles and the opinions expressed by the Government of
Russia, I should be disposed to draw a very different infer-
ence from that which the hon. member has thought fit to
draw, and if I were to search out the origin of the inspira-
tion which dictates these articles, it is not, certainly to the
English Government that I should go. (Cheers.) The ques-
tion which to-night is to be submitted to the house is whe-
ther her Majesty will receive the support of Parliament in the
contest in which this country is about to be involved. Now,
it is known, I think, to those who have given their attention
to the affairs of Europe for a considerable time past, that the
views of Russia upon Turkey are not of yesterday, or indeed
of any recent date. (Hear.) It is known that for a great
length of time it has been the standing and established po-
licy of Russia to endeavour to obtain possession of at least
the European part of Turkey, and subsequently of Asiatic
Turkey. This policy has been pursued with undeviating and
systematic. perseverance. It has been ever kept in view.
When opportunities have offered steps in advance have been
made, and when checks have been experienced those steps
have been withdrawn, but only for the purpose of taking ad-
vantage of the next opportunity which offers. (Hear.) Delay
has been no element in mitigating or in inducing Russia to
abandon its s.?hemes. Its policy has been to keep one object
in view—not to hurry, not to lose its object by prematurely
grasping at its possession, but to watch the course of the
other Governments of Europe, and to take advantage of every
opportunity which might present itself by which it could get
even the slightest advance towards the ultimate object of its
ambition. Now, sir, do I blame the Russian Government for
entertaining such a policy ? A policy of aggrandisement pur-
sued by legitimate means is a policy which you may condemn
as dangerous to yourselves, which you may oppose as destruc-
tive of the independence and the liberties of other States, but'
which is not a reproach to the Government which pursues it,
provided it be pursued by open, undisguised, and avowed
means, without concealment, without subterfuge, and with-
out fraud. Now, the course which, I am sorry to say, the
Russian Government has pursued in all these recent transac-
tions has not been that open and straightforward course
which would justify it in avowing and in boldly declaring
its policy. (Hear, hear.) But was it from ignorance that
had frequent that policy was pursued ? Did the Russian Government enter-
tain. any doubt whether its aggrandisement in the direction of
Vifr! ? eY would or would not peril its relations with other coun-
e tn
t NoslloCcheasiniofenr,enwcheeon I
rdhoeulbdt existed.the
seals (Hear, hear.) hFe g
Foreign
IDmaneapgtiausrttaglientot, to with an eminent Russian diplo-
gEonvgelialinmdeenutte:
pen the relations between the two countries, and his
eafierabgle°."(rnfiema
think constitution:3s always this :—He said, " Russia and
different views on general principles. You
your notions, we naturally elin. te
Youat
endeavour
oeub
endeavour
awveo
supportutih.
t n:
poarurotb.pi
atoig
aw
nn arbitrary
But we have great European interests in common, and so long
. as we do not come into conflict upon the affairs of Turkey—
nas England and Russia have no differences upon that most
s°importantlo point, the affairs of Turkey so long" said he, " I
tell my Government that there is nothing in, our opposite
general principles of government which will prevent England
and Russia from acting amicably together in other matters
in which they have a common European interest." Now
what was it which made the Russian Government think the
tho u It t imagined recent occasion seized upon by it was a favourable one for
advancing its long-cherished views Why, no doubt it spe-
culated upon differences—irreconcilable as it thought—be-
tween England and France. (Cheers.)
there never could be a cordial union between these two great
countries. (Hear.) It speculated upon differences between
:t itn h ee that
England and Austria. (Hear.) gh t
diffe-
rences of opinion which had prevailed between these two Go-
vernments, and to a certain degree between the two nations,
would prevent any common action between them; and think-
' inn, thorofors, QM then WAS disunion among the great /A.

tions of Europe, and that it was impossible there could be any
combination between them, the Russian Government thought
it a favourable moment for making another great step in its
progress of aggrandisement towards Turkey. (Cheers.) That
step was made with all the ability and with all the sagacity
which has ever characterised the policy of that able and am-
bitious Government. It sought no acquisition of territory, it
ts
iooungsh t
ofo p
Ee
uropfor n
ando th i ns
og we
chi!
tcahi
uslhyo upl
rdo am me thessgreat n
It
sought that which was more useful to its views than the ac-
quisition of any provinces of the Turkish empire—it sought
by a concession from the Sultan to the Emperor of Russia to
acquire a real sovereignty over the whole Christian popula-
tion of Turkey. (Hear.) We have been told to-night by the
hon. member for Manchester (Mr. Bright) that he could not
see what harm would have arisen from the Sultan accepting
either the Menschikoff Note or the Vienna Note. Why, it is
impossible for any man not to see that if, by a concession
ifrom the Sultan, the Emperor had been made the arbiter of
all the rights—general, civil, and political—of the whole
Christian population of the Turkish empire, the sovereignty
of the Sultan would have been held simply at the will and
discretion of the Emperor of Russia. (Loud cheers.) And
that was his object, and the greatest move it was that
has for a long course of time been made towards
the extinction and partition of the Turkish em-
-1 pire. (Hear, hear.) The Russian Government pursued
the course marked out by it with a secrecy and silence which
showed its certainty that that which it was demanding was -a
thing which could not, and ought not, to be granted, if the
Turkish Government acted upon a just sense of its own inte-
rests, and duly consulted the interest of its allies. (Hear.)
