The Sun.
London, England, 1847-03-17 00:00:00

\\,-)

>`'-

could not therefore rely upon the construction wbfikts
made in their favour, or on the friendly interpositigis
Powers who were parties to this treaty. He would beg fes.
these several treaties beiore the House, and remincflitlap, vit;
wha had occurred at the commencement of the present- Stt
sion. The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamwortb
(Sir R. Peel), after a series of observations on the real con-.
sequences of the treaty, had expressed his opinion that
this was but an annexed treaty to the treaty of Vienna-
-(Loud cheers.) But what did the Right Honourable Gen-
tleman say? He asked, what was the use of these.
treaties, and had designated them, as if in contempt, as an=
nexed treaties; and had asked what was the use of those trea-
ties. lie should be sorry to misrepresent those treaties, but
he believed that the effect of the whole of them was to give
nationality to Poland. And he did not believe that the treaty of
Vienna at all interfered with the objects of that treaty.-
' (Cheers.) What, indeed, was the use or the meaning of
these propositions, if they were not to be backed by the Go-•
vernment ? Quite sure he was that the House would never
sanction the fulfilment of the treaty if it were not sanctioned
by public opinion. What, in fsct, was the meaning of these
terms, or the use ot them, if they did not mean at the same
time to sanction the expression of public opinion.-(Hear,
hear.) What was the meaning of these terms if they
%sere not to sanction the preceesiings of the several Powers ?
Fli•ar, hear.) Was there a human being in existence
who did not believe that the same faults would be committed
if the same fanqs were to be observed at every trifling change?
lie was not aware of the mischief which might arise, hut no ono
t
g
ncr,e,:oui
Cad
hurch
ene
at,
:t%:l to I.illaintei!rce:ul l
tpBiif t:aitat}
inculpate
iclausectttel7,aeatsxycsailvvit,}:titrrrlaittelhuo:efmtchit:Ler,me,etinka.,,ecimr‘oh,sen
o,,,tovrf.fo:uPuatillhodiviel.abfirciends
jadtftwhit-itiloihtl
nlehai
(yes:
aonfd
Viennarleir ascht:i.o
should
hh
ee
broken,esti osrs
men's consciences
was
notwhether a s to
should stand; and in showing that the treaty of Vienna ought
to be observed, he wsukt rely not only on what had been said
on his own side of the House, but also on the plain principle
of justice. and which was conformable to the general rule of
the House with respect to treaties. He could not agree that
the,general rules of the House should be violated for the sake
of a trifling expense, and that the first principles of general
law sht.uld be sacrificed in order to me. t the feeling of irrita-
tion from which we have suffered so much. The Hight Hon.
Baronet the Member for Tamoorth had pointed out this ques-
tion as the foundation ot a triumphant expression of popular
feeling, and the means by which it was to be reginated and im-
proved.-(Che.rs.) He would ask whether the opinion of the
Ric ht Hon Baronet was to be maintained, and whether toe in-
fraction of a particular treaty was to be sufficient for the infrac-
tion of a genera teeaty. it was very evident that there had
been an infraction of the general treaty, and if it was not, there
was sufficient opportunity for correcting the report. The question
had been discussed over and over again. but it as yet had never
been settled. The Right Hon. Baronet had put the question
as if the ttealy had never been violated. In this case, the
treaty was evidently violated, and the consideration was, whether
the violation of one article was sufficient to justify the viola-
lesion of others. That was the question to which Austria, Russia,
Prussia, and France were parties ; and if they didnot adhere to
the principle which they had laid down, they would lose their
locus standi. If there were any objections to the particular
article, still none could be entertained as to. the principles of
the original treaty. And if that were to be abrogated, the
signers of that abrogation ought to give notice to the parties
to the original treaty, He would not refer to precedent, for
precedent was altogether opposed t . the infraction of a part'
of a treaty and yet retaining the principles of the whole agree•
ment. He would ask the Noble Lord, after reading the gene-
ral treaty, and the whole series of the correspondence, whether
one dot of a vowel of that agreement should be set aside, or
whether any foreign interposition should be suffered? Hon.
Gentlemen might choose to make an exi.ibition at Freemasons'
Hall, and prostitute the influence of the British Senate, but
' he trusted that, for the ci edit of the country and the character of
the Noble Lord, they would not carry this question to a division.
