The Sun.
London, England, 1841-01-27 00:00:00

Til E SUN. LONDON, WEDNR\DIY, JAN [LARY. 27, Is4t.

' maintenance cf cordial good will between this country and
France is essential and necessary to the interest of Europe.
I cannot entertain a doubt that the French nation have a
false conception of the people of England ; I believe there
is no wish on the part of the great community of England,
which has been called the enemy of France—l do not be-
lieve there is the slightest wish on the part of the people of
England that the power of France should be curtailed.
And I believe that there would be no feelings of gladness
on the part of the people of England at any thing that would
deteriorate the interests of the people of France. At the
same time, with that feeling, strongly in my mind,
I am not prepared to say that the policy of attempt-
ing the settlement of the Eastern Question was necessary.
I can see complications arising from the continuance of
the Syrian question, in which any attempts at adjustment
might have involved this country in war. It is true that
the Turkish Empire has exhibited weakness, but still it
existed, and every effort, in my opinion, should be made to
prevent that conflict which would arise upon the dissolu-
tion of the Turkish Empire. It is clear that the condition
of the Pacha had become inconsistent with the stability of
the Turkish Empire. Looking at Russia, I have thought,
and always have thought, that her natural position rendered
her a subject of jealousy and suspicion, but I think the
course that Russia has pursued ought to exempt her from
some of the observations which have been made by the
Honourable Member for Kilkenny. That. Hon. Gentle-
man had thought that what had taken place on the
north-west frontier of England was attributable to Russia.
It would be no easy matter for us to make the evacuation
of Constantinople by Russia one of the conditions est
peace with that country. I shall, therefore, suspend al-
together my opinion upon the policy of the intervention,
until I receive that full explanation from her Majesty's
Government, which I presume they are prepared to give.
They may be enabled to show that the consequences of
England's forbearance would have been the imnaed:ate
intervention of Russia, or of Russia, Prussia, and Austria;
they may possibly remind us that that event which did
occur in the year 1833 would have occurred again in 1810.
The Porte applied to us in 1833 to protect her against
this very Pacha; we refused, and what was the conse
quence ?—an application to Russia. Russia did step in,
did protect the Porte, and obtained the signature of a
treaty against which we were the first to protest.
We were obliged to tell Russia, "We will not con-
sider that treaty as part of the law of Europe." We were
driven almost to declare war in 1833 on account of that
very treaty ; and seeing that the Porte was about to be
spoiled, without a show of justice, by one of its own sub-
jects, who for that purpose abused the authority with
which he had been entrusted, I do believe that Russia, 1
do believe that Austria, would have felt the necessity of
intervention ; that they would again have been led to the
same course which had been taken in. 1833; and depend
upon it that Russia cannot taice protect Turkey, and
twice save her from annihilation within a period of
seven years, and be placed in any other relation
to her than that of master ; and therefore she, though
I am not prepared to concur in any address
to the Throne approving of this policy, and would rather
suspend my judgment, and should not be acting an honest
part if I concurred in the Address in the absence of in-
fornietion implying censure on those who were parties to
the Treaty of July. I say, therefore, Sir, that lam pre-
pared to admit the case, first that intervention was neces-
sary—advisable, perhaps, if you could have the co opera-
tion of France—nay, necessary, perhaps, even if the as-
sistance of France were ultimately positively refused. But
then I must say this, that in proportion as the assistance of
France was withheld—in proportion as her cordial co-
operation and concurrence were wantinea and in
proportion as the loss of that co-operation and
assistance greatly decreased the chances of success,
you ought to have shown, and I trust }cu
have shown, in the whole of these proceedings the utmost
consideration for the not unnatural feelings with which
France might view the revival of a former alliance. It is

in vain to say that the principles of this alliance are diffe-
rent from those of 1815. lam perfectly ready to admit
that ; but sometimes the coincidence of facts and circum-
stances is almost as unfortunate as tie coincidence of prin-
ciples. Nothing can be more dissimilar than the princi-
ple of this Quadruple Treaty and the principle of that
Treaty which led to the occupation of Paris in 1814 ; but
it should be remembered that France is a country which
has always, and justly, set the highest value upon
its military glory. I should be sorry to think that
the people of that country view the events of 1814
and 1815 with any feeling of bitterness. They
must view with regret the repulses to which they were
subject ; but I am sure no impartial than, reading the his-
tories of the campaigns of 1814 and 1815, can fairly con-
