The Sun.
London, England, 1860-02-21 00:00:00

COLONIAL.

TEA.—The market continues ;;y dull, no business of
any importance having been transacted, and prices are
unaltered.
SUGAR.--There have been but limited inquiries, and the
few parcels that have changed hands have been for imme-
diate requiiement at previous rates. In the Relined Market
business has bcon quiet.
COFFEE.—There has been a fair demand for Plantation.
Ceylon at about former prices. In other descriptions the
dealings have been limited, with no alteration to record in
values.
RICE.—A fair amount of business has been done in East
India at full rates.
SALTPBTRE.—The demand has been inactive, and prices
have undergone no material variation.
TALLOW.— Ihe market during the last few days has
shown less activity, and prices have slightly given way.
P.Y.C. on the spot is now quoted 60s, April to Juno de-
livery 1365, and last three mouths 53s per cwt.

1 adopted
edeLvoßeopts
OPPOSITION
Willd*
o
Np TOt
111.1) le
Et
i
ROYAL ENGLISH OPERA, COVENT GARDEN.—
Last evening the opera and popular pantomime of
" Puss in Boots" was honoured by the presence of
her Royal Highness the Princess Louisa and his
Royal Highness Prince Arthur, attended by Lady
itnugivdi With France,that th e
watßsi
ounhpooGnnEo
Tutrieilidws
Fwp
oAitihot the
Caroline Barrington, eriflo or cme
ad
ne ,e e Colonel
Liddell, and Major Elphinstone.
theatre last evening
small tenements, it is be-
pfor the
pre-
sence Lord
d Countess oc fhaahorefl re
Desert,
M petitioneF snai j
trezts: tooylyi and
ohape
n.House
theuoLcu7;
sePeuKrteoie.
fnccraceolLim. Ctotilorhondnneoscanl
To
tar
os
imt.an,inrnoct.tyoi hpermsuee: :
The inhabitants of this borough have unanimously
lady for its total avoidance of
reciprocity
British mercantile marine. Th
tPx is felt to be an unbearable goad.
prop Every house
rperaoctihraeitedi
tooinrioaf\h, tle.her ee:nh treaty
asva
EMIGRANT SHIP.—An account
rnAmoreerican ship
Luna, Captain
days before with Shannon,3 which left that port three
7 emigrants, and a crew of 14
men and 3 officers
been (including the captain), had
wrecked on the coastof
bourg, and that everybody on board had perished
except No ofthis
two persons. details deplorable
disaster are, however, given.
THE RELIGIOUS RIOTS IN ST. GEORGE' S-IN-THE•
E T
AS .—Mr. Rosier appeared before the ,onsi I" •
story
Court to-day to answer the h c arges mai le against
him by the Rev. Bryan King. As na opposition
was made to the articles, they were admitted. The
case will be heard by viva voce eviden to in a short

time.
CHERBOURG, Feb. 18.—The Luna, from Havre
to New Orleans, is totally lost. Out of a crew of
22 men and 85 passengers, only two men. are saved.
LIVERPOOL, Monday.—A severe gale has been
blowing here since early yesterday moral ng, which
has had injurious effects upon the shipl ling con-
nected with this port, and several forges k owe been
reported.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
et five o'clock.

THE NEW TREATY.
Lord EBURY presented a petition from SP
italfields
against the free importation of French silk.
1:
CHURCH RATES.
A great number of petitions were presented in favour o
church rates.

• PRIVATE BUSINESS.
On the motion of Lord REDESDALE, the following
bills were read a second time :—Maidstone Water Great
Northern and Western (Ireland) Railway ; Eaubrink
Drainage ; Anchterarder Common Muir, Hamilton
and
Strathaven. Railway ; Maidstone, Rochester, and C
Water ; Athenry and Tuam Railway ; Brompton: Chat-
ham, and Gillingham, &c., Water ; and the Kilkenny
Junction RailwayN.
EDOWED SCHOOLS.
The Duke of MARLBOROUGH gave notice that in
bringing up the report of the committee on the endowed
schools, he should move a clause to the effect that educa-
tion in those schools be limited to the terms conformable
to the Church of England.
VOLUNTEER CORPS.
