The Sun.
London, England, 1854-03-14 00:00:00

of the comments which have been made upon it. (Hear.)
I can say nothing more about it, except again to repeat
that I am entirely ignorant cf the source whence the

I comments alluded to arose, nor can I form an opinion
or conjecture on the matter, except this—that I have
been given to understand that some clerk in the Foreign-
office, but who is not a clerk there now, and who was
introduced, by the by, by the noble earl opposite
(Malmesbury), had scandalously betrayed his duties by
revealing the contents of some papers. (Hear, hear,
and a laugh.) However, I know not whether it is
through that source or not that this correspondence has
been made public, and on which the comments are based
to which the noble earl has attached so much import.
ance. All I can say is, that I have not, directly or in-
directly, the slightest knowledge personally of the mat-
ter. The first question, then, which the noble earl has
asked, I have already not only answered, but stated
that it was the intention of the Government, without
having been asked, to do what he has requested.
(Hear.) With respect to the other matter to which the
noble earl referred, it is perfectly true that when his
Imperial Majesty was in this country, several Commtl-
nications—verbal communications—took place between
him and the late Duke of Wellington. lam not
sure whether any took place with the late Sir R. Peel
or not ; but, with respect to the Duke of Wellington
and myself, there is no doubt that communica-
tions did take place as to the state of affairs in the
East, and the views and prospects which might be enter-
tained on this subject. It was, I think, shortly after his
Imperial Majesty's visit to this country—indeed I am
not sure that it was not about the same time—that
Count Nesselrode came here and embodied those views
of the Emperor, and the conversations that had taken
place, in a memorandum, which was afterwards reduced
to writing. I have not seen that document for the last

ten years—from the time when it was written, and pro-
bably the noble earl knows more about it than I do. In
these circumstances I am not prepared to say at this
moment whether it may be fit or not to lay it on the
table, but I shall ascertain. I do not wish to speak
about a document I have not seen for so long a period ;
I may say, however, that I think it is not likely to have
much reference to present circumstances, or that it re-
fers to the dispute about the holy places—to the mission
of Prince Menschikoff—to the Vienna note—or, indeed,
to anything involved in the recent discussions ; and
therefore I do not think it is at all likely to be of any
service at this moment ; but on that point I reserve
myself till I have had an opportunity of seeing and con-
sidering the document. (Hear, hear.)
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH—My noble friend
states that, during the year 1844 communications took
place between the Emperor of Russia and the Duke of
Wellington, but that he is not sure whether any such
communications took place with Sir R. Peel. Now, lam
able to state that there were communications with Sir
R. Peel, for my right hon. friend communicated to me
one point on which the Emperor of Russia had expressed
a very clear opinion, and that was with reference to Tur-
key. I understood my noble friend to say that he
knew nothing whatever of the document which has been
read as coming from St. Petersburg. If that be the
case, I would suggest whether he is not premature in
promising to lay these papers on the table of the house?
I think this would better be delayed till he has seen a
copy of the St. Petersoburg Gazette containing the docu-
ment ; for, as yet, there is no official or certain informa-
tion that it is genuine.
The Earl of ABERDEEN was understood to say he
had no doubt of the authenticity of the document.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH had understood his
noble friend to say that he knew nothing about it till he
saw it in the Times newspaper ; but that was not a suf-
ficient authority.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE—I hope that all
the conversations which have been carried on with the
Emperor of Russia by Sir H. Seymour on this subject
will be laid on your lordships' table— (hear)—because,
undoubtedly, his Imperial Majesty has no right whatever
to select one particular part of those conversations and
make them matters of communication intended for this
house and the Government, and to debar her Majesty's
Government from having the full advantage that an
entire communicati•n would give them. I say this,
because it has been current at St. Petersburg, and ru-
mours have been current in the diplomatic and other
well informed circles throughout Europe, that in that
conversation a most important communication im-
portant in itself and important also as regards the con-
duct of the Government and of Parliament, if it should
turn out correct—took place, in which the Emperor of
Russia expressed his determination to lose his last
soldier, and spend the last rouble in his treasury,
sooner than give up his claims on Turkey. (Hear,
hear.) I think the memorandum given by Count
Nesselrode to the Ministers of this country in 1844, as
stating the views of the Emperor and his Government on
the then condition of Turkey, it is of vast importance for
us to have. (Hear.) We have a full right to know
what was the view then entertained by the Emperor,
because it is evident that it must bear most strongly on
the present circumstances which have rendered war so
imminent. (Hear.) I trust that we shall have all the
conversations with the noble earl, who was then Secre-
tary of State for Foreign Affairs, in some shape or other
also before us. (Hear.) It appears impossible we should
not, for I think it necessary, for the credit of our Go-
vernment, that we should be able to show exactly what
were the communications made to her Majesty's Minis-
ters, what was the answer, and what was the language
held in 1844, as well as what was the language held by
Russia, so as to give a really conclusive answer to the
manifesto now published. (Hear, hear.) It is essential
that we should know what language has been held ; for,
though this is the first time we have had itl)ut forward
in this way, it has been rumoured throughout the whole
continent that language very different from that we have
recently taken was held formerly by Ministers of this
country, and, among others, by the noble earl who
was then Secretary for Foreign Affairs. (Hear.) It is
well to have documentary proof that this is not true,
and that we should be able to show that we have pre-
served our consistency on this most important and mo-
mentous question. (Hear.)

