The Sun.
London, England, 1860-01-26 00:00:00

ADDRESS TO THE QUEEN.

The report on the Address, in reply to her Majesty's
most gracious speech was brought up, and, on the motion
for its adoption,
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said that he would have
adopted the usual course with regard to this motion, which
was to allow it to pass silently, but he thought that there
should have been some explanation afforded by Govern-
ment with regard to China. As related to Italy, he
had no observation to offer, as England was not
committed to interference in the affairs of that coun-
try. He was sorry that there was not in the Royal
Speech some expression of regret that it had been found
necessary to send out a hostile expedition against
China ; for he thought the interests of civilisation
and commerce would not be promoted by adopting that
course. They were dealing with 3,000,000 of people in that
country, who would consider that they were not properly
treated, and in whose minds hostile feelings would be ex-
cited by the proceedings they had taken. He deprecated
most strongly the expenditure of life and money that re-
suited from the recent hostilities in which this country had
been engaged, and illustrated his position by referring to
the Affghan war. He complained. of the emission from the
Royal Speech of any allusion to economy, and repeated his
opposition to the fitting out of a hostile expedition against
a civilised people.
Admiral WALCOTT said he indulged the confident hope
that the house would not think he ought to offer any apo-
logyfor rising, as a natal officer, to speak on a subject very
nearly affecting a brother seaman and the reputation of the
profession. He would, however, first express his satisfaction
with the gracious passage in the Speech of the Sovereign
relating to the action on the Peiho, and with the graceful
and generous tribute paid by the right hon. gentleman the
member for Buckinghamshire and by the noble lord at the
head of the Government. He rejoiced that this country had
not reversed its ancient judgment, and that a forlorn hope
was not fatuity and a dishonour to those engaged in it. He
doubted not that the-sight of the heroic admiral, stretched
on the deck, wounded and bleeding, but still undaunted,
under a terrific fire and heavy responsibility, exercised a
moral influence on his officers as well as on the service at
large—(hear, hear)—and produced an effect which far out-
weighed any impression which the most complete success
would have carried without it. (Hear, hear.) The tempo-
rary victory, it was true, remained with the Chinese, but
;he conduct of the admiral in that hour of bitter trial was
never to be forgotten—(hear, hear)—for the sight of a brave
man suffering adversity, if the saddest, was the grandest
spectacle under Heaven. " What will they think in Eng
land ?" was a thought which perplexed the weak but nerved
and animated the brave heart. He expressed a hope that
the breasts of the men who accompanied the admiral would
not remain without decoration. That we owed alike to the
memory of the dead and to those who should bear the arms
of England in the future. (Hear, hear.) He believed that
the story of the struggle through the treacherous marsh,
the bold passage in the moat, the attempted escalade in the
face of the sweeping cannonade, would be recorded in a page
as honourable as that which commemorated the ride of the
immortal 600 into the valley of death at Balaklava.
(Cheers.) Upon the graves of those wlio fell might be writ-
ten the epitaph of old—" We could not conquer, but we
died." The bravery of the survivors of that blood-stained
day had not been in vain.. It did not terminate with their
slow and sullen retreat, when comrade after comrade who
had fallen was raised on tbe shoulders of comrades and
borne to the boats. The memory of their daring, when de-
feat trembled on the verge of annihilation, survived, and
would in the coming hour of retribution strike dismay into
the heart of the enemy. He would only add a hope that the
• house and the country at large would adopt as their own
• the sentiment of the illustrious soldiers of Rome—" It was
ordained that the winning cause should rest with our foes ;
but that which lost commends itself to us." (Haar, hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON—I am desirous of putting a ques-
tion to her Majesty's Government in reference to the com-
mercial treaty recently concluded between this country and
France; but before doing so I cannot refrain from express-
ing my concurrence in the remarks just made by my hon.