Lord VIVIAN, referring to his speech on this subject,
delivered a few evenings ago, said it was scarcely
judicious of the Government to pay adjutants for volunteer
corps, arid not pay drill sergeants. It was of the greatest
importance that good drill sergeants should be se-
cured, and he . ventured to ask his noble friend
(the Earl of Ripon) to reconsider his determination on the
point. He thought the services of the volunteers would not
become permanent without the Government acted in a more
liberal manner towards them.
The Earl of RIPON said he was unable to give the noble
lord any other answer than he had given on the evening in
question. It was the intention of the Government to mass
the different corps into battalions, but not force them to
come together for battaliondrill. In the event of their being
called out for active service, it would be necessary to form
them into battalions, and for this it was advisable to orga-
nise them jade battalions, and government intended to ap
point a paid adjutant to each battalion, which the Govern-
ment thought was the best step they could take at the pre-
sent moment.
THE INDIA PRIZE MONEY.
Lord BERNERS moved for copy of a despatch, in July,
1858, signifying the approval of the late Board of India
Directors to the regulations proposed by the Governor-Ge-
neral on the subject of the Delhi prize money, and all sub-
sequent correspondence which may tend to explain tho
delay which has taken place in satisfying the just expecta-
tions of -the army which effected the capture of the city.
The noble lord inquired into the cause of delay-in distribut-
ing the medals and clasps granted by her Majesty for tho
caoture of Delhi.
the Duke of ARGYLE said there could be no objection
on the part of the Government to produce the whole of the
despatches moved for by the noble lord. The noble duke
assured the noble earl that there was nothing that could be
in the slightest degree construed into indifference on the part
of the Governor-General with respect to the brilliant services
rendered by the army in India. With respect to the medals
he had great pleasure in informing him that the medals
were being struck off, and would very shortly be distri-
buted.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH said as far as he could
learn the Royal assent had not been given for the distribu-
tion of any part of. the Delhi prize money.
Lord BERNERS did not impute blame to the Govern-
ment, but it was certain blame rested somewhere.
The motion was then agreed to.
THE TREATY OF. COMMERCE.
- - -

The Earl of DERBY—My Lords, although I have only
given notice that I would ask the intention of her Majes-
ty's Government with regard to the manner in which they
propose to give. effect to the 20th. article of the treaty of
commerce, the subject is one of such importance, and in
volves such serious constitutional questions, that I am
sure your lordships will excuse me if- I preface my inquiry
• with a few observations, and if I conclude with a motion,
on which, however, it is not my wish to take the sense of
the house; but I shall move it merely for the purpose of
enabling any of your lordships who may think proper to
take part in the discussion without violating the rules of the
house. The article in question stipulates that the treaty shall
not be valid unless her Britannic Majesty shall be authorised
, by her Parliament to execute the engagements entered into
in her name. When I first read this article I thought it was
for the purpose—certainly a very proper and desirable one
—of giving this and the other house the fullest latitude of
discussing the treaty without involving that inconvenience
and that compromise of the dignity of the_Crown which
might arise if Parliament should discuss a treaty her as-
sent to which her Majesty had personally ratified. That
difficulty would of course be altogether avoided if, in the
• treaty itself, her Majesty stipulated that it should not be
binding unless Parliament also signified its assent. But,
my lords, on looking at the correspondence, I find that this
article is to be understood not in an English but in a French
sense ; because I find it stated in the correspondence that
as an arrangement would probably be made that the pro-
posal should be submitted at the same time to the English
Parliament and to the French Legislathe Assembly, the
article should apply to both sides. However, the article
has been introduced, and it not only gives to Parliament an
opportunity, but it imposes upon it an absolute duty, to
discuss fully and to give a specific assent to the treaty.
Now, my lords, it is not my intention on the present occasion
to enter on the merits of the document. On the contrary,
my only object in rising is to ask her Majesty's Government
whether it is their intention that the fullest and amplest
opportunity shall be given, in conformity with thr 20th
article, for the consideration of this treaty in all its details
on a future occasion. (Cheers.) lam not now at all con-
cerned in discussing whether it is in accordance with the
theoretical principles of free trade. That question was very
ably discussed on the first night of the session by a noble
earl whom I see opposite (Earl Grey), who stated what,
according to his views, were the legitimate principles of free
trade, and showed that the treaty was entirely at variance
with those principles. (Loud cheers.) Be that as it may,
there can, at all events, be no question that it is at variance
with the principles laid down by her Majesty's Government
three or four years since. (Cheers.) Nay, my lords, it is
no longer ago than the 21st of July in last year that Mr.
