The Sun.
London, England, 1847-01-20 00:00:00

sion of Saxony to Prussia, for in that England, as a guarantee-
ing Power, was bound to go to war immediately if called upon
In consequence of an infraction of the treaty.
Lord P ALM ERSTON—There is no special guarantee in
the Treaty of Vienna for the concession of the kingdom of
Saxony to Prussia.
Mr. DISRAELI—The Noble Lord would find it if he looked
to the treaty when he left the House. He was now, for the
first time, really alarmed at the state of the foreign affairs
of the country, when the Noble Lord the Foreign Secretary
had stated that there was no special guarantee of the kind he
had alluded to in the Treaty of Vienna.—(Hear, hear.)
Nothing was more important than a proper under-
standing of the treaties. If the country were to
adopt the modern interpretations of those treaties, no
language could express the mischief which would result.
When he found that the Treaty of Vienna was so manifest, ho
thought the inference was very clear. He thought, in
determining upon this questicn, that they ought to
take the authority of Cardinal Richelieu on the prin-
ciple involved in the question before the House at pre-
,ent. It was most necessary for this country to have a
good understanding with the great Powers of Europe. He
did not regard the marriages that had taken place on the con-
tinent in the same light as others had done. He did not regard
with jealousy the power of Russia in Germany, or of France
in Spain. England held the balance of peace in her
own hands, and they could have all the advantages of
amicable relations instead of the evils or rivalry.
Colonel CONOLLY said, in justice to the county he re-
presented, lie must deprecate the language of the Hon. Mem-
ber for Bath, who had made use of the most unwarranted
language that had ever been used by a Member of the House, ss
well as the greatest perversion of 'fact. He considered the
statement of the First Lord of the Treasury as a vet y dexterous
exculpation of himself, but he was of opinion that the country
suffered severely from the non-interference of Government
in the case. He hoped that Government would not be
carried away by idle theories, but determine upon some com-
prehensive and efficient measures for the relief of Ireland.—
( Hear, hear.) He had been in that country ever since he had
left that House, and he could confirm the patience with which

seems to have attached to this last remnant of the Polish state,
and to have induced the Powers who were parties to the an-
nexation of the free state of Cracow to the dominions of the
Emperor of Austria, who seemed to have acted precipitately,
and, as appeared to him, without any just motive to have used
their power without considering the relations of justice in
which they were bound. He did not knew that it was neces-
sary for him to address the House with respect to any other
parts of the speeches which had been delivered that evening.
He would have an opportunity very shortly of bringing for-
ward the separate measures of the Government. On Monday
next he proposed to give an outline to the House of the various
measures with regard to Ireland which would afterwards form
the subject of separate Bills, and which would therefore come
fully under the consideration of the House.—(Hear, hear.)
If his Noble Friend the Member for Lynn had
any better plan to propose, let him state it to the House, and
let them all endeavour to find those measures which may best
be calculated to raise the condition of Ireland—to unite her
more closely to this country by sympathy and temperate govern-
ment ; giving her not only all that which bare justice would
require, but giving that help in her necessities which he
thought any part of the United Kingdom was entitled to claim
if placed in a similar condition.—( Loud cheers.) He
believed much injury had been done to the feelings of the
people of this country by the language that had been used
in Ireland with respect to the conduct of England during the
past year. He felt bound to statethis. He believed that that
language had induced many to forbear making such exertions
as they otherwise might have felt inclined to use on behalf of
Ireland at that moment; but still he believed that the general
wish of the nation was to do everything that could by any pos-
sibility be useful to Ireland. --4 Loud cheers.) He believed
that this was the desire of the country. He lamented that there
was not in Ireland at that time so much of general combination
and exertion as had taken place in Scotland—in those parts
which were suffering from a similar calamity—bat he rejoiced
to see, independently of the separate resolutions proposed and
the various plans propounded, that at a meeting lately
held in Dublin, men of all parties united—men of all
1 religions were combined together to endeavour to concur in
plans likely to be useful to the country. He thought it was a
good sign for the future welfare of Ireland. He thought, if
Irishmen would allow him to say it, that what they had reason to
complain of was not so much the hostility of England as the
hostilities of parties of their own people.—(Cheers.) He
believed likewise there was, with scarcely an exception, an
absence from any language at that meeting either to-
wards the Government, or towards any with whom
they might have relation, or who might differ in
opinion with them of an irritating nature—(Hear,)
He trusted that when they came to the discussion of
those roe *sures, that a similar spirit would prevail—( Cheers)
—and then, however great the present calamity. might be—
however appalling to the imagination—however painful to dwell
upon, he hoped that Ireland might yet prove destined to enjoy
years of prosperity, and that in strict union with England,
they should present the spectacle of a country whose freedom
and civilisation had made admirable progress. (The Noble
Lord resumed his seat amid loud cheers.)
