The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-13 00:00:00

SAVOY AND NICE.

Lord J. MANNERS said he wished to put to the noble
lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs a question on this
subject. It had been stated, in spite of the somewhat am-
biguous
language contained in the speech of the Emperor
of the French, it was still the opinion of her Majesty's Go-
vernment that it was his intention to consult the great
Powers of Europe before he proceeded to annex Savoy. A
despatch had since appeared, which had been published that
morning, and ho wished under those circumstances to ask
the noble lord whether, since the expression of the opinion
to which he referred, he had received any further informa-
tion as to the intentions of the Emperor of the French with
respect to the question.
Lord J. RUSSELL said her Majesty's Ambassador in
Paris had been instructed to ask in what form the great
Powers would be consulted. He had ascertained that M.
Thouvenel was preparing a despatch on the subject, which
he would probably be able to send to the different Powers of
Europe either to-morrow or Wednesday. With respect to
the effect of that communication, he could only say that he
felt assured the opinion of the great Powers would have due
weight with the Government of the Emperor.
Mr. DISRAELI said, as there was misapprehension as to
the course of business for Monday next—for which day he
understood the motion of the hon. member for Bridgewater
respecting Savoy as well as the second reading of the Re-
form Bill was fixed—it would be convenient if the Govern-
ment would state what was to be the order of proceeding on
that day.
Lord J. RUSSELL said no engagement had been entered
into with the hon. member for Bridgewater that his motion
should come on on the ]9th. It was his intention to move
the second reading of the Reform Bill on that day.
Mr. KINGLAKE—I wish to know whether the Govern-
ment are prepared to fix the discussion on the subject of
the annexation of Savoy for any definite day. I may be
permitted to remind the house of the circumstances under
which I ask this question. When the discussion on the
commercial treaty was pending, and when several ques-
tions ware from time to time put to the Government with
respect to Savoy, the noble lord the Secretary for Foreign
Affairs took occasion to say that the continued interrup-
tions thus created were extremely inconvenient and ap-
pealed to the house to decide whether it would not be much
better to set apart some particular night for a fair and open
discussion of the question. Well, in compliance with that
suggestion, I was induced by several friends on whom I
rely to give notice on the subject, and I must appeal to the
noble lord whether we have not fairly performed our part
of that honourable understanding. It was open to any
one logically to import observations on the Savoy and Nice
question into the discussion of the commercial treaty, but
that was avoided. I did not address myself to the subject,
and almost all who are interested in the question likewise
abstained. I must, therefore, say I think we have a fair
claim on the Government to assist us in fixing a day for
this discussion. (Hear.) The noble lord will also recollect
that I had my motion on the paper, giving me precedence
of the Government, and I must say I feel great aegrei that
on that day I was prevented from bringing the subject
before the house, because the information I have received
shows that time is in this matter absolutely vital. (Hear,
hear.) Only this morning I received intelligence that the
Savoy deputies to the Sardinian Parliament had met at
Chambery with the view of proceeding to Paris to do ho-
mage to the Zvi)Pervr
of
the
French, hear.) /*l9