and gallant friend behind me (Admiral Walcott), and the
satisfaction I feel that justice has been at last done—l must
say rather late in the day—(hear, hear)—to the conspicuous
gallantry displayed by Admiral Hope in the action on the
Peiho. (Hear, hear.) lam glad that the distinguished
• and heroic bravery of those who served with him has been
recognised. Ido not believe that more heroic conduct
than that displayed by Admiral Hope ever did honour
to the navy of England. (Cheers.) I shall not now enter
into the question of our present relations with China. I
regard the state of those relations with the greatest possible
anxiety, and I trust the day is not far distant when her
Majesty's Government will state the course they intend to
take on that important subject. (Hear, hear.) My imme-
diate object, however, in addressing the house is to express
a hope, on behalf of those tradeswhich are interested in the
approaching changes in our commercial relations with
France, that the Government will at the earliest
possible period state to Parliament and the country what
are the precise alterations contemplated under the new state
of things. (Hear, hear.) It is represented to me that
those trades the interests of which are to be affected are
already experiencing great difficulty from the present uncer-
tainty which prevails on the subject. 1 have myself al-
ready received a communication from Worcester to the
efiect that the trade there is completely paralysed ; that
- goods to a very large amount have been arrested at Folke-
stone ; and that the manufacturers know not what course
to take under the circumstances. It is most important to
that and other interests that the house should be apprised
without delay of the intentions of the Government on the
subject—(hear, hear)—and I take the earliest opportunity
of expressing a hope that the great interests of the coun-
try will be speedily relieved from the injurious uncertainty
which now prevails. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HADFIELD disapproved of the war with China,
and denounced the Affghan war as being impolitic.
Sir. H. SEYMOUR bore testimony to the gallant con-
duct of the force in China during the late hostilities, a-id
contended that it would be impossible to deal with the
Chinese except by force.
Lord FERMOY said he could not allow the present op-
portunity to pass without entering his protest at the delay
which would take place in the introduction of the proposed
Reform Bill. Instead of allowing a month to have elapsed
before it was brought before the house, it should have
been submitted to the consideration of members within a
fortnight of their assembling. He could account only for
the delay by the fact that the Government were not agre d
among themselves with regard to the measure, or that
they were indifferent to a waste of time. He thought, also,
that the Reform Bill for Ireland should have been alluded
to, and that other bills in regard to that country should have
been brought forward. He complained also that Ireland
had not received encouragement in respect to the volunteer
movement, and contended that notwithstanding the Ultra-
montane party in that country, there was a large body of
the Roman Catholics there who would not be instructed by
Rome. The moderate Protestants had received great pro-
•iocation, but had behaved with much forbearance, which
he thought should have entitled them to be sustained by
Government instead of having their enthusiasm damped.
The fact was that the Government was afraid to arm the
people of Ireland, because they were discontented. But
why were they discontented ? Because they had ground
of complaint, which, as statesmen, the Government of the
country should investigate. -
-Mr. CARDWELL said that the absence of any allu -
*ion to Ireland in the Royal Speech must be considered as
a ground for congratulation. Though no measures for that
country were mentioned, there were several bills prepared,
'Which he would introduce during the present session.
With regard to the volunteer movement, the law of this
country was not applicable to Ireland, so far as concerned
the formation
on the subject
b.rifle corps. There were not many appli-
cationsect from Ireland, which, however, was
not to be attributedi
try. (Hear, hear.) to any want of patriotism in that coun-
education in Ireland he
related to the question of mixed
Govenimeetthought he had stated clearly last
session that
and as concerned the Irish to adhere to that system,
.FAV'orm Bill, it would be intro-
duced shortly after the glish Reform RH. (Hear,
hear.)
