The Sun.
London, England, 1849-06-12 00:00:00

THE IRISH; CONFEDERATION—PROCLAMA-
TION OF MR. SMITH O'BRIEN.
Sir JOHN TYRRELL said he intended to move for
the following return:--" Copies of a proclamation in the
hands of head-constable J. Tompson, and filed in the
police-office in the town of Kenmare (it is a counter
proclamation to that of his Excellency the Lord-Lieute-
nant of Ireland), by order of the Council of the Irish
Confederation, dated 3d May, 1848, and signed
W. Smith O'Brien, chairman. Of the police reports
severally within the last three 3 ears, with reference to
altar denunciations in Kenmare; the police reports of
the 18th of March, 1848. April 17th, 1848, April 24th,
1848, and May 19. h, 1848; and, of any correspondence
with the Government in Ireland, respecting such altar
denunciations, from the district of Kenmare." Now he
understood that it was the intention of the Hon. Baronet
the Secretary for Ireland to refuse the return; he wished
to know if he conceived that the ends of justice would
be thereby answered?
Sir WM. SOMERVILLE was understood to say that
he did not conceive that public justice would be answered
by the production of those documents at the present
moment.
ARCTIC EXPEDITION—SIR JOHN FRANKLIN.
Lord PALMERSTON laid on the table documents in
reference to this expedition.
Sir R. 11. INGLIS wished to make a few observations.
It was now four years ago since 138 of as gallant men
as ever went forth on an expedition had sailed for the
purpose of exploring the North-West Passage. No in-
telligence had been received with respect to them. Lady
Fraeklin, on behalf of herself and child, had addressed
a beautiful letter to the President of the United States—
a letter which, in beauty of language and sentiment,
could not be excelled ,by any which man or woman
could address to another and the result was
that the Government of the United States had,
in the most creditable manner, agreed to send
out two expeditions. And Rusisa had also sent
ships to the eastern coast of Asia in search of the ad-
venturers. So also had this country. And this had
been done by other countries, not for their personal ag-
grandisement, but on the purest grounds of humanity.
—(Cheers.) Such acts would tend more than anything
to promote a good feeling between the nations.
Lord PALMERSTON fully coincided in the
remarks of the Bight Hon. Baronet. It was most gra-
tifying to find other nations sending out ships after
these enterprising navigators.—Cheers.)
Mr. DISRAELI was glad that the sympathy of this
House would reach the United States, since the
exalted conduct of the President of that Government
confederacy was above all praise. Such conduct was in-
deed worthy .of the sacred cause in which they had en-
gaged. Such incidents would, in his opinion, and he
was sure such would be the opinion of the House and
the country, do more than arbitration schemes to pro-
mote that fraternal feeling among the nations which
they must all desire to see.
INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION.
Mr. COBDEN then rose to move that an humble ad-
dress be presented to her Majesty, praying she will be
graciously pleased to direct her principal Secretary of
State for Foreign Affairs to enter into communication
with Foreign Powers, inviting them to concur in treaties
binding the respective parties, in the event of any
future misunderstanding which cannot be arranged
by amicable negotiation, to refer the matter in dis-
pute to the decision of arbitrators. He said he did
not remember that he had ever before had an
opportunity of addressing the House when he felt me re
desirous for the few minutes he should occupy their a -
tendon of having the indulgence of Hon. Members, be-
cause he represented a numerous body both within and
out of the House who took a deep interest in this question.
—(Hear, hear.) He deeply regretted that there should
have been any misapprehension in the House on the sub-
ject of this motion, but he thought the remark the Hon.
Gentleman the Member for Buckingham had just made
was a proof that some misapprehension did exist, or
he would not have ventured to sneer at a
motion before he had heard it made.—(Hear, hear.)
The Hon. Gentleman must have conceived that there
was some thing remarkably preposterous about the
motion—that it was that peculiar kind of matter which
ought to be condemned betore it was heard or he never
would have indulged in a sneer. He had often heard
the Hon. Gentleman indulge in ex pane facts, seeing
but never till now bad he ventured upon receiving in an-
ticipation,
uther.lf there
uving wustahiaituchueuswivansuausicluititle atedthteuosnteir as
up
tthhee
milk of human kindness in their breasts it was
that which had just past, and it was something
-strange that in the same breath that he spoke of Lady
Franklyn's letter the Hon. Member indulged in a sneer
at the expense of a motion he had yet to hear.—(Hear.)
With the Hon. Baronet the Member for the University
he accepted the act of America and Russia as a proof
that we live in altered times, for at no former pe-
riod in the history of the world was there
an instance of a foreign Government sending out, to seek
at great expense, adventures unconnected with their own
country.—(Rear, hear.) Now, he stood there on that
classes,occasion both a s
t ofthem of m
he humble representative
importancesentativ
eof
in the
distinct
community.
