The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-16 00:00:00

long a time, for he must have expected this annexation as
the result of his own counsels and acts. It was not till the
press and Parliament of the country had spoken that the
noble lord seemed to take up the matter, and then he ad-
mitted that the noble lord spoke in the proper tone. But
he did not think that the noble lord acted in the matter
with the views of a statesman, or like one conversant with
the public law of Europe, and with international obliga-
tions. England, Russia, Prussia, Austria, Sardinia herself,
were co-trustees to the Treaty of Vienna, and it was the
duty of the noble lord, when he became acquainted with
this proposition relative to Savoy, to inform the co-trustees
to that treaty, and take their opinion with regard to it.
When frontiers most important to the safety of all Europe
were to be altered, which had been guaranteed by all the
'great Powers—that Lord John Russell should have satisfied
himself with addressing some not very strong remonstrance
to the Emperor of the French was to him wholly unintelli-
ble. The opinion of Europe was that this country had
been indifferent on the point, and that Savoy had been
sacrificed to the treaty. He (Lord Malmesbury) had a
greater right than any man to remember what were the
promises of the French Emperor when he established his
Government and took the title of Napoleon 111. It was
necessary to ascertain whether he took that title as the
direct descendant of Napoleon 1., or by virtue of popular
election. The Emperor at that time most candidly came
forward and declared that he would observe all the acts of
1814 and 1815 that had been passed, and he had kept his
word most faithfully. (Hear.) It was, therefore, with the
deepest regret and apprehension that he saw the Emperor
for the first time step out from the straight and honourable
path which he had hitherto pursued, and a continuance in
which would have ensured to him the respect of all Europe,
and the utmost desire on the part of this country for his
friendship. (Hear, hear.)
Earl DE GREY and RIPON was confident that their
lordships would take the view which had been taken in the
other house, and aid in that extension of commerce which
was sure to be attended with great blessings to both
nations. (Hear, hear.)
Earl STANHOPE said if the noble lord persisted in
dividing the house, although he agreed with his views, still
he could not, under existing circumstances, vote with him.

Lord OVERSTONE said he entertained grave doubts
as to the wisdom of the treaty. Such arrangements were
full of difficulties with respect to our own internal arrange-
ments, and danger as it regarded foreigners. Let this
country confine its attention to her own fiscal arrangements,
and if every other country did the same, there would be
a commercial emulation between all countries which
would be productive of advantage to all. (Hear.) Those
treaties could only have the effect of depriving us of that
freedom of action so necessary for our welfare. With re-
spect to the coal question, and as to whether an export
duty should be imposed on that commodity, he was of
opinion that it was legitimate on the part of any country
to preserve to itself any exclusive advantages which it
might possess, and not share them with foreigners. (Hear.)
The tea and opium duties clearly showed that the removal
of a duty was not always an advantage to the country im-
porting the article. Coal did not resemble commodities
which could be re-produced from year to year—its supply
was limited. It was not an article the supply of which
could be increased in proportion to the demand. It was, on
the contrary, constantly becoming lessened in quantity.
On these grounds, he thought the propriety of imposing an
export duty on coal should be left an open question. (Hear.)
With respect to Customs duties generally, considering the
heavy amount of revenue which this country was obliged
to raise, he saw no impropriety in imposing reasonable
duties on all foreign imports except the prime necessaries
of life. He thought those tariff arrangements were calcu-
lated to produce feelings of jealousy and suspicion between
nations, rather than feelings of amity and good will. As
to the proposed address, it was because he feared that this
commercial treaty, in connection with their fiscal arrange-
ments, would greatly damage the country, that he could
not give his vote in favour of the address. The treaty
might disappoint those who thought unfavourably of it,
but most sincerely he hoped it would have the effect of ex-
tending the intercourse between two great nations, and
above all, that it would establish a virtuous feeling of com-
merce, instead of an accursed feeling of national jealousy,
and contribute to the social confidence and industry of the
people of this country. (Cries of "Hear, hear.")
The Duke of ARGYLL said the scope of the debate had
extended far beyond the limits of the motion, at the same
time that he fully admitted that the present was an occa-
sion upon which noble lords had a right to enter into the
discussion of the whole commercial policy of the Govern-
ment. (Hear, hear.) He complained of the noble lord
who had just sat down, that while he accused the Govern-
ment of carelessness, and Mr. Cobden of carelessness in
negotiating this treaty, he himself had shown that he had
not read the articles of the treaty with due atten-
tion. Mr. Cobden was not aware of the intention of Go-
vernment to repeal the paper duty ; and if he had been
aware of such intention he could not have known that the
House of Commons would have acceded to that proposition.
There seemed to be some misunderstanding in the minds of
some noblelorda as to the changes made by the treaty, and
how far their fiscal arrangementawere affected by the treaty.
They were not adding at all to the deficiency under the
existing law. The tea and sugar duties were to lapse alto-
gether this year, and that was caused by a mistake in the
act, for such had not been the intention of Parliament.
(Hear.) He had been anxious, in listening to the speeches
of that evening, to ascertain what other course than that
taken by the Government would be recommended, but the
Opposition had been silent on that subject. They had con-
nected the income tax with remissions on trade and com-
merce. The great difficulty they had to meet was the large
amount of military and naval expenditure. Looking at
that, it was impossible to get rid of the war income tax.
