The Sun.
London, England, 1854-12-22 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.)

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at five o'clock.
Lord DENMAN took the oaths and his seat.
Lord MONTEAGLE gave notice that to-morrow he
would move for certain returns relating to Exchequer
bonds.
Lord WYNFORD put a question to her Majesty's
Government respecting the occupation of the barracks
at Dorchester by convicts, to the prejudice of the militia
there assembled for training.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE said that the cause that
led to the occupation of the barracks at Dorchester,
was the fact that the cholera raged with great violence
at Millbank; it was therefore thought necessary to
order the eunvicts to Dorchester. He was happy
to say that the cause that had led to the
occupation had ceased, and orders had been given for
the removal of the convicts. That removal had taken
place, with the exception of eight or ten, who were kept
there for the purpose of cleaning up the barracks.
THE BLOCKADE OF RUSSIAN PORTS.
_ _

The Marquis of SALISBURY put a question to the
Government, not on the notice paper, respecting the
blockade of the Russian ports in the White Sea, the
Baltic, and the Black Sea, and made a statement relative
thereto, but neither the noble marquis's question nor
statement was heard in the gallery.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE appealed to their lord-
ships whether the course adopted by the noble marquis
was either in accordance with the practice of that house
or the convenience of the public administration. There
was a certain class of questions connected with the
public administration of this country on which her Ma-
jesty's Mii iiters should be prepared to give answers, and
it was the practice of noble lords to give notice in
writing or otherwise of the questions which they intended
to put ; and no Minister of the Crown had a right to
complain of having any such questions put to him, un-
less this customary courtesy was departed from. (Hear.)
But the noble marquis had made a statement respecting
the effects of the blockade which had been established
in the White Sea and the Baltic, and respecting what
he represented as the ineffectual blockade of the Black
Sea—subjects which were of a most delicate nature, and
which not only were intimately connected with affairs
of this country, but touched another country with which
we were in co-operation and alliance. A noble marquis
not then present—the Marquis of Clanricarde—had more
than once during the last session referred to the blockade
of the Russian ports, especially those in the White Sea,
but it was after giving due notice ; and he on those oc-
casions admitted, when it was stated that negotiations
were going on with France at the time, that it was not
a fitting topic to be then discussed in their lordship?
house. (Hear.) If he (the Duke of Newcastle) could
not answer the question just put to him, he admitted
that it was on that principle, and he, therefore, felt
bound to decline thus answering in that house a question
in which the Government of France was interested as
well as her Majesty's Government. (Hear.) He should
not be called on to give answers there on such subjects
without having the opportunity of referring to the Go-
vernment of France or to his colleagues. He, however,
demurred to the statement made by the noble marquis
respecting the effects of the blockade in the Black Sea
and the Baltic. (Hear, hear.) Should the noble mar-
quis think proper to bring the question before the house
in proper form, either he (the Duke of Newcastle) or
some of his colleagues would be prepared to reply to him ;
but this was much too serious a question, with respect
to our trade and the alliance of France, to be entered
upon in that way. With respect to the Black Sea, he
must decline to answer the question put by the noble
marquis.
The Earl of ELLENBOROITGH believed that by the
strict rule of the house the question put was irregular.
These questions were only acquiesced in, or tolerated
by the house, with the view of preventing unnecessary
motions. When a question was put to the Government
unexpectedly, it was the custom to desire the noble lord
who put it to give notice, and then an answer would be
given.
The Earl of DERBY, although he concurred with his
noble friend with respect to the custom of the house, did
not think his noble friend behind him (the Marquis of
Salisbury) was open to the charge of having made any
elaborate statement, for he had only occupied the atten-
tion of the house for a few minutes. He was surprised
to hear the noble duke say that the question of the block-
ade of the Russian ports was unconnected with his de-
partment. He thought the noble duke presided over
the War Department, and he thought the blockade
was an operation connected with the war ; there.
fore, if there was one Minister who should be pre-
pared without notice to state whether or not her Ma-
jesty's Government had practically or not enforced
the blockade, that one was the Minister of War. He
was not surprised that the noble duke was not pre-
pared to answer all the questions and statements of
the noble marquis ; but these were questions that re-
quired explanations. The noble duke might say that this
was a most delicate subject, and he might refuse pro-
spective information ; but the question put to him was
not a prospective question. It had been announced over
and over again that orders had been sent out to enforce
the blockade of the White Sea, of the Baltic, and of the
Black Sea. Answers to that effect had been given by
the First Lord of the Admiralty and others ; and the
First Lord of the Admiralty had repeatedly announced
to Parliament that the most stringent orders had been
sent out to enforce the strictest blockade in the Russian
ports, not only in the Baltic but in the White Sea. When
it was considered that this was a measure for carrying on ,
the war, they were justified in asking the question, whe-
ther or not the Government bad taken the proper course
to give practical effect to it. It did not appear to him to
be a very unreasonable course, or one that exposed his
noble friend to censure, to ask for information on a sub-
ject which materially affected not only the war, but our
commercial interests. It had been stated on many occa-
sions that orders had been issued for a strictenforcement
of the blockade in theßaltic. But in the Baltic, although
we might enforce the blockade, we could not atop trade,
for it might be carried on by neutral powers. Yet this
was first attempted. The trade in the Archangel ports
was not interrupted till August, and the trade in the
Black Sea ports at Odessa and elsewhere was practically
as uninterrupted as if we had no war. Every blockade
was injurious to our own and to other nations as well as
to the enemy—so was every battle. In every warlike ope-
ration, as well as in every operation of trade, we should
consider the injury done not only to our enemy but our-
selves. But the Government determined that they would
institute a blockade, and that they would stop the trade.
EarIGRANVILLE rose to order. Heprotestedagainst
the course pursued by the noble earl. His noble friend
(the Duke of Newcastle) had objected to a question put to
him, not because he was unwilling to answer it, but because
it was a question of such a delicate nature that a Minister
should not reply toit offhand and without notice. It was
a very important question ; but if due notice of it was
given, there would be no objection on the part of the
Government to its being put. Such being the answer
given by the noble duke (the Duko of Newcastle),
the noble earl rose, and there being no subject of dis-
cussion regularly before their lordships, proceeded to
make statements. That course was clearly out of
order. (Hear, hear.)
The Earl of DERBY—I bow to the objection on the
ground of irregularity, and as there is no question
before your lordships, I will postpone my observations
till the discussion comes on this evening, when we shall
have to consider the measures we have taken to carry
on the war.