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

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