Well, this had been laid down as the rule under these circum-
stances, that when a superior instrument was present the mere
repetition of its clauses was to be looked upon as a mere reci-
tal. They were merely the machine by which the signora of
the original treaty were allowed to interpose in the settlement
of questions which might arise under the particular treaty. He
would hesitate very much, although he might be able to esta-
blish his opinions by reference to very grave authority-he
would hesitate very much-he would feel he had a great diffi-
culty to encounter in referring to the past-but he could well
establish his position by reference to living witnesses-by re-
ferring to the experience of statesmen in that House. He must
say, however, that nothing had more amazed him than the
speech which the House had heard irom the Right Hon. Gen
tleman (Sir Robert Peel) on this question. He wouldisle
the Right Hon. Gentleman, or he would ask the Noble Lord
opposite, how they had both acted in tke case of Belgium?-
How had the king of Holland acted? What was the conduct
of the King of Holland ? He had an intimate
knowledge of the law of nations ; but then he was not a mem-
ber of the House of Commons.-(Laughter,) He was not a
Member of that House, influenced by assemblies held at Free-
masons' Hall, which settled at will important questions of which
they had no knowledge -( Hear, hear)-and, therefore, the
King of Holland, looking only to his legal rights, did not appeal
to Europe. Did the House think that the King of Holland, if
he were justified in so doing, would not have appealed to
Europe ? He could only expect his legal rights-he held
these rights from the Congress of Vienna, and they were embo-
died in the same stipulations which embodied ;he rights of
Cracow and of Poland. But they were stipulations subsidiary
to the general instrument, and were expected to demand only
from the signing Powers a moral interference for the preserva-
tion of their integrity. But did the King of Holland appeal to
Europe against the violation of the treaty of Vienna? No, he
leoked to the original treaty, and he appealed to the
Plenipotentiaries who had represented the Powers of Europe
in Vienna. The Right Hon.. Gentleman, although he did not
occupy the position which the Noble Lord then held at the
head of the Government, was a distinguished Member of the
then Ministry ; he was the leader in that House, and therefore,
from his position, doubly responsible to the House and to the
country. The King of Holland then appealed to the two Im-
perial Courts of Prussia and England, the Powers which had
made him King of the. Netherlands. A conference was called
in consequence of that appeal, sanctioned by the Right Hon.
Gentleman, and shortly afterwards support. d by the sanction
of the Noele Lord opposite. If they would peruse that prece-
dent-if they would peruse only that-they would find ample
authority for the proposition he had laid down-a proposition
which he would be greatly surprised to find damaged. It was
of great importance that France shouts' have been present at the
conference on this appeal ; and what was done ? It was dis-
covered that, according to the principle of general law,
France, as a signing party to the general treaty, might
be appealed to. France vas then called on to attend
to the duties which were recognised by nations as
demanded from the Powers signing general treaties, namely,
to exert he: friendly interference in bringing about the peace
of Europe It was in consequence ot signing the general
treaty that France was called upon to interfere in this case.
He had heard the principle which he was laying down urged
by his Noble Friend the Member for Lynn in that House, and
his remaiks touched the Right Hon. Gentleman from the po-
sition which he teen occupied. The Right Hon. Gentleman
did rise to reply to his Noble Friend, but he had not once
alluded to the precedents which his Noble Friend had in-
stanced, or to the principles which he had laid down-pre-
cedents which were no:orioua in Europe-which were acted
upon by all nations, yet the Right Hon. Gentleman-a prac-
tised debater-in a speech which might be eharacterised as
perhaps, too classic for Freemasons' Hall-(Laughter)-but
which seemed realy imbued with all its spirit-(Conti-
nued laughter)-had never referred to them. I will ask
(continued the Honourable Member) the Noble Lord opposite
whether he is prepared to deny his protocols ?-(Hear, hear.)
I will ask whether he will produce the secret dispatches which
were sent to Sweden ?-(Cheers.) I will ask him of his
hurried dispatches to Portugal. 1 will ask him of the vessels
sent to Spain ? Will the Noble Lord give the names of the
Plenipotentiaries of the powers which assisted at this con-
ference, and who advised him in that agony of European
politics.-( Cheers.) 1 never heard their names, bat I suppose
we must ask them from Lord Aberdeen, who says that of all the
infamous stipulations in the treaty, the wcrst was that which
had taken the army from Denmark to give it to Sweden.-
(Laughter.) The Right Hon. Gentleman had given them his
exposition, and they were called upon to attach to it an official
importance. He told them what were the intentions of the
Powers with reference to the free town of Cracow. He (Mr.
