The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-10 00:00:00

Ic-
nit
nd
'at

his country than that which we may simply obtain by the
treaty now before us for consideration. But if—and I
for one would not at all have critically examined the
decision of the Government—if they had arrived at that
decision, if on the whole it had been thought wiser at once
to have entered into some agreement with France, and not
to have waited for what I cannot but believe, though it
might have been the gradual, must have been the inevitable
decision of the French nation—if that had been the opinion
of the Government of this country, taking into consi-
deration those vast and various circumstances that must
have been placed before their examination on an issue so
important—if that were their decision—if it were wise at
once to enter into some agreement with the French Govern-
ment, I still think it would have been better, by some alte-
ration of our mutual tariffs, to have attained all those ends
that could at the present moment be acquired, and then,
when the period of July, 1861, had arrived—profiting, II
hope, by experience—we might have completed the work
and have accomplished all those ulterior results which, by
the present treaty, are not achieved but only contemplated.
I think that, under ordinary circumstances, that would
have been the course it would have been wiser for us to
have taken, and which this house would have had no diffi-
culty in sanctioning. But I believe that there are objections
to a treaty even for the purpose of attaining an object so
desirable as the increase of our commercial relations with
°ur neighbours, and that it is to be objected to both on
scientific• and political grounds. I have not throughout
the debate heard, either on scientific or political grounds,
Why it has been deemed expedient to tie up the policy of
the country for a term of years so long, and to accomplish
results which might, I think, have been realised by a
ahnpler process. These are the views with which I have con-
sidered this subject under ordinary circumstances. Under
ordinary circumstances, I should have regretted if the Go-
vernment, in order to attain a very desirable end, should
have availed themselves of questionable means, but no one
can for a moment maintain that this treaty has been nego-
tiated under ordinary circumstances. The circumstances,
art the contrary, are indeed of the most exceptional
character, and under these circumstances I object to
this treaty on three grounds—financial, diplomatic, and
Political. I will not enlarge on the financial, because a
fair opportunity has been given to the house to decide on
that portion of the subject, and, though I cannot agree in
the decision at which it arrived, I am content to •take it as
one which at least precludes me from at present entering
into a lengthened review of it. I think that the condition of
the revenue is at the present moment such that it is not

Prudent for us to increase a large deficit by creating a con-
siderable deficiency in addition, in order to obtain the corn-

ntercial arrangements which are secured by the present in-
sftrruens it. en t. The house has had the question fairly passed be-
However, tleey may ultimately regret these arrange-
rno
epts, for I believe the time will come, and that, too, ra-
pidly, when they will-deeply regret it. However much the
Scheme propounded by the Chancellor of the Exchequer
this Year may be considered to be unsafe in principle, im-
provident in arrangement, and pernicious in its conse-
duences, I do not think that to-night we are called on to
es,
it. So far from regretting that decision, I for-one
should not have thought I was doing my duty to my con-
stituents and the country had I been silent I think the de-
cision of the house was not to the advantage of the country;
but I do not look with any regret to the means by which
that decision was arrived at. I think the time will come
when the principle the minority then held will be recog-
nised as sound. (Cheers.) Although my objections to this
treaty are founded on what I deem the pernicious influence
it will have on our financial condition it is unnecessary wnv
to deal with it in detail. Being, therefore, under ordinary
circumstances, in favour of any policy that may increase the
commercial relations between the two countries, I neverthe-
-488 cannot agree with some gentlemen in the exaggerated
views they took of this impending increase in our commercial
intercourse with France. It has always been one great fault
°f the English people—having, as they no doubt have, com-
mercial instincts superior to all other nations—it always has
been their failing to exaggerate the importance of particular
markets ; and it is a verycurious thing that they have always
ever-estimated those markets that have proved the last pro-
ductive and the least advantageous to suchintercourse. The
Markets of South America, some years ago, were always
bralted In t his house in point of importance above the mar-
Ps —those solid and substantial markets—of our North
'"nterican brethren which have since been a source of so
much
wealth to this country ; and so at this moment hon.
Fapntlemen speak of commercial intercourse with France as
it they had a new California or a new Australia opening to
their enterprise and energy. (Cheers.) The hon. gentleman
Who seconded the address, and who, representing as he did
great district of country, did so with authority, used argu-
ts much too frequent, to the effect " Australia, with her
milliont of inhabitants, takes £11,000,000 of imports; France
8.36,000,000 of population ; multiply the trade of Aus-
tralia by 36, and you will form some faint idea of the com-
mercial intercourse that is about to take place between the
two countries" (Cheers.) These were just the observe-
„lions indulged in. (No,-no.) Brazil was also taken, with.
