The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-17 00:00:00

THURSDAY EVENING, AUGUST 11, lB4B.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, August 16.

(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
THE GRANT TO SIR CHARLES TREVELYAN.
Mr. SPOONER then rose to call the attention of the
House to the grant of 2,500/. to this gentleman. He
wished to know whether any opposition would be given
by her Majesty's Government to an expression of opinion
by the House, that it was unc3nstitutionat to make such
a grant out of the civil contingencies without a pre-
vious application to Parliament? He trusted that the
Hon. Member (Mr. Osborne) would propose a vote of
censure, if some means were not afforded of getting that
money returned.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he was of opinion that
the Government were perfectly justified in giving a
gratuity to Sir Charles Trevelyan for the extraordinary
services he had rendered, and he believed the sense of
the House was in favour of it. Sir Charles Trevelyan
had, however, expressed a desire to repay the
whole amount into the Exchequer. The sum of
100,0001. was set apart annually for civil contingencies,
and he did not see that the Government had acted un-
constitutionally in offering a portion of it in the way they
had done, but he begged to say that the Government
were prepared to meet any vote of censure that might
be proposed.
Mr. OS BORNE said he intended to propose in Supply
that the whole vote should not be allowed.
SLAVE TRADE.

Mr. URQUHART said it was not his intention to
bring forward in the Committee of Supply the following
motion, of which he had given notice : —That from the cor-
respondence laid upon the table of this House in refe-
rence to the suppression of the sLive trade in Mussulman
countries, it appears that her Majesty's servants have
adopted proceedings calculated to aggravate the horrors
of the traffic, and to alienate from this country the good
will of the Governments and nations so interfered with.
The House then went into Committee.
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.—ITALIAN POLICY.

On the vote of 57,0001., to complete the sum necessary
to defray the salaries and expenses at the office of her
Majesty's Secretary for Foreign Affairs being proposed,
Mr. DISRAELI rose and spoke as follows:—Mr. Ber-
nal : Sir, whatever may be the justice of some of the
complaints which we have heard from her Majesty's Mi-
nisters, as to the time of this House being occupied with
too much discussion—complaints which I, for one, can-
not admit to be founded in fact—there certainly is one
member of her Majesty's Government who, I think, has
no right whatever to join in these complaints. I think
the Noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Af-
fairs, so far as his department is concerned, cannot for
one moment pretend that any criticism upon the policy
which he has recommended, or any remarks upon the
transactions which have occurred with regard to foreign
subjects have given rise during this momentous session
to any very frequent or very lengthened discussions.
Sir, although this year has witnessed throughout Europe
events more important than probably have occured in
the recollection of the vast majority of the House,
cannot at this moment remember more than two occa-
sions on which the attention of the House of Commons
has been called to anything connected with our external
relations. For one of those occasions I confess I am my-
self
responsible, but I think that in that instance I was
warranted in calling the attention of the House of Com-
mons to this circumstance—that an ancient ally had
claimed the fulfilment of a guarantee from England—
(Hear, hear)—and the sympathy expressed by the House,
when I ventured to make the observations I did upon the
position of England and Denmark, at least showed that
however imperfect my advocacy of that subject was, it
was not considered by the House of Commons as being
intrusive.—(Hear, hear.) There was one other in-
stance of our attention being called to a foreign subject,
but I shall be surprised if any Member of her Majesty's
Government can for a moment pretend that the discus-
sion which originated in that instance was an unneces-
sary one. It is in the recollection of every Gentleman
that a very remarkable incident occurred at the capital
of one of her Majesty's allies. A Minister, who might
be styled virtually the representative of the Queen of
England, was expelled the capital of one of her Majesty's
allies.—(Hear, hear.) Surely, Sir, neither the House,
nor our constituents, nor her Majesty's Ministers, can
for a moment maintain that some observations upon an
event so remarkable—an event which I may almost
characterise as unequalled—partook of the nature of
surplusage discussion.—(Hear.) And, Sir, in both
these cases the discussions, as far as the Government
was concerned, were conducted in any other spirit than
that of party acerbity.—(Hear.) Notwithstanding the
important events which have occurred—notwithstanding
the favourable opportunities which have been offered
to the Opposition—opportunities which at another time,
and in another age, would have been very readily seized