Mr. EWART said, with reference to the commercial
treaty with France, that if Frenehines were introduced
into this country it would necessitate the alteration of the
licensing system in this country,

Mr. S. FITZGERALD had hoped that the discussion
tne
haverc
ia l
sv 'mid have closed without any allusions to the "
treaty with France, and in that case he would not
a
thought it -his duty to address the house ; tu
lion,. gentleman who had just spoken, as a free trader,
theadcr
,had congratulated the house on the commercial alliance
with li'r4rico, and tendered his thanks to the Government
for entering into a treaty of reciprocity, he, as one who
certainly had always concurred in the policy of the free trade
adopted by this country, must enter his protest against
such a treaty as one of the most objectionable measures that
had ever come before Parliament. (Hear.) He had always
thought it a principle of free tract: to distrust treaties
,of this kind. They had been told that reciprocity was pro-
fs. Ition in its worse guise, and on that ground he thought
any thing more objectionable than this treaty of reciprocity
coul,l not well be imagined. If the Government had car-

ried this out as a treaty of reciprocity, then they had done
it in the meat clumsy and objectionable manner ; and if it
was not a treaty of reciprocity, then they had taken a course
most adverse to the interests of this country. Ho would
view it as a treaty of reciprocity, and it was on this ground
that the noble lord recommended it last night to the house.
He said it was necessary to enter into a treaty, as otherwise
it would be impossible to secure those advantages which
were offered. Now, let the house understand exactly how
the matter stood. They were going to make immediate con-
cessions of a very important kind, and they were told that
in return they were to receive certain advantages at the dis-
tant period of 18 months. But how stood the case in refe-
rence to this very question of the wine duties as regarded
other nations of Europe ? It had always been the great
object of the commercial classes in this country that there
should be a large reduction of duty in some articles of
British produce, with a view to obtaining the wines of
Spain, Portugal, and Austria. Communications had passed
between our Government and those countries with regard
to the admission of articles of British commerce ; and their
answer had been that they had no objection to admit them,
provided that we in return reduced the duties upon their
wines. To that proposition the reply of England had been
that these duties were not protective, but for the purposes
of revenue, and that, consequently, we could not enterinto
any reciprocal arrangements which would involve the sacri-
fice of a large amount of revenue, even for the sake of secur-
ing, to a certain extent, the admissioni of our own produc-
tions. The consequence had been that there was no treaty
of reciprocity with Austria, Spain, or Portugal. He could
perfectly understand the position of the Government, if
they had declined from beginning to end to enter into
a treaty of reciprocity, as being inconsistent with
the great principles of free trade which this country had
adopted with so much success. But, instead of employing
an argument of that kind, the Government were actually
claiming credit to themselves for having effected this reci-
procal convention. The result of that treaty, if carried
out, would be the reduction of the duties upon all foreign
wines in return for the substitution in France of protective
duties on certain articles of British commerce, but without
any return from Spain, Portugal, Naples, or Austria. Look-
ing at the convention as a reciprocal treaty, it certainly ap-
peared to him, as a firm adherent of the principles of free
trade, that the Government had clearly abandoned that
free trade policy upon which they before prided themselves
so much. The treaty was an anachronism, a retrograde
measure, and met with his moat decided disapproval. As
a reciprocity treaty it was clumsy in the extreme, because
it reduced the wine duties without receiving from the various
foreign nations interested in the matter those tangible bene-
fits which they were willing to afford, and on the promise
only of some return from France 18 months hence. He was
afraid that the delay of 18 months in admitting articles of
British commerce into France was likely to create misap-
prehension and irritation. No doubt, if the duty on French
wines alone were reduced at once, a considerable increase
in the consumption over here would follow, and the French
producers would find their account in that result, but if the
duty on all foreign wines was to be reduced at the same
time, then there seemed to him a high probability that as
regarded France the consumption would remain much as it
was, for by far the larger increase would take place in the
use of those wines to which the people of this country were
most accustomed—the wines of Spain and Portugal, the
greater strength and body of which were perhaps better
adapted to our atmosphere and climate. If that turned out to
be the case, he feared that when the time came for France to
do her part of the agreement the producers in France, disap-
pointed in their experience during the 18 months, would
be apt to charge us with having promised them more than
they had obtained, and to regard with irritation and alarm