'Tr limited population of 5,000,000, and her great commer-
cfV4 exchanges with this country, and in the next sentence
'Ley were told that France had eight times the population
„"
"i Brazil, and from this hon. gentlemen might calculate
What would be the results of the new commercial policy.
France
But ancient and long-established countries like
',ranee will never offer to a country like England the same
mart that virgin colonies, like Australia or California, or
countries settled under circumstances of modern civilization
like the Brazils offer. We must remember that the menu-
„setures of France are on the whole, with some few excep-
,l°llB, more acient than the manufacttures of England, and
!aat they arenas skilful, if not more so ; and although no
inconsiderable increase between the commercial rola-
!loons of France and England will accrue from this treaty
These relations must still be of a comparatively limited cha-
racter, and depend upon it, no great branch of industry in
France would ever be allowed to be superseded by any great
branch of industry in this country. No doubt the intro-
duction of our goods will increase the demand for theirs,
stimulate invention, and reduce the cost of French goods.
No doubt the French consumer generally will be benefited,
and great advantage may accrue from that, but the moment
there is any prospect of a large branch of French industry
being susperseded by equal industry on this side the Chan
nel steps will be taken to prevent this result, and for this
reason alone, if not for others. France, whatever may be
her form of Government, is a democi acy—and a democracy
`will never submit to any great supercession of the native in-
dustry of her country. His noble friend was perpetually
...iPettling with prize to the instance of France and the
a uited States as vourable to the protective principle he
uPPorts, and you may rely on it that if you succeed with
your new Reform Bill, and especially with the aupplemen-
IsrY reform bill announced by the member for Birming-
siii, you will soon produce a protective interest in this
house, which will be the result of what you little anticipate.
think we are rather led away by a too sanguine view of
What may be the consequences to our commerce of opening
those
new markets. This new market will be subject to all
those conditions that prevail in ancient'
populous, and
•
ghly civilised countries, and the consequence will be cer
fain limits to our enterprise which we do not see at present.
I object to this treaty further on diplomatic grounds. It
sPPears to me to be a treaty unskilfully and negligently ne-
gotiated. I have heard nothing with reference to the pro
Posed arrangements of either a satisfactory or advantageous
ic,oaracter, although more than one minister has addressed
Lis house I have not heard any answer yet to account for
thel.‘, mysterious appearance of the 3d article, which refers to
;o ditties on shipping. There is no apparent reason why.
that subject should have been introduced into a strictly
cß°rarnercial convention ; but when the hon. member for
l'stamford reminded you that all the differential duties
have been temporarily terminated, indirectly or di-
rectly, between England and France, were only tem-
Orarily terminated, and that it was within the power
Of the Government of France within a few months to
Put an end to the treaty of 1825, and that, under these
circumstances, differential duties will exist between French
and English navigation, not only as to the direct but
ludirect trade, it is a question that must occasion great
anxiety, and the very fact that in the 3d article navi-
gation should be introduced into the treaty is one of a cha-
.trater to create great apprehension in the public mind.
With- reference to the article which is the subject of the
resent amendment, there is a great objection to that article.
am told we are incapable of discussing it because it. is
legal," but it is a new theory in this house that members of
it should not give a public opinion on a legal subject. As
understand it, the Sovereign is entrusted with a certain
Power, and the advisers of her Majesty have advised her to
Part with that power ; and now we are told that that being a
legal question members of Parliament are not competent to
give an opinion on it. I believe that the dispensing power
Was once considered a subject which members of Parliament
were perfectly competent to give an opinion upon. (Cheers.)
It appears to me to be not at all shrouded in obscurity ; and
I ask the house to consider how unwise it would be t• evade
this question, and by saying it is a legal question sanction
the bases of this treaty. And suppose we evade the difficulty
—assume that we agree to this address to the Crown. We
shall then communicate that address to the other house of
Parliament, which can hardly be prohibited from inquiring
into the legal question ; and what may not probably happen
in the other house of railiament by our evading the fulfil-
ment of our duty in this house ? The 11th article will be
discussed there, and it will probably be decided by the other
house that it is not possible to carry that article into effect
,Without an Act .of Parliament. The other house, if it
mayclearly resolve to address the Crown on the treaty,
but at the same time they may, probably, introduce an Act
Of Parliament to carry that 11th clause into effect; but
What humiliation and reproof to this house if we should
""•°° an Act of Parliament sent down to enable us to corn-
Pieta the matter. I will not enter into any discussion of a
etatistical kind as to our resources in coal and iron, to which
tho amendment refers. I take it for granted that the right
b
"si.,,,,c'n• gentleman made no statement on that matter of the
h of which he was not deeply convinced; but we
have also had a speech from one who, on such a subject,
„
ks with great authority. He bears the name of one with
whom I was intimate in this house, and whom we all
Featly respected ; but having myself not been altogether
than
with the district to which he refers I know
‘nat the railways of the present day have penetrated every
given
in the South Wales district, and a stimulus has been
ti'iien. to
,the production of coal in that part of the country
Which if-is not at all likely can be 'sustained. But it is im
ossible to settle a question of this kind by local experience.