± •

doubt time is of the deepest importance in this matter, and I
for one will not accept the responsibility of being the cause
of any delay. That responsibility must rest strictly with
her Majesty's Government, u,,less as soon as possible we
have this question discussed. Sir, I move the adjournment
of the house.
Lord J. RUSSELL—My hon. friend will recollect that
what I stated on the occasion to which he has alluded
was not only that the discussion with respect to Savoy and
Nice should not be mixed with questions affecting the com-
mercial treaty, but I told him that such discussions would
be injurious to the public interests, and I thought my hon.
friend agreed with that suggestion. That is certainly my
opinion at the present time. We had a discussion on the
question of Savoy and Nice, in which the hon. baronet the
member for Tarnworth made a very eloquent speech, which
produced a great impression on the house, and I think that
the inclination of the house could not be doubted. But it
was considered whether there should be a separate motion
on the subject. The discussion in the other House of Par-
liament was not a discussion that ended or tended to end
in any definite resolution, or any proposal that the Govern-
ment should take a different course from that which they
had taken. I asked what could be the meanirr; of a mo-
tion, if merely to express the opinions of the house and de-
liver speeches that may have the effect of producing irrita-
tion and exasperation. So far from being useful, I said I
thought it would be very detrimental to the public inte-
rests. There is a party in this house who, on the contrary,
think that the question of. the annexation of Savoy to
France, however it may be done, even if it has the consent
of the King of Sardinia—if it has the consent, either gene-
ral or partial, of the people of Savoy, and if it is not actively
opposed by the great Powers of Europe, it would still be
the duty of this country to go to war for that question.
Why, then, I say let them bring forward a motion stating
their grounds for that opinion. If my hon. friend pis of
that opinion, it ;II not be difficult to obtain a day for that
discussion. It is of great importance that A should not
long delayed; but to have discussions in which to express
the opinion of the house with regard to Savoy which has
been already sufficiently expressed would not be useful, and
I think it is unnecessary in the present state of affairs.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. DISRAELI—I must say there is a great fallacy in
the observations of the noble lord, which, indeed, has
pervaded all his remarks on this subject from the
beginning. The noble lord always assumes that the only
conduct that ought to be questioned by the House of Com-
mons is the conduct of the Emperor of the French. That,
no doubt, is a matter of great importance; but I have yet
to learn that it is not the right and the duty of the House
of Commons upon questions of high policy to express its
opinions. (Hear, hear.) There is another portion of this
subject which opens a question of equal interest to the
country--that is, the conduct of the Government. (Hear,
hear.) We want a discussion of this question of Savoy,
that we may clearly understand that the course of her Ma-
jesty's Government with respect to the whole of this matter,
which now so much agitates Europe, is clear before the
house and the country. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord,
therefore, only begs the question when he assumes that it is
merely the conduct of the Emperor of the French which we
criticise and call in question. We want to know how far his
Folicy has been occasioned by the conduct of her Majesty's
Government. That ought to be made clear to us, and with
that view I agree that a discussion should take place in this
house on the subject. (Hear, hear.) It is quite natural that
the hon. member for Bridgewater, who takes so much inte-
rest in this question, should bring it forward. It maybe he
only wishes to bring it forward to express an opinion as to
the policy pursued by the Emperor of the French ; but I
believe that there is another part of the question, in which
the House of Commons takes a very deep interest, as to the
course taken by her Majesty's Government, although I am
not prepared to give a definite opinion of it in the present
state of affairs. The conduct of the Government on the
question of Savoy does appear involved in great mystery,
and requires much explanation. The noble Ibrd made no
answer to the statement I made the other night—that the
noble lord, being perfectly aware for many months of the
policy of the Emperor of the French, has pursued that
policy in Italy which rendered it unavoidable. He has offered