Mr DISRAELI would endeavour to imitate, though he
feared unsuccessfully, the address of the Noble Lord who had
just resumed his seat. As to what he had stated with re-
ference to one subject, namely, the condition of Ireland, there
could be no difference of opinion. He was sure it was the
desire of this House, and all parties in it, to assist in the set-
tlement of Ireland in a manner that would conduce to the
future happiness of that country—(Cheers)—and in bring-
ing on such an occasion to the Ministers of the
Crown a temperate, indulgent, sympathising spirit.
But, unfortunately, that was not the only subject
on which the Noble Lord had anticipated there could be no
difference of opinion. He had, indeed, imagined that the
subject of the Spanish marriages would not be brought under
the consideration of the House that night, as the debate
seemed to threaten a termination. The Noble Lord had ex-
pressed, with perfect propriety the general feelings of the
House with respect to the subject of their foreign
policy, which had been brought under their no-
tice by the Speech from the Throne.._ It was
certain, however, that the imprsvement of the condition
of Ireland would not be assisted if differences existed
between this country and France. The Noble Lord had laid
down some principles of policy with which he thought no per-
son could agree. He said that France had no right to exercise
a predominant influence over Spain. What he said with re-
spect to those marriages was not exactly apposite. The
cave before them was this —They knew from authentic informa-
tion that an estrangement had taken place between the
two countries, and were told in the Speech from the Throne
that the Infanta of Spain had married a French Prince, and
that in consequence some correspondence had taken place be-
tween the two countries. Now one would naturally have
thought that the correspondence would have been of a congra-
tulasnry nature—( A laugh)—but they were not informed that
the Noble Lord had protested against the infringement of the
treaty, which he alleged to have taken place. ( Hear. )
But the Noble Lord had protested against the
infringement of a treaty by the greatest Power in
Western Europe, and they were informed in a paragraph which
immediately followed that he protested against the violation of
a treaty of more inaeortance by the greatest Power in Northern
Europe. He believed there had been no violation of any
treaty in either case. It was possible that the destruction of
the political independence of Cracow might have been as great a
blunder as the destruction of Poland might be a great crime,
and if we protested against it such a protestation ought to be
made on intelligible grounds, and not on perverted views of
rights and privileges. He did not think that the object of
the Treaty of Utrecht was to prevent an alliance between
the French and Spanish families, because he could
not agree that the object of the French Minister was
to secure exclusive advantage to Philip and his posterity.
The sixth article of the treaty positively declared that not to be
the object of the treaty. Whether that treaty was right or
wrong it was within their province to decide. It was the
policy of Louis XIV. to promote an union by marriage or
otherwise between the two countries, for the very first act of
that Prince was to marry his daughter to a Spanish Prince.
That alone was conclusive as to the meaning of those who
signed the treaty. There was not, therefore, in his opinion,
any violation of the Treaty of Utrecht; into the po'icy
of the subject he would not then inquire.—(Hear, bear.)