ei question has occupied men of science of the greatest
Cnenoe. I do not pretend to offer any statement to the
t:its,te to influence their opinion, and I can only refer them
bn'tiose general statements which the highest authorities
accepted. The general result has always been con-
sidered to be that there are in England and Wales 12,000
square-miles of coalfields; that the half of that quantity is
citinot workable ; that every year exhausts 160 square miles ;
_
id therefcre every hon. gentleman can, if he think right,
make out the account. If such a quantity would, at the pre-
'bent consumption, last 300 or 400 years, everybody can
estimate the result if the produce and exportation from the
call-fields when doubled. I cannot pretend that the caloula-
Lu should influence legislation ; but when the hon. gentle-
n, from his local experience, and speaking under the ex-
citement of the recent explorations made in South Wales, I
%list remind
receiv the house that these are calculations which we
h( mid e with due distrust, and that we must recollect
;that there are estimates which are sanctioned by the highest
Points and men of science. There are many ether
Faints in this treaty which appear to me to prove that it has
not brath_een negoeiated with the skill, knowledge, and attention
th; re zequired in such an instrument, that on the contrary
re are evidences of precipitation and carlessness. There
1444 been no SPAiatactc.ry aWlWer to the charges that have

been made. It does appear a very improvident arrangement
that the silk manufactures of England cannot enter France
without bring subject to 30 per cent. duty, while at the same
time the raw material from Franco is also subject-to. a
high duty. I have heard no answer to that matter. What
said the Preeident of the Board of Trade last night?
Ho said, "If you try to settle exacty the rate-
of duty on every detail of every branch of manufacture"--
having, no doubt; in his head the celebrated passage which
used to be quoted from Mr. Eden as to the difficulties of ne-
gotiating treaties of commerce—" if," said the right hon.
gentleman, "we had tried to do that, we should not have got
over the matter by this time." But this is no answer to the
unfortunate silk manufacturer, who is subject to 30 percent,
duty, and receives at the same time the raw material of his
manufacture subject to a high duty. He naturally says,
"Why are there governments ; why are there negotiators ;
why, above all, are there secret neceetiators---(cheers)--if
my interests are not considered ?" And,' so far as I can learn
—but of course I speak with hesitation on that subject—
there would have been no difficulty on the part of the French
Government if this claim had been preferred. If the claim
had been preferred and refused, it would not have been in
dicative of amity on the part of the French Government to
refuse it; but if it was not preferred I say it was great ne-
gligence, We have had no answer to these matters which is
of a satisfactory character. It may seem a little point. I
believe it is a point of great importance when you come to
the arrangement of a commercial ti eaty. I have not heard
an answer to the complaint of the English brewers, that
when they are sending into this country French wines the
English brewers do not obtain a market in France. • I am
assured that if that claim had been preferred to the French.
Government they would not have objected to :the proposi-
tion. Task the house is it evidence of sedulous attention
to English interests to have omitted a provision of that
kind ? (Cheers.) Why was this state of things permitted ?
Would such a request have offended any of the principles
of the new commercial system ? Not at all ; for even the
hon. member for Birmingham would not pretend thet the
exchange of British beer for French wines would have
been contrary to the principles of free trade. But all this
shows me that this treaty has been negotiated with precipi-
tation ; and the very tone of the Government, when you
make your criticisms upon the treaty, confirms that suspicion
for what do they say ? They do not vindicate their instru-
ment. They say, "We are aware of it; we admit that there
is et good deal of truth in what you say, but we have madea
representation to the French Government and there is a fair
prospect of obtaining a remedy for the grievance." But
what was to be gained by this precipitation? My objections
I have now stated shortly against this treaty financially and
diplomatically. Financially it affects injuriously a revenue
in a state of dilapidation, and diplomatically it appears that
it does not fully provide for British interests. (Cheers.) I am
now to consider the political objects of this treaty, and this
is a part of the subject that I cannot avoid, because we are
challenged to consider this treaty on political grounds. This
is a commercialtreaty between Englandand France I admit;
but it is a treaty between England and France mainly and
avowedly negotiated fora political purp9se. (Cheers.) This
treaty was not introduced to us by any Minister of the
Crown; we incidentally became acquainted with its
provisions while involved in the dreary labours of committee
on the Customs Acts. But we have the basis of the treaty in
a great public state paper, which regulates the principles on
which thenegociation should le carried on, and the character
of the instrument contemplated. To that alone we are in-
debted for our understanding of the nature of this instru-
ment, and the objects to be obtained by carrying it into effect.