no explanation to us how, at the commencement of this year,
he proposed four points for the settlement of Italy, from
which it appears that he was cognisant, if those terms
were accepted, a Sardinian province would be annexed to
France. The House of Commons, I must say, has con-
siderable desire to have that question discussed, even more
than the conduct of the French Emperor. (Hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON—The right hon. gentleman states
that there are two distinct propositions involved—two
branches of the subject connected with Savoy—one in so
far as it bears on the French Government and the Emperor
of the French; the other branch is the degree in which it
bears on the conduct of her Majesty's Government. Now,
my noble friend stated, in a manner which no man in this
house would be disposed to, controvert, that this house
having distinctly and clearly explt'Wsed it opinion on the
policy and project of the annexation of SlaToy to France, it
was not riatirnllln to ropockt aiocuooivuo vu that subject from
week to week— (near, hear)—involving angry animadv.er-
alone on the conduct of the French Emperor, and—l can-
not forbear stating—personalities in regard to him not very
useful or tending to the public interests, when stated in
this house with regard to the Sovereign of a foreign coun-
try with whom we are on terms of friendly alliance. (Hear.)
My noble friend stated that, the question having been dis-
cussed, no good could arise from weekly repetitions of such
discussions. I ant decidedly of that opinion. But, on the
other hand, a great deal of evil will arise—first, in regard to
the issue of the matter in question, and, secondly, in regara to
the relations in which the two Governments stand to each
other. (Hear, hear.) And, therefore, if the object of those
who wish to renew the subject is simply again to express
an opinion disapproving the project entertained by the
French Government, I think my noble friend has given
ample reasons why it is not expedient that the house
should take that course. If, on the other hand, the
right honourable gentleman opposite thinks that the
other branch of the subject requires to be brought un-
der the consideration of Parliament—if he. or any other
member, is prepared to propose to the house a vote
Of censure upon her Majesty's Government for the con-
duct they have pursued in regard to Savoy, that un-
doubtedly is a most legitimate motion to propose to the
house, and most proper for those who think that our con-
duct is deserving of censure. I can only assure the right
hon. gentleman, and any other members who:may concur
in that opinion, that we shall be perfectly prepared to meet
that discussion whenever it shall be brought forward. (Elear,
hear.) Therefore, I think it ought to be clearly explained
whether those who wish to bring this subject of Savoy again
before the house do so with a view to renew expressions of
censure on the Government of France, or to ask the house
to concur in a vote of censure on her Majesty's Govern-
ment. (Hear, bear.) I doubt whether my hon. friend the
member for Bridgewater, who has charged himself with this
subject, has the latter object in view; but if the right hon.
gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) entertains the opinion he has an-
nounced, that the Government have failed in their duty in
regard to this matter, I say it is legitimate to make a motion
on that subject; but the motion should be made precisely
and clearly on the subject, expressing censure on the Go-
vernment, and hon. members should not content themselves
with expressing their opinion that the Government was
deserving of censure in a debate on a motion which does
not bear on the conduct of the Government, but on the con-
duct of an allied and friendly Government. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON—My right hon. friend has been
misrepresented by the noble lord. He has not indicated
any intention of moving a vote of censure ; he merely stated
that for certain reasons ho felt entitled to call on. the Go-
vernment for explanations as to the line of conduct which
they had pursued on this subject. I think the noble vis-
count cannot deny that the circumstances are such as fully
justify hon. members on this side of the house in requiring
from the Government some explanation on certain points
involved in their proceedings, especially on that point to
which my right hon. friend adverted—viz., that, al-
though the noble lord does not appear toave made
any remonstrance or expressed the opinion of her Ma-
jesty's Government upon this subject till the month of
December, it is clear that her Majesty's Government must
for a considerable period previous to that have possessed
a knowledge of the intentions of the French Emperor.
(Hear, hear.) As far as I remember what has passed in
this house on this question the conduct of the Government
is hardly fair towards the hon. member for Bridgewater.
The noble lord appealed to that hon. gentleman the
other night to postpone his motion, because to pro-
ceed with it on the day fixed would be injurious to
the public service. The hon. member readily acceded
to that proposal. At the same time the noble lord the
Secretary of State expressed an opinion that, looking
toithe great importance of the project to annex Savoy to
France, it is desirable that a discussion should take
place
both Houses of Parliament. (Hoar, hear.) And, if he did
not promise the hon. member for
eßridgewater a day on
which to bring the subject forward, h
certainly gave him
a right to expect that the house would have an opportunity
of expressing its views before the course of events in Europe
rendered it toolate to do so. (Hear.)
Mr. HORSMAN—I must say that if I correctly caught
the noble lord's remarks I think they are calculated to
alarm the house and the country at the present state of
affairs. (Hear, hear.) No doubt the Government have a
heavy responsibility pressing upon them. A heavy re-
sponsibility also presses on the hon. member for Bridge-
water, who has given notice to bring forward a subject
which has excited great interest not only in this house and
out of it, but also abroad. I fur one am content to leave
the question in my hon. friend's hands, not merely because
he has first occupied the ground, but because he has shown
much knowledge and much earnestness upon it; and I am
satisfied that no other hon. member, from his general cha-
racter and ability, could do more justice to it. But there is
a great responsibility resting upon the house itself. (hear.)
In the course of this session we have allowed ourselves to
pi part
be kept, in regard to our foreign relations with every
of the globe, in a state of ignorance almost
(Hear, hear.) On this very question of Savoy papers have
been laid on the table most scanty and meagre in their
character; and on one very important point on which we
require information—viz., as to the communications be-
tween our Government and the Governments of Russia,
Prussia, and Austria, we arc not told a single word. Yet
it isby their communications with these Powers that in the
oyoAt 911 Z Q9YellgllcUt WWltDejAdged tjat, clAtOtit% WO