Bright, a very distinguished member of the other house,
suggested in that house a course of policy which he recom-
mended should be adopted with regard to France, not with
reference, however, to any commercial advantage, but with
reference to the preservation of peace, and with a view to
obviate the necessity of continuing our great armaments.
Mr. Bright said he would not commission Lord Cowley to
make any great demonstration on the subject, but he would
have the proposal made to the Emperor of the French
with a frankness that could not be misunderstood in
France, while on our side it would be hailed with enthu-
siasm as the beginning of a new era. Then he goes on to
suggest the remission of a considerable amount of the duties
now levied on articles of French origin, and he particularises
the " extraordinarily heavy imposts upon one of the greatest
productions of the soil of France—her light wines." (Hear
hear.) Then he says that when the French people saw the
great advantage they would possess, from obtain-
ing 30,000,000 new customers in England, the French
Emperor would acquire an irresistible power, and he would
be enabled to make changes in the French tariff which
would be as advantageous to us as it would be to them.
(Hear, hear.) I will do Mr. Bright the justice,
therefore
to say that he does not propose a commercialtreaty,
but he recommends that we should take off our
own duties. But what did the noble viscount the
Prime Minister and the noble lord the Foreign Secretary
say to all this ? The noble lord (Lord J. o
Russell)nnat tl the said,du ty
" My hon. friend has made some propositions
of her Majesty's Government to the French)
should be very loth to enter upon any correspondennee ori
discussion with the French Government whichwould induce
a party, not very numerous in this country, but still very
numerous and powerful in France—the Protectionists—to
say that their Government had been bargaining away the
interests of France in order to obtain some advantage from
us. (Cheers.) The benefits conferred by free trade as be.
tween country ani country are mutual ; both parties are
gainers by it; and, therefore, I should be sorry if this
question-were.made the subject of diplomatic correspon-
dence." (Hear, hear.) With regard to this last observation
of the noble lord, I wish here correct a misapprehension
into wnich the noble earl opposite fell as to what I said en
the first night of the session. The noble lord said that I
had committed the fallacy of supposing that the advantages
to be derived from free trade were limited to exports, and
not considering that there was a corresponding benefit to
be also derived from imports. Now, my lords, I did not
at all overlook the fact that the country which makes a
concession may also obtain a considerable benefit from
the articles imported ; but why I dealt with exports only
was because any advantage to be derived from the reduc-
tion of duties and the consequent increase of consumption
was a matter entirely within our own power—a matter con-
cerning which we might act as we pleased, without making
any bargain about it whatever. (Hear, hear.) Whereas,
when you go into the question of exports, you will find that
the amount of the articles you send away will depend upon
the act of the country to which you send them. That, I
take it, is the distinction between imports and exports—
the one are entirely within your own power; the other
will entirely depend -upon the acts of other Governments.
(Hear, hear.) But to return to what 1 was saying. How
did the First Lord of the Treasury meet theproposaloowf
Mtharl 116,1111:It!, He said,_ " I agree with my noble friend
a treaty
of of expedient that England should enter into
Open mutual
a_merce with a foreign State founded
which the rrangements. (Cheers.) The country to
ibt
made proposalwould
ry that we should enter into such a treaty
is tOtti,ght by the Government
suppose that some advantage
ernpent from which the offer ema-
nates. (Hear, hear.)v wise course is to make for our
oWn ad va:rtage sumehlaaideiptionution in our customs' duties as I
we think M.ast cal
StAtes are satisfied that we ari'Ve' us
; then, when foreign
:itittnag upon a simple conic- I
lion of what if+ g°°d foarnuigi,lore, when they see that our I
more. eidcr,efl our prosperity, they
policy is attonded by
withmit any treaty be
ossYusrterd°e.Ver a van •
ample than ifwe had asked thyempotsso imititoudr
Lord
ollioud cheers.) I
tage which tuey imagined the
Such wag th. language of the First
e.,n Secretary on the 21st of Jultytelra;s7d and the Fo-"ei
yet, in the ecru. se of
.the following December, it 9
transpired
'auspices of these two noble lords, a
that, under tl'e
sits .member ember of the other house had been very