—there have only been those two occasions on which
subjects connected with our external relations have been
brought under the consideration of the House; and cer-
tainly, in both these instances, her Majesty's Govern-
ment have no right whatever to complain either of the
spirit in which the observations were made, or the ob-
jects which the discussions were intended to attain.—
(Hear, hear.) Now, Sir, I feel it to be my duty to call
the attention of the Committee to a branch of our
foreign relations—in itself of the utmost importance—
and also because I think I shall be able to show the
Committee that it is incumbent upon them, as the re-
presentatives of their constituents, to make themselves
acquainted with the exact state of affairs which, in this
respect, at the present moment exists. The subject to
which I wish to call the attention of the Committee is
the state of Italian politics, and our relations at this
moment with the Italian states. It had, Sir, been my
intention, on looking over the various items brought
before us on the votes for the miscellaneous
estimates, to have called the attention of the Com-
mittee to the subject upon the vote to one of the Minis-
ters of the Crown, namely, the vote to the Lord Privy
Seal.—(Hear, hear.) I thought it was an appropriate
occasion on which to introduce this very interesting sub-
ject, because the Lord Privy Seal is the individual who
has recently figured in a very conspicuous manner in
the transactions to which I am about to allude, and be-
cause it would be impossible to place the subject fairly
before the consideration of the Committee without ad-
verting to the recent exploits of the noble personage in
question.—(Hear, hear.) But on more mature con-
sideration, Sir, it appeared to me that the adoption of
such a course would tend to give to the observations,
which I wish fairly to put before the country, too per-
sonal and invidious a character. The Government are
responsible for all that the Lord Privy Seal did, and it
seemed to me that it would not be an unfair occasion—
on the vote for the maintenance of the Foreign-office—
to bring the matter under the consideration of the
House. At the same time, it is totally impossible, how-
ever brief and condensed my observations on the subject
may be—it is totally impossible to forget the operations
of the Lord Privy Seal in Italy.—(Hear, hear.) They
commenced before those important events in which their
interest has been in a great degree absorbed. But all
the transactions in which the Lord Privy Seal was con-
cerned are intimately connected and even involved in
anything which has since happened.—(Hear, hear.) The
Lord Privy Seal—it is in the recollection of the Com-
mittee—went last autumn upon a very peculiar and a
somewhat roving mission; he went, Sir, I believe, to
teach politics to the country in which Machiavelli
was born.—(A laugh.) It seemed that the princes of
Italy were so ignorant of their own interests that they
required counsel ; and, in fact, that it was necessary to
take a position with respect to those sovereigns which
was not adopted in our communications with other po-
tentates. We had several Ministers Plenipotentiary in
Italy, and some other diplomatic agents of inferior note,
but it was thought necessary to communicate with the
sovereigns of Italy by no less a personage than a member
of the British Cabinet—one who would not wait for in-
structions in order to guide him on an occasion of emer-
gency; but who, himself, should to a certaindegree,.be
a portion of that original inspiration which is to guide
the conduct of our foreign diplomacy—one perfectly fa-
miliar with the whole scope and scheme of her Majesty's
Ministers on these subjects, and who, therefore, with a
large—l might say illimitable discretion—might prevent
the recurrence of many untoward circumstances in that
country, and lay the foundation of a future state of
acknowledged prosperity in the Italian Peninsula.—
(Hear, hear.) Sir, it is really a curious thing to put be-
fore the House, in the very roundabout way, the princi-
pal objects of this important and peculiar mission—it is
a curious thing to put before the House its objects, and
to compare with those objects its results.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord Minto had a very important object to
achieve in the north of Italy; there was great
uneasiness in Italy, there was great apprehension
on the part of her Majesty's Ministers that Austria,
for example, actuated by unnecessary fear, should
invade Sardinia; and the first object of Lord
Minto was to induce the Austrians not to invade
Sardinia. Well, Sir, so far as that object went the Noble
Lord was perfectly successful, the only unpleasant
thing which happened having been, that instead of the
Austrians invading Sardinia, the Sardinians invaded
Austria.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) Well, Sir, cross-
ing the Appenines—having achieved complete success in
the north of Italy—Lord Minto found himself in the
-centre of Italy, engaged in a delicate and peculiar nego-
tiation with a potentate whose name, in deference to my
Hon. Friend near me (Mr. Spooner) I will not mention.
