The Sun.
London, England, 1849-03-23 00:00:00

ficd r, it

listur

p
.!.^l,

aaxioue deeire to investigeis compleinte arid bake &Lica
reforms as would be likely to satisfy the reasonable de-
mands of the people. He agreed with his lion. Friend
the Member for Bradford that it was most desirable to
assert the moral power of that country—and it was,
doubtless, very great, unless, by her own fault, she
should forfeit it He could assure him that it was the
wish of her Majesty's Government to maintain it by
every possible means. A country strong in itself, and
which could not be supposed to be actuated by fear, was
enabled to couch its communications in a manner calcu-
lated not to wound the feelings of other states, and by
that means it was frequently enabled to confer essen-
tial benefits upon the parties concerned, and promote
the interests of peace, to which his Honourable
Friend had so ably alluded and so well described.
With regard to the question before the House, the
Government had taken that part in the discussion which,
as the friend to both parties, were best calculated
to forward the objects they had in view, and he trusted
the question of time, being the only question now pend-
ing between the two powers, would be ultimately settled
to the mutual satisfaction of both.—(Hear.) He was dis-
posed to finish there, did he not know that the state of
those affairs had created a great deal of discussion out
of doors, from the apprehension that that question would
lead to an interruption of those friendly relations. It
was alleged that certain orders that had recently been
given by Turkey for the usual naval and military prey
partitions—that the announcement of the usual equip-
ment of a squadron at that season, and the march of
troops to the northern provinces for review, were some-
what suspicious, and that had led to a disclaimer of any
hostile intentions. He trusted that these statements
would prove well founded, and that the negotiations
which were then pending would terminate to the satis-
faction of both parties, and without disturbance to the
general peace of Europe.—(Hear.)
Mr. ANSTEY said matters had now assumed so
serious an aspect in the east of Europe that if England
was what she had formerly been she would not then be
discussing the present question in the House of Com-
mons. He maintained that a fearful blow had been struck
at British interests when the first Russian soldier had
passed the boundary of those principalities. They had
seen on the part of Russia perfidy after perfidy, and
fraud after fraud, and yet the Noble Lord told the House
that he relied upon her honourable intentions, because
she had signed the treaty of June, 1841. He contended
that the English Government was bound to interfere,
and to insist upon the immediate withdrawal of every
Calmuck and Russian from that soil, which they pol-
luted by their presence. These provinces were 30,000
square miles in extent, and no less than 20,000 of them
were rich and fertile lands. This territory was inha-
bited by a population now of upwards of 4,000,000. This
population was capable of supplying our markets with
every commodity which we were now reduced to pur-
chase, at enhanced prices and inferior quality, in Russia.
They were willing to receive payment for their com-
modities, not in money, but in British produce. The
mouths of the Danube were so choked up with sand as
to make it impossible to carry on properly the timber
trade, which was formerly the most thriving trade in
those parts. At this moment there were not more than
eight,or nine feet of water, and the vessels that could
enter there were of two small a size to conduct properly
that trade. Russia had beset every mouth and access
with her quarantine regulations; so that if even a letter
be allowed by the Russian authorities to pass, we owe it
to their forbearance, or, as the phrase is—their magna-
nimity. The consequence Ras that British trade in Mol-
davia!, was now wholly extinguished. Our merchants
were forced against their will to go to Odessa and other