Was this a violationlof the Treaty of Vienna? Let them 10,1
merely into the legal merits of the question for that was the
only way in which the question ought to be regarded. Of
eourse he did not wish that any Gentleman should accept
his opinion except as to the legal merits of the affair, but
he would ask them, without prejudice or passion, to decide
it merely on its legal merits. It was unnecessary for him
to comment on the transactions of affairs at Congress;
it would merely be convenient for him to remember its
result. It was merely a treaty of the various Powers of
Europe after a general war, in which these Powers settled
the different questions of different treaties ; for instance the
Treaty of Utrecht. They had nine different treaties all em-
bodied in that one. That final act which they called the
Treaty of Vienna had in it seventeen treaties—diplomatic
in‘truments of the highest class. When the Treaty of
Vienna was negotiated it recited at its commencement that
the powers of Congress were anxious to give the general
result of various negotiations included in one cotr.mon ratifi-
ration for the settlement of affairs at Utrecht, and of the 181
sectinns of that treaty about BO were original stipulations, and
the rest were merely quotations, or merely portions which had
formed other treaties, and in order to prevent any misconcep-
tion in the 118 articles comprising portions of these, 17 treaties
were Frecifically recitcd. The House would remember that of
'here 17 treaties three were Polish, negotiated between three
Polish Powers, and not a single word in the Treaty:of Vienna,
except the clauses in these instruments, were original stipu-
lations ; and any violation of these clauses would not be a
violation of the original instrument. It also contained sti-
pulations for various personal rights, and for certain privileges
to the provincial states of Germany, and by the principle of
the present discussion any violation of these would be a viola-
tioe of the Treaty of Cracow. That instrument at this mo-
ment regulated all the rivers of Germany, and that regulation
WA+ in the same category as the Polish treaties in the Treaty
of Vienna. One of the stipulations of that treaty at the present
moment enacted that a German P. ince could not appoint any
inspector or sub inspector of rivers except the appointment was
for his life, and there were many instances in which these in-
spectors h•d been appointed, and not for life,
and that act was a violation of the treaty. There
was immense difficulty at Congress to arrange
the precedence arnnngst Remembers, and M. Talleyrand at last
arranged articles of precedence by which the various diplomatic
agents should be received, and if their claims were equal, they
• were to cast lots for the precedence. That was one of our
treaties in the same category as the Polish treaty; and if the
Swedish and Spanish Ministers quarrelled about precedence,
and one of them were to take precedence of the other without
casting lots, the Treaty of Vienna would be violated ieltheir per-
sons. The King of Sardinia in his treaty, which was a basis of
other treaties, agreed to give certain privileges to the Univer-
sity of Genoa, and within five years after those grants were vio-
lated. Could they believe that the great man who drew up
the Treaty of Vienna, would make a stipulation like this a means
of upsetting the whole, and that, too, after 30 years' constant
communion with the greatest diplomati-ts? To his (Mr.
Disraeli's) surprise, this fact was reverted to in the Queen's
Speech ; but he was more surprised that the Noble Lord, who
must understand the question, should so far have de-
ferred to public clamour as to have allowed any
one of these circumstance; to be a breach of the treaty
any more or less than the late events in Cracow, and should
hive no better course to adopt than the present one. It was
an acknowledged principle of public law that a superior instru-
ment could not merge into an inferior one, and he defied the
Noble Lord to show him a single instance in which the solemn
stipulations of any specific treaty of the time had not been re-
presentee, as embodied in the general stipulations of the final
act at Congress. He could show the Noble Lord authentic
precedents, but to prove the case beyond all question it was
not necessary to do so, and he would only produce one of them.
He did not mean to say that in a case like the present he sup-
posed that he ruled influence their opinion by foggy references
to some obscure transactions. He would take public trans-
actions of as great importance as those in the Congress of
Vienna, where the actors were eminent men, and dealing with
circumstances as great as those in the Congress of Vienna.
He alluded to the treaty of Westphalia. The treaty of West-
phalia was the foundation of the public law of Europe until
the French Revolution, and was only suspended by the Treaty of
Vienna. This question settled at Congress was an analogous
instance in which the Powers of Europe were placed in the 1
same position as the one they were now placed in, and in
which they were called violators of treaties. The question
had been discussed by the first juris consults of that learned
age, Cardinal Richelieu amongst the number, and they were
called upon to act under circumstances of greater importance
than those which had recently taken place at Cracow. He
would put to the Noble Lord the particulars of Westphalia,
negotiated at the Congress of Minister, when Germany
was at the conclusion of a great war, and parallel
to the late war when the greater Powers met. The treaty
settled all the great questions with regard to the balance of
power, but it was found impossible to deal with the affairs is`
Germany, where firseof all religious grievances were to be
settled between the Protestants and Roman Catholics, besides
the claims of 150 German princes. They said that
they could not settle all this at Minster, and that the con-
tending parties should go to Osnaberg, and hare a Congress,
to be sitting at the same time as the one at
Minster. The Emperors of Germany, the Princes of
Germany. and the King of Sardinia, who afterwards got
Pomerania, were parties to this treaty at Osnaberg, and all
the affairs settled at Osnaberg were declared to be parties to
the treaty of Minster, which was signed by all the powers of
Europe. The Imperial cities of Germany obtained, through
the influence of the Swedish Court, the privilege of voting in
the Diet, so that they should have a voice like German
Sovereign States. The Emperors and Princes of Germany
never allowed these free cities those rights guaranteed to them.