In first place,
who
h e
repud u
representedteu r
res tthatrg
influential body of the
Christians
to war in any case, and in the second that class of the
Christians consisting of a large portion of the middle
arid working classes of this country who
desired that they should take some precautions
and if possible to obtain some guarantee
against the necessity for war.—(Hear.) Now it was not
necessary for any one in the House who acceded to the
motion that he should be of opinion that we ate not
justified as Chriatiads, under any circumstances, of
resorting to war in self-defence. It was only
necessary that they should agree that war was an
great calamity which it was desirable if possible to avoid,
—(Hear, hear.) What was it that he proposed? Ile
assumed that every one in the House would only sane
tion war in cases where it was imperatively de mantled.
His object was that they should simply and solely resort
to that male in communities which individuals resorted
to in private life. He only wanted them to carry
out in another instance that principle which they
recognize in a thousand other cases—viz, that the
intercourse of individuals was nothing but the
intercourse of individuals in the agregate. He wanted
to know why any disagreement between this country
and France or America, which could not be settled by
mutual representation, should not be referred to
the decision of an arbitration. He did not
mean necessarily crowned heads or neutral
states, though he could mention many examples
where a reference to such 'forms had proved eminently
successful. There were cases in which disputes between
France and the United States had been referred to
tngland, between England and the United States to
France, between the United States and Mexico to
Prussia, between the United States and England to the
Netherlands. And these had all been eminently
successful, or if one had tailed in its immediate
object, there was no instance of such a re-
ference being followed by war.—(Hear, hear.) But
he did not confine himself to neutral powers, inasmuch
as one might chance to prefer a republic, and another
a monarchy. There were many instances in which
was
ted bth
y e
other plan
disputes had been ref. rred to commissioners, and that,
countries,
whichtrieho
for
wished to
purpose
or
I,
(siseee
adopted—the men should be appointed by this country to
meet
omn
if, ens saepdp,oi
of inquiring into the matter in dispute, and, in the event
of their not agreeing, to have the power of calling in an
arbitration. He saw no essential difference between that
plan and the plan which was now resorted to in private
lite; his views were sometimes considered Utopian and
visionary, but at other times so practical and material
that it was said there was not a bit of sentiment about
him—(Great laughter)—but in the present instance
there could be no doubt about the practical
nature of his plan, for in 1794, in 1814, and again in
1818 the country had been a party to the appointment of
commissioners to settle differences with America. He
mentioned those cases to show that this plan was no in-
vention, but had been already carried out with success,
and only wanted to be carried out a little further to
anticipate our quarries with other countries.—(Hear.)
What was the use of any treaty? What was the use of
the Foreign-office or the Secretary for Foreign Affairs?
They might as well shut up the one and cashier the
other.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) He, therefore,
thought if any provision was made by which they
could avoid hostile collision with other coun-
tries, that provision would be as eagerly
sought after by one party to the quarrel, as by the
other. Wars urose out of accidental collisions, and trea-
ties were really as well observed by powerful states
against weak states, as by weak states against powerful.
Therefore, he saw no difficulty specially applying to
treaties of that kind greater than with any other
treaties.— (Hear, hear) Bu there would be an
advantage in having a treaty which bound another
country if that country did not afterwards fulfil its
treaty. That country would then enter into war with
the brand of infamy stamped upon its banners.—(Hear,
hear.) He anticipated another objection. It was
said, were the great interests of England to be en-
trusted to Commissioners such as those he proposed?
That was upon the assumption that our quarrels in-
volved the whole existence of the empire, quarrels on
the most minute and ridiculous customs. A peace friend
of his, the other day, told him that he was standing re-
cently by a penny peep-show of the battle of Waterloo,
when a little boy, who was peeping into it, asked the
old man who owned the show what was the cause of the
battle of Waterloo. The old man scratched his head
and said, upou his word, he could not tell.—(A. laugh.)
So it appeared that we could not tell what were the
causes of half our wars.—(Oh, oh.) At all events
lie might quote the remark of the Noble Lord on
the Treasury Bench the other night, that the last two
wars were unnecessary—(Hear, hear) —and in that re-
mark he (Mr. Cobden) agreed. But could Com-
missioners be intrusted with settling disputes be-
tween nations ? Already they had intrusted those
matters to individuals. Treaties of peace made after
wars were generally entrusted to individuals to carry
them out. Lord Castlereagh, when he was called to
account in the House of Commons for the share he took
in the treaty of Vienna, distinctly told the House that
he took upon himself the reapon-ibility of that
Congress, and of the interests of the honour of
England were sacrificed he alone was responsible. And
in the case of Lord Ashburton, when he went to nego-
tiate the Maine boundary question, had power to
bind this country to anything he set his hand to in
America. All he :(Mr. Cobden) wanted was that
those matters should be done before and not
after they entered into war, and thai it should be to avert
war rather than make up differences after they had ex-
hausted themselves in conflicts.—(Hear, haar.) From
1836 down to the last year they had increased their
armed force 60,000 men, and they had increased their
expenditure 60 or 70 per cent. That was
no proof of any increased duration of peace; the Go-
vernment found that was an increased security against
war; he (MrCobden)thought it argued quite the contrary.
What were their
preparations or war? They had 170
barrels of gunpowder in store. Besides that they had