In one of the memorandums- the last, 3 think it is, of the
secret correspondence—what is the language which the Rus-
sian Government uses in regard to its policy towards Turkey,
and in regard to the manner in which the European Govern-
ments should act towards Turkey ? Throughout the Emperor
of Russia professes an anxious desire to maintain Turkey as it
is. Apprehensions are entertained that that will not be long
possible, but he says that the mode of doing it will be that
the Powers of Europe should abstain from pressing imperious
demands upon Turkey, supported by menace—(hear)--and
that opinion is recorded at the -very moment when Prince
Menschikoff was doing at Constantinople the very thing which
the Russian Government said Europe should abstain from
doing, so as to maintain the independence and integrity of
Turkey. (Cheers.) I say, then, it is impossible for any man
who has his eyes in his head, or who is capable of drawing
conclusions, to doubt that there is a settled intention on the
part of Russia to overrun and overthrow the Turkish empire,
for the purpose of establishing in the territory of Turkey the
ascendancy and domination of Russia. (Hear, hear.) Then
it is said, " Well, but what about that ? Is it possible for us
to maintain things as they are ?" The Turkish empire, says
the hon. member for Manchester, (Mr. Bright), is in a state
of rapid and progressive decay, and he declares that I am the
only man in the world who is blind to that, and who thinks
that the contrary is the fact. Why, I will appeal to the events
of the last eight months as a proof of the truth and correctness
of my opinion. Just compare the resistance which Turkey
lits made within the last eight months to the armies of Russia
—compare that with the military events of a former year, aril
let any man say whether Turkey has not shown proofs of
vitality and energy which few people imagined she could pos-
sibly have diSplayed under circumstances so embarrassing as
those in which she was placed. (Hear.) Among the reasons
which, I have no doubt in my own mind—and, in-
deed, it is avowed in this correspondence among the
reasons which urged Russia to strike the blow at the present
time was this :—The Russian Government saw that progress
sive improvements in Turkey were tending highly to streng-
then the Turkish Government ; and it saw also that, by these
improvements, and by the progressive wealth and comfort
and wellbeing of the Christian and Greek population, these
masses of Turkish subjects were gradually withdrawing their
eyes from Russia as their supporter, and were looking for
their well-being .to other sources. (Hear, hear.) The Rus-
sian Government saw that the Greek population was slipping
out of its hands—(hear, hear)- and that the Turkish Go-
vernment were getting gradually too strewg to be easily over-
thrown, and therefore it was that they thought it would be
inconvenient any longer to delay striking this blow. (Hear,
hear.) But then some hon. gentlemen say, " Oh, you are
supporting Mahomedanism against Christianity." Now that
has nothing to do with.the great question which Europe is
about to settle. (Hear, hear.) In the first place, I contend
—and the argument has been already used, I believe, by the
hon. member for Aylesbury—that however you may wish
that these vast fertile regions, the favoured portion almost
of the earth, might, be ruled by a Christian Government and
filled by a Christian population, in the present state of these
countries the Mahomedan race is the only one which can
keep that country together as one empire, and govern it as
such. The Christian population, as every one who under-
stands the subject, is well aware, is divided into religious
sects, into national divisions, into such minute fragments,—
no one of them sufficiently powerful to rule over the whole,
and no one of them _inclined to submit with tranquillity to
the Government of another—that the Turkish Government
affords the only method by which these great countries can
be kept under one independent head. The real question,
however, is not what you would wish to put in the place of
the Turkish empire, but that which you are determined shall
not be established there—(hear, hear) —not what might, but
what, for the interest of all Europe, ought not to be. (Hear,
hear.) That which = think ought not to be—that which I
hope all Europe will take care shall not be—is the transfer
of these countries to the sceptre of Russia. (Cheers.) That
is what I trust the Powers of Europe have determined shall
never take place. The hon. member for Manchester asks
what are our interests in this war, and he requests me to
explain to him the meaning of the expression, " the balance
of power." Now the hon. member for Manchester and I
differ so much upon almost every question involving great
principles that I am afraid I shall be unable to gratify him
by explaining, what is the meaning of the expression, because
I think that any man of his unquestionable abilities, of his
extensive knowledge, who has arrived at his time of life—(a
laugh),—and has not by his intuitive perception acquired a
correct understanding of what is meant by " the balance of
power," is not likely to be greatly enlightened by my humble
efforts. (Loud laughter.) Why, sir, call it the balance of
power, or what you will, the idea is one familiar to the mind
of man, and which has influenced the conduct of Xll mankind
from the earliest ages. The balance of power means only this
—that a number of weaker States combine together to pre-
vent one strong one from acquiring a power which shall be
be dangerous to their liberties, their independence, and their
freedom of action. (Hear, hear.) It is the doctrine of ooli
preservation—(hear); it is the doctrine of self-defence, with
this simple qualification—that it is combined with sagacity
and with Eforesight,—that you endeavour to prevent an im-
minent danger before it comes thundering at your gates.
(Cheers.) I know that the hon. member is so attached to
his principles that he thinks peace is of all things the best,
and war of all things the worst. I happen to be of opinion
that there are things for which peace may be advantageously
sacrificed, and that there are calamities which nations may
endure still worse than war. (Hear, hear.) This has been
the opinion of men of all ages, whose conduct has been ad-
mired by their contemporaries, and has obtained for them
the approbation of posterity. (Cheers.) The hon. member
for Manchester, however, always reduces everything to a
question of pounds, shillings, and pence. (Loud cheers and
laughter.) I verily believe that if this country were threat-
ened with an immediate invasion—likely to end in its 'con-
quest—the hon. member would sit down with a piece of
paper before him, and put down on one side of the account
the contributions which his Government would require from
him for the defence of the liberties and independence of
his country, and on the other side he would put down
the probable contributions which the general of the in-
vading army might levy upon Manchester—(loud laughter) ;
and if he found, on balancing that account, that it would
be cheaper—(continued laughter)—to be conquered than to be
laid under contribution for defence, he would give his vote
against going to war for the liberties and independence of the
country, rather than bear his share in the expenditure which
it would entail. (Hear, and a laugh.) That may be the hon.
gentleman's opinion, and he has, no doubt, a perfect right to
it, but it is not the general feeling of the country. (Cheers.)
Therefore I look with as much confidence for the vote of this
house and for the support of the country in favour of a policy
which the Government has by necessity been compelled to
adopt as if the very eloquent—and very eloquent certainly it
was—but somewhat hypothetical speech of the hon. gentle-
man had never been uttered. The real question, however,
which we have to consider is, not whether Mussulman is bet-
ter or worse than Christian—it is not whether it is desirable
to hasten more or less those internal reforms which must
sooner or later tako place in the Turkish empire—not that we
have proposed to Turkey a convention containing exactly the
same dictations which we have urged her to reject in the case
of Russia. Nothing of the sort has been done; the question is,
not whether sooner or later these reforms shall take place in
Turkey (for they must inevitably take place), but the question
we have to consider is this—whether Europe is to lie pros-
trate at the feet of one great overwhelming power—(hear)—
whether (me power is to bestride the globe, from north to
south, from the Baltic to the Mediterranean, to dictate to
Germany and to domineer over Turkey, to have the whole of
the rest of Europe at its mercy, to deal with! it as it pleases—
or whether that power shall be taught that there are limits to
the ambition even of a Czar, to the conquests even of a mili-
tary empire of which one may say that the whole territory is
one great camp, and the population one regimental depot ;
that in spite of the power, which the Sovereign may bo able
to sway, in spite of the military resources which he is able to
command, there does exist in Europe a respect for the princi-
ple of national independence, that there does exist in the
Powers of Europe a determination to resist overwhelming en-
croachments in any one power, be that power what it may,
and that we are able, as we are willing, by arms—as resort to
arms has become necessary—to maintain by land and by sea
the liberties of Europe and the independence of nations. (Loud
and continued cheering)

Mr. DISRAELI—Having had the opportunity on a for-
mer occasion of making some reMarks on the papers laid on
the table of the house, I should not have presumed to ad-
dress the house on the present occasion, but for two reasons.