the establishment of a system which would, in the opinion
of the French themselves, blow out all the forges in the
north of France. Me must confess he could not see the
slightest necessity, in a commercial sense, for making im-
mediate concessions to France for the sake of a prospective
return at the end of 18 months. And when he came to re-
gard the question as one of revenue the position of the
Government appeared to him infinitely more objectionable
and unjustifiable. The position of Parliament and of the
country, they must remember, was entirely changed since the
adoption of the policy of free trade. In the days when it
was considered part of the duty of the Executive to watoh
ever the industry of the country and to promote this, to re-
press the other branches of trade, the Government were, no
doubt, at liberty to enter into any commercial treaty by
which certain restrictions on articles of foreign commerce
were modified in return for concessions from abroad; but
the position of the Government was entirely changed when
it was laid down as a rule that there should be no duties in
this country save for the purposes of revenue. And yet,
within a week of the meeting of Parliament, the Govern-
ment had thought proper to enter into a treaty which would
affect the permanence of revenue to the amount of -three
millions of money. Supposing a deficiency should occur
under the new system—and whatever it might be: ulti-
mately, that could hardly be avoided during the first year
—some new tax must be imposed to make up for it. It
might be perfectly true that the wine duties were a tax
not in the best state ; but it was quite clear that if there
was to be any considerable reduction in these duties, they
must be replaced by some new tax. What was that tax to
be ? The wine duties were a tax that pressed upon the
rich, who could afford to indulge in such luxuries—was
there to be an increase or continuance of income tax in or-
der that the wine duties might be reduced ? Were those
who did not drink wine to be taxed for the benefit of those
who did ? They had duties on tea and sugar—were they
going to reduce the duty on stimulants, and tax the beve-
rage of the poor and temperate ? (Hear.) These questions
ought to have been brought before the house before the
Government embarrassed Parliament, and, to a certain ex-
tent, the Crown, by entering upon a treaty which, subject,
of course, to the approval of Parliament, involved a redue-
tien of revenue duties. It was quite possible that the duty
on wine at the present moment might not be in the best
state, and that when reduced the increased consumption
might lead to a larger revenue. It was an experiment, how-
ever, that they could only conjecture what the result would
be. But in entering into a commercial treaty of this sort
they prevented any return to an increased rate, should there
be a falling off. They had often before had deficiencies of the
revenue which ren&ared it necessary to put an additional 10
or 15 per cent. upon the customs' duties ; but the result of
this commercial arrangement would be to throw the addi-
tional percentage, if found necessary, upon all articles except
wine, to raise the price of articles of ordinary consumption
among the poorer classes of the community, and to exempt
one of the chief luxuries of the rich. (Hear.) These were
the main objections to the treaty ; but beyond these he could
not help thinking there was some special reason ;why the
treaty was to be entered into just then, and he felt as confi-
dent as he could be upon any subject where he had no docu-
mentary evidence that it was with a political, and not a com-
mercial object, that the convention had been got up. It was
done with the object of diverting the attention of this coun-
try from the political relations of her Majesty's Govern.
ment with the Government of France, and it was assumed,
no doubt, that as a nation of shopkeepers we should at once
become engrossed in anything which wore a commercial
aspect, and give no heed to what required the closest and
most anxious scrutiny—the political relations of the noble
viscount's Government and the Government of France.
(Hear, hear.) No man was more desirous than himself
of maintaining the most intimate relations between Eng-
land and France. He believed that an intimate alliance
was for the interest of both countries, and necessary
for the peace of Europe and the world ; but there was a
difference between mutual friendship and intimacy, and
an understanding between the two Governments which
should amount to an identity of policy, and he was afraid
it was the latter which the noble lord had in view. He be-
lieved that the language which the noble lord was disposed
to hold to Europe was that England and Franc* were of
one mind, and that the rest might do what they liked. The
result of that could only be a combination of the other
Powers with a different view, the division of Europe into
two camps, and the maintenance of peace solely by the
preponderance of power on the part of England and France
In his opinion, that would be a most objectionable state of
things, for many reasons. If he understood the feeling of
this country at all, it was that we were not to engage need-
lessly in hostilities ; and this feeling arose not from mere
commercial reasons, but he hoped and trusted from a
higher and Christian view of our national responsibility.