The noble lord, in language which has been referred to part-
ly, but not completely, in his instructions to the negociators,
which is infect the state paper on which the treaty is founded,
while he talks of the advantages of commerce says, "But
over and above this consideration the Government attaches
a high social and political value to the conclusion of a com-
mercial treaty with France." Political value, and therefore
I am obliged to consider this treaty in a political sense.
Those who have deprecated introducing political conside-
rations into the discussion of this treaty, seem to have en-
tirely forgotten the standing point on which this instrument
rests, and the introductOry terms by which the House of
Commons was made acquainted with this instrument. These
were the words quoted by the mover of the amendment.
The noble lord says,—" Its signification at the present mo-
ment is that it would powerfully re-assure the public mind
in some parts of Europe ;" but there the noble mover stop-
ped short, and omitted this, " that on these grounds the
Government are prepared to enter into negotiations." I
do not blame the noble lord ; all I say id; that in discussing
the treaty of commerce that is preceded by a state paper of
this character, the noble lord should not cavil with me if I
endeavour to ascertain the soundness of the principles upon
which he proceeded. Thenoblelord has gone out of his way
though I am sure he thinks in due fulfilment of his duty to
inform the judgment of the country what were the principal
considerations in negotiating this treaty, that they were po-
litical—that it was on these political grounds the Govern-
ment were prepared to enter into this negotiation. The
noble lord has received compliments from both sides of the
house for the spirit in which he maintained the character of
a British minister in those negotiations. I am not apt to be-
lieve that any one who occupies the noble lord's position
would be wanting in his duty to the Crown or the country
upon any occasion of importance. (Hear, hear.) lam not
disposed to believe that the noble lord would form an excep-
tion to that rule. But the noble lord will not be offended
with me if I do not address him in those terms of compli-
ment and eulpgy with which his name has been associated.
The noble lord will not be offended with me if I offer him
some criticism upon a portion of his political conduct as
Foreign Minister. I shall confine myself to facts, and what
is even dryer than facts, to dates, and then 1 shall deduce
and draw inferences so strikingly logical that I am sure the
noble lord himself will be willing to admit their accuracy
He will not be offended if, by way of contrast to the
compliments, he has received, I shall ask him to give the
house some satisfaction on a matter connected with the
treaty, and that he will afford me that explanation which I
shall require before I give my assent to the motion.
(Hear, hear.) The night when the address to the Crown
was first to be moved it was unexpectedly post-
poned. Some discussion, however, then took place upon
the question of our relations with France. I had
not read at that time the papers which were circulated
only that morning, and therefore, I would not
have presumed, even had the discussion then gone on, to
enter at that time into the question. But I have read those
papers since, which have been noticed in different moods by
different speakers. But nobody had made the inquiry of the
noble lord which I wish to-night to make, because until I
have an answer from the noble lord I cannot form a correct
opinion of the state a Europe, which he describes to be so
critical, and which in consequence he considers as a reason
for entering into this treaty with France. Now 'have read
these papers, and I am bound to say that the conduct of the
French Government upon the question of Savoy, which is
the question above all others that renders the condition of
European affairs so critical, appears to Me, so fir as the
Eifglish Government is concerned, to have been sincere,
frank, and straightforward. (Hear.) That is my opinion,
and I am prepared to prove it in a very short space of time.
The house will remember in July last, when the noble lord
the present Secretary for Foreign Affairs announced the
preliminaries of the treaty of Villafranca to the house, and
congratulated us on the fact that France required no ac-
cession of territory, he referred to the distressing rumour
that had previously prevailed—namely, that it was the in-
tention of France to demand the annexation of Savoy.