The principal one is that this being a motion for an Address
to the Crown in answer to a message, I thought it would
hardly be consistent with my duty if I had allowed the motion
to pass without some observation on behalf of the gentlemen
among whom I have the honour to sit. I rise to support the
address which the noble lord has moved—(hear)—in the same
spirit which I endeavoured to express, I believe, on the first
night we met. (Hear, hear.) I look upon the power of de-
claring war to be a prerogative of the Crown—as a real pre-
rogative ; and, if her Majesty summons her Parliament and
informs them that she has found it necessary to engage herself
in war, it is not an occasion when we should enter on the policy
or impolicy of the war. It is our duty, undec such circum-
stances, to rally round the throne and to take a proper subse-
quent and constitutional occasion of commenting on the po-
licy which may have led to the war. I know that the ex-
pression of this opinion has subjected gentlemen on this side
of the house to considerable animadversion, and, to my great
surprise, these objections have proceeded from the Treasury
bench. We have been told that we are not open to support
her Majesty, and at the same time to question the policy
which has led to the war. This question has been argued
before in this house ; when Mr. Canning was taunted in a
similar manner by Mr. Sheridan, he refused to allow himself
to be withheld from commenting on the counsels which had
involved the national war, at the same time that he lent his
support to the Government to carry on that war, and I think
that is sufficient apology for the course which we have
thought proper to pursue. There is also another reason
why I have ventured to-night to trouble the house with any
observations. Since I expressed my opinion on a former oc-
casion on the weighty document which detail the conduct of
the Government with regard to the negotiations preceding the
war which were laid on the table at the commencement of the
session, other documents have been added for our consideration,
and I cannot allow these documents to pass without some
brief notice. They have been referred to in the course of the
debate by several hon. members, and more particularly by the
hon. member for Aylesbury, in a speech of eminent ability,
which I thought might have attracted more attention, and a
completer answer than it has as yet received from her Ma-
jesty's Ministers. No doubt there are many circumstances in
these documents and in the observations of the hon. member
which cannot ultimately be passed unnoticed by the Govern-
ment. The hon. gentleman referred without circumlocution
to the fact that there was a discordancy of opinion in the pre-
sent Cabinet with respect to the important policy which now
occupied our attention, and which has led to such vast re-
sults. I am the last person, I am sure, who would in this
house fancifully assume any variance of opinion, in the Cabi-
net. I think there 15 no weapon of 'oPlmition more illogiti"

mate and more unconstitutional than that—or if I might use
the language of the Emperor of Russia—l would say more 'un-
gentlemanlike. (Laughter.) I remember some few years ago,
when the present First Minister of the Crown, with the aid,
as we are informed by the present leader of the House of
Commons, who I am sure is a gentleman that would never
make a statement without due authority, of foreign conspira-
tors, prevailed on the First Lord of the Admiralty, sitting
opposite to me, to impeach, as it were, a Secretary of State,
also sitting opposite to me. I remember I had occasion,
both publicly and privately, to protest against a course which
I thought so unjustified and uprecedented. It was my opi-
nion that there was not the slightest evidence of any diffe-
rence of opinion, so far as the Cabinet was concerned, between
the noble lord the then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
and his colleagues, and that nothing could be more unjust,
unfair, and unparliamentary to make an attack against that
noble lord, as distinct and isolated from his colleagues. No
circumstance had ever transpired, which, for a moment, jus-
tified the belief that the foreign policy of the Government
of the noble lord, the member for London, was not fully ap-
proved of by all the members of the then abinet; and though
I highly disapproved of it, and especially of the insurrec-
tionary mission to Italy, I took the opportunity of stating
in the most distinct manner, that my disapprobation was
disapprobation of the policy, of the Cabinet and not of the
policy of an individual. (Hear, hear.) I stated on that
occasion that no circumstance had transpired authorising
the belief that the then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
and the other members of the Cabinet had any difference of
opinion with respect to foreign policy. But is that the case
at the present moment? The hon. member for Aylesbury
has called attention to the strange contradiction in expression
and conduct which prevails in the present Administration,
and on another occasion I have myself alluded to it. We have
a member of the Government who tells us that the indepen-
dence and integrity of Turkey are facts of the utmost impor-
tance • and we have also other members of the Government
who declare that the independence and integrity of Turkey are
not facts, but phantoms and phrases. (Hear, hear.) We have
a Secretary of State in the other house of Parliament, and of
the most important department, so far as the question of
foreign policy is concerned, telling us that it is the interest
and intention of England to secure for the Christian subjects
of the Porte equal privileges with the Mussulmans ; and we
have the noble lord opposite, the member for London, most
judiciously informing this house to-night that the present Ad-
ministration has no intention to insist on such terms. (Hear,
and laughter.) The war in one house is called a blessing, and
in another place it is denounced as a curse. It is said in one
place that we are about to embark in a war, the future of
which to the most prescient must be involved in obscurity ;
and yet we have the Foreign Minister of the country announc-
ing publicly in the Senate, or rather in a despatch read in the
Senate, that we may succeed in crippling Russia, but that the
irretrievable destruction of Turkey is the most probable of
events. (Hear, and laughter.) I say, then, that it is a fact,
that there has been a difference of opinion in the present
Cabinet on the policy which we ought to pursue; nor is this
weaderrul. There have always been two opinions on that im-
portant subject, which, in common phrase, is called the Eas-
tern question; and each has been maintained by statesmen of
great eminence. There are statesmen who are of opinion that
there is vitality in Turkey ; and that, so far from being exhaust-
ed, it is a country full of resources, which hitherto have been
only imperfectly developed. There are statesmen, and the noble
lord the member for London is one, who believe that it is a
country not only capable of being independent, but absolutely
capable of being progressive. Statesmen of this kind, holding
these opinions, have been of opinion that, with wisdom and
firmness Turkey might form a substantial real barrier to Rus-
sian aggression. (Hear, hear.) Well, there is the other
school, who believe that there is no vitality in Turkey—that
it is decrepit and decaying, that its resources, always imper-
fectly developed perhaps, are now virtually exhausted, and
that it is totally impossible for Turkey long to exist as an in-
dependent, or quasi independent community. Those_ states-
men, not wishing to hand over this rich prey to its powerful
neighbour, have been of opinion that by encouraging the en-
franchisement of the Christian subjects of the Sultan, and by
advancing the civilisation and the rights of those classes, you
might in time prepare a population in Turkey which would
prevent that intermediate state of anarchy which would
otherwise elapse between the fall of a great empire and the
rise of a new Power. These are two opinions which may be
conscientiously entertained by men of very great ability ; but
it is a notorious fact that the present Prime Minister of this
country has never concealed that he was the disciple, or
rather the professor, in this country, of the second class of
opinion. 'He never has pretended to believe in the vitality of
Turkey, or that it could be an independent State, and of
course he could not believe that it could be a progressive one.