The Earl of MA LMESI3URY—Even if I had never
held the seals of the Foreign-office, I should on all occa-
sions of this kind have endeavoured so to express myself as
to avoid the possibility of embarrassing those who are
charged with the administration of foreign affairs .With re-
ference to the present question, I certainly should not have
pressed her Majesty's Government to produce this cor-
respondence, and I think that, under the circumstances,
they were warranted in abstaining from laying it before
the house. I will say more than that.' I think the great
advantages we enjoy from living under a constitutional
Government at a period like this are somewhat abated
by the disadvantages which belong to our position, with
reference to public affairs, as compared with a Govern-
ment entirely despotic. I know that a Government
which is entirely despotic—a Government resting on the
will of one man—can carry on warlike operations with
much more secresy and much more rapidity, and, there-
fore, with more advantage, than one which has to con-
sult the wishes of two houses of Parliament. Feeling
this most strongly, I abstain as much as my duty per-
mits me to do from any remarks relative to the great
questions and subjects now agitating the country that
could possibly be considered factious on my part, or on
the part of my noble friends with whom I have the
honour to act. (Hear.) My lords, I expect, therefore,
on the other side—and I must say I have always been
met in these discussions in the same spirit by the noble
lord now at the Foreign-office—l might have expected
that I should have been met with any other feelings ra-
ther than those of hostility, and, let me say, with an ex-
pression of rudeness from the other side. (Hear.) The
noble earl (Aberdeen) has defended himself from the
charge that, whether from indiscretion, or from any
other cause, he was connected with, or under the
suspicion f being connected with the Times news-
paper, and that either directly or indirectly, he
had nothing to do with putting them in possession of
confidential communications. The noble earl has said
that these confidential communications have not been
given purposely by any member of the Government, or
knowingly by them, but that they had been revealed to
the Times. ("No, no ?") I understood the noble earl to
say that the Times had obtained this information from
—(" No, no," from Lord Aberdeen.) Then what did
the noble earl say ? Will the noble earl inform the house
what his statement was ? The noble earl said that the
only way in which he could account for the knowledge
which the Times possessed of transactions known only
to the Government as State secrets was, that there had
been at the Foreign-office a clerk who, either from indis-
cretion, or still worse motives, had betrayed those State
secrets ; that that clerk was now no longer a public ser-
vant ; that he had been dismissed in consequence. ("No,
no ; no longer a clerk.") Well—that he was no longer
a clerk • and then, in a tone and manner which nobody
in the house could misunderstand, the noble earl added
that the gentleman had been appointed by me. (Hear,
hear.) From the spirit and manner in which he uttered
it, the noble earl seemed to be sure that such was the
case. (" No, no ?" from the Ministerial bench.) Then,
he had no business to say it. (Hear.) Nothing could
be less consonant with the manners that prevail in this
house, or with the usage of this house, nor does it agree
with the customs which we, as gentlemen, not merely as
peers, observe towards each other, that the noble earl
should in this way have spoken of me as having appointed
a man who has betrayed his trust. I wish to know from
the noble earl who that gentleman is. (Hear, hear.)
And this leads me to a much more serious considera-
tion. Great and important State secrets have been be-
trayed, as the noble earl says, by a public servant. A
public newspaper is made conversant with these secrets
through the treachery of a servant, though the noble
earl does not seem to be sure of it. He will not say
that that is the case, But, my lords, matters have come
to this pass, that it is necessary we should know who it
is that betrays the public secrets—how it is that Cabi-
net secrets have ouzed out and been filtered through the
public offices, and that papers whicie have been refused
to Parliament have found their way into the newspapers,
while the Prime Minister of the country does not know
how or by whom the Government has been betrayed.
(Hear.) My lords, I think first of all I have a right to
ask what is the name of the public servant who has be-
trayed his trust, and whom I am said to have appointed
—(hear)—and, in the next place, I will take into my
serious consideration whether it is not my duty as a
peer and member of Parliament to move that some
searching inquiry shall be made by Parliament, and with
all the powers that Parliament is armed with, to ascer-
tain who it is that betrays public secrets to the news-
papers, who this person is that has not yet been dis-
covered, and who cannot be named by the noble earl.
The Earl of ABERDEEN—The noble earl will ex-
cuse me from answering his question, for I do not know.
(Laughter.) He was a clerk in the Foreign-office, but
is no longer a clerk ; but I did not say he was dismissed.
(Hear.) I said I had heard a rumour that it was
through his instrumentality that this information had
become known, but I did not say he was dismissed, nor
do I know his name. (Hear.
The Earl of DERBY—We have it on the statement
of the noble earl, that it is supposed the secrets of the