template those campaigns, though unfortunate in the re-
sult to France, with any other feeling than that of admi-
ration fur the skill of the leader, and the valour of the
army of France. But at the same time the events are too
recent, the reverse too great, that France should not be
exceedingly jealous of the nations to whom she was op-
posed. I entreat you, my Lord (addressing Lord Palmer-
ston) to take care that you do not excite and aggravate
those jealousies; I do think that there is some danger of
this. I attach the utmost importance to such a considera-
tion.—(hear.) I hope the Noble Lord will not taunt
me by saying, " You do not find fault with the
great object which we contemplate, but you
select some minor point for the subject of your re-
marks." Ido attach the utmost importance to this
point. If it wore necessary for you to act without France,
I would exhaust every means of convincing Prance that
you came to that resolution with the utmost reluctance, ,
and would have left, as I hope they have been left, distinctly
upon record, the grounds upon which you felt bound to
act without the concurrence of France. I trust you will
be able to show that you exhausted every means of con-
ciliating the good feelings cf that nation.--4 Hear, hear, )
Now, I tell the Noble Lord that there is one point which, in
reading the French debates, struck me very forcibly, in order
that I may make the matter more clear. I will quote exactly
?gat tilfl4icblPrirhrhttaligllgignlci4niliii*lAll Parties
who wore concerned in the diecussion were speaking in
perfect good faith, and describing the feelings which
they really entertained. M. Guizot was making a speech,
and he was stating he gave some general warning to the
French Government that negotiations were pending which
would possibly lead to the conclusion of the Treaty be-
tween the Powers, when he was interrupted by M. Thiera
in this manner:—" M. Thiers (interrupting M. Guisot)
--I will prove to M. Guizot that he told rtio on the 14th
of July that we have still plenty of time be-
fore us, and that there was nothing to render
urgency necessary." "M. Guizot—lt is true."
" M. Tniers-e-The Bth, filth, and 14tn July, ydd wrOte triiat
follows i--‘ The question is in.agitetion, and at a crisis, but
nothing as yet decided.' This is what you wrote to me;
an year letters contain the supposition that before signing
any Treaty a proposition would be made to France."
Now (continued the IYight flan. Paronet) ph at
'tar the accused" M. Guizot—.'tat is true, I believe.
All the world knows that France was kept in the dark as
to what was going on; the Treaty was concluded apart
from us, and it was a proceeding against which we had a
right to complain." Now, Ide not deny that Ferber; from
the general tenoer of the langEtagE held that 11J. Gui.ot
rd`.glit have inferred that a treaty was about to be signed,
but I must say, considering the character of the man, con-
sidering the friendly feelings expressed towards him by
England, and considering the friendly feeling entertained
by him to England, r: o cantet wonder thetl the Treaq
of the filth of July tictrieei7 those Powers who
were parties to the Treaties of 1814 and 1815,
were signed, and it was kept from the Ambassador
and representative of France that such a treaty was on the
point of being signed, I must easy I am net sewriaed that
there 7707 C etame !'eellitti, of inuigdatien.—( Hear, hear- I
Con'ildeieing all circumstances, I think it would have been
best to have apprised M. Guizot of what was intended, and
to have slid to him, " Now, we tell you, in a friendly spi-
rit, that our first object is to unite with you;
•but if yo"
will not trite ,telth lies ti•C p't.deee'd !dd." Jt
is quite clear from the letters that were written from the
French Ambassador to the French Minister that nothing
of the kind was done. On the 9th, 10. h, and even up to
the 14th of July, M. GUnot was placed in the humiliating
condition of ilet being ilikäte of tilt tfeety which Ass
about to be signed. The Noble Lord says that it vedttld
have been a greater ground of offence to France to com-
municate the intention, than it was to sign the Treaty
without be etineurtence. Why, no doubt there is a way
of doing those Ihinitsh If yoU bad gone to franCe, And
said " We aie going to sign a treaty, and see are utterly
indifferent whether. you join tit tir iidti stirtell year,
whether you agree or tyot,e shill sigh it.'' ',know that
would Ilion bah an ofensive mode of proceeding, but if
Fen had gone id a perfectly conciliatory spirit, and told
rance " this ik gaiha in be dale, dti net deedYe lent Goa
verti.t.en't by hording out any hopes of its interruption," I
cannot help thinking that there mould have been less offence
in such a probeeding than iii thie errs sk-hiCh adtipted,
namely, ths tignaidre of the Treaty without communica-
tion. tam sure that in private life and in the intercourse
of society generally, the principle for which I amcon-
tetttliit is Most heneficially adopted. Now let site remind
the Noble Lord of what took place at Verona. In the
Congress of Verona the position of england very much
resembled that of France at the present time, and in that
1 institute the tattle teat pursued which I think ought to
I have. been plirsiiett with reference to France.—( Hear.)