He has been called on in the course of his career as a public
man to act when this great Eastern question, as it is called, has
been placed before him for his solution or management. The
year 1829 will not easily be foreotteu, and we have it on
record that Lord Aberdeen, then Secretary of State for Fo-
reign Affairs, under the Duke of Wellington, agreed with the
Russian Government that the Turkish ports of the Mediterra-
nean should be blockaded, and, if that blockade had been
established, Turkey probably could not have maintained her.
self during the first of her two campaigns. I may be told
that the Duke of Wellington was Prime Minister, and respon-
sible; but the fact is known that he repudiated the agreement
of Lord Aberdeen, his Secretary of State, who consented. to
the blockade, and owing to the Duke of Wellington it was
that the blockade was not carried out. I also heard it from
the lips of a most illustrious statesman—and no doubt others
in this house heard it likewise—that Prince Metternich never
would have encouraged Turkey to make those two campaigns
of 1829 if he had not had the moral conviction that the Bri-
tish fleet would have entered the Black Sea ; and wo know that
Lord Aberdeen prevented that. I do not say he did not
act from what he considered his sense of duty. He thought it
no doubt, on the wholee much better to temporise and to
patch up the existence of a state which he considered in a
condition of rapid decay and ultimate dissolution. But if he
be wrong, it must be recollected that he is the statesman who
at the present moment presides over the fortunes of tho coun-
try, when there exists a still more trying exigency, and when
the same materials are in question and the same result at issue.
I must now call attention to that mysterious document, refer-
ring to the year 1844, which no one has hardly referred to,
and which having been laid on the table without explanation
has hardly attracted the attention it deserves. I can assure
the house that it is one of the most important documents
probable ever submitted to Parliament, and I venture to say
that nothing but the unprecedented circumstances that have
noonrrocl, unforeseen and unexpected, which must indeed
have confounded any Cabinet when made known, could have
brought this document under the consideration of the House
of Commons. This document is dated 1844, and called " The
Memorandum of Count Nesselrode." Ten years have elapsed
before that is made known,to the House of Commons. The
document, in the whole teuour of its expressions, alludes to
an agreement, and is composed in a spirit which assumes that
there is an agreement entered into between the then Govern-
ment of England and the Emperor of Russia, during his visit
to this country. Now what are the points on which this
agreement is founded ? The first point is neither more nor
less than the proposition of the partition of the Turkish em-
pire made by the Emperor of Russia to the English Govern-
inept. It is not proposed to enter upon the partition to-day
or to-morrow ; but the very fact that the suggestion is made,
and the subject dwelt on, shows that the time is not consi-
dered far distant for the partition. The very first point of
agreement is that there should be a partition, when it be-
came necessary, of the Turkish empire ; and how is that to
be effected ? By Great Britain, Russia, and Austria alone.
This document is an a,greement between Great Britain,
Russia, and Austria, with the studied and expressly inten-
tional omission of France. The noble lord who has just
addressed the house, speaking' on a subject of which he is
a complete master, and giving the house all the reasons which
have led to the present lamentable state of affairs, tells us that
ho has no doubt that the catastrophe has been hastened by
the circumstance of the Emperor of Russia having an idea
that the good feeling which now exists between England and
France would not be of long duration. When the present
Government came into office, he knew that the noble lord at
tho head of it had in 1844 entered into an agreement for the
ulnativmeatyeoupartnoittihoinnsofeTluserk, ehyowweitvheoru:texthceepktnotwhils exclusion ofedge of France.
France ? You have another point intimately connected with
the subject of the present discussion. What is the agreement
of 1844? What does ;the Emperor of Russia propose, and
what does the British Government agree to ? The Eineeror
of Russia states that Turkey is not yet ready for partition,
but that the Turkish Government have a habit of endeavour-
ing to escape from the performance of their engagements under
treaties, but that, if those Powers to whom they were under
engagements endeavoured to compel a performance of them,
there was always a degree of jealousy exhibited by the other
Powers, and that, therefore, it would be wise to agree that,
if any Power to which the Turkish Government were under
engagements should insist upon their fulfilling that engage-
giana—that is to
ment, no other Power should interfere. That is Weed to by
my Lord Aberdeen, but is there nothing more The Em-
peror goes on to state that it is of importance to vindicate
the rights of the Christian' subjects of the Porte. ,Well, sir,
what does this amount to ? It amounts to this—that Russia
has entered into an engagement with En
say, with the present Prime Minister of England—first, that
when the proper time arrives there shall be a partition of
Turkey, that partition to be effected by England, Russia,
and Austria, without the interference of France ; secondly,
that the Emperor of Russia may, at any time he thinks fit,
interfere with the Government of Turkey under pretence of
engagements under treaties, and that no great Power
like England or Austria is to question bun as to his
proceedings ; and, thirdly, to give him a further Pretext
the
for interfering, he is to be allowed to vindicate right
of the Christian subjects of the Porte. Then I°l2 are told
that this document is not an agreement—tha
t rt Is only
a memorandum of Count Nesseirode's. This document,
which was never heard of till the St. Petersburg Gazette
mentioned it, is certainly not signed by Lord Aberdeen ; it
is not a convention ; it is not a protocol ; it is,
intact, merely
an understanding between two gentlemen. (Hear, hear, and
laughter) —and these two gentlemen arc old friends. (Hear,
hear.) We have the sort of instrument the Emperor of Russia
prefers employing, for we have had evidence
on that subject;
but let the house ask if there be any one with courage suffi-
cient to declare that this document was not an agreement be-
tween two gentlemen. What was the answer given when this
memorandum was sent from St. Petersburg? The English
Minister was waited upon by the Russian Ambassador, who
gives him, with great pomp and ceremoney, this document,
which is in effect an agreement between the present Prime
Minister of England and the Russian Government. (Hear,
hear.) I understand that we arc to be told that there was no
agreement; but what are the facts of the case? A Minister
of the Crown received a document; he left that document to
his successor invested with every circumstance which might
cause it to be considered one of the great State secrets. That
Minister does not consider himself bound by that document
now; but I ask him, did he at that time consider himself
bound to answer it ? Did that minister write and say,
have received a memorandum which affects to be an agree-
ment into which I have entered, and which refers to certain
conversations which are alleged to have taken place. I have
entered into no agreement of any such character, and no such
converstations have ever taken place, and on a point of such
magnitude as the the partition of an empire there ought to be
no mistake, and therefore I send this memorandum to state
that no such conversations as are referred to in thememoran-
dum sent to me ever took place ?" If this document be only
a memorandum, where, I ask, is the answer to Count Nes-
selrodc ? As I iave never heard of any answer, I am bound
to believe that no answer was ever sent, but I am forced to
believe that this document was accepted in the same spirit in
which it was offered, and I look upon it as an agreement be-
tween the two Governments in the year 1844. This agreement
was, as I have already stated, an agreement which provided
for the ultimate partition of Turkey, which tended to render
justifiable interference in the affairs of Turkey, which allowed
unchallenged, unquestioned interference, either on a pretence
of engagement under treaty or of vindicating the rights of the
Christian subjects with the prerogative of the Sultan. Let us
now consider whether this document of 1844 is not mate-
rially affecting the present position of affairs ; but first I
should wish to notice the observations of the noble lord, who,
I thought, put the, whole question as regarded the personal
intentions of the Emperor of Russia very fairly, and also as
regarded the policy of his country, and I think that conside-
rable misapprehension exists upon that subject. I think
that nothing could be more extravagant than that England
should go to war because the people are taught to think that
any foreign potentate has not behaved with sufficient open-
ness to this country, or because the policy of any foreign
Power may show a spirit of aggression ; these are not causes
for which the country should be called upon to stake the
blood end treasure which we are now called • upon to stake.