ports, which, it might be said, enjoyed the advantage
of the prohibitory tariff of Russia. The question the
House had now to decide was, whether we were strong
enough in our foreign, commercial, and politi-
cal relations, to submit to this great loss of political
influence and commerce in the territory he had
described. If Wallachia was suffered to import
and export freely, the trade of Russia was gone. So that
this was a case of life and death to Russia. If the policy
o Russia, and he was afraid he might say the policy of
Great Britain, be suffered by Parliament to be carried
out in respect to these provinces, he feared that what
had been done in Moldavia and Wallachia would be imi-
tated by Russia in every other part of the Turkish do-
minions, so that the future occupation of the Dardanelles
would not be a question for the statesman to consider,
but for the historian to record. He did not know what
information the Noble Lord had received from his diplo-
matic agents in this quarter, but he was authorised to
say by one of the highest authorities on this subject, that
every attempt was now being made by the Russian
general and the troops under him to stimulate and
exasperate, not only the population, but the Turkish
army of occupation, to aggressive measures against
Turkey. As to the Noble Lord's confidence
in the disclaimer of Russia in respect to any
aggressive intentions, it should be recollected
that Russia had never yet invaded any country with-
out heralding her advances by a disavowal of aggressive
designs. It was quite clear that Russia:would remain in
these provinces in spite of all that :had been said and
done; so that it was too much for the Noble Lord to say
that Russia would withdraw her troops. He should vote
for the motion of his Noble Friend, and he hoped that
Noble Lord would not yield to any persuasion to with-
draw it. If the Noble Lord did give way, he (Mr. An-
stey) should feel it to be his duty to ask the House to
come to a division upon the question.
Mr. M. MILNES trusted that his Noble Friend (Lord
D. Stuart) would not press his motion upon such an im-
portant question to a division in so thin a House (about
fifty Members were present) as this happened to be.—
(Hear, hear.) lle (Mr. Milnes) would not attempt to
follow the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who preceded
him into the various topics he had adverted to in the
course of his speech, because he thought that the present
was not the time or the fitting opportunity for discussing
the terms and principles of the treaty of Adrianople,
and other treaties of an equally ancient date. If this
country had failed in peforming its duty to humanity
with respect to its share in those treaties, be thought
the cause of any such failure was not attributable to the
Noble Lord now at the head of the Foreign Depart-
ment.—(Hear, hear.) He saw no reason for supposing
that any dispute between Russia and Turkey could be
adjusted at the desire of this country. All it could pos-
sibly be expected to do was to exercise its moral influ-
ence to prevent any misunderstanding which was calcu-
lated to disturb the peace of the world. It was cer-
tainly very hard that Wallachia should be forced to
contract debts for the purpose of maintaining the troops
of Russia, and he hoped that his Noble Friend (Lord
Palmerston) did not countenance such an imposition.—
(Hear, hear.) lie trusted that his Noble Friend might
feel it his duty to represent to the Government of Russia
that this nation did not approve of the system of
forcibly occupying a country with foreign troops
that did not require their presence or assistance.—
(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord would do well to im-
press upon the Russian Government that in the opinion
of the English people it was vain for that Govern-
ment to declare that they had no ulterior object in view
in sending their troops to occupy foreign provinces.—
(Hear.) The evacuation of Moldavia and Wallachia by
the Russian troops was a subject that his Noble Friend
would do well to keep in mind. Let him take a firm