The Diet was the arbiter of all the differences on the
'ubj'et, and in three years, it the grievances of these
cities were not settled, all the other German free
cities
We,• obliged to, declare war in their cause
ant they entered into The parties to these
of Cracow is a violation of
treatiea," but noilllef the
precedents of the same kind
self act? Look at the disruption
Nether-
lands. The Noble Lordg
King of the Netherlandsinterfered, not u
violation of the treaties of Vienna, but of
treaties were nothing more than witnesses,
;leuwahreanntael:i whatever.
edktoin The absorption
the provisions of the "seventeen
,a,ti,yltilVienna. There are several
kingdom of the Nether-
It'h°zts'r:Esistance
ototzedid the Noble Lord him-
by the
eerund of the
In the case of the partition of Cracow, it is not ee
competenttreat tit;
Cracow to call upon the guaranteeing powers, because
they are not a party to the seventeen treaties. There
was a great difference between the original stipula-
tion; of a treaty, and the clauses quoted from it, ,
as might be seen in the original stipulation, as in the conets.

THEI SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY

the people were suffering. He should be exceedingly sorry to
embarrass the Government; he was ready to bear witness to
their anxieties to meet the distress, but he conf 'seed himself
to be much mortified at the flat refusal of the Noble Lord to
make any exertion to keep the markets down. The prices of
everything had nearly trebled, and the landlords had not re-
ceived anything like one-half of their rents. He would con-
jure the Noble Lord to throw his principles of political economy
for once to the winds, and to listen to the voice of a patient and
starving people.—(Hear.) He hoped that the House would be-
lieve his assertions with respect to the awful character o
the distress. He stated it on his word and truth, and he hoped
that the House would not listen to the virulence and unquali-
fied statements of the Member for Bath, who had calumniated
the character of the country. --(Hear, hear.) Before he
concluded, he desired to bear witness to the manful exertions
of the Catholic clergy to mitigate the evils by which they were
surrounded.

Sir ROBERT PEEL said he was not about to interrupt
the unanimity which seemed to prevail on all sides of the
House with respect to the Address. They would be better
able to discuss the topics which had been en-
tered upon in the Speech from the Throne when
the promised information should be laid upon the
table.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had stated that with
respect to the marriage which had been entered into be-
tween a son of the King of France and the Infanta of Spain,
that the whole of the correspondence would be laid upon the
table. That correspondence, which had appeared in the
French papers, he apprehended was but a portion.—(Hear. )
He trusted that the Noble Lord would give, as freely as should
be consistent with his duty, all the documents connected with
the part the Government had taken in reference to that oc-
currence. Conceiving,as he did, that discussion would be the
more satisfactory to all parties, he should therefore at
present abstain from adverting to that subject; he would only
observe that during the period that the late Government were
in office, no attempt was made to advocate the connexion of a
Prince of the house of Coburg with that of Spain. For his
own part, he deprecated any such connexion, for he thought
that the interests of the people of England would not be bene-
fited by any such alliance. He thought that its effect would
be to introduce them more intimately into the domestic con-
cerns of Spain—an introduction which he considered would be
anything but beneficial to the interests of England.—( Hear,
hear.) It was his belief that her interests were,
that , Spain should be really an independent Power,
and that she should maintain the high character of an
independent nation, and that she should conduct her own ad-
ministration without tolerating any interference. He hoped to
live to see the day when Spain would place herself in such a
a proud position, and become a powerful and independent
country.—(Hear, hear.) But, speaking of the late Govern-
ment, he could with truth assert that not only did they not di-
rectly, by any official act, but he hesitated not to add, that
net any indirect means were resorted to for the purpose of ad-
vancing the pretensions of a Prince of the house of Coburg.