—(A laugh.) It was certainly a considerable object to
solve a difficulty which had perplexed the Cabinets of
England from the days of Elizabeth to the days of Vic-
toria. How to establish a diplomatic communication
with his Holiness was an object worthy of the mission
even of a Cabinet Minister, and involvea a question, the
solution of which would necessarily offer very great
claims to the applause and the confidence of his colleagues.
Sir, in this instance, also, Lord Minto appears to have suc-
ceeded. At the commencement of the session, no less a
personage than the Lord President of the Council, with
breathless haste, informed the House of Lords that he
must immediately introduce a Bill to establish diploma-
tic relations between the Court of St. James's and his
Holiness the Pope. I believe that the usual forms of
the House of Lords were not observed on that occa-
sion. I believe that the Bill was absolutely brought in
without notice, 'and that the usual lapse of time which
is permitted to occur between the first and second read-
ings was waived, on account of the urgency and the
exigency of the case.—(Hear, hear.) What was the
result ? The Bill did not pursue its course with the
rapidity with which it was at first intimated was abso-
lutely necessary, and for this reason—that at the very
moment when, under the successful management of
the Lord Privy Seal, England had resolved to revive
its diplomatic communications with the Pope, it seemed
that the Pope, as a temporal prince, ceased to exist.—
(Hear, hear.) I suppose, however, that by some of
the last bulletins there ,is a chance of his Holiness yet
exercising some doubtful authority, since at the end of
the session, this Bill, which was brought into the House
of Lords with breathless haste in the month of Fe:

bruary, has, now that August is waning, stolen into a i
little legislative life, and will, we are informed, have a i
chance of being yet introduced to our notice.—(Hear, '
hear.) Observe, Sir, how eminently Lord Minto suc-
ceeded in the north of Italy in preventing the invasion of
Sardinia by Austria; and observe, teo, how successful
he was in the centre of Italy in establishing diplomatic 1
relations with a potentate weo has no longer any diplo-
macy at his command.—(Hear, hear.) There remains,
then, but a third portion of Italy, the extreme south, in
which the labours, the unparalleled labours, of this
eminent diplomatist could also be employed, and that is
the kingdom of the Two Sicilies. It has been said, Sir,
in a high place—a place of authority—that Lord Minto
was invited by the King of the Two Sicilies to favour him
with his counsel, and to interfere in the management of
his Majesty's dominions. Sir, it is very possible. The Noble
Lord, like other celebrated performers, was ",starring
it" throughout the Italian States—(Hear, hear, and
laughter)—and having been so successful at Milan, and
so distinguished at Rome, there came an invitation that
he should exhibit at Naples.—(ltenewed laughter.)
Now the result of his Lordship's performance in the
south of Italy was not less successful than in the north
and in the centre. Called in by the King of the Two
Sicilies to remove some misconceptions which existed
between his two kingdoms, the Noble Lord laboured
hard to support the legislative union between Naples
and Sicily; and his labours resulted not only in the
severance of their legislative union, but in the repeal of
their political connexion.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.)