engaged
wiome time_ —I presume not unauthorised —upon negeti, -
tto.lg for a trea based upon the very principles
t which had
mLe ex) enapha tically repudiat ed by
artith9two noble lords
with r.Verence to the very same c,e, thevery
same eceintry w ith regard to which the repudiation had
been given,(j,oud cheers.) The treaty in question is
'intended by her oll.tjasty's Government to be a treaty of re-
.cipfecity ; tivit itis, Is,indeed, a treaty of reciprocity in its
Wriktest senae—
t:or then it would be a treaty where each
esrty gave anti received an exact equivalent for what he
g vve at the some time—r am not prepared. to
contend.w..ch
(L Tear, hear,) That it proceeds upon the principle hi
is Bo" emphatic Ally condemned by the two noble
lords—
nan that 1‘ 'e are not to say to a foreign State, "If you
will -e suetz,„a44 such changes In your tariff we "1

make such and such In ours," I think the noble lords op •
posite will scarcely deny ; but, as I said before, I am not
now about to enter upon a discussion of its merits. What
I wish to know is the course which her Majestp's Govern-
ment intend to pursue in order to give Parliament an op- i
portunitY of exercising the right which they possess under
the treaty itself of deliberating upon its provisions. I
must say, however, that there is a feeling abroad in the
country that there has been a great deal of mystery and
secrecy unnecessarily employed about the negotiations, and
•
that an attempt has been made to surprise the house into a
hasty decision. (Loud cheers.) For my own part I know not
why there has been such a mystery with regard to Mr.
. Cobdep's share in the negotiations ; for it was not until the
very last moment that Mr. Cobden was announced as having
bad anything to do with them. As for the correspondence
which has been published, I must say that it is of the most
meagre character ever submitted to Parliament ; it indi-
cates an amount of haste in the framing and the execution
of the treaty that is not creditable. (Cheers.) It is not until
Dec. 23, 1859, that Lord Cowley sends a confidential com-
munication to Mr. Cobden on the subject. Then he writes
home, and wishes to know whether the English Government
would be disposed to enter into any negotiations on the sub-
ject. On the 17th of January, Lord John Russell writes a
letter to Lord Cowley and Mr. Cobden, which in point of
form is certainly not a little singular, for it begins, "My
Lord and Sir—(a laugh),—Having received from Lord Cow-
ley"—the noble lord being one of the parties addressed—
" having received from Lord Cowley, &c., I have to ac-
quaint you that her Majesty has been graciously pleased to
confer on you the necessary powers as Plenipotentiaries."
On Jan. 23, six days after they had thus received their
powers, Lord Cowley states that the treaty had that day
been signed, and transmits to his Government the result of
the negotiations, but in his letter he washes his hands of
the treaty as much as ever man did in this world. He in-
timates that he had signed the treaty as her Majeety's Am-
bassador at Paris ; but that it had all been Mr. Co bd en's
doing—that it was Mr. Cobden's treaty, not his, and that
he had merely been the sleeping partner. (Hear, hear, and
a laugh.) On the 31st of January the treaty was ratified.
I say there has been undue haste in the construction of the
treaty, and in the next place a desire to take the House of
Commons by surprise as to the conditions of the treaty;
and I shall be pleased to hear from the noble lord such ex-
planatior-s as will satisfy me that such was not the case.
Now, I think it may be useful that we should compare the
course taken by her Majesty's Government on this occasion
with the course which was taken by a former Government
under nearly similar eircuirditances, namely, the course
pursued by Mr. Pitt in the year 1787, on the occasion of a
treaty of commerce and navigation with France. The ob-
jects which the Government'had in view at that day were
precisely similar to the objectswhich the Government have
in view at the present day; and, in the Speech from the
Throne in 1787 that treaty was referred to in the following
words :—" I have concluded a treaty of navigation and
commerce with the most Christian king, a copy of which
shall be laid before you. I recommend you to take such
measures as you shall judge proper:to carry it into effect ;
and I trust that you will find the provisions contained in it
are calculated for the encouragement of industry, the ex-
tension of lawful commerce ; and, by promoting intercourse
with our respective subjects, will be an additional security
for the maintenance of peace." Now, I apprehend the ob-
jects of the present Government were precisely the same.