In referring to another portion of her Majesty's Address, he
could not but express his regret that the extinction of the
free state of Cracow had been determined on by three of the
Powers which had been parties to the Treaty of Vienna.
While be admired and acceded to certain portions of the
speech of the Hon. Member near him (Mr. Disraeli), the
Hon. Member must be aware that there was an assurance given
to Europe at the peoriod when a settlement of its affairs took
place—there was a public assurance given that that last rem-
nant of Polish independence should be maintained—(Cheers)
—and that Cracow should not be annexed to another country
as it had been lately annexed. There was therefore a distinct
and positive departure from their engagements in the course
lately pursued by the Courts of Vienna, Petersburgh, and
Berlin.—( Hear, hear.) True, they assigned as a reason that
Cracow had given refuge to insurgents in the last disturbances;
yet, surely, they might have thought that these three great
Powers might have protected themselves from any danger to
which they might be threatened by an invasion from Cracow.
—(Laughter.) Their true 'policy would have been to have
given to Cracow all the rights arid privileges to which she was
entitled, taking at the same time effectual security against any
danger arising to their peace or prosperity from that re—
public. If danger were really apprehended, a confer-
ence, with the sanction of France and England, might
be held with the other European States, and a new arrange-
ment effected which would be deemed binding on the contract-
ing nations. But he could not find in the circumstances any
sufficient justifieation for the cct wirieh had been committed,
and he was grieved and astoni,hed that Austria should have
consented to that distinct breach of the Treaty of Vienna.
Such an act was inconsistent with true policy, and calculated
to shake tl e confidence which ought to exist between the great
countries of Europe.—( Hear, hear.) There was another
subject adverted to in the Address from the Throne which he
hailed with great pleasure—he meant the intention of
the Government to introduce some measures for improving
the sanatory condition of the people. No one could possibly
exaggerate the importance of sanatory regulations as conducive
to the wealth and greatness of a country, or to the happiness
of its people ; and he trusted, therefore, that the measures in-
troduced would be of a most extensive character. It was not
merely in large cities that such a measure was required—it was
equally necessary that smaller towns should be benefited, and
he trusted that power would therefore be given to municipal
authorities in these smaller places to make such improvements
as they might consider necessary. With respect to
Ireland, he was disposed, from his knowledge of
the difficulties all Governments had in dealing with
this question, to make every allownnce fur the difficulties her
Majesty's Ministers had to overcome. He knew how easily it
was, by superfluous care, to create unnecessary alarm, and on
the other hand the greater danger that might arise from a san-
guine idea of abundance. He could not, therefore, blame the
Government 'that they did not anticipate in September the
miseries which affected the sister island at this period. It was
said that there were 420,000 persons employed upon public
works, at an expense of 158,003/. Hear, hear.) New he
thought measures ought to be taken to restore these
people to their former position, for setting them to
work to cultivate the soil, so that they might have
a prospect of a future harvest, and next to improving and drain-
ing the land. It was perfectly legitimate ; perhaps it was the
best means for a Government to employ the surplus labour of
the country upon public work.. There were many public
works which bad amply repaid the outlay, but still there ought
to be a limit to this mode of employment. The time for intro-
ducing that limit had arr ved, and he thought, with the aid of
the landed interest of Ireland, the labour engaged upon
public works might , easily be transferred to the
cultivation of the soil. The Noble Lord at the head of the
Government proposed to suspend for a time the existing duties
upon corn, the navigation laws, 111,C1 to facilitate the introduc-
tion into this country of other zrticles of food. Now, it was his
intention to give these proposals his cordial support. He
thought the advantages to be derived from them would not be
as great as if they had been adopted at an earlier period. Cir-
cumstances were different now to what they were in November,
1846, but although the advantages to be derived from the
measure might be less than if it had been adopted at an earlier
period, before France and other countries had commenced im-
porting corn, yet he thought they were bound to do all they
could to increase the supply of food in Ireland . There might
be catgoes of wheat in this country which the measure would
bring into use, while the suspension of the navigation laws
would promote the transmission of corn front foreign
countries. Therefore, seeing that a great many
deaths were constantly taking place in Ireland for
want of food ; seeing, also, that all this privation and suffering
had been borne with the greatest patience. Looking to the
'general state of that unhappy country, and bearing in mind
that the same distress and suffering was prevalent in the
western parts of Scotland, he should be constrained to give
these measures his most cordial support. With respect to the
measures of a more permanent character for the improvement of ,
the condition of the people of Ireland, it would be time enough
hereafter to speak of them. The Noble Lord proposed on an
early day to state his plans to the House, and he would not
be so ungracious as to say anything which was
calculated to prejudice the House against them.