stand upon the matter without any attempt at dictation,
arid he believed that the advice of England opportunely
given would have the effect of restoring to those Turkish
provinces that independence in the scale of European
countries to which they were justly entitled.—(Hear.)
Mr. URQUHART said that the question before the
Hou-e involved more than a mere motion fur the pro-
duction of papers. It was a question whether an act of
oppression had not been committed against one ally of
the British Crown by another of its allies; and the an-
swer must be that there had. The Noble Lord the Se•
cretary for Foreign Affairs said that the question between
Russia and Turkey was one of time. But in his (Mr.
Urquhart's) opinion, the question with regard to time
was not when Russia would deem it necessary to
give up her occupation of the provinces of Turkey, but
when Turkey would be able to resist and throw off the
system of oppression to which she had been subjected
for the last 150 years. Being an ally of both countries,
he thought that friendly mediation upon our part to
settle the differences was perfectly justifiable, and ought
to have been applied. He trusted that the Noble Mem-
ber for Marylebone would press his motion to a divi-
sion, for the purpose of showing how few Members were
in the House upon this occasion, and bow small was the
number who sanctioned the general concurrence of the
Foreign Secretary in the acts of Russia.
Mr. HUME said he was disposed to think that the
Hon. Member for Pomfret (Mr. Milnes) had somewhat
magnified the power of Russia; though he (Mr. Hume)
had expressed himself frequently against the aggressive
policy of the Emperor of Russia, and he thought
that the introduction of questions of this sort was of
advantage, because opinions expressed in that House
and by the people of England were likely to
produce an effect even on the mind of such
a despot as the Emperor of Russia. He (Mr. Hume)
confessed that ho thought there was not much
danger to be apprehended from Russia. He believed
the Emperor of Russia's present councils were leading
him into danger, which might ultimately fender him as
helpless as were many other monarchs at the present
moment. The Noble Lord at the:head of the Foreign-
office had stated, that having offered the advice of an in-
dependent country like this, he thought that that advice
would be sufficient. He (Mr. Hume) was glad to hear
that, because there could be no doubt that honest advice
would ever produce a good effect. He certainly did not
believe that Russia intended to take permanent posses-
sion of those countries ; but at the same time it was
most desirable that this country should use the moral
influence it possessed to prevent the encroachments of
Russia. He was glad to hear that harmony existed be-
tween France aed this country, and lie hoped that other
countries in Europe would be equally disposed to join
with them ; but whether they did or not, he was firmly
convinced that by the cordial co-operation of France and
England, even though it were against the inclination of
other powers, they would be able to maintain the peace
of the world.—(Cheers.) He would advise his Noble
Friend not to endanger the advantage which had been
obtained by the introduction of his motion, fur
during the time he had had the honour of
a seat in that House he did not recollect that any
Member ever rose and defended the course which Russia
had taken, and he believed that there was not only un-
animity in the House, but out of the House, upon the
subject of the aggressive character of Russia. It was on
this ground—whilst deprecating all interference by co-
ercion—that he thought it would be prudent and wise
in his Noble Friend not to press the House to a division,
but to accept the fact that negotiations were still pend-
ing, as a sufficient reason why he should not persist in
calling r the production of the papers.—(Hear.)
Mr. DISRAELI—Sir, I rise to express my hope
that the Noble Lord will not call upon the House to
divide upon the present occasion, for by so doing, I