But what course did the Governments pursue ? In 1787
Parliament met on Tuesday. the 23d of January ; in 1860
Parliament met on Tuesday, the 24th of January. On the
26th of January, 1787, Mr. Pitt, as soon as the Address
was disposed of, laid on the table of the two houses of Par-
liament the treaty he had concluded with France. He did
not think it necessary to wait till the treaty had been
heralded in and apologised for by an able speech, mixing
up the treaty with the budget and the financesof the coun-
try. He trusted to the conditions of the treaty themselves,
and, without requiring explanation or delaying the presen-
tation for a considerable period, ho at once, on the opening
of Parliament, laid the treaty before the two houses. That
treaty, like the present one, was accompanied by
.a con-
vention which was to carry out in detail the provisions of
the treaty itself. Now Mr. Pitt, before he called on the
house to enter into a discussion on the treaty, laid be-
fore them not only the treaty itself, but the conven-
tion which specified in detail what was to be the precise
amount of the duty on British goods. We are called upon
to take a very different course. In the first place, there
was a delay from the 31st January to the 10th February
before Government ventured to lay the conditions of the
treaty before Parliament. That delay took place in order
that the treaty might be explained at the same time that
it was laid before Parliament, that the country should have
no time for the consideration of the treaty before it came
on for discussion. But where is the convention in which
the present amount of the duties is stated ? I say nothing
of the period when the duties are to come into operation.
but the duties themselves, it is stated, are in no case to
exceed, 30 per cent. There is this difference between the
two treaties, that whereas this treaty provides for the in-
troduction of French goods into this country without duties,
immediately, English goods are not to be introduced into
France until the expiration of eighteen months at duties
not exceeding 30 per cent. But the principle of Mr. Pitt's
treaty was this, that goods should be introduced recipro-
cally into the two countries at the same rates of duty—
into the one country and into the other simultaneously—
and the rates of duty specified and defined in no case ex-
ceeded 15 per cent., and in some cases were so low as 5
per cent. I can easily imagine that it would have been
convenient for her Majesty's Government to lay this treaty
and Mr. Pitt's treaty side by side on the table of the
house without all the explanations that could be given on
the subject; but Mr. Pitt, when the treaty had been laid
on the table from the 26th of January to the 2a of February,
gave notice that, on the following Monday, he should
move that the treaty should be taken into consideration
that day se'nnight—thus a period of seventeen days elapsed
after the treaty was laid on the table before it was dis-
cussed. 'Now, I find that Mr. Fox, among others,
vehemently protested against the unparalleled short time
given. The present Government took care that we should
know nothing of this treaty till the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer had an opportunity of making the financial state-
ment, and accordingly the treaty was laid on the table be-
fore he made his statement, and notice was given that, on
the following Thursday, it would be taken into considera-
tion, or rather that the house should proceed with regard to
those duties which wane involved in it. Well, by dint of
pressure the House of Commons did obtain an extension of
time equivalent to that very short period of which Mr. Fox
so bitterly complained in liB7. Now I beg your lordships
to recollect that there was no 20th article in existence in the
treaty of 1787. There was nothing that specifically re-
quired that the consent of Parliament should be given, ex-
cept in so far as that consent was necessarily to be given to
the financial portion of the treaty. But Mr. Pitt thought
the better course to take was this :—He in the first place
moved three resolutions affirming the main regulations of
the treaty ; and having had those r esolutions separately
discussed in the House of Commons—and they led to many
lengthened discussions—a motion was made on the 12th of
February, and the first resolution was adopted on that day :
the second resolution was adopted on the 15th, and a third
on the 16th. The resolutions were reported on the 19th,
and then Mr. Pitt thought it necessary to move an address
approving the treaty, and thanking the Crown for having
entered into it. Those resolutions and the address having
passed the House of Coramons, were then communicated to
your lordships' house. I beg your lordships to consider the
great importance in a matter of this kind of your being en-
abled to exercise your deliberate judgment in questions of
this nature, without being told that you have no power,
practically, to deal with these questions, because they in-
volve money considerations, and you have no power of mak-
ing any amendment in a money bill sent up from the House
of Commons. It is most important that your lordships
should have as ample an opportunity of considering this
treaty in its financial and political bearings as the-House of
Commons itself. t When those resolutions were brought up
from the House of Commons a species of protest was entered
by Lord Stourmont to the motion made, that the assent to
those resolutions would not bind the house in its legislative
capacity, even in regard to measures that were founded on
the resolutions, and that, after having agreed to the re-
solutions and the address, they were to be equally at liberty
to discuss every portion of the treaty as mach as if those
resolutions and address had not been agreed to. Now, let
me remind you who were the men who took part in these
great debates, for they were great and protracted debates,
though some of the opinions expressed may appear to us un-
reasonable, and more especially the language that was used
by Mr. Fox—(a laugh)—with regard to the necessarily in-
herent hostility between this country and France, and the
impossibility of our ever being on good terms: Mr. Fox held
this doctrine, and I think he was entirely wrong. I think
that Mr. Pitt's account of the treaty itself, and the policy
on which it was founded, had greatly the advantage. But
these discussions are well worth the attention of your lord-
shie s who have the leieura to read them; and, with regard
to many of them, they would appear to be not discussions
having regard to the events taking place in 1787, but to
what is taking place in 1860. Now, the men who took part
in those discussions, and among whom there was no differ-
ence whatever as to the propriety of the course adopted,
..es_etsianraey—coisPithi and tte,Fellasoox,ltu, notßenucrekeaniedastht,ep
Windham, Grenville, Wilberforce,
one
owwerhyoitthhewnhich made
hs
so
theofiftresnt
who on
instructed and delighted yourthat
occasion,
lordships,
as mr
my late.