Cabinet have been betrayed by a person in a public situa-
tion. It is said that these secrets have been scanda-
lously betrayed by a person appointed by the noble earl
beside me. (Hear, hear.) Now, that person ought
clearly to have been dismissed, and if he is not dismissed
for this violation of duty, the heads of that office have
failed in their duty to the country. Unless, however,
the noble earl was perfectly convinced of the fact—unless
he knew that the person so appointed, as he says, by my
noble friend, had been guilty of that base treachery to
the country, he was not warranted in making the state-
ment he has done ; and, if the noble earl did know,
nothing should have prevented him from stigmatising the
' person who had been so guilty in the face of Parliament
and the country. (Hear, hear.)
Earl GREY looked upon this as a case of very great
importance. It was the first time in Parliament that
he had ever heard of such a case. He confessed, how-
ever, he had seen for some time past, with surprise and
very great regret, the sort of official communications
that had found place in the newspapers, because this was
not the only case. Their lordships would remember
that, about a fortnight ago, the noble earl on the upper
bench asked a question as to what steps were to be taken
with reference tu the Russian fleet coming out of the Baltic,
and how those ships could be stopped in the absence of a
declaration of war. The noble eari at the head of the Go•
vernment thought it consistent with his duty to avoid
givingany explanation in answer. But the next morning
there appeared in the Times newspaper a complete ex-
planation, because they were then informed by the Times
that this difficulty of a declaration of war did not exist
—that a summons had been addressed to Russia to with-
draw her troops from the principalities, and that if that
summons was not attended to it would be equivalent to
a declaration of war. Now, that was a fact of great
importance to know, and the same statement he might
observe had been made by Lord J. Russell in the other
house of Parliament. Now, seeing these official com-
munications in a particular newspaper, and information
of such a peculiarly important character, it was hardly
satisfactory that they should be told by the noble earl
that he bad no knowledge, either directly or indirectly,
as to how these communications were made. He did
not for one moment doubt the statement of the noble
earl, but he thought it important for the honour and
dignity of this country that such a scandalous breach of
faith as they had heard of should not be passed over
without some more serious notice being taken of the
fact. He did not think that an imputation so grave
should have been thrown out on any individual whatever
who was said to be in the Foreign-office, but which not
being fixed on any one individual would bang over the
head of every one in that department, and that too with-
out the imputation being distinctly made or the grounds
of that imputation being given. (Hear, hear.)
The Earl of ELLENI3OROUGH said it had been dis-
tinctly stated, in answer to a question, that the answer
of the Emperor of Russia to the summons given him was
not expected till the 25th of March. Our fleet sailed on
the llth of March, and, as we must wait till we have
received that answer on the 25th of March, our fleet