All I contend for is, that a less unkind course might have
been adopted.:--(Hear, hear.) Now I must enter my
protest against Parliament not having the slightest intima-
tion, cm the eve of a rupture with that Power, the alliance
of thigh we all felt to be of such importance.---( Bear.
hear.) This was an etent that might affect the interests
of the world. Parliament was sitting here on the 15th
July. The Noble Lord told us he hoped for the co-opera-
tion of France, and quoted a speech of the King of France
which left us under that impression. He also read a letter
froth 1%1. Guitot to the like effect; and I must say, consi-
treeitik the ma(•,,nitude of the question, arid that the Bri-
tish Parliament was then Sitting, whatever may be your
teebnical forms and ceremonies, not to hare called in
the Assistance and advice of Parliament to prevent the se-
verance of the connection With Fiance does appear to me
to have been a slight upon deliberative assemblies, which
may not hare been intended, but which if drawn 'alto
preCedent they tend greatly to undermine their powers.
• ( ehcela.) answer I 'afro* ia, that the treaty was not
ra,ified • but recollect the peculiar condition of the ques
tion—('Cheets)—Recollect the special and extraordinary
power:, set forth iti these treaties. So anxious were they
for their immediate execution, that the parties to them con-
sented they should be put into immediate execution with-
out being rat:fied,—( Hear, hear.) Orders were given to
your navy end army with regard to these treaties, that
if other measures failed they should: carry fire and
sword into the heart of Syria.--( Hear.) Now
before ratification, it is not uncommon to carry into effect
the provisions of a treaty, but should this have been done
when the practical execution of the Treaty might endanger
the union with France ?—( Hear, hear.) Sir, as I have
said before, there aro many points in connexion with this
subject on which, before I form a conclusive judgment, 1
must see the progress of the negotiations, and the founda-
tion of your alarm of Russia and other Powers. One
thing I will say. Considering the position of M. Guizot
when tic consented to accept otlice, nothing should have
been done to add to his difficulties; but I think the letter
I of the Noble Lord, of the 7th of November, might be

s~•a • r

found fault with for its temper. I cannot help saying
also, I share in the feelings of regret which have been ex-
pressed at the omission of the name of France in
the Specch.—( Hear, hear.) It is difficult to over-
estimate the force of sympathy. Could there have
been any difficulty in taking the words used by the Noble
Lord in the first instance, and expressing i egret—main-
taMing your own ground, making no concession in point
of argument—at the termination of an alliance so long
continued ?—( Hear, hear.) In former speeches you have
mentioned the existence of that alliance with exultation,
as a security for the peace of the world, after the termina-
tion of it could there have been any difficulty, even if
France were to blame, in expressing your regret
at that circumstance ?a-4 Hear, hear. ) Remember, you
take credit for the success that has attended your opera-
tions. Could there have been any more becoming addi-
tion than the expression of your anticipation and hope that
a speedy and cordial understanding, would take place,—
( Hear, hear.) It might have been an argument directed
against those who seize every opportunity of poisoning
the public mind against us. Her Majesty's Speech says,
" I have the satisfaction of receiving from Foreign Powers
assurances of their friendly disposition, and earnest desire
to maintain peace." Why, if France has conveyed to us
the intimation of her friendly disposition, in what would
it have been derogatory to your honour to have done so?