Grey,telamentresdt
friend Earl Grey,
made
onearance in Parliament. Now, the course whichfi
Mr. hisPitt and the Government of that day pursued was,
after having given due time to enter into the consideration
of the different portions'• the treaty—to move resolutions
—to send these resolutions to the House of Lords—to move
an address to the Crown, gproviniof the treaty, and to
obtain itnhetnhethassatewnot ongfo.
Horses of
of
s Parliament or Lords st
otookt
nh
pa t t
hetheir address—
and
joi n t
course Mr. there Pitt werepnrs considerablesdbecause,
address to the Kin
He
eminmterorcdial legislation,
objections taken to the e
when he came to deal with the
rlinost of the
course he pursued was this :—.
and extensive measure, called
Duties of Customs and Excise,"
existing duties, and re-enacting repealing
A
of
large
thetb e
solidated form. This consolidation required, if I
mistaken, the passing of some 3,000 resolutions. 4,tatiecnonoi
re-
sult of these 3,000 resolutions was then consolidated into
one single act; and it was complained, and more especially
in the House of Lords, that the duties affected by the treaty
and the duties not affected by it, were mixed together, and
that it was impossible therefore to discuss them as bearing
on the treaty. Now, I might have spared your lordships'
time if her Majesty's Government had been a little earlier
in their intimation of the course they intended to take; but
iaisv notmee itshetosibieghctseislotdinotinmato-
tuipo
on oft
too
ft hteh
op rine soednot
bmyo
which
wpeahr
express its opinion. On the contrary, so far from dealing
with the political portion of the treaty, when the speeeh on
the budget was made, a motion was made that the House of
Commons should go into committee of the whole house,
with a view to deal with the financial portion of the guess
lion. lam not going now to discuss a question which 1
believe the House of Commons is discussing at this moment
—whether the political part of the treaty ought to have pre-
ceded the commercial question ; but of this I am quite clear,
that the course which her Majesty's Government ought to
have pursued would have been to have dealt with those ar-
ticles of the revenue which were necessarily affected by the
treaty, and to have taken them into consideration in con-
nection with the general bearing and scope of the treaty;
and that the proper course would be, not to go into con-
sidera tioa of the customs duties, but to go into committee of
the whole house to take into consideration every provision
of the treaty. By that course attention would have been
directed suiatiin to the commercial and political considera-
tions, and then there would have been an opportunity, as
was given in 1787, of expressing an opinion on each part of
the treaty befere you proceeded to adjust your finances, as
it
rially affected by the treaty. I would ask, then, whether
c't.onasdristhheeenintteon,tion of her Majesty's Government to pursue the
intention to
cilscrotas adopted by Mr. Pitt—whether it is their
BLeangictßiloagltqsthneo
intention topropose .•
resolutions with regard to this treaty,
inunicate their resolutions to this house—
should ueir tennitteionintahajtointhteatdwdroesbsr,angicvfhensgotfhtehier
termssio.n of the treaty ? My noble friend op-
panosviteernment are yet.c Perhaps the views of her Majesty's
I may be permitted to say
of some little alteration. But
it will not meet t1:17 that if that course should be pur-
sued,=ements of the present day.
I believe it will not be di:
but one mode by which the assbeytany
this treaty, and that is assent of
lawyer that
can be
there is
given t 9 hPaarnlizetenpft