I feel that it would be wrong for me to offer any-
thing but the most friendly criticism on the defunct
career of this most eminent diplomatist. I only
wish to have it understood that the present Go-
vernment are not new hands at conducting diplomatic
interference, and that they cannot now tell us
that in consequence of important events which had oc-
curred, they were obliged on a sudden, and without that
consideration and experience which are generally de-
manded in those cases—that they were obliged on a sud-
den to undertake the diplomatic interference in Italy.
They had been trying their hands for a considerable
timebefore the great revolution occurred; and the results
have been not more interesting than successful.—(Hear,
hear.) But now, Sir, I understand that the Noble
Lord the Foreign Secretary—not profiting by what has
already occurred—is about again to open a new cam-
paign in Italy, that he is about to mediate in Italy in
canjunction with another country, and I think it is a
very legitimate subject of inquiry, and that I am per-
farming my duty to my constituents and to this House,
if I take this opportunity of inviting the Government
to give us some information is to the objects
and as to the motives of their policy. The
Noble Lord informed us the other night, and it has
since been announced in every organ of public opinion,
that England and France are going to mediate in the
affairs of Northern Italy. Now I think I am but making
legitimate inquiries of the Noble Lord when I ask him
to inform the Committee—first, what is to be the princi-
ple of this mediation; secondly, what is to be the nature
of this mediation ; and, thirdly, what is the end pro-
posed to be attained by this mediation?—(Hear.) These
appear to me to be three inquiries which it is our duty to
invite her Majesty's Ministers to respond to.—(Hear,
hear.) Now, Sir, first with regard to the principle of
mediation. The principle of mediation may be of a
political character; there may be a desire to prevent the
effusion of blood which has been occasioned by a very
prolonged and hopeless contest ; or there may be a de-
sire to put an end to a state of things which has incon-
venienced the merchants of this country. The interests
of commerce, and those interests of humanity which
enter into all the relations between nations, may prompt
the Noble Lord to interfere in a particular case, and he
may wish on a political principle to mediate. But as re-
gards,the north of Italy,there is no effusion of blood to stop,
there are no commercial interests of ours there which
require defence, or which are suffering from any circum-
stances which are occurring there ; so that if the Noble
Lord has to mediate in that country between the Eine
peror of Austria and the King of Sardinia, or between
the Emperor of Austria and the Emperor of Austria's
subjects, why then, Sir, the Noble Lord—mediating on a
political principle—will have a very easy task. The
means are as obvious as the result is clear. The Noble
Lord, mediating on a political principle, will be guided
by the doctrines of the law of nations, and by the stipue
lations of existing treaties. Ile will take down Vette],
he will look at the treaties of Paris and Vienna, and
when he finds that the Emperor of Austria is in posses
sion, in peaceable possession, of the dominions which
these treaties secured to him, and when he finds that
the King of Sardinia is also in pessession of the do-
minions which those treaties secured to him ; why,
Sir, when he finds that such is the case—when he
finds that, as regards these Powers, there is no
question of public law which is at all in controversy,
why, then, the Noble Lord may shut his book—his
mediation is annihilated.—(Hear, hear.) He will find
that he has nothing to do, and the House will be in-
formed that the mere offer of his interference has af-
forded a conclusion, satisfactory, no doubt, to Europe,
but which would probably have occurred if the Noble
Lord had never opened his mouth.—(Hear, hear.) But,
Sir, we can hardly conceive that a statesman so able and
experienced as the Noble Lord should announce to the
Parliament of his country that he is going to mediate
in the affairs of Northern Italy, merely that he may af-
terwards announce to us that he has done nothing ; and
therefore, I apprehend that the Noble Lord, instead of
mediating on a political priciple, is perhaps going to
mediate on that dangerous principle with which he has
sometimes played, and which I have ere this had the
honour of calling "the sentimental principle." The senti-
mental principle in the management of the affairs of fo-
reign nations at the present day recognizes the principle of