—and if France has expres ed an earnest desire to maintain
peace, what difficulty would there have been in adding
an expression of your regret at its interruption. Again
i the Speech alludes to objects that are or. the eve of cc-
complishment. What are those objects? The great ob-
ject contemplated by this country was the maintenance of
the integrity and independence of the Ottoman empire,
and thereby "to give security to Europe." Why, if you
are on the eve of accomplishing this great object, why
take exception to the insertion of such a clause as this?
Sir, I still hope that the clouds which hang over the poli-
tical horizon will pass away, and that the reasonable part
of Europe will exercise such forbearance as shall prevent
a recurrence to the dreadful calamity of war.—(Cheers.)
What has war done ! What a consumption it is of time
and capital, uselessly and unprofitably—nay, not only so, if
it were sunk to the bottom of the sea, there would be
some limit to it, but you cannot make these preparations
for war without reviving that fell spirit, and all those bad
passions and animosities which belong to it; and how
shall these be suppressed ?—(Cheers.) Every shilling
devoted to these prepaiations is an additional tax and
burden upon France, as well as upon us, withdraws so
much capital, and promotes a spirit pregnant with the
most obnoxious principles.—(Cheers.) I do hope that
France will hear what is almost the unanimous voice of
this House, and will henceforward disbelieve the false re-
ports which are originated to create animosity between
the two nations.---(Hear, hear, bear.) I see several
grounds for not being released from apprehanion,
that the peace of Europe will not be affected.
I look to Syria. You are perhaps determined to
1 mit the power of the Yachts nd to confine him to Egypt ;
/i
tut remember t • s, while F t nee remains in her insulated
position, you will find, afte the present temporary settle-
ment, a thousand questions Arise you cannot satisfactorily
settle without the co-operation of France. The relations
between the Pacha and the Porte arc still to be settled.
These may be framed entirely destructive of his power ;
but from the relations of Turkey, and the peculiar situa-
tion of Turkey with respect to the Mediteraanean and the
entrance to the Bosphorus, how important for our own ob-
jects to effect a general and amicable settlement, and that
France should take part in it, not to extort from you a
confession that you were wrong, but if possible, forgetting
the past, to prevail on her to unite with you for mutual good.
No man is more convinced then I am that you have no gua-
rantee for peace. I again say lam not prepared to con-
demn in the slightest degree many of your objects. Oace
begun you have no alternative but to persevere. But you
say that your measures have been attended with signal
success. Now, it appears to me that this is an opportunity
in which you may make—not unreasonable concessions,
for that might only encourage the war party in France—
but let me advise you, because you are strong, because you
are successful, because vou have shown that years of peace
have not abated the gallant spirit of your army and navy—
now, I say, is the time to say to France, Enter into
communion with the great Powers of Europe for
the peke of peace ; we are all of us animated by an
earnest desire to admit you again into the great family ; we
entreat you now to enter into our councils. I trust France
would accede to this request, and I formed that hope on the
opinions expressed by the present Prime Minister of France
with respect to the Porte, to which I trust he still ad-
heres. The Right Honourable Baronet then read 20113 C
extracts from letters of Marshal Soult, but in so low
a tone as to be quite inaudible in the gallery. If
there was any man—if there were any two men, who
would shrink from a conflict with England, it was the
combination of these two men. It would be a sacrifice of
opinion on my part if I did not give expression to it, and
my belief is that these men acted from their honest con-
victions. I admire the honesty and manliness with wnich
Marshal Soult came forward and stated that he
bore a grateful recollection of the reception be
had met with in this country.—( Hear and cheers.)