With reference to the personal conduct of the Emperor, I

can only say that, having read these secret and confidential
deSpitches, I feel it my duty to state that I entirely acquit
the Emperor of anything like duplicity. The Emperor in-
' forms us not only of his future plans, but also of his present
intentions, and, indeed, I should say that a very remarkable
frankness is the characteristic of his correspondence. When
letters are published IA this manner, there may, .of course, be
details calculated to convey an unfavourable opinion of the
writer, aud I do not think that any gentleman in this house
would like his confidential correspondence to be suddenly
published and his character gauged and ascertained by the
expressions which might appear in such correspondence.
With regard to the desire of aggrandizement on the part of
Russia, there exists a little too much prejudice against
Russia on that account, and it is pretended that Russia is
animated by an extraordinary and immoral propensity for
increase of territory. I don't think that it becomes any great
European Power to bring any such charge against Russia. I
don't understand how France can come into court with a
clear conscience and bring such a charge that Russia from a
desire for territorial aggrandizement has seized two provinces
of the Turkish empire, when France herself has seized the
most considerable province of Turkey—Algiers. I don't
think that England, remembering the Indian wars, and the
recent occurrences in Burmah, can bring such a charge ; nor
would it even become the United Statee of America to
bring such a charge, considering that they have recently
absorbed Texas. Why we oppose the policy of Russia is
because we believe that, if Russia obtained possession of Con-
stantinople, she would exercise such a preponderance
over European politics as to be fatal to the civilization
of Europe and injurious to the interests of this country. The
class of politieians represented by the noble lord, who believe
that there is still more vitality in Turkey, can reasonably talk
of the independeneb and integrity of Turkey ; but that other
class of politicians represented by the Minister to whom the
hon. member for Aylesbury has referred, and whose position
I have illustrated by the document of 1844,—that is a class of
politicians of whom I cannot conceive how any one of them
can with any confidence come forward and ask us to support
them in a struggle to maintain the independence of a country
which they believe incapable of remaining independent. You
are placed in the position you now Occupy by a divided Cabi- •
net representing discordant opinions. We know the opinions
of that portion of the Cabinet which Lord Aberdeen represents
by his Servian policy in 1842. We have it, too in this docu-
ment of 1844. And now I ask the house to consider how
that notorious policy of the Prime Minister has acted upon
the present position of the, country. I am bound to say, that
after the fall of Sir Robert Peel, when the noble lord the mem-
ber for London was Prime Minister, there' was no trouble
about any. plans for the partition of Turkey. (Hear, hear.)
When Lord Derby acceded to office no plans for the partition
of Turkey were suggested, although there were some conver-
sations upon other matters. which were received in a manner
which prevented any repetition of the subject. It was so
notorious that it was the determination of the Late .Govern-
ment, as I hope it is of the present, to maintain a cordial un-
derstanding with France, that these schemes of partition
slept. (Hear, hear.) It was settled in 1844 that the Minis-
try then in power would be of 20 years' duration, and the
Emperor of Russia believed the policy of Catherine was about
to be fulfilled. That Ministry fell sooner than was antici-
pated, and there appeared no prospect of the fulfilment of
that policy. Within 48 hours of the retirement of Lord
Derby news was unexpectedly received that Lord Aberdeen
was Prime Minister. The Emperor, with unbefitting haste
and undignified restlessness, immediately sent for the British
Ambassador and referred to the position which he had occu-
pied in 1844. (Hear, hear.[ The circumstances under which
Lord Aberdeen acceded to office were rather remarkable.