nationality. The Noble Lurd is going perhaps to mediate
in the affairs of Italy on the sentimental principle of
nationality.—(A laugh.) Now, I beg the Committee to
remark into what an inextricable difficulty and danger
the encouragement of such a course on the part of the
Noble Lord may lead this country; and that is the rea-
son—that is, one principal reason, why I now bring the
state of Italian satin's before the notice of the Com-
mittee. If it be necessary, on the sentimental principle,
that Lombardy should only be in the possession of the
Lombards, and that the person of an Austrian should
not be tolerated there, on what ground can you justify
the arrangement by which the Austrians are to retain
the whole of Venicia? If the Noble Lord is a disciple
of the principle of nationality—if, on that principle, he
is going to advise the Emperor of Austria to relinquish
his dominions in Lombardy, on what grounds can he
refuse to completely develop time idea by recommending
his Imperial Majesty to relinquish his hold on the
Venetian territory? I want to know how can the
Noble Lord be a preacher of nationality in Lombardy,
when, in the north of Europe he is, as he is bound to do,
defending the interests of Holland and Denmark against
the invasion founded on this very same principle ? I
want to know how the Noble Lord intends to act as far
as the sentimental principle is concerned in case an ap-
plication should be made from a most powerful and in-
teresting kingdom, which, four months ago, it was pub-
licly announced, did probably intend to call on England
to mediate—l mean Hungary. In the kingdom of Hun-
gary there are four races, the Magyars, the Sclavoniuns,
the Germans, and the Wahles. Now, I want to know
whether three of these races should quit Hungary, and
leave it to the predominant power of the fourth ? If the
Committee do not take the earliest opportunity—if the
House of Commons du not take the earliest
opportunity of discouraging the sentimental prin-
ciple in settling the affairs of nations, I am
convinced that this country, will be involved in a dif-
ficulty which it is impossible to contemplate without
dismay, and that you will be supporting a policy which,
should it be fully developed, will resolve Europe into its
original elements, and not leave any social or political
system in existence in the forms which it now assumes.
And now for the principle of that mediation of which we
have heard so much, and which has been so ostentatiously
announced—the mediation of England and France in the
affairs of the north of Italy, I wish to know from her
Majesty's Government whether the principle of the me-
diation—whether that political principle is founded on
the law of nations and the stability of treaties, or whe-
ther it is a modern new-f'angled principle of nationality,
which will leas): to inextricable confusion, and difficulty,
and danger.. I want to know what are the means by
which you intend to mediate. Is it to be an armed me-
diation? Because if it is to be an armed mediation, the
Emperor of Austria, being in possession of his estates,
and the King of Sardinia being in possession of his
estates, war at this moment, as I am informed, not being
waged between those sovereigns, that armed mediation
of England and France is an invasion, and, therefore,
you would seem to say that the best way to secure peace
is by commencing war. If it is not an armed mediation,
is it a mediation only of good offices? If that be so, I
leave it to the Committee to decide what prospect we
have of success with our good offices, when we go to the
Emperor of Austria as friends merely, iand as friends
recommend him to relinquish those dominions which he
has gained by great sacrifices, by the display of great
valour in his troops, and which have been held tor three
centuries, and perhaps never with a firmer grasp than at
the present moment. In the first place, then, as regards
the means of mediation, an armed interference is an in-
vasion—is war, and an interference of good offices is a
nullity. So much as to the principle cf mediation—so
much as to the means by which Ithe mediation is to he
carried into effect. Now, then, I ask litr Majesty's
Ministers what do they intend to do with Loin-
bardy should their ancient ally, in deference to their
kind offices, relinquish his'dominious? Do they mean
to swell the territories of the King of Sardinia with the
possessions of that duchy? Is the return fur that noc-
turnal attack which he made upon his neighbours to be
an increase of authority and power? Why, Sir, if the
King of Sardinia had not made war without even the
declaration of war, you would hesitate as to that coarse.