That reception was not so much the personal esteem in
which the old warrior was held, as an indication that the
old ungenerous national antipathies and animosities against
France were extinct in this country, and that we took
that opportunity of proving our kind feeling towards it.—
(Cheers from both sides of the House.) Sir, I have
risen at the risk of doing a disservice to Marshal Soult,
by complimenting him in a British House of Commons,
when I caprena my anxious hope that he and
M. Guizot, aided by the enlightened King of - France,
may be successful, and that, while maintaining the
honour of France inviolate, they may have power
enough, aided by the returning. good sense of that country,
to rescue it and the rest of Europe from the miserable
calamity of renewed hostilities.—(Loud cheering.)
Mr. GROTE explained, He had not said that the
Clielitt alfse lor the war, but traiiiher&-was no ieFurily or
much an occurrence from their interfering in the concerns
of the Ottoman empire.
Lord PAL Mk: RSTON—Sir I am not going to dis-
cuss the whole of the topics introduced in the speech of
the Right Hon. Bart., or to find fault with him for find-
ing fault with some of the details of our conduct while
approving of the main policy. The Right Hon. Baronet
has a perfect right to maks these distinctions ; but I
think that I shall be able to show that the objections he
has made do not rest oh any solid formation. I hope, on !
the contrary, to show that in many thing! which have fallen l
from the Right Hon. Baronet, and especially at the con-
eles4er ,of his speech we do not entirely concur.--s
(Hear, urea?.) filir Ido concur in deeply lamenting that
the course these discussi6hS he taken have for a time,
and only, I trust, for a short tithe, interrupted that
good and friendly feeling which has happily so to lass or at
laasylering the last 10 years, subsisted between England
and trance. I attire.. with the Right Hon. Baronet that
it is of the greatest importane6 fstSt raerely to the welfare
and prosperity of the two countries, taut t 5 tl‘e peace
and tranquillity of Europe, that there should be a good .s..na
charstaniing between England and France. Sir, I have gone
surtlier do that rosat than the Right Hon. Baronet, for I
have attached greater iinsidria'nte eO. aallie than himself
to a closer connection between the two t fitmtri.c.s.—

(hear, hear.) ftl;;;oftelibeeri my lot Co ;ianciin tti7
place here and to justify myself against the charge of at-
ttchirig too much,. importance to that connection. I al-
wayS Bair Said; tihtn that topic: was brought up against
me, that I understood the (aliened lieteen Prance and Eng-
land rested upon the interests of the two totrittiea; and
whenever their interests diverged the alliance would lid
placed in the same antithesis. Sir, I should deeply la-
ment that the lmeteste of those two countries should di-
verge; and although it may be pi-eivr.reptuous in an Eng-
lishman to estimate the interests of I,rance differently
from the French people themselves, I cannot help thinking
that the real interests of France with regard to
the terN,j'h tiattn'tin ,sre identical with those of England,
and that we ha 4 not ireett parsing any course which
would justify the resentment or hostility o'f that country.
I am persuaded that when the French nation earnt's tv a
calmer temper and reflects more coolly upon our prinei.
pies of action, end the ends we have endeavoured to main-

taut, ttnd when they know and understand more fully that
we have not acted In a spirit of jealousy or unfriendliness
towards France, I cannot direst myself of the conviction
that we shall find that the temper of the French
nation as regards England will turn to that form
which re most anxiously desire, and which we regret has
been de fitted frotti.—Sir, I rejoice that the speech of the
Right Hon, lihronet has shown that in the great interests
of England both parties in th's House concur, and what-
ever party rivalsbips exist with regard to competition for
power in this country, they do not stand in the way of
unity of opinion when it is shown that the great interests
of the country are at stake. lam glad also to tied by
what has fallen from the Right Hon. Baronet, that,
whatever may Have been said casually by individuals on
former occasions, among the leading men on both sides
there is a settled conviction and an earnest desire that the
best understanding and the kindest feelings should
exist between the two countries.—( Hear, hear.)