The Ministry of Lord Derby was of short duration, for
there was a patriotic feeling among different sections of
the house, and men' ' who had sympathy together
and no party feeling came to the determination
to secure peace, and measures of Parliamentary reform, and
other blessings of that character. (Laughter.) No time was
to be lost, and it was perfectly clear that by turning us out
and making Lord Aberdeen Prime Minister large measures
upon those subjects alone could be procured and peace alone
could be maintained. (Cheers from the Opposition.) The
Emperor of Russia then reverted to his old plans. (Hear,
hear.) It is said that the Emperor has been guilty of dupli-
city, and exception is taken on the subject of the mission of '
Prince Menschikoff; but what do I find in the secret de-
spatches on that shbject—in those despatches which range '
over barely the first three months of the year ? In the first '
place, propositions are made for the partition of Turkey in
the same spirit as the memorandum of 1844; but with regard
to the mission of Prince Menschikoff, the Emperor stated that
he was at Constantinople to obtain the consent of the Turkish
Government to certain proposals, and that, if the Porte con-
tinued to refuSe its consent, he was determined to employ
foree. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for Aylesbury has
given the house so accurate a narrative of all that has taken
place that I need only refer to those strange events to com-
plete 'my argu t, not to fill up my picture. A communi-
cation on the sun ect was made to the noble lord the member
for the City, at t at time Secretary for Foreign Affairs. The
noble lord is one of those who have faith in the vitality of
Turkey—that is to say, he is a professor of British, not Rus-
sian politics; but the noble lord took the seals of office with-
out any serious intention of long retaining them. The noble
lord, however, wrote a despatch upon the subject, some por-
tions of which I am bound to say I should hate thought
would have been referred to by the noble lord in his opening
statement this evening. This is what may be called an his-
torical despatch. In it the noble lord refers to the Succession
War and the decease of the dynasty of Medici. I dare say
the Emperor of Russia had heard of the Succession War, but
of the last of the Medici it was probable he would derive his
knowledge only from those poetic historians whom the noble
lord once figured among. (A. laugh.) But when the noble ,
lord referred to tho Succession War, as ho often does, and
always with vigour and accuracy, and when he adorned his
despatch with the felicitous recollection of the last of the
Medici, I could not help wondering why, as the noble lord
wished to make an impression on the mind of the
Emperor of Russia, he did not resort to an illustration which
would have been far more apposite and instructive. The two
instance to which he referred have no analogy to the parti-
tion of Turkey. They arc both cases of the'possiblo dismem-
berment of an empire contingent on the extinction of a dy-
nasty. This is not the case here. The Sultan is alive; he is
a young man, and has a great many wives and a great many
children. (Laughter.) Suppose the noble lord had said,
" There is one case of an instructive-character to which I
will venture to refer at this perplexing moment. If your
Majesty recollects what has occurred to England, to Europe,
and even to Russia in particidar, from the partition 'of
Poland, you may perhaps see cause to hesitate before you
embark in an undertaking of a similar nature." But of
Poland the noble lord said not a word. (Hear, hear.) The
noble lord said in the same despatch that there was not suffi-
cient evidence to prove that the Sultan was not able to
govern his dominions; but the noble lord's successors soon
took especial care that, as far as depended upon the iistruc-
tions which he sent to our ambassador at Constantinople,
the Sultan should not be able to govern his dominions.
There was, however, one passage in the noble lord's despatch
to Sir H. Seymour, which excited my astonishment. The
passage to which I allude is this,—
" The more the Turkish Government adopts the rules of
impartial law and equal administration, the less will the
Emperor of Russia find it necessary to apply that exceptional
protection which his Imperial Majesty has found so burden-
some and inconvenient, though no doubt prescribed by duty
and sanctioned by treaty." .
These are remarkable words. (Hear, hear.) The Emperor is
told that he has not only a right but a duty to perform.
(Hear.) A man may hesitate to enforce a right. Some men
have a right of free-warren ; but no wise man in the present
day would exercise it. • A duty, however, a man is bound to
perform. And it is stated to be a duty beyond doubt.
(Hear, hear.) This is a remarkable admission. (Hear,
hoar.) I want to knoW where the treaties are 'which sanc-
tion the right and prescribe the duty ? The noble lord
is a dexterous hand at a schedule. No .statesman has
ever placed more schedules on the table of the house than
he has, and if he would only add more to his perform-
ances in that way by a giving us a schedule of the
treaties which prescribe the Emperor of Russia's duty,
and sanction his right to a protectorate over the sultan's
Christian subjects, I think it would be ono of the most in,
structive diplomatic documents which could be submitted to
our consideration. I read to-day, in one of those organs that
sometimes do an injury to statesmen by vindicating their con-
duct and defending their characters (laughter), that the pro-
tectorate referred to by the noble lord was applicable only to
Moldavia and. Wallachia. Unfortunately for this argument,
the noble lord's observation was an answer to one made by
the Emperor of Russia. The Emperor said :
" In that empire (Turkey) there are several millions of
Christians whose interests I am called upon to watch over
(surveiller), while the right of doing so is secured to me by
treaty. I may truly say that I made a moderate and sparing
use of my right, and I will freely confess that it is one which
is attended with obligations occasionally very inconvenient ;
but I cannot recede from the discharge of a distinct duty.
Our religion, as established in this country, came to us from
the East, and there are feelings, as well as obligations, which
never must be lost sight of."
This is what we are going to war about. We are not going
to war to insure the evacuation of the principalities ; for the
Emperor had declared twenty times over that he was ready to
evacuate them if Turkey would only give him the protecto-
rate he required over her Christian subjects, When we aro
told that every modification of falsehood had been exhausted
by Russia —when the passions of the people are excited in be-
half of a war, the cause of which is still obscure, and its cod
even darker, I must ask whether there is any foundation for
these statements ? What did the charge of fraud apply to ?
You cannot say that the Emperor of Russia is guilty of fraud
when he pretends to be the protector of the Christian popu-
lation in Turkey. I am of opinion that the Emperor has not
the least right to assume such a protectorate under the treaty
of Kainardji or any other; and, on a former occasion, I en-
deavoured to satisfy the house that a more monstrous claim
could not be set up. But what does the Emperor of Russia
care for my opinion ? He has the opinion in his favour of the
noble lord —a Minister of the Crown, with whom he holds
secret and confidential correspondence, and on whose advice
the Queen of England declares war against All the Russias.
(Cheers and laughter.) The Emperor has your despatch, in
which you 'tell him that to exercise a protectorate over
millions of the Christian subjects of the Porte is his right
and his duty, and therefore I do not wonder that his Majesty
felt a little nettled when he found the very Minister who made
this frank and complete admission was the first person in the
British House of Commons to denounce his claim as fraudu-
lent. (Cheers.) Notwithstanding this unfortunate paragraph
in the noble lord's despatch, I agree with the hon. member for
Aylesbury in thinking that the tone in which that document
was written contrasts favourably with that employed by his
succee:sor. It is evident that there has been in the Cabinet a
conflict between British sentiment and Russian sentiment,
and that this has brought us into the position iu which we
now are placed. I say that the despatches show that the
question of the partition of Turkey was entirely set aside by
the Emperor himself at an early period of the negotiations.