That tax had gone through various stages, and those stages
had reference chiefly to the necessity which existed for naval
and military expenditure. The policy of their predecessors
had compelled them to levy an increased, income tax within
the half year at the close of the last session. The estimates
for the army and navy had largely increased, and it was
impossible, in the face of those estimates, to get rid of the
income tax. There was nothing in the address which
called for any hostile expression of opinion on the part of
their lordships, and he sincerely hoped that no attempt
would be made to do so. It did not pledge noble lords to
the adoption of the financial operations of the Government.
He believed himself it was a good one, founded not on
theory, but experience, on which, for the last few years, the
country had prospered.
The Earl of DERBY said that at that late hour of the
night ho was very reluctant to trespass on their lordships'
attention, the more especially as the ground on whioh he
intended to enter had been already completely occupied
by the able and eloquent speech of the noble earl opposite,
and the speech of the noble baron who addressed their lord-
ships a few moments ago, and who,, although a general sup-
porter of the Government, was opposed to them on the pre
sent occasion. There were some things which fell from the
noble duke who had just sat down which he could not pass
over. He did not wish to say anything with reference to
his little song of triumph for the majorities recently obtained
ix the other House of Parliament, nor trouble himself to
inquire whether they were obtained on account of the actual
confidence in the wisdom of the financial statement, or
whether, through united councils, or whether the baits
thrown out to various interests did not induce them to obtain
advantages for themselves, and look with an indulgent eye
on the faults of her Majesty's Ministers. The noble duke
must acknowledge, whatever may be the peculiar opinions
entertained by their lordships, that there was nothing in the
debate of a party character, and if ho looked at the state of
the benches on his (the Earl of Derby's) side of the house,
he would at once be convinced that no party motives actu-
ated their lordships. Indeed, two of the most powerful and
eloquent speeches made in the course of the evening came,
not from the opponents, but the supporters of the Govern-
ment. They were not on that occasion about to pass a vote
on the financial policy of the Government, or commercial
intercourse which might be necessary with France, or the
policy or propriety of extending their commercial relations
with that country. But they were asked to take a course
which was not unusual; they were, by the address then be-
fore the house, called upon to volunteer to signify to her
Majesty their approval of a treaty which they might
t other-
Ilse pass over. Now, if their adoption of it did not bind
em, what was the use of asking their lordships to accept
it 2 There was, he thought, a particular stipulation in the
treaty, which required the assent of Parliament before
it was carried into effect ; ho did understand that that
article existed, and that her Majesty's Government,
instead of laying it on the table of both
Houses
of Parliament, thought there was something. peculiar in it
which rendered it necessary to get the assent of Parliament.
But the noble duke said the address had nothing whatever
to do with the treaty, that it was carefully drawn up so as
to ensure the approval of all their lordships. Well, then,
if the treaty did not require the assent of Parliament, why
waste the time of this lordships' house, though certainly,
on the present occasion, it was anything but wasted. He
(the Earl of Derby) wished to know precisely how the mato
ter stood. The noble earl opposite asked the noble and
learned lord on the woolsack a •question, to which the noble
lord had not as yet given a reply. The noble and learned
lord was asked whether if the address WAS attended to or
not it made the slightest difference in the ratification of the
treaty. If the noble and learned lord were prepared to say
that the rejection of the address was a rejection of the treaty,
then, indeed, their lordships ought to consider whether they
would incur such a responsibility; but if, on the other hand,
he believed that, so far as the treaty was concerned,.the ad-
dress was mere waste paper, then, in point of fact, the blame
lay on those who unnecessarily and gratuitously brought it
before them. For his own part, he confessed, that after the
best consideration he could give to the treaty, it appeared
to him that the introduction of the address was absolutely
useless. It was said, no doubt, that unless with the assent
of Parliament her Majesty could not enter into the engage-
ment; but as regarded those articles contained in the
commercial part, they were disposed of in the com-
mittee on Customs, and the address, as regarded them,
was entirely unnecessary. There was, however, another
article, namely, the 11th, which referred to' coals, and
would require more than the assent of Parliament. That
Was not in the slightest degree affected by either a reso-
lution or bill carried in the House of Commons. By the
aw as it now stood, her Majesty, by an Order in Council,
was empowered to prohibit on certain occasions, and under
certain circumstances, the exportation of certain articles.
That was a power conferred on the Crown by the two
Houses of Parliament for the ad vantage of the country, and
he (the Earlof Derby) contended that, without the sanction
of another act of Parliament,
consti-
tutionally dispose itself of the Crown could not
at,toorthgeive its authority away.
Without saying ono word export of coal, or whe-
ther the duty on it be or be not a legitimate
of en
source of taxa-
tion—still more, without the least
into the
a
matter of how long the supply would last--and
theh
noble lord opposite said 5,000 years—he did not believeug it
would last 250 ; but without pretending to discuss
any of
those points, it was not in the power of the Crown to give
export to that article without authority of an act of Parlia-
ment. The address now moved, however, would have no
effect one way or another. The noble earl who so ably
opened the subject, entered into the question of the budget
and the commercial treaty, and very properly, because after
all, the great question was, wore the finances of the country
in such a condition as to justify what had been done ? The
case of the budget was clearly brought bafore their lord-
ships, but the noble duke throw quite a new light on the
subject, for ho said the Chancellor of the Exchequer did not