But when you remember the circumstances of the case
—when you remember that the King of Sardinia made
war without declaring war against Austria, and was at
the very time in friendly confidence and communication
with the Austrian Cabinet—when we know th it in con-
sequence of that conduct he is receiving most, signal pu-
nishment and discomfiture at this morneet, and that he
is only, in deference to the feelings of Europe on the
part of Austria for existing treaties, allowed to remain
in possession of his own capital, I can't imagine that
any Minister not even a Minister at Frankfort
would recommend Austria to relinquish Sar-
dinia. It is a proposition I can't for a mo-
ment imagine that any Minister in any country
will now contemplate. What will be done with Milan?
Will you establish by this mediation that you have an-
nounced, an independent Government? and make the
states in the north of Italy a source of public dis-
quietude contiguous to two powerful military neigh-
bours, perpetually quarrelling and perpetually calling
for foreign interference. What form do you mean to
establish in the announced mediation for these free and
independent. states? Of course it must be republican.
You cannot have a King of Lombardy. It is for the in-
terests of England and of Europe that you should diplo-
matically
establish a republic. If a republic, then what
sort would her Majesty's
,Government recommend?— I

(Laughter.) Is it to be a revolutionary republic or a
Conservative republic—a red republic or a white re-
pubtic—a republic with a red cap, or a republic with a
white feather?—(Great laughter.) That is a question
upon which, of course, the country will receive some
intimation. These are threw points upon which
the Committee ought to require information from
the Government.—(Hear, hear.) The Government, let
me remind the Committee, have announced a media-
tion— a joint mediation of England and France in
the affairs of Northern Italy. I think the Government
are bound to tell us the principles upon which that me-
diation is founded, the means by which that mediation
is to be carried into effect, and the end which it is pro-
posed to attain by that mediation. Now, Sir, there is
an object for this mediation, as I am informed, which
her Majesty's Government will not announce. It is the
secret object of many transactions which is so perplex-
ing to the public eye. The object of the joint mediation
in the affairs of Northern Italy—where there is nobody
to mediate between, and where there is nothing to settle
—the object of the joint mediation is to prevent the in-
vasion of Italy by France. I have no hesitation in say-
ing that the invasion of Northern Italy by France
would be much to be deprecated ; and if her Ma-
jesty's Government, with all the advantages of the
recent experience of the Lord Privy Seal, can de-
vise a means by which such result can be prevented,
they, no doubt, will have cause to plume themselves
as statesmen.—(Hear.) But the Committee will recol-
lect that France has no right whatever to interfere in
Italy. It would be a violation of every principle of pub-
lic law, and of every treaty which exists with retererce
to the Italian States. I am of opinion, myself, that
France will not invade Italy. Ido not think it would be
for the interest or for the honour of France to do so. I
very much deprecate even an inference as to the contin-
gency so highly disastrous to the world, and most un-
justifiable on the part of France. As regards Italy, as
regards Europe, France has not the colour of a case in
this respect. I wish I could say, with regard to Eng-
land, France was in the same position. I admit I can-
not. I admit that the conduct of our Government in
Italy affords a precedent for France. It does not
justify France in violating the law of nations—it does
not justify France in violating treaties—it does not
justify Farce to Italy and Europe, but it does, un-
fortunately, justify France to England. Should the
Noble Lord, for example, put himself in commu-
nication with the representative of that country at
this Court, if he were to make an appeal to the French
Minister on the subject, he might refer to a circumstance
which gives a colour of pretext of precedent to France.