Now, having pointed out to you the agreement of 1844, and
having shown you how the 'Emperor of Russia constantly
referred to this agreement withUn almost fatal frankness, I
ask the Government how they acted with regard to the views
and policy of the Emperor? In doing so, I entirely acquit
the noble lord the member for London of agreeing with or
intending to countenance the political and territorial aggres-
sion of Russia, but I do not in the same way hold harmless
the successor of the noble lord, by whom, I consider, a to-
tally different line of policy was pursued. If the proper
line of policy had been pursued in these negotiations and cor-
respondence with Russia, in the face of all these despatches
now before the house, I fearlessly ask, whether this war might
not have been prevented ? (Hear, hear.) There are, in fact,
Sir, two systems of policy,' which seem to have been adopted
advocatedob
of which
Ci tvern
maymb
ye Government in reference to the Eastern
ytheef
ona
sqlo.cubatrehllesleptee iedrocaeni
earl
et:;:ttßhtohefei the first
shLfisa
neoiraansdndt.
tbhee
.ncalledob le
lord ' British
th the
pol i
member c policy,"
Lon-
don and the noble lord the Secretary of State for the Home
Department, and which embody the opinion that Turkey. ,
should be independent and should be supported in her resist-
ancepo
policy,"
yt o, , ,
as Russia;ad vo c theate advocated
andecon
supported
systempport emayd b
of her Majesty's Government, and which always presupposes
that Turkey, as a nation, is exhausted, and which contem-
plates with serenity the occupation of that country by the
Russians. (" No, no !" and cheers.) I repeat again, that the
First Minister of the Crown has, by all his actions, proved him-
self a supporter of this Russian policy. He proved it in 1844,
and he has proved it ever since, showing in every way that
i he could that he was favourable to a limited partition of the
Ottoman empire, and the immediate interference of Russia
' with that country. (Hear.) Why did not the Emperor of
Russia endeavour to press his views upon the English Minis.

• try when Lard Derby was head of the Administration? Be-
cause he dare not. Why did he lose not a moment in doing
so, when Lord Aberdeen came into office 7 Simply because
he knew that Lord Aberdeen was favourable to his views, and
would lend himself to carry out the proposal of 1844, which
he has done, and thus eventually conducted this country to
the present war. (Cheers.) Now, I ask what ought to have
been the conduct of the Ministry ; and, in considering this
question, I would remind the house that it is quite evident
the Emperor of Russia placed all his hope on a quarrel
between this country and France. and expressly stated, in
this secret correspondence, that 'the partition of the Otto-
man empire was to take place without the concurrence or
consent of France. Between Lord Derby's Administration
and France the Emperor of Russia well knew that the most
cordial understanding existed, and therefore, that while Lord
Derby was in office, his (the Emperor of Russia) machinations
would be useless ; but the moment Lord Aberdeen came in,
the Emperor sent at once for Sir Hamilton Seymour, finding
that in the First Minister of the Crown he had got hold of the
very man who had previously and constantly agreed to the
partition of Turkey. (Hear.) But we are told that the Em-
peror of Russia thought there was a change of views in the
two countries ' - and unhappily there was so upon the retire-
ment of Lord Derby and the accession of Lord Aberdeen.
(Hear, and a laugh.) The policy that the Government ought
to have adopted was to have distinctly told the Emperor of
Russia that we would not be trifled with - that we knew of
his plan, matured with great judgment and great skill ; that
we knew he counted on the differences which might
arise between this country and France, as he him-
self told Sir Hamilton Seymour; that there had been great
changes, however, since the year 1844 ; that therq was a
great alteration of opinion with reference to Turkey; that
we could not sanction his plans in connexion with that em-
pire ; and that he must dismiss his favourite notions regard-
ing the same, which we could not in any way countenance or
submit to. (Hear.) We ought to have told him more, and
clearly to have placed before him the relation which subsisted
between England and France, which was not merely dynas-
tic or familiar, but based upon mutual understanding and
good faith ;
,and that, in a matter of this kind, the first
Power we should call to our consultation would be
France, in her character of our neighbour and ally. (Cheers.)
Could any one doubt for a moment that, if we had done this,
our country and Europe would now be in the position that
it was? (Hear, hear.) No, it would not; and I firmly,
truly, and conscientiously believe that this war has been
brought about by one man, and that man holding the respon-
sible position of the First Minister of the Crown, by whose
vacillation and by whose policy, feeble and irresolute as it
has been, this dreadful calamity has been forced upon us.
(Loud Opposition cheers.) This, sir, is my opinion, and I
feel little doubt that before long it will be the general and
unanimous opinion os all England. (Cheers.)

Lord J. RUSSELL—I do not intend to occupy much of
the time of the house in rising to reply to some of the ob-
servations of the right hon. gentleman who has last spoken,
and with whose speech I must confess myself to be some-
what surprised—not at the cleverness with which it is dis-
tinguished, or the bitterness with which it is disfigured—
(hear, hear)—but at the peculiar character of the objections
which the right hon. gentlemen had raised. I cannot
imagine upon what principle it is that the right hon.
gentleman, who for so long a time has been ac-
customed
to take so great an interest in the welfare
of Turkey, and so much trouble to prevent that country
being undermined by Russian influence, should, upon an
occasion when the house is asked whether they will render
an active, earnest, and effectual support to Turkey, go out
of his way to leave the question for the purpose of attack-
ing the Ministry. (Hear, hear.) The first part of the right
hon. gentleman's speech chiefly referred to The Times news-
paper of last year, and the right hon. gentleman attempted
to show that the writers in The Times encouraged by their
advocacy the policy of Russia, with which, according to the
right hon. gentleman, they seemed to agree. If the right
gentleman had shown that the Times newspaper agreed with
the Government in these matters, it might have been pre-
sumed that the right hon. gentleman meant to affirm that
there was some understanding between the Government and
that paper ; but, as he has stated it, he has merely made out
a case to show that the Times newspaper advocated, in his
opinion, the policy of Russia, which policy, according to his
own admission, he gives me the full credit of having opposed
(cheers and laughter); and upon these premises he arrives
at the somewhat illogical conclusion that the Times and the
Government were leagued and agreed together. (Hear, hear.)
I really cannot think what the right hon. gentleman can
mean, unless it be to extend those inquiries of which we
have had some experience lately, for the purpose of en-
deavouring, and certainly not uniformly with success, to
ascertain from editors and managers of newspapers upon
what materials they form their opinions—(hear, hear),—and
the names of the writers who contribute to their columns.
(Cheers and laughter.) The right hon. gentleman has asserted
that my noble friend the Secretary for Foreign Affairs has
differed from me upon the question of Russian policy ; but I
can assure the right hon. gentleman that he is mistaken in his
supposition, inasmuch as, however different the means may
have been by which we have arrived at our conclusions, such
conclusions have been precisely the same—namely, by every
fair and honourable means to repel the aggressions of the
Emperor of Russia. (Loud cheers.) The right hon. gentle-
man seems much distressed that the understanding between
the Emperor of Russia and some of her Majesty's advisers
has not been carried on in so gentlemanlike a manner as the
right honourable gentleman approved of. (Laughter.)
And he then proceeds with painful detail and very length-
ened statements—(laughter)—to speak of things which he
says existed in the Administration of 1829 between the Duke
of Wellington and Lord Aberdeen, and ho proceeds to point
out differences of a similar kind which he believes to exist
among members of the present Administration and endea-
vours to charge. on the head of that Administration faults for
which his colleagues are responsible equally with himself.
