The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-10 00:00:00

"22 E
SUN,: LONDON, SATURDAY -EVINING, MARCH ellOe 1

his country than that which we May simply obtain by the
- treaty now before us for consideration. But if—and I
for one would not at all have critically examined the
decision of the Government—if they. had arrived at that
decision, if on the whole it had been thought wiser at once
to have entered into some agreement with France, and not
to-have waited for what I cannot but believe, though it
might have been the gradual, must have been the inevitable
decision of the French nation—if that had been the opinion
of the Government of this country, taking into consi-
deration those vast and various circumstances that must
have been placed before their examination on an issue so
important—if that were their decision—if it were wise at
once to enter into some agreement with the French Govern-
ment, I still think it would have been better, 'by some alte-
ration of our mutual tariffs, to have attained all those ends
that could at the present moment be acquired, and then,
when the period of July, 1861, had arrived—profiting, II
hope, by experience—we might have completed the work
and have accomplished all those ulterior results which, by
the present treaty, are not achieved but only contemplated.
I think that, under ordinary circumstances, that would
have been the course it would have been wiser for us to
have taken, and which this house would have had no diffi-
culty in sanctioning. But I believe that there are objections
to a treaty even for the purpose of attaining an object so
desirable as the increase of our commercial relations with
our neighbours, and that it is to be objected to both on
scientific and political grounds. I have not throughout
the debate heard, either on scientific or political grounds,
why it has been deemed expedient to tie up the policy of
the country for a term of years so long, and to accomplish
results which might, I think, have been realised by a
simpler process. These are the views with which I have con-
sidered this subject under ordinary circumstances. Under
ordinary circumstances, I should have 'regretted if the Go-
vernment, in order to attain a very desirable end, should
have availed themselves of questionable means, but no one
can for &moment maintain that-this treaty has been nego.
tiated under ordinary circumstances. The circumstances.

on the contrary, are indeed of the most exceptiona
character, and under these circumstances I object to
s this treaty on three grounds—financial, diplomatic, and
political. • I will not enlarge on the financial, because a
fair opportunity has been given to the house to decide on
that portion of the subject, and though I cannot agree in
'the decision at which it arrived, I am content to take it as
one which at least precludes me from at present entering
into a lengthened review of it. I think that the condition of
the revenue is at the present moment such that it is not
Prudent for ns to increase a large deficit by creating a con-
siderable deficiency in addition, in ordcr to obtain the com-
mercial arrangements which are secured by the present in-
strument. The house has had the question fairly passed be-
fore it. However, they may ultimately regret these arrange-
ments, for I believe the time will come, and that, too, ra-
ipidly, when they will deeply regret it. However much the
scheme propounded by the Chancellor of the Exchequer
this year may be considered to be unsafe in principle, im-
provident in arrangement, and pernicious in its conse-
quences, I do not think that to-night we are called on to
discuss it. So far from regretting that decision, I for one
should not have thought I was doing my duty to my con-
stituents and the country had I been silent. I think the de-
cision of the house was not to the advantage of the country;
but I do notlook with any regret to the means by which
that decision was arrived at. I think the time will come
when the principle the minority then held will be recog-
nised as sound. (Cheers.) Although my objections to this
treaty are founded on what I deem the pernicious influence
it will have on our financial condition it is unnecessary now
to deal with it in detail. Being, therefore, under ordinary
circumstances, in favour of any policy that may increase the
commercial relations between the two countries, I neverthe-
less cannot agree with some gentlemen in the exaggerated
views they took of this impending increase in our commercial
intercourse with France. It has always been one great fault
of the English people—having, as they no doubt have, com-
mercial instincts superior to all other nations—it always has
been their failing to exaggerate the importance of particular
markets; and it is a very curious thing that they have always
over-estimated those markets that have proved the last pro-
ductive and the least advantageous to suchintercourse. The
markets of South America, some years ago, were always
exalted in this house in point of importance above the mar-
kets—those solid and substantial markets—of our Narth
American brethren which have since been a source of so
ranch wealth to this country; and so at this moment hon.
gentlemen speak of commercial intercourse with France as
if they had a new California or a new Australia opening to
their enterprise and energy. (Cheers.) The hon. gentleman
who seconded the address, and who, representing as he did
great district of country, did so with authority, used argu-
ments much too frequent, to the effect " Australia, with her
Million of inhabitants, takes £11,000,000 of imports ; France
has 36,000,000 of population ; multiply the trade of Aus-
tralia by 36, and you will form some faint idea of the com-
mercial intercourse that is about to take place between the
two countries" (Cheers.) These were just the-observa-
tions indulged in. (No, no.) Brazil was also taken, with
her limited population of 5,000,000, and her great commer-
cial exchanges with this country, and in the next sentence
they were told that France had eight times the population
of Brazil, and from this hon. gentlemen might calculate
what would be the results of the new commercial policy.
(Cheers.) But ancient and long-established countries like
France will never offer to a country like England the same
mart that virgin colonies, like Australia or California, or
countries settled under circumstances of modern civilization
like the Brazils offer. We must remember that the manu-
factures of France are on the whole, with some few excep-
tions, more ancient than the manufactures of England, and
that they are as skilful, if not more so • and although no
inconsiderable increase between the' commercial rela-
tions of France and England will accrue from this treaty
these relations must still be of a comparatively limited cha-
rsqkor, an, g-ren -Drallell of industry ill
France would ever be allowed to be superseded by any great
branch of industry in this country. -No doubt the intro-
duction of our goods will increase the demand for theirs,
stimulate invention, and reduce the cost of French goods.
No doubt the French consumer generally will be benefited,
and great advantage may accrue from that, but the moment
there is any prospect of a large branch of French industry
being susperseded by equal industry onthis side the Chan
nel steps will be taken to prevent this result, and for this
reason alone, if not for others. France, whatever may be
her farm of Government, is a democracy—aegl a democracy
will never submit to any great supercession enlist native in-
dustry of her country. His noble friend was perpetually
appealing with pride to the instance of France and the
United States as favourable to the protective principle he
supports, and you may rely on it that if you succeed with
your new Reform Bill, and especially with the aupplemen-
tary reform bill announced by the member for Birming-
ham, you will soon produce a protective interest in this
helve which will be the resultof what you little anticipate.
I think we are rather led away by a too sanguine view of
what may be the consequences to our commerce of opening
thoSe new markets. This new market will be subject to all
thOse conditions that prevail in ancient, populous, and
highly civilised countries, and the consequence will be ter
tain limits to our enterprise which we do not see, at present.
I object to this treaty further on diplomatic grounds. It
appears to me to be a treaty unskilfully and negligently ne-
gotiated. I have heard nothing with reference to the pro-
posed arrangements of either a satisfactory or advantageous
character, although more than one minister has addressedfor
thelouse. I have not heard any answer yet to account
the mysterious appearance of the 3d article, which ref erso
the duties on shipping. There is no apparent reason whyt
that subject should have been introduced into a strictly
commercial convention ; but when the hon. member for
Stamford reminded you_ that all the differential duties
that have been temporarily terminated, indirectly or di-
rectly, between England and France, were only tem-
Porarily terminated, and that it was within the power
of the Government of France within a few months to
put an end to the treaty of 1825, and that, under these
circumstances, differentia duties will exist between French
and English navigation, not only as