That is our conduct at Naples. Let me remind the
House of the ultimate result of the cordial co-operation
between the Lord Privy Seal and the King of the Two
Sicilies. As far as I can obtain information, it is the
following, namely—the King of the Two Sicilies having
prepared a powerful army to chastise his rebellious sub-
jects, exactly as Austria has done, he finds suddenly, in
the Bay of Naples, an English fleet, and it is announced
to him that his rights as Sovereign of Sicily have
ceased to be acknowledged by the English Govern-
ment. The English Government, it appears, animated
by that principle which governed the motions of the
Earl of Minto—animated by an extreme desire to
consolidate the kingdom of the Two Sicilies, put
an end to all misconception between the subjects of
his Majesty, and were so kind as to approve of the
nomination of an independent sovereign, who was to go-
vern Sicily in violation of the rights of Naples. The
Government—the servants of her Majesty the Queen of
England—commenced with communicating with the re-
bellious subjects of the King of Naples, and finally they
sent a fleet to prevent the King of the Two Sicilies from
asserting his sovereign rights. France, in possession
of these facts, would have a very good cause to invade
Italy.

Lord PALMERSTON—They are not facts.
Mr. DISRAELI—These are not facts, says the
Noble Lord; but I ask, why are they allowed to be
supposed to be true? It is at all events true, that when
asked for information upon the subject—when asked
whether instructions had been given to our fleet in the
Mediterranean to prevent the Neapolitans invading
Sicily, the Noble Lord refused to give an answer to the
question. The Lord President of the Council, in another
place, refused to give an answer to a similar question;
and these facts were admitted by the chief Minister
in another place, that we did interfere in the affairs of
Sicily as far as thus, indicating to that people the terms
on which Sicily should be independent, the form of go-
vernment they should choose, the manner in which the
choice should be made, and the individual of whom
England would approve as sovereign. The Noble Lord
will not say that those are not facts. The interference
was complete on our part, and what answer should we
have to give to France, if a French invasion of Northern
Italy should take place? lam quite prepared to make
this admission to her Majesty's Government —.l
do not believe that, injurious as the precedent is,
our conduct with respect to Naples will bo made it
precedent for the invasion of -Northern Italy by France.
and for this reason—simple and satisfactory—that I do
not believe there is the slightest wish at this moment on
the part of France to make such an invasion. But still,
Sir, I think it necessary to enter my protest against any
such precedent being made. All the French Government
desire is, to avail themselves of this forced
occasion of giving to Europe and the world
an idea that there is cordial cooperation be-
tween the Cabinet of Paris and the Cabinet of
St. James's. Now, it may be asked, what is the harm
done by the French Government availing themselves of
this forced occasion? The harm is, that these forced
occasions, these made opportunities, have never, on any
occasion, been used by the Governments of the two
countries but at the expense of the rights of some third
independent Sovereign.—(Hear, hear.) Upon this oc-
casion, Sir, I do not wish that my opinion should be
misapprehended—of an alliance with France, a cordial
understanding with France, or whatever phrase may be
used—that the great events which periodically and gra-
dually occur in the world should be managed by two of
the leading nations, by a wise spirit of concession and
compromise, followed by a cordial co-operation between
the two countries—if you mean by that an alliance with
France, or a cordial understanding with France, of that
principle and that system I shall ever be a feeble but
warm supporter. It is not a new principle in the
history of this country, although of late years
it has been announced in this House as if it
were some novel discovery in politics. If you take
a general view of modern history, of our country,
and of Europe—l mean that modern history of those
times during which the great events have occurred
you will find that hostilities with France have been the
exception, and not the rule. For the last two centuries
and a half more than two -thirds of the time was spent
in a warm and close intimacy between the Government
of this country and that of France. That was the prin'
ciple which was acted upon by the Cabinet of Elisabeth,
who managed the affairs of the world in co-operation