If, however, this entente cordiale, this identity of policy
between the two Governments of France and England,
were to continue, it must end in the more active military
Power leading the way, and leaving England to follow
humbly in its wake—a position inconsistent both with the
interest and dignity of our country. (Hear.) He was per-
fectly convinced that it was possible for this country to
maintain the most amicable relations with France and the
rest of Europe, and io hold her position and exercise her in-
fluence as a liberal and enlightened nation; but if there was
one policy more than another calculated to injure her inte-
rests and lessen her influence it was the adoption of an
identity of policy with France. (Hear.) There were many
reasons why no such identity ought to exist. The English
were not the people to go to war for an " idea," and re
garded the necessity of going to war in a very different light
from their neighbours. But, without going into all the
many points of difference which subsisted between them in
form of government and in the spirit and genius of the people,
he maintained that, while it was their interest and within
their power to hold the most intimate and friendly alliance
with France, they would only jeopardise the prestige, hon-
our, and influence of England, as well as the alliance itself.
by attempting to preserve that identity of policy which he
believed it was the object of the noble lord to establish.
Mr. W. E WART explained that he would agree with
the commercial treaty only if it proved consistent with the
principles of free trade.

The CIIANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said,—l
must first notice the observation of the right hon. baronet
(Sir J. Pakington) that he was glad justice had at length
been done ky the Government to the gallantry of our naval
forces in the contest at the mouth of the Peiho, because it
appeared to him that otter and earlier occasions of doing so
hai been allowed to pass without advantage being taken of
them. On the part of the Government I may venture to
say that they have always entertained the feeling of un-
qualified admiration expressed by my noble friend last
night. I am not aware of any occasion that we have lost of
giving expression to that sentiment; but if the right hon.
baronet will bring it to our knowledge, we shall at once
express our regret at having overlooked it. (Hear, hear.)
Of course, I rise particularly for the purpose of following
the hon. gentleman who has just sat down, and who
has discussed very much at large the treaty which is not
yet on the table of the house. The first question I think
in the mind of any gentleman who has listened to the hon.
member must be, how in the world is itthat this single and
fortunate member of the House of Commons has attained to
that minute and correct knowledge of the character of the
treaty which has enabled him, before it is produced to the
world, to express his opinions upon it in so copious urnan-
ner and in every possible point of view. Though my hon.
friend is incapable of a dishonourable action, his conduct
leads to a suspicion that he must have secreted himself; after
the ancient fashion, behind the tapestry in the room where
the negotiations were going on, and that i t was in that extra-
ordinary and not creditable manner he obtained the know-
ledge of which he has been giving the advantage to the house.
(A laugh.) In one respect I am really sorry for my hon.
friend. He has, I think, put himself at a disadvantage ,in
having anticipated the occasion for his objections, inasmuch
as those sweeping denunciations of his against that unfor-
tunate agreement, that disastrous convention, would have
come with greater force, because his audience would have
been better prepared to receive them, had my hon. friend
been able to exercise a greater degree of self-control, and
to wait for a few days till the treaty was before the house.
He must have now emptied ant the budget of his objet
twills, and when the treaty is on the table he will have no
more objections to produce; or, at least, if his ingenuity
ibse
eanb
teat
n supplyoffhie
acriticism, them the
and t
bloom red
edgefreshnessof his a d
will havevie
advice
wgeinlltlhemavaenlhosast asilogrweant vortion of its sharpness. The hon.