I can assure the House and the Right Hon. Baronet,
that as, on the one hand, no efforts on our part shall be
omitted during the course of these negotiations to
obtain and retain the co-operation of France; so, on the
other hand, no proper efforts on our part shall be
omitted to regain the good will of France, and to bring
back our ancient friendly relations. Sir, lam perfectly
ready to admit that, considering the great power of
France, possessed as she is of vest military and naval
means,4'nd placed geographically in the centre of Eu-
rope,
she
cannot be excluded from the great affairs of
Europe
settlement of any of its great affairs, nor
can
be complete or secure until France is brought
to take a part in their settlement. I shall now dis-
pose of some of the objections of the Right Hon. Baronet ;
viz., that we did not show sufficient courtesy to France,
in not making her acquainted with the intention of the Four
thpeey in any
Powers to conclude the Treaty. Sir, I have on former
occasions discussed that point in this House, and it is
toentirelya mistake to say that we allowed Parliament
separate without giving it any intimation or a know-
ledge of the transaction. Sir, I need scarcely re-
mind the House that on two occasions it fell to rry
lot, after the signing of the treaty, to enter into explana-
tions as to the course we had pursued. We had been
for twelve months endeavouring to bring France to an
understanding wife us. We failed in so doing, although
we made several propositions to France, and made several
concessions of our own views. We made a last repre-
sentati°l stating the utmost extent we should go in sacri-
ficingt we considered expedient to obtain her co_epe.
ration ; and now the Hon. Member for Kilkenny accuses
us of inconsistency, in having gone so far, although at
least it is a proof of our sincerity in wishing to make every
possible sacrifice for the purpose of obtaining the co-opera-
tion of France in the transaction to which I allude.
After the lapse of five or six weeks, we received a posi-
tive refusal on the part of France to concur in the arrange-
ment, and that refusal was grounded on the distant and
broad principle that it could not be carried into effect with-
oat resorting tocoereive mea Aires against the Pacha, to which
France would not be a party. Our Treaty was founded
upon that very arrangement, with a proviso of having re-
' course to coercive measures. Would it have been seemly
or any thing but a mockery to France, to have gone to

'her and said, " You have refused to join us; we told you
the ultimate extent of cur concessions, to which, if you did
not agree, we should net without you; . and we now call
upon you to be a party to those coercive measures which
you declared on no consideration would you take a share in."
So far from that heing a cause of quarrel with France, I
think the Ambassador would have had just cause of quarrel,
for it would have implied on our part that we thought them
insincere, and that we had disbelieved France in ber
former declaration. But then, Sir, to the point of e;:pe-
diency. It must be clear to every one, after the'% have
read the debates in the French Chamber, that the
only object of the French Government: was to gain
time to prevent us from doing anything except by negotia-
tion ; and every one must know, that bad we made any
communication, it must. have led to others on the part of
the French Government, and time would have been lost
which, considering the period when operations must
cease en the coast of Syria, must have prevented Any ope-
rations altogether during that season. Had we taken that
course, it would have shown the greatest imbecility, be-
cause the French Government would have found some
means or other to cause delay, and all effective measures
would have been rendered useless for & year. Then, Sir,
again I am perfectly aware that such a clurse would have
been inconsistent with usage, for I am not aware that the
Plenipotentiaries at this Court would have been justified
in consenting to any modification, unless they knew that
their own Courts would agree to and ratify them. An-
other objection taken by the Fight Hon. B2ronct was the
secresy---...
Sir R. PEEL—It was communicated.

Lord PALMERSTON—Undoubtedly. The second
day after the Treaty was signed I communicated to the
Ambassador of France, not only the fact, but the substance
of the Treaty ; but that, I apprehend, would not be enough.
The French Government would have said, " You must
give us the Treaty in extenso ;. we have already said we
will not agree with }our proposition ; you must let us see
the `Peaty itself in order to know whether any of the de-
tails will make amends to us for its sub=tance." Now,
Sir, with regard to the communication to Parliament, the
Right Hon. Bart. says it was unfitting for Government to
allow Parliament to separate without making them aware
of the nature of the engagements which had been entered
into by the Crown of this country. Now, Sir, as to lay-
ing the Treaty itself on the table, the objection was insur-
mountable. We could not lay a Treaty on the table of
the House without its having been ratified. That the
Treaty was signed was a matter of notoriety in the House.
Tne Treaty itself wns published in the nc:vspapers either
a day or two before or after the separation of Parliament.
Sir R. PEEL—Not till three weeks after.