must have sailed without specific orders. (Hear, hear.)
In the meantime the Russian ships going out of the
Baltic for the purpose of preying on our trade might
pass through Admiral Napier's squadron untouched.
(Hear.) This was a consequence of not attending to
time, which was of all things the most essential in every-
thing connected with war, and he was not surprised
that his noble friend, when he put the question to him
the other night, did not give him any answer, inasmuch
as he could not say what answer it was possible to give
under the circumstances ; he was unable to say whe-
ther the Russian ships should, in the circumstances, be
stopped or not. (Hear, hear.)
Earl FITZWILLIAM was afraid that the explana-
tion which had been given could hardly be called an
explanation. There bad appeared, within the last 48
hours, disclosures of certain things in the newspapers,
and, unless this person against whom suspicion had
been raised had left the office within 48 hours, a suffi-
cient explanation would not be given of the paragraph
of Saturday to which he referred. (Hear.) He begged
to observe on this subject that it disclosed to the world
how mischievously the country submitted to place itself
in the hands of the metropolitan press. It was a very
serious affair, as it showed they were too much under the
dominion of the press. He was very much afraid that her
Majesty's Ministers—that all Ministers, not only those
at present in
.office, but their noble friends opposite—
felt the necessity for courting the public press too
greatly to allow of their being as rigorous as they ought
to be in their e
examination of the means by which the
press obtained its information. In conclusion, he begged
their lordshipS to bear in mind that these secrets could
not have been disclosed by the clerk unless he had been
in office 48 hours before the paragraph alluded to was
published.
The Earl of MALMESBURY—I have not received
at the hands of the noble earl the justice that I expected.
After having made such a charge, I expected, if not for
my sake as responsible for the appointment of the gentle-
men, yet for the sake of those other gentlemen on whom,
as has been said, the charge will rest, that the noble earl
would have named the gentleman to whom he has al-
luded. I appointed two or three clerks, and if the noble
earl conceals the name of the party in this instance, on
them will the stigma of this charge also rest. I beg
your lordships to remember one thing. I have been
told that the appointment was made by me ; now, if the
custom still prevails that did when I held the seals of
the Foreign-office, this man alluded to must have been
quite at the bottom of the list of clerks occupied in copy-
ing documents on very important matters. It is there-
fore impossible, or almost impossible, and it is wrong,
that they should have been acquainted with correspon-
dence of such important and confidential nature as that
to which the noble earl Las alluded. Looking at the
circumstantial evidence of the case—as the noble earl
refuses or is unable to give me further information on
the assertion made by him most unwarrantably—l say,
looking at the circumstantial evidence of the case, it is
almost impossible that any young man appointed but for
two years could have been cognisant of this correspon-
denca, and, consequently, almost impossible that he
should have revealed it.