the Governmentanhdaa
seibieun, asgu rieigtyarodfs
some
erantoets ow fedirdye,fitneadt
but verjghgrtso
rights, he has done
i ha
that infringement
with moofr e yourful constitu-
tionalnessth anprudence, seeing that my noble friend stated last night that
the treaty had been framed in such a manner as to preserve
intact and entire every right and privilege of the house, so
that it can only take effect in virtue of your vote and deci-

sion. (Hear, hear.) I cannot but feel, though lam unwil- '
ling to say it, that there really is a certain degree of adverse
prepossession about my hon. friend which will prevent him
from delivering a perfectly impartial judgment on the sub-
ject. The hon. gentleman has shown you what an objec-
tionable document this treaty is with regard to the princi-
ples of free trade, and I regret to say I am not at liberty to
follow him in his discussion. I must be content to
wait, as I hope the house will do also, until, in com-
pliance with the necessary forms. of diplomatic proceeding
and the principles of the constitution, which I can assure
my hon. friend the Government have not altogether for-
gotten, the treaty can be produced, and we can have
ample discussion of its merits, not in our present state of
ignorance as to what it really is, but in the clear light of
day and in the full knowledge of all its particulars. (Hear,
hear.) For the present I must beg to adjourn the defence
of the principles of free trade and the establishment of the
relation in which this treaty stands to them. Notwith-
standing the denunciations of the hon. gentleman, I can
assure him that I entertain a full and perfect confidence
that when Parliament shall have obtained a knowledge of
the subject on which it is to pass judgment, and-when on
one side and on the other we have come to a clear and com-
prehensive understanding of what the treaty is to effect,
the verdict of Parliament will be favourable to the pro-
ceedings that have been concluded. (Hear, hear.) My
hon. friend tells us the treaty is bad as regards free trade
and commerce, but far worse as regards revenue. It is
monstrous, he says, to take up a subject of this kind after
we have declared that we have no duties but those for the
purposes of revenue. I must confess my ignorance of the
time when we made any such assertion. I should like to
know whether my hon. friend will pledge himself to the
fact that we have no duties but those of revenue, and whe-
ther he will maintain that the 15s. a-gallon on brandy, com-
pared with Bs. on spirits, is a duty solely for revenue. If he
will, I must join issue with him upon that matter. In point
of fact, it is not true that we have no duties but those of re-
venue. (Hear, hear.) We have been engaged for many
years in a gradual and, I am thankful to say, sweeping pur-
gation of our tariff ; but, though that process has gone far,
it has not yet been fully accomplished, and I shall invite
the hon. gentleman by and by, as a man ardently attached
to the principles of free trade to join with us in congratu-
lating the country on the great step which has just been
made towards its completion. lam afraid that my hon.
friend who has been so learned in the things that are to be,
has not taken adequatepains to inform himself in the things
that have beeu. My hon. friend went back to the history of
the foreign negotiations for the reduction of the tariff which
were conducted in formeryears, but abandoned, he says, on
the ground that, as the duties which we were desired to re-
duce were levied as revenue, we could not make any con-
cessiens in regard to them. I took an active part in these'
negotiations myself, as did also my noble friend beside me,
and so far from its being the fact that we always reserved
our wine duties, and were unwilling to touch them as being
collected for revenue, there was not one of the negotiations,
whether with France, Portugal, or Spain, in which we did
nit offer large reductions of those very duties on wine. The
negotiations failed just because the two parties looked at
the matter from different points of view, and could not
agree as to the relative value of the concessions to be made
on either side. (Hear, hear.) Probably they did not pro-
ceed on that broad and firm basis on which such arrange-
ments alone can be carried out. Then, said the hon. gen-
tleman, perhaps the wine duties of England are not in the
best state ; but that is a very mild statement of the case.
The hon. gentleman did not show why the wine duties
were not in the best state, but told us what, if 3 were true,
would be a very high eulogy to pass on a duty which pro-
duces some £170,000 or £lBO,OOO a-year. He said that the
wine duties pressed upon the rich mainly, if not exclusively.
But why is that ? Simply because these duties prohibit wine
to the poor. The wine duties do not press upon the poorer
classes, because the wines never come within their reach.