THE SUN,

the 2;

a VI:11

in teres'_
my aclyi,

(

10t taX(
Mr. Hutue)

LONDON;

not go to a division on tne pieteut occasion, said he had
sat in Parliament a considerable time—that there had
always been a unanimous feeling against the policy of Rus•
sia, and that the Autocrat and his policy had never been
mentioned without being denounced; end, therefore, he
recommends that the same course should be pursued on
the present as on former occasions—namely, that those
denunciations should be continued, and that divisions
should not be had recourse to.—(Hear, hear.) Now, the
only inference I should draw from the advice of the Hon.
Gentleman would be rather against the counsel he re-
commends to you, for certainly the speeches which have
been made in the House of Commons have not produced
any particular effect upon the policy of the Russian
Court.—(Hear, hear.) But I wish to remind the Hon.
Gentleman that the policy of Russia has never been
mentioned in this House without somebody rising to
vindicate what I, for one, generally speaking, regard as
most politic and even magnanimous. I would appeal to
the policy which Russia has pursued during the last
twelve months of agitation; and there are Jew but will
be ready to admit that there has been exhibited on the
part of that power a great amount of forbearance—a
great desire to maintain peace (an object which is of such,
importance with Hon. Gentlemen opposite), and I be-
lieve a sincere desire to maintain tranquillity. What-
ever may be the ulterior designs of Russia, and I do
not pretend to share in the powers of divination which
lion. Gentlemen opposite seem to possess, yet I think it
is a point upon which we may fairly congratulate this
country, that a power of the importance of Russia, under
such circumstances of temptation as those which have
presented themselves during the last twelve months,
should have evinced a disposition which no one can deny
had not only materially tended to, but has been one of
the principal causes of that peace, the maintenanee of
which you congratulate yourselves upon.—(Hear.) Con-
trast the conduct of Russia under those circumstances
with that of the French Republic forty or fif,y years ago.
Imagine the career which might have been open to a
great power like Russia had she chosen to have seized
such opportunities as have recently occurred; and what
confusion, suffering, and loss to Europe and to civilisa-
tion might have been the result.—(Hear, hear.) Nothing
can, I think, be more unjust than for Hon. Gentlemen to
give an opinion as to the character and conduct of one of
the greatest powers of Europe, not on account of what it
has done, but of what it will do, according to the pro-
phetic powers of lion. Gentlemen. We must judge of
the conduct of Russia by what has actually occurred.
We see that its conduct in a late transaction was charac
tensed by great temperance and great forbearance.
With respect to the immediate instance before the
House, we do not know the cause of the occupation of
those principalities. It may have originated in a false
interpretation of treaties—in a misconception of the di-
plomatic position of Russia with respect to these trans-
actions. It is quite true that the conduct of Russia
under the :circumstances, however we may consider it
opposed to our interests, or to the law of nations, is still
such, that it is on an occasion like this that we must
look with confidence to the Minister of the Crows, and
we are bound to give him our fair confidence in a trans-
action like this, for this is an occasion on which negotia-
tion ought to have a fair opportunity. If the result of
the negotiations should be fruitless—if they should be
hostile to the interests of England, then there will be
the right time and the proper occasion for
the House of Commons to interfere.—(Hear. )
But then these attacks on a great power, not on ac-
count of what it has done, but on account of visionary
results, which only exist in the imagination of
those who speak them, are certainly not the basis on
which public men should act. We expect a Secretary
of State to express opinions upon some other grounds
than those which such crude materials would afford him
to deal with, and the promulgation of which are calcu-
lsted to lead to results most inconvenient, not only for
the transaction of public business, but ultimately to the
tranquillity of Europe. This, Sir, is my opinion, and I
have now to express the hope that there will be no division
on the motion before us, and it may lead to a false im-
pression. Ido not wish the Emperor of Russia to sup-
pose that there is a want of sympathy for populations
that are not treated in accordance with what may be
considered the law of nations, nor with what may be
considered is high policy—that suffering humanity has
not the sympathy of the House of Commons under all
circumstances. I hope the Emperor of Russia, too,
will understand, that it is not the opinion of the House
of Commons, nor the opinion either of the English
people, that he is a despot whose conduct no one will
vindicate.—(Hear, hear.) I hope the Emperor of
Russia will understand that the speeches made by the
Hon. Member for Montrose, and of others, are not a fair
representation of the feelings of the House of Commons
nor of the English people.—(Hear, hear.) Ido not be-
lieve that such speeches do represent the feelings of the
English people. I believe that the feeling of the sensible
part of the community is that they recognise in the ruler
of Russia an individual of great ability and of great
merit—that he is a man. of great intelligence and of
great power, and that he has exercised that power with
a due regard to the position he occupies and a strong
sense of the duties that devolve upon him.—(Hear.)
As to the inclination to impugn the conduct of the Em

peror of Russia, as if he ha-d
committed an act of felony,
because he has not been born with a king, lords, and