He could not help thinking that whatever value might be
attached to a national plan of emigration, it would be some
time bef ere it could be brought to operate beneficially. He
was perfectly willing that this part of the empire should be
called on to take its just share of the evil that had overtaken
Ireland ; but they must bear in mind that the Government had
no money of its own, but must borrow, in older to make ad-
vances of food to the people. Still, he was willing that this
should be done in the present crisis ; but with respect to the
general improvement of the people, nothing could be more in-
jurious than ill judged liberality.—( Hear, hear.) Ireland
should feel the necessity of making great exertions on her part;
that she should not consent to depend on charity, which could
never forward her real interest, nor seek to transfer her bur.
Hear, hear.) He hoped,
ad
lesnos, tit:to t
dh
eeaphenop e
go withft his
thisc o unt ry.
—(
momentous question, that all party
feelings and interests would be laid aside. They had all this
deepest interest in contributing to the peace and prosperity of
the sister kingdom ' • and if they were enabled by wise and pro-
vident legislation to heal these evils, wh ilew,
ould Cher y lattme y the
conserved the rights of property, they
foundation of the permanent improvement and welfare of the
at the eam % the
people of Ire.aud —( Loud cheers.)
Lord PALMERSTON said he did not wish to occupy the
Howe at any length, but he wished to say a few words relative
Mr. Di). .
Hon. Member for Shrewsbury (
to the Treaty of Vienna, which had beensraeli referredTthoebeHtohne
hGee(illoemrdapt%hiacodertsatlokoed)of thew
wished to
in the treaty,
treatykoowwwashoaft npoo_rvtaioluoes.
also says that there are no distinct engagements
treaty there were that were valueless ? The Hr. Member
On this
nor general guarrntees ; that there were only some special
arrangements that were agreed to bo carried out.
was
point the Hon. Member was quite mistaken on the treaty as
only a treaty
it regarded Cracow. He maintained that it
binding on the three Northern Powers, without the interven-
tion of the others. If the Hon. Member could only to oral
k to
the 6th, 7th, Bth, 9th, and 10th sections of the ge.ne
treaty they would find that they related to the free and inde-
pendent_ state of Cracow. If that were so, then said the
Hon.
Member, the treaty would enforce also the free navigation of
rivers. He (Lord Palmerston) admitted that it was so, that
such was the construction of the treaty, and it had been so
considered by all the states of Europe. The Ministers of a
Court took precedence at the Courts to which they were accre-
dited from the time of their arrival. The fact was, that
the first two protocols were not signed by himself, but
by the Earl of Aberdeen, under the Government of
the Duke of Wellington. The Noble Lord opposite
(Lord George Bentinck) was mistaken in the supposition
that the renunciations of the Duke of Orleans and
the Duke de Berri were inoperative, because they did not form
portions of the municipal law of France and Spain. That was
a mistake, fait these renunciations had since been made parts

of the law of those countries. But he wished it to be dis-
tinctly understood that it was not the treaty of Utrecht on
which the Government took its stand. The ground which her
Majesty's Ministers assumed was, that it was agreed that the
two crowns of France and Spain should not descend to a rn, tu-
ber of the family of Orleans. But this was not the proper
time for entering upon the subject, and when the proper time
came and the papers were laid upon the table he should be
quite prepared to defend the course which her Majesty's Go-
vernment had taken.
The Address was then passed without a division, the depu-
tation to carry it up to her Majesty was appointed, and the
House adjourned at a quarter past one o'clock.