(Hear, hear.) The duty stands like a wall of brass between
the poor man and a glass of wine, Bad, however, as is the
treaty with regard to free trade, infinitely worse as it is in
regard to revenue, to say nothing of its being a breach of
the constitutional privileges of this house, the climax of the
accusation is not' reached till we come to the political cha-
racter of the measure. There is a secret intention of draw-
ing closer, in some mysterious way, the relations between
this country and France—the weightiest and most dange-
rous offence of all. My hon. friend says it would be most
objectionable to maintain the peace of Europe by the pre-
ponderating influence of England and France. He is
afraid we are bent upon an identity of policy in all cases
between the two countries, and he thinks that the object of
the treaty is to divert attention from the st ate of the rela-
tions between the Government and the-Emperor. If it is,
the plot has signally failed, for on the very first day of the
session comes down one hon. member, than whom no one
is more competent, to denounce us, to disclose the clandes-
tine proceeding in the face of the world, and to blast what-
ever hope we might have had of concealing our infamous
. intentions. In former times there have been individuals
and parties in this house who have felt an ineradicable and
incurable jealousy of a close amity between France and
, England. I had hoped those times had passed, but cannot
, feel well assured after listening to the speech of the hon.
gentleman. He says he wishes for an intimate alliance
with Franco, but not too intimate—he is afraid of identity
of policy ? Is there any other man in this house who
is afraid of identity of policy ? Is there another
member who believes in the possibility of an iden-
tity, in all cases, at all times, between the policy of
England and France ? The practical question is, whether
we believe there can be, in the nature of things, too close
an understanding between the two countries. (Hear, hear.)
The hon. gentleman believes there can. To my mind there
cannot, because in the nature of the case, in the relations of
the two countries, and in the circumstances of Europe,
there-is hardly anypossible contingency in which they could
ever be associated in policy, except for objects honourable
in themselves and beneficial to mankind. (Cheers.) On no
occasion in our own day or in history have they ever been
combined for a bad object as regards the politics of Europe ;
and therefore I trust that alliance, as I hope we all do, and
wish it may be drawn closer and closer, not only on account
of its intrinsic value, but because it contains nothing in itself
which can by any possibility be hot.tils to the interests of
the other Powers of Europe. And the best proof of this is
—as my hon friend eannot have failed to observe—that no
association between the Governments of France and Eng-
land has ever awakened the jealousy or suspicion of the
other Powers, because it is known to be an association which
can only be applied to good ends. ( gear.) As to the period
at which it will be practicable to submit the treaty to
the consideration of the house, I have to say that the treaty
was signed the day before yesterday, that the ratifications
are to be exchanged within ten days—a very short, but it is
hoped a sufficient, time for the review of so important an
instrument,—and that, therefore, we shall be able to present
the treaty to the house about the end of next week. The
Government have felt that as these propositions have an ica-
pertant connection with the revenue, and enter into the
general financial arrangements of the year, full justice
would not be done to the house, unless the financial state-
ment of revenue and expenditure for the year were brought
up at the same time. Impressions have gone abroad, whether
well or ill founded, which are exercising a paralyzing effec t
on certain important branches of trade, and though we shall
have to consider some questions connected with the forms
of the house, and the relations between the different modes
of proceeding in regard to votes of money and supply, I hope
we shall be able to lay the treaty on the table and submit
the general financial statement for the year on next Monday
week, the 6th of February. (Hear, hear.) It is our desire
that not a moment may be lost in bringing those questions
forward, and that there may be the fullest discussion in
regard to them. (Hear, hear.)
After a few remarks from Mr. NEwnEGlrs and Mr.
HOUMAN,
Sir DE LAO/. EVANS said he thought the Chinese
question should have been brought before the house with-
out delay, in order to enable the country to see its position
with regard to China. They would then be in a position
to decide to what extant they should proceed, or whether
they should not discontinue any further hostile preparations.
He had heard with great pleasure what the noble lord at
the head of the Government had stated last night on this
subject, but it did not go to the extent of satisfying him.
He eulogised the conduct of Admiral Hope and the officers
under his command, and thought that an early opportunity
should be afforded of expressing the feeling of the country
towards them.