with one of the most eminent of the Bourbon princes'
It was brought forward as a charge against the pan,'
of the Protector that he was of the same opinion es
Elizabeth on the subject—l think most unjustly. Batt
at any rate, approved of by the sagacity of those men,
and by the wisdom and prudence of Cromwell, surely it
is a policy that cannot be wholly erroneous. I nee':
scarcely remind the House of the policy of England
on a subsequent occasion, conducted as it was by IWO
of the most eminent statesmen of the last century-
It is well known that two most eminent men—wh°
never agreed on any other subject, who were constantrivais
in all things—l mean Lord Bolingbroke and Sir Robert
Walpole—were both supporters of a warm and cordial
alliance with France as the basis of our policy. Lord
Bolingbroke became the victim of the negotiation et
Utrecht; and no sooner was the great Whig party
power, than Sir R. Walpole commenced the principles
and for twenty years secured the peace of the world as
-li se prosperity of England by his cordial understanding
with France and with Cardinal Fleury. The Noble
Lord only the other night told us that the peace of the
world was to be maintained by a co-operation of the,
powerful Governments of Russia, of England, and of
France. Now, I believe that the present Government
of France is a powerful Government; but let me remind
the Noble Lord that he has not yet informed Pallas
ment that he has recognised its existence. But it is I,s,
strong Government, for this simple reason, that the/
have transferred the government of Algeria to the
streets of Paris. That Government may be performing
its duty. The great Lord Protector of equality has letteli
executed a monster razzia against the fraternal multitude
of Paris. General Cavaignac or his successors may have
to repeat, probably will have to repeat, those exploits,'
but if the Noble Lard enters the plea of a cordial under
standing with the Government of France, and under
that plea is going to repeat the steps which, unfortu-
nately, preceding Governments under similar circuit?:
stances have adopted, and which have always ended. 1!
disappointment and discomfiture, then I trust this Souse
will interfere. A natural alliance and a cordial genella
understanding on the basis of mutual co-operation en"
conduct is no doubt a great good; but an understanding
only founded on forced occasions and forced opPortua.
nities—occasions unfounded, and opportunities devise,
in order to show the world that there is co operation hies,
tween the two Governments—will produce great evl.4
and cause the greatest disasters. The Noble Less'a
tried this system in 1830 and 1832, and then be ha
circumstances much more favourable to deal with that at
present. Then we were in alliance and co-operatiLis
with a Sovereign who, whatever may have been ,e_
s,
fault,, had, fora period of 17 years, succeeded in brid.lo
the Jacobin tiger; yet what did the system end, lof
It planted the tri-coloured flag upon the Wat's
Ancona and of Antwerp—it led to interference in SPsio,
in Portugal, and in Greece—it troubled our cornate_r4i
in the Atlantic and in the Pacific, and was the 711,
cause of the disturbances which have taken Place Tt;
waters of La Plate. Sir, I protest against this system'
I protest against any mediation in Northern rof,-
where nothing exists to mediate, but merely to SP__,,a
that a cordiarunderstanding exists between Franet
England. lam convinced that if the House of
us, Co'7in
talons sanctions that policy, you will found distcs!_fid
every quarter and discord in every state—that .nte_
of the alliance between France and England bet g,se
ding. Pr"'
security of peace, that alliance, that understan
ev..ssie
it as you will, that future concert, will lead inevitable
in the end to war.—(Hear, hear.) And, Sir, what
s_ ar
s.ou
you doing this for? You are doing it becatiu:lnJely,
have created a bugbear of your own, France.
the impending invasion of Italy by France. ~..soce,
I repeat it, has no right to invade Italy.
.71-r'ssing
I say, has no interest at this moment in u
.1..7,`.`" by
Italy. Hon. Gentlemen talk of the invasion _
af i_ttieLo•i
France ns if it were an incident which might hPP !I
telegreP".
any summer day upon an order sent by the
to giee
What is an invasion of Italy by France? Even
._. of
France a chance of success in the present po? tared__
Italy she must cross the Alps with at least at nua-nlis
thousand men. She must do much more than hll4l,ed
thousandrvkemrystdoayt
htmetni
eabnt a
snsiklhese
mofu st
th crossed
eR advance
hthi
nee Ataolnpsa
meetr
ruwithy
thereu
uhte r
the
less uf,oduloget;
nant spirit of Germany, forgetting then,. i°,,a.sinferws7ear
An its nebulous mysticism of nationality wv