Well, that circumstance showed that the mind of the noble
lord was perfectly alive to that question. And, indeed, he
must have found in,the archives of his office that it was a
question which had occupied in such a sense and manner
the consideration of his predecessor. Iu July last the
noble lord was aware that the question of the annexation
of Savoy had then been given up, and he justly congra-
tulated the house upon the fact. Well, we have a despatch
amongst theselpapers, in which,,the Government are in-
formed, that after the preliminaries of Villafranca had been
signed the. Emperor of the French had renounced his
intention of mooting that question, and that the annexa-
tion. of Savoy was entirely given up. But it now appears
in those papers before us, by the despatch dated tho' end of
January _last, that in the interval between the despatch
which announced that the Emperor had given up all in-
tention to annex Savoy and the subsequent despatch, that
on more than one occasion, in consequence no doubt of
the difficulties which stood in the way of the carrying out of
the treaty of Zurich, the minister of France had,frankly in-
formed the ambassador of the Queen at Paris that, in the
event of the treaty of Zurich not being carried into effect, the
Emperor of the French would certainly look to the annexa-
tion of the duchy of Savoy and the pi evince of Nice as a
necessary consequence. (Hear, hear.) That fact appears
clearly in these papers. Now, I want to ask this of the noble
lord. It appears that the noble lord was fully aware that
under certain circumstances clearly indicated—namely, the
aggrandisement of Sardinia—that is, if Sardinia became a
considerable power in Italy=-France would require as com-
pensation for such a cir(cHumsrtahneceerth) e aHnenNevxaetainione of then
tthhoesne,
Sardinian provinces. ea ,
that the noble lord from that moment pursued a policy
ces to France inevitable(Hear.)
The of those provinces which, if successful in Italy, would have rendered the an
onthTaht
ethneeabglegslaenrati
andse
rnen tef nobleSardinialord wasw acel clearly
or
Sardinia, end to make it a Power of con-
eys i af b result.ii
to strengthen Sar
don't let us enter into a his colleagues colleagues were of olainion that it was an English inte-
restsiderable importance. Now
I have no doubt the noble
troversy upon that point now.
of England to pursue
convinced that it was for the interest'tale—th, while they
lord and his colleagues, after mature consideration, were
that policy. But this result is inevi
must have known that
Sardinia, her Majesty's Government
were pressing this policy in Italy for the aggrandisement of
Hear hear.)
annexation by France of those two provinces. (
?
the success of their endeavours must necessarilyd h
lea to te
What '
is all this
Well, if that be the case, how can her Ma,jesty's Govern-
ment now turn round to France and say,
for? You have taken us by surprise ; we find that
you are
going to annex Savoy and Nice to France—this is
be-
having in a manner whieh can only be described in the
language used in the despatch of the noble lord
—that such a course will produce distrust and suspicion
throughout Europe—" it will disturb the settlement of
Europe, and will lead men's minds back to the long and
sanguinary struggles that took place some years ago ; and
perhaps, after all, the result may prove fatal to your own
happiness." (Hear, hear.) But so strange are the facts
contained in those papers laid before Parliament—so much
better informed is every other nation under the sun of its
foreign affairs than is the British public—(hear, hear)—by
a remarkaple circumstance there isno record on the table of
the fact to which I have just referred. 'I here is not amongst
those papers an official document disclosing the attempt of
the noble lord at the commencement of the year to settle the
affairs of Italy. At the commencement• of the year the
noble lord produced four propositions for the settlement of
the affairs of Italy.
Lord J. RUSSELL—They are numbered in the paper.
Mr. DISRAELI—There is no:printed record of them. At
all events the fact does riot affect myargument. But wehavo
a despatch of the Foreign Minister remarking and serament-
ing on those four propositions which have been published
to all Europe. But strange to say, owing only to the casual
inquiry of the hon. member for Tamworth, the noble lord
in his place here expressed what those propositions were.
Although this circumstance took place a fortnight, or per-
haps, a month ago, it is only on this evening that they have
been placed upon the table of this house. (Hear, hear.)
Now, let us look to these propositions. The gist of them,
if thay mean anything, is the establishment of Sardinia as a
powerful Government in Italy. The noble lord will not
deny that. The noble lard proposes that it shall be left to
the voice of the people in Central Italy to arrange to whom
they shall belong. Surely the noble lord must have been
impressed with the conviction that the declaration of the
people would be in favour of their annexation to Sardinia.
Well, as I before said, the gist of the four propositions is
that Sardinia should be established as a powerful Govern-
ment in Europe. Well, these are offered for the coxsi-
deration of France, and France agrees to them and accepts
them all, except in ondvaryminor particular. (Hear, hear.)
But I want to knew, then, from the noble lord—when he of-
fered a proposition for the settlement of Italy to the French
minister, the result of which was that Sardinia should be
aggrandised in this manner, did the Minister of France in-
form the noble lorgi,h4 his Government renounced the con-
ditions they had-previously attached to such an event—
namely, that Savoy and.. Nice should be annexed to France?
(Hear, hear.) That is a question which we must have an-
swered by the noble lord. The noble lord was aware six
months ago, by tizlottoefrom Lord Co' len that in cm!) of