The Sun.
London, England, 1860-02-18 00:00:00

•
had not attempted to give the shadow of an annYar.
(Cheers.)
Lord J. RUSSELL complained that the noble lord oppo-
site had unintentionally misrepresented him altogether.
The hon. member for Perthshire had asked why it was that
when both countries, by their legislative bodies, could have
instituted changes in the duties which they relatively im-
posed, the Government had chosen to proceed by way of
commercial treaty ; and he replied,l that when the debate
was raised upon Monday upon the whole question he would
give the reasons why in this instance he had thought it ad-
visable to enter into a commercial treaty. He did not say,
as had been represented by the noble lord opposite, that on
that occasion he would be prepared to enter into the details
of that commercial treaty. He would now give to one part
of the general question an answer, which possibly he had
before omitted to do—namely, that no such correspondence
as had been referred to existed at the Foreign-office.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HARDY, with a view of showing how completely
and inseparably the Government had mixed up the Budget
and the commercial treaty, read a passage from a letter
written by Lord John Russell to Earl Cowley and Mr.
Cobden, which was as follows :—" The effect of your in-
structions will be to place at your disposal a large sum be-
longing to the revenue from Customs to be employed in re-
moving, in moat cases wholly, and in all cases to a consi-
derable extent, the charge of Customs' duty from very im-
portant productions of France. These productions are not
in general articles of primary necessity, or of auch univer-
sal use among the people of the United Kingdom as to en-
title them on those grounds to the first attention of the
' Government. (Ironical cheers.) They are selected, then,
• for relief, in part indeed upon. commercial grounds, but in
part also because of the collateral effectnwhich we antici-
pate from the conclusion of the treaty." If the house were
to act in the manner that the Government now calla on
' them to do—in an independent way and for the interests of
England [alone—they ought in the first instance to enter
on the consideration of the treaty, and afterwards to take
up the discussion on the Budget. (Cheers.)
The motion for adjournment to Monday was then agreed

to.
On the motion that the Speaker do leave the chair,
with a view of going into Committee of Supply,
Lord PALMERSTON said—Sir, I take advantage of that
motion to answer the inquiry of the right hon. gentleman
opposite. It must be obvious to anybody who has read the
treaty, or to any one who reflects on the constitutional
principle, that it is essential that the opinion of Parliament
should be taken on the treaty as a compact between the two
countries. The only question is as to the order by which our
proceedings should be governed. Now, I humbly think—
considering that the treaty involves a considerable number
of changes in our Customs regulations—that if we had come
down to the house, and at once and before any other pro-
ceeding had proposed a general vote sanctioning the whole
treaty as it stands, we should have been met with the natu-
ral objection—" You call on us by one vote to give an
opinion on a matter involving a great number of details—
(cheers)—you are not dealing fairly with Parliament.
(Hear, hear.) Let us go through the matter point by
point and step by step, and when we have arrived at a con-
clusion on all the separate parts, then give us an
opportunity of expressing an opinion on the national en-
gagement as a whole between the two countries." (Cheers.)
Tliat, I apprehend, was the course pursued by Mr. Pitt ;
that is the course we mean to pursue. (Hear, hear.) We in-
tend to take the sense of Parliament on the different matters
dependent on that treaty, in combination also with changes
made on separate grounds in our other Customs and fiscal
regulations. But unioubtedly it will be our duty—a duty
from which we have no intention of shrinking-4 give to
the two houses of Parliament an opportunity of stating

their opinions plainly and directly—aye or no—in approba-
tion or disapprobation of the treaty. (Hear.) It will be our
duty to give notice of the time most expedient for the public
interest to take the discitssionj and the house may be as-
sured we have no intention of shrinking from that duty.
My noble friend has deprecated the premature discussion of
the treaty, and with all submission I must say, when the
house is assombled to discuss the Army Estimates it is in-
convenient to employ the time of the house in discussing a
treaty which will probably be a subject of debite in the en-
suing week. My noble friend has been interrogated by se-
veral hon. gentlemen after the time when the forms of the
house permit him to be catechised ; and I believe I am now
in some degree departing from those forms in giving the in-
formation asked by the right hon. gentleman.
Mr. DISRAELI—I have not received any answer from
the noble lord. Of course no member of the house supposes
that this treaty will be carried into effect without the house
having an opportunity of giving its sanction to it. But the
question to which I wish to call the attention of the house is
the mode and manner in which it shall receive that sanction.
The noble lord says the question of the approval of the
treaty will be brought before the house. But I maintain it
should be brought before us in the same manner as the
' treaty of 1787 was laid before the house by Mr. Pitt, so thai
the house should have an opportunity of expressing its
opinion on each article. (Hear, hear.) By the course the
Government has settled, the house will have the opportu-
nity of parting with a considerable amount of the revenue
of the country ; and afterwards it will have an opportunity
of rejecting the treaty in consequence of which this amount
of revenue has been destroyed. (Hear, hear.) Nothing is
more proper than that we should have an annual statement
of the financial prospects of the Government for the year
that informs its of its commercial and financial policy, ex-
ternal and internal ; but because we have that statement it
does not follow that we should immediately go into com-
mittee to consider the Customs duties. In 1787 Mr. Pitt
was Chancellor of the Exchequer as well as Prime Minister,
and made his financial exposition when he moved that the
treaty be taken into consideration. The duty of the Go-
vernment now is to give the house an opportunity of ex-
pressing its opinion on every article of the present treaty.
That, I believe, is the proper and constitutional course, nor
will any other course be satisfactory to the oountry.