commons, and a parliamentary committee, to keep him
in check, it is au absurdity, for which there is no sym-
pathy in this House; but I believe there is no sympathy
even amongst the people who are now walking
outside in the streets. The time has gone by
when such attacks can be made, and they have been left
unimpugned too long. For 30 years the Hon. Member
for Montrose has been indulging in these remarks—and
I say it with great respect for his talents, he has been
during all that time indulging in unmitigated nonsense
on the subject.—(Laughter.) He has subjected the Em-
peror to the same sort of criticism, because he has not
been surrounded with the forms of a constitution. For
this reason the Hon. Member has described the Emperor
as a despot, as an ogre, as a sort of being that only ex-
isted for the purpose of inflicting misery upon mankind.
I believe the opinion entertained of the Emperor is, that
throughout his career he has shown the influence of his
individual character, that he is rather in advance of the
people he governs, and that of all sovereigns that during
recent events have occupied thrones in Europe, he is the
most entitled to the respect of mankind.—(Hear.)
Sir H. VERNEY observed that the question befofe
the House was, whether the Emperor of Russia had done
that of which this couotry had a right to complain. If
Russia had been peacefully inclined, why had the Em-
peror promoted the denunciation of the treaty of Mal-
moe ? There could be no doubt that if Russia had re-
monstrated with Denmark that peace would have been
the result.
Mr. J. A. SMITH differed from the Hon. Member
for Bucks, and thought the feeling in this country in
general was against the Emperor of Russia. Perhaps it
was from necessity that the personage had become the
unscrupulous and determined enemy of constitutional
liberty wherever it appeared. The House had surely
not forgotten the history of Poland, of Circassia, and of
Cracow.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord could not have
forgotten the opinion which he had expressed of the
conduct of Russia towards Cracow. He hoped the Noble
Lord would nut divide the House, for he must feel satis-
fied with the result of his motion. Tho moral force of
England, in this as in other questions, w ould have
its weight, but influenced as it was with our alliance
with France would be irresistible. That alliance they
owed to the conduct and policy of the Noble Lord the
Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and on that alliance
he believed the peace of the world depended.—(Hear,
hear.) In the occupation of Moldavia and Walla-
chia by the Russians, he feared the rights of humanity
had been disregarded. Ho hoped Turkey would
protest against it, and he trusted, as the Noble Lord
had not expressed a different opinion, that the Govern-
ment had also protested against it. He joined with
those Hon. Members who had asked the Noble Lord not
to divide on his motion.
Mr. J. O'CONNELL congratulated the Hon. Member
for Buckinghamshire on the cause he bad undertaken.
The remarks of the Hon. Member who spoke last were
excellent. He could have been content to leave the
matter to his ',vindication. If any subject could excuse
the use of strong terms, it was the conduct of that
monster—the Emperor of Russia. The Hon. Member
for Buckinghamshire had defended the scourge of
women and the destroyer of men. Had the House for-
gotten the case of the unfortunate nuns of Minsk—
dragged from their convents—brutally flogged—ex-
posed to the violence of ruffian soldiers—with the
cognizance—with the express written approbation of
the client of the Honourable Member for Buckingham-
shire? Had the House forgotten the conscription of
Polish children sent to Siberia, dying by the way-side,
and the orders issued to fill up the numbers by
fresh victims—all to satisfy the cruelty of this hide-
ous monster! He was glad such conduct had been
protested ,against. If sentimentality meant sympathy
for human suffering under the heel of the greatest
despot—the greatest monster of modern times—he
should not be ashamed to avow it. Speaking on behalf
of the Irish people he should support the motion, if
pressed to a division. At the same time, he admitted
there might be reasons why the Noble Lord should not
divide the House.
Lord DUDLEY STUART, in reply, said he gave
full weight to the opinions of those Hon. Members,
whether agreeing in his views or not, who recommended
him to withdraw the motion. He had heard with some
surprise the Hon. Member for Bucks say that on this
question he advocated opposite interests from those es-
poused by him (Lord Dudley Stuart). Ile (Lord
Dudley Stuart) was endeavouring to defend the in-
terests of the Turkish empire, and he thought
He recollected that not very long ago the Hon. Member
for Bucks, in a most eloquent speech on the question of
Servia, had expressed as strong an opinion on the im-
portance of maintaining the integrity of the Ottomen
empire as could possibly be imagined. He (Lord D,
Stuart) had, throughout his observations, endeavoured
to express himself in temperate language, and had
given no utterance to those feelings which he was not
ashamed to confess always rose in his heart when con-
templating the acts of the oppressor of Poland; and he
would not be seduced by the exaggerated lauguage in
which the Hon. Member for Bucks had thought proper
to support his views, or be led to resort to intem-
perate expressions by way of retort. The opinions
of the Honourable Gentleman appeared to find no echo
in the House, and he was sure they would find none in
the country; which was much more likely to coincide
wish the feelings of the Hon. and Learned Member for
Limerick. He (Lord D. Stuart) confessed he had heard
the observations of that Honourable and Learned
Member with pleasure. Such generous sentiments did
honour to him who delivered them, as to the
assembly which received them with cheers.—
The lion. Member for Bucks, however, took another
view, and he had a right to his opinions. His motives, no
doubt, were excellent. Possibly he might think, now
that his contemptuous treatment of the consolidated