Lord PA LMERSTON—I will not lay any stress upon
that fact. I
am not quite aware of the circumstances,
but the object of the treaty and the fact were matters of
public notoriety, and the Hon. Member for Kilkenny had
brought the -question two distinct times before the House ;
therefore it was impossible but that Parliament was com-
pletely aware of the circumstance, and could not by possi-
bility be kept in ignorance of what had been done. The
Rig ht Hon. Baronet said that although the treaty could
not be laid before them unless ratified, still there was an
accompanying protocol which ought to have been laid upon
the table. It was true that there was such a document,
but that protocol was founded upon the treaty, and there-
fore could not be laid before the House without the instru-
ment cut of which it arose, and although the Plenipotentia-
ries of the Four Powers determined that certain measures
should be immediately carried into execution, still the proto-
col had to go to the various Courts, and they might object to
the steps proposed to be taken, and might have stopped
their execution before the orders given could have been
acted upon. Now, Sir, with legaru to my despatch of the
2d of November, I should certainly have wished that it had
been communicated before the change of the Government
in France, but circumstances prevented me from sending it
sooner, and I did not think that the change was any reason
by they should allow matters to be recognised in which
they could not concur. With respect to the general policy
it would certainly be the duty of the Government to lay be-
fore the House such documents arid information as would put
lion. Members in possession of better grounds on which to
form a conclusive opinion upon these matters. The Noble
Lord ( Lord J. Russell) stated in so masterly a manner
the general outlines upon which our policy rests, that it
is only necessary to refer to that Speech for a full and
satisfactory answer to all that has been advanced, and I may
fairly say that the lion. Members for Kilkenny and Lc I-
don are the only Members who, upon general grounds,
would be disposed to vote any objections to the cause
which Government has pursued. The state of affairs in
the Levant for many years past has been pregnant with
danger to the people of Europe. The Sultan was
threatened by a powerful vassal ,upon whose for-
bearance no reliance could be placed, nay, who
was about to carry his aggressions further. The
Sultan felt obliged to throw himself upon the pro-
tection of some Power in Europe, and it was neces-
sary that we should either form a combination, or leave
him, as in 1832, to the support of one Power, which
Power would have acquired undue preponderance in the
affairs of Europe. The intention of the Treaty was to
avert events which might have involved the Great Powers
of Europe in great difficulties, if not in actual hostilities.
Then it is said we ought not to have engaged in this po-
licy, knowing the objection of France ; because, by so
doing, we incurred the danger of war. In the first place,
I will say that, according to all the diplomatic transac-
tions of France, they were entitled to assume that,
without an entire departure from her own professions, she
could not take up arms in support of the Pacha, and
against the Sultan, and then if not, it was clear no war
could ensue ; it was said that:the interference would be
beset with difficulties, and that the means would not be
sufficient. The result has proved that that information
and those opinions were based upon wrong calculations,
because we have not only succeeded, but we may say that
our success has been more rapid than it was possible to
have anticipated. It appears to me that the very reason
fiat's' lie ai"fritiffe" a" .11117ProY4 'flinffy -1, rem d
the Member for Kilkenny—namely, that we were assisting
a willing people to emancipate themselves from a tyranny
which they felt to be intolerable, and that we were
aiding them to give effect to their own wishes with regard
to their allegiance to their own sovereign ; for if the
people had not been anxious to return to the direct autho-
rity of the Sultan, and to get rid of the rule of Egypt, it
is clear that the Turkish force and our squadron of marines
on the coast, would not have been sufficient to accomplish
that great and rapid result which we had the good fortune
to realise. Therefore I say we have had good grounds in
the first place in thinking that what we were about would
Pot disturb the peace of Europe ; and, secondly, in being
of opinion that we were not undertaking an object which
we had not means to accomplish. And though undoubtedly
great irritation has been created in France by the course
which the Four Powers have pursued, yet I feel bound to
say that if the same pains had been taken to enlighten and
lawn public opinion in France as to the nature of those
transsctions—Hear)—and as to the spirit in which
they were conceived, which have been taken to mislead the
people of that country, to excite unfounded jealousies and
grovuadless animosities, I anveonvinced that the interrup-
ton which has unfortunately for a moment taken place
between, the tae countries would either rot have existed
at all, or, if it had existed at all, would have been of an
infinitely more trifling and snore transient nature.—
I will not, on the present occasion, go into the
details of the minor points, to which my Hon. 1; riend, the
Member for Kilkenny, has adverted. Many of those
points he will find explained when the papers are laid be-
fore him ; and I will then be ready when the House is in
possession of full information on the subject—l will be
ready to go into more detailed explanatione, which will
be more easily understood by the House than they could
be at present. I shall now cnly say, that if my Hon.