Disraeli) would be sorry to misrepresent what had
fallen from the Right Honourable Gentleman, but he believed
that he had said that Cracow should have constitutional insti-
tutions, and be established as a free and independent state.
He (Mr. Disraeli) had had no means of information; he had
had no idea of what had beem intended for the settlement of
Europe, but he presumed that it was the intention of
the great powers of Europe to erect Cracow into a sort
of Normal school-a model constitutional farm, from which,
perhaps, on account of its limited extent they were to
regenerate Europe-(Laughter)- and prepare them for that
constitutional arrangement which Prussia had lately given
to its subjects. But the Right Honourable Gentleman
had means of information, which ke (Mr. Disraeli) could not
share. That was one great advantage that Members of the
Government had over less firtunate Gentlemen in that
House.-( Hear, and laughter.) Bat he was reminded by
his Noble Friend that Lord Castlereagh had offered to
Europe in conjunction with Austria, Prussia, and Russia, that
the nationality of Poland should be respected and held inviolate
-( Hear, hear )-and that the independence of that country
should be revived. He (Mr. Disraeli) did remember to have
read that correspondence, but it had seemed to him that the
sarcasm was so clear, the irony so transparent, that it needed
not to have deceived the astute understanding of the Right
111_0
rodn
ad Gentleman.told
themthat The t
hNeorbel
reasonLord,al
a free town was on account of principles ofe compensation, yAirrabceorwsowiftoasorw:lmee-
col
stiss considered
eedr
that some compensation was owing
ot
be-
cause at the time the town was declaoreFdraforoee if
-e compensation to England for her
empire, and also some little_soemn ph
French people would be somewhat
for the
colonies. He thought
the
declaration, coming as it did from a gen-
tleman at such
eaentheUnder-Secretary of State of no less
ridiculous for France to make annual
by some to be extremely
atleptnersanonawgbeotbbaadn been
Duke of Wellington. It was considered
pretests about the independence of Poland ; but after what
had heard on this subject, he should
not be surprised if
they
was ler a Member of
some Deputies rose in the Chambers to declare that there was
one thing still more ridiculous-and that
Parliament to attempt to explain the making Cracow a tree town
on the score of compensation. But the opinions and conduct of
Cabinets and nations could be better ascertained from public
documents than from peivate conversations, and he hoped no
attention would be pai to gentlemen who .aid the treaty of
Vienna was all very well,
htl it , or a g. neman,whotold them that
but. he knew Prince Metternich's opi-
nion did not coincide wit
he had been in Paris, and in a conversation he had with
M. Guigot, he learned that Prince Talleyrand differed from a
particular construction of the treaty. Now, what really was
the original situation of Cracow ? Why, the Emperor Alex-
ander being in military occupation of Poland, he naturally
wished to keep it. Austria wanted it too ; but in the end a
partition took place, and Cracow was declared to be free.
Prince Metternich warned the Emperor of Rustic, that Cra-
cow, if allowed to be free, would always be the focus of po-
litical disturbances, and the centre of sedition. Thirty
year's experience had proved the accuracy and foresight of
Prince Metternich's opinion, and Cracow had once more,
with the consent of Russia, become a part of Aus-
tria.-(Hear, hear.) In the face of these solid facts
how could he believe that Cracow was made free for the pur-
pose
of establisl ing a monument of Polish independence, or
as compensation for the loss of the French empire. Such an
idea was an insult to the twenty millions of independent men
of whom the Hon. Member for Bolton had reminded them,
rather than a monument to the freedom of a.great people. Great
nations, however, produced great men, and it was not by
millions that the greatness of a nation was to be estimated; and
however deeply, as an Englishman, he might regret the
political event which led to the partition of Poland, he had
no sympathy for the partitioned. Let him remind those gen-
tlemen who attended Freemasons' Hall of an . event.
which, no doubt, in their warmth and inspiration,
twonu,
they had forgotten. One hundre4• ears ago,
partitiongo,
proposed to certain European Powers
mounted her throne. She
Austria, and just look to the circumstances under which it was
proposed to divide that empire. It was at the time governed by
an unprotected girl, who had just
the head of the conspiracy was th of the republic of Po-
was the Empress Maria Theresa,e
Kingamilita_ry genius. Now, at,
land ; but it failed, and why was Austria not partitioned ?
Why, because her people, who at the time by no means num-
bered so many as twenty millions, were brave soldiers, and their
prowess had ever astonished the world. Austria had remained
faithful to England in trouble and in peace, and she ought not

rAw