Mr. EDWIN JAMES complained of the delay in bring-
ing forward the Reform Bill which he considered should
have been submitted immediately to the house. There was
no great difficulty in bringing forward such a measure if
the Government were agreed among themselves, for it
might be introduced in a short speech, and then the coun •
try would consider its details. That course would give the
house time to discuss other pressing and important sub-
jects ; but by delaying the Reform 81l they might practi-
cally be promoting the views of those who wished to ob-
struct reform. (Hear, hear.) It was clear that there would
be a debate on the Chinese question, and if the Government
were defeated and resigned, the Reform bill might be lost
altogether. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. LOCKE considered that it was hypereritical to con-
demn Government for the delay in introducing the measure.
Lord PALMERSTON said—l will not detain the house
more than a few moments. With regard teP the "observa-
tions of the right hon. gentleman the member for Stroud
as to the period when notice has been given for introducing
the Reform Bill, I would just remind him that it is impos-
sible for the Government to satisfy the wishes and opinions
of all the members as to the course of public business. The
right hon. gentleman and others who agree with him are
desirous that the Reform Bill should be the first measure
proposed. The hon. and gallant member for Westminster
attaches great importance to an early discussion of questions
connected with China. Other members think that the treaty
concluded with France, involving the interests of our com-
mercial system, ought to be the first measure taken in this
house. Other members attach great importance to the
general review of our finances, and :hope the Chancellor of
the Exchequer will take an early opportunity to bring on
his budget. (Hear, hear.) It is impossible for her
Majesty's Government to satisfy equally the wishes and
opinions of all, and the chances are that it will be found
that the course we have pursued is the one which, on' the
whole, is best suited to bring the deliberations of the house
to a satisfactory and useful result. (Hear.) I can only assure
the right hon. gentleman that there is no reason whatever for
supposing that the Reform Bill being introduced on the 20th
of February there will not bo ample time for discussing all
its details, and, as I hope, passing it into law in the course
of the present session of Parliament. The right hon. gentle -
man has to some degree promised—l do not know whether
he
Nve intendedateno not to
ot doxp escot—frtohma t
hi
mt i la
any
hyavt
omtee aosfureisdisposedhostilityi
cohf
it
.Nlvt-
am
will
ma
tag
much
ahhetul
hlebaha
et
obliged
the
ungenerous
dgg,eoldn
hetpositionoroohpueh
ittfooorfhtt that
indicates
s
ladthn intimation, Government.
mtaotit
dispositionohne strict
tnr
i(
dLe,t
tao (Laughter.)
although
l giveet htetre
ur
0.
s)f
agtfairinai
yerdr
argumentpe
tl
coa eype ut
hanci
ntlieal touhflp
eetwhmeasure
• teo•
fsof •
transactions.lareform
gt
the gallant safely(gettThi
lener
tsph.
general
per
neblreovsrua,i harboured ehi dhr
to
laid upon the table at an early period, and then will be the
proper time to enter into a detailed examination of the course
which her Majesty's Government have pursued. My hon.
friend behind me has expres.ed a wish to know whether we
are at war with China or not. He has stated very correctly,
in reference to the relations of the Queen with the Emperor
of China, that we never have been at war—that is to say,
that the Emperor of China never has chosen to consider
the operations at Canton to obtain satisfaction for the out-
rages there committed as a rupture of the relations between
the two empires. Accordingly trade has gone on contem-
poraneously at Shanghai and the other ports; and that is
the c.ndition of things at the present moment. If the
treaty had been ratified, it would have placed the relat ions
of the two countries upon a much more satisfactory footing
than that upon which they have hitherto stood. Lut the
ratification not having taken place, we are exactly in the
same situation in which we were before Lord Elgin nego-
tiated the treaty, and the Emperor of China has made known
that he does not wish the commercial relations to be inter-
rupted in consequence of that which happened at the Peiho,
or any antecedent transaction at Canton. If a declaration
of war issued. it would be impossible for us to carry on at
Shanghai or Hong Kong commercial relations, and I think
the house will see that it is a matter for grave considera-
tion before we by any overt act disturb those relations