The subject then dropped.
CIVIL SERVICE,

Lord MONTEAGLE moved for a copy of the in-
structions given to the commissioners who have reported
on the state of the civil service, and of the evidence taken
before them. The noble lord in a speech of considerable
length entered into an elaborate discussion of the
changes recommended in the civil service, and expressed
his total inability to concur with them. He contended
that they had been arrived at cx parte, and complained
that the commissioners' report had been printed in the
newspapers on the 9th of February, although it was not
presented to Parliament until the 24th.

- Earl GRANVILLE said there was no objection to
produce the instructions, but no evidence could be given
as no short-hand writer had been admitted during the in-
quiry. The Government were of opinion that some such
change as that recommended by the commissioners might
advantageously be made ; and he added that it had the
support of the heads of various departments. When
the Government should bring their measure forward, it
would be found free from the slightest selfish feeling,
and to have been prepared solely with the object of im-
proving the civil service.

Lord. BROUGHAM doubted whether any plan was
really in contemplation ; but if one was, he certainly
could not agree with it.

After a brief debate, in which the Earl of Harrowby,
the Marquis of Clanricarde, and the Duke of Argyle
engaged,
Lord MONTEAGLE replied, and the motion was
agreed to.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE gave notice that
on Friday next he should move for a copy of the cor-
respondence between the Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs and Her Majesty's Council-General at Riga
with regard to the exportation of Russian produce
being the property of Her Majesty's subjects, and
with regard to the rights of neutrals in the event
of a war. He considered that to be one of the
greatest questions that could possibly occupy the public
attention, and that it was one which would not be pre-
maturely brought before the public by him. Indeed,
his reason for making the motion was in consequence of
what had taken place in the other House of Parliament
where statements had been made on the subject which
were entirely at variance one front the other. This was
a very serious matter, and he hoped that by giving
notice of the question for Friday next the Government
would be prepared to give the explanation required.
The Consolidated Fund (8,000,0001.) Bill was read a
second time.

The House then adjourned shortly after half-past 8
o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The Brighton, Hove, and Preston Waterworks, the
Hastings and St. Leonard's Gas, the London Life Asso-
ciation, the Middleton Gas, and the Radcliffe and Pil
kington Gas Bills, were read a third time and passed.
On the motion that the East London Waterworks
Bill be considered,
Mr. A. PELLATT moved that the bill be read a
third time this day six months.
➢lr. JOHN M'GREGOR spoke in support of the
bill, and against Mr. A. Pellatt's amendment.
Lord SEYMOUR thought the house wouid neither
act consistently with reason or with justice, if they should
let this bill go on.

-I\ir. ALCOCK spoke in favour of the bill going into
committee.

Lord PALMERSTON said he had had communica-
tions both with parties in favour of the bill, and those
against it, and on the whole he was against the second
reading of the bill. (Hear, hear.)
After a few words from Mr. Bright, Mr. French, and
Lord D. Stuart, the house divided, when the numbers
appeared—
For the second reading ll4
For the amendment 143
Majority against the bill —

PETITIONS.
Mr. 11. W. WICKHAM presented the following pe-
titions :—From the congregation of Wesleyan Methodists
worshipping in Richmond-terrace Chapel, Bradford,
Yorkshire, praying that public-houses and beer-shops
may be closed the whole of Sundays, except to lodgers
and bona file travellers ; from the congregation wor-
shipping at the Centenery Wesleyan Chapel„and the Kib-
gate Wesleyan Chapel, Bradford, Yorkshire ; also from
the congregation worshipping at the Wesleyan Chapel,
Low Moor, Yorkshire, praying that the sale of intoxi-
cating liquors may be prohibited during the whole of
Sunday.
Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from Mr. Urqu-
hart, stating that he was formerly employed as secretary
of embassy in Turkey for many years, and he believes
that Turkey is able to defend herself against any hostile
attacks of Russia, and believing that an internal revolution
will arise in Turkey consequent upon our inteference in
the quarrel of Turkey and Bulimia, and Praying the

house to withdraw our ambaasador from Constantinople
and our fleet from the Black Sea. (Loud laughter.)
The hon. member also presented a petition from an in-
dividual named William Peplow, Stafford, praying the
house to order an inquiry into the secret diplomatic cor-
respondence between this country and Russia.