Now, all I shall say is, that the theory of the right hon. gen-
tleman certainly differs very widely from his practice.
(Laughter.) The right hon. gentleman has made a criticism
with respect to the memorandum of 1844, and with respect
to the secret correspondence which has lately been laid before
the house, and in making that criticism he has not only
taken parts of sentences, totally separating them from other
parts of the sentences, but he misstates the whole foundation
of that memorandum, and of the correspondence ; because
the proposal of the Emperer of Russia is not to this effect :
" Turkey is a weak Power ; she cannot maintain herself ; let
us ask her to give up her provinces ; I will insist on having
Bulgaria—do you insist on Egypt, and we will share those ter-
ritories between us." That was the manner of the partition of
Poland—the combined Powers insisted on making demands
on Poland that destroyed her territory and subverted her
independence; but the proposal of the Emperor of Russia
was not of that kind ; therefore any reference on my part to
the partition of Poland would have been a gratuitous imper-
tinence, and would have been considered by the Emperor of
Russia and his 'Government as having no application whatever
to the proposel he had made. (Hear.) I think it is fair, at
least, to suppose that the Emperor of Russia might well ima-
gine, as many persons, not in Russia alone, but in various
countries in Europe did, that Turkey is a Power that cannot
very well maintain itself, and that the hour of its dissolution
may be near at hand. (Hear, hear.) I may suppose that the
Emperor of Russia may think that it would be very injurious
to his empire, and very injurious to his policy, if, while he is
respecting the•independence and integrity of Turkey, Eng-
land and France should agree on what is to be the ultimate
fate of the Turkish territories. -If he could take that suppo-
sition—a natural supposition enough—he would then arrive
easily at the conviction stated in the first sentence of the
memorandum of 1843. The right hon. gentleman says that
memorandum has for it whole object the partition of Turkey,
and shows that this is a ruling idea in the Emperor's mind.
Now, what is the first sentence of that memorandum ?
" Russia and England are mutually penetrated with the
conviction that it is for their common interest that the Otto-
man Porte should maintain itself in the state of independence
and of territorial possession which at present constitute that
empire, as that political combination is the one which is most
compatible with the general interest of the maintenance of
peace."

That is the first sentence of the memorandum which I have
been obliged to read, because the right hon. gentleman has
endeavoured to convey to the house a false notion of its
contents. (Hear, hear.) The memorandum goes on to say
that it is desirable, lest the dissolution of Turkey should come
suddenly, that there should be an agreement on the subject,
and the Emperor proposes that England and Russia should so
far understand each other as to recognise the general measures
to be adopted. (Hear.) Now, was Lord Aberdeen satisfied
with accepting that memorandum ? My belief is, that Lord
Aberdeen lost no time in communicating the substance of
the Emperor's communication to the Government of France.
(Hear, hear.) And, so far from being on bad terms with the
Government of France, that was the period when the term
" a cordial understanding" with France was first employed—
the entente cordiale which afterwards marked the relations
that existed between the Government of Sir R. Peel and the
Government of France. (Hear.) So far does the right hon.
gentleman wander from the facts of the case as they actually
exist. (Hear.) Then the right hon. gentleman speaks of the
correspondence that took place in a despatch from myself.
He says it was evidently my object, in not agreeing to the
proposition which was made, that I should give occupation
to'tho Emperor of Russia—that I should point out to him an
employment in which he should spend his time in future, and
that employment was to be the protection of the Greek sub-
jects of the Sultan. (Hear.) Now, the right hon. gentleman
made that representation by dint of leaving out part of a sen-
tence. The sentence which I used, after stating that the Sul-
tan should be advised to treat his, Christian subjects in con-
formity with the principles of equity and religious free-
dom, was—" The more the Turkish Government adopts the
rules of impartial law and equal administration, the less
will the Emperor of Russia find it necessary to apply that
exceptional protection which his Imperial Majesty has found
so burdensome and inconvenient." So that my object was not
that the Emperor should interfere more, but that he should
find occasion to interfere less. (Hear.) Then, the right hon.
gentleman finds great fault with the end of this sentence as
contained in these words, " though no doubt prescribed by
duty and sanctioned by treaty." Now, I supposed that every
one agreed that the treaty of Kaivardji imposed certain obli-
gations on the Sultan, and, at the same time, imposed
rimwphoyseids
recip-
rocal th a t
obligations ou the Emperor of Russia ,
the hon. member for Aylesbury and his friends wish to get
rid of the obligations of the treaty of Kaivardji? It is be-
cause by that treaty there are stipulations on the part of the
Sultan given to the Emperor of Russia by which he is to give
exceptional protection to the Greek subjects of the Sultan.
Would any one believe that it would be consistent with the
conduct of the Emperor of Russia to hear of Christian villages
being destroyed by the irregular troops of the Sultan, being,
as I have shown, authorized by the Sultan himself by treaty,
and not think himself bound to remonstrate with the Sultan
with respect to such things being allowed ? (Hear, hear.)
Therefore, I will say no more than that it was always under- ;
stood that by the treaty of Kaivardji, in exceptional cases,
exceptional protection was given by the Emperor. (Hear,
hear.) With resiiect to the general observations of the right
hon. gentleman as to the policy that has been pursued, I will
only say that, whatever differences of opinion there may be
as to Turkish institutions, and the administration of law in
Turkey with respect to Russia, there is no difference of opinion
at all, and that we are determined to allow no weakness on
the part of Turkey to contribute to the aggrandisement of
Russia—(hear, hear)—and that is the essential point of this
question. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman seems to
find fault with the progress of the negotiations. Far be it
from me to blame him or any member of this house for exer-
cising the right which they have to find fault with any part
of the conduct of Government. I believe, however,
that this country, in general, would have blamed
us if we had at the commencement of these transac-
tions declared that there was no resource but wa .
(Hear, hear.) If we had entered into war before we ha d
exhausted all the means of negotiation, I believe this count ry
would have blamed us for such conduct. (Hear, hear.) Ike-
member saying last year that I thought we ought not to make
war till we had exhausted every endeavour to maintain peace
—that the only preparation for war by which we could main-
tain the rights and immunities of the people of this country
would be to show that we had made every endeavour—pro-
tracted and long-continued as it might be—to come to a
pacific conclusion. (Hear, hear.) The Government may meet
with the criticism of ie right hon. gentleman—they may
meet with the censure of the hon. member for Aylesbury ;
but they believe this, that if either the right hon. gentleman
or the hen, member for Aylesbury will produce a resolution