Friend presses the amendment he has introduced, it affords
me great satisfaction to think that he will not find a large
ntie,r_77 of supporters. If I were inclined to criticize his
Address oil the came principle on which be has criticized ours,
I thick I might pUiai out almost as many omissions in his
address of the matters v4uleh ought to be touched on, as
he alleges he has found in our speech and the Address
moeed to-night. I will not further detain the House; I
can only spin repeat, that if we did not advise the Crown
to introduce into the Speech from the Throne any capres.
sion of regret that France has not been a party to the
transactions, it was not because we did not feel that regret,
or because we thought that the House would not respond
to such an expression, but I apprehend it would have been
unusual—it would have been inconsistent with the ordi-
nary principles on which Speeches from the Throne are
framed, to express regret at an interruption of good under-
standing which had not been marked by any diplomatic
event. If either country had formally expressed its dissa-
tisfaction—if there had been an interruption of diplomatic
relations, then there would undoubtedly have been an act of
which the Crown might have taken notice in its speech. But
for the Crown merely to have taken notice of that irrita-
tion. which in various ways has been unfortunately manifest
in France, would not, I think, have been consistent with
the ordinary course of proceedings in regard to documents
of that nature. But if the Right Hon. Baronet thinks
that the omission implies any want of regret on the part
of her Majesty's advisers on the subject, I can assure him
—and I am satisfied that every one of my colleagues would
equally assure him—that the regret he has expressed is sin-
cerely shared in by us ; and I have a confident hope that be-
fore any length of time shall have elapsed, we will find that
the present irritation in France has subsided, and that
France will revert to her natural and proper position in
Europe, and that that understanding which is essential to
the fundamental interests of the two countries, will be
found to have returned to its former condition.
The Address was then put and agreed to. It was or-
derred to be referred to a Committee and reported to-
morrow, and the House adjourned at Half-past Eleven
o'Clock.

Mits. GORE'S NEW NOVEL, " GREVILLE;
OR, A SEASON IN PARIS."—This new work (observes a
Contemporary) exhibits Mrs. Gore's well-known charac-
teristics of easy, buoyant, and pointed composition ; a feli-
citous skill in depicting manners, and a smart, rather than
bitter, satire, directed against vice in all its forms. By
laying the scene of her story for the most part on the Con-
tinent, she has been enabled to vary hey--subjects, substi-
tuting French for English mauners---,the fashionable quar-
ters of Paris for those of London.--='-and the Court of the
Tuilleries for that of James's‘r There aro many clever
scenes in the work, many bold and energetic sketches of
figures, and it exhibits a In6st intimate knowledge of so-
ciety and the habits of the French capital. The piquancy
of observation display,ed by Mrs. Gore in " Greville," is,
perhaps, even pre striking than many of her former
works; and so are her portraits. Greville, the hero, is
well painted, as a young, high born, and 'Argil bred Eng-
lishman. Young Massingberd, the dandy rival, of mode-
rate means, whose method of advancement is impudence
and extravagance, is capital ; and the French Marquis is
not only life-like, hut new. Greville is likely to be one Sf
Mrs. Gore's most popular productions, for there are few
English visitants to Paris who will not desire to peruse
her sparkling sketches of society in that lively ructrepoli..
It is rumoured that amongst the honours which
will be dispeised by her Majesty immediately upon the
christening of the Princess, Viscount Melbourne will be
created a Marquis, and that an English With= will be
' e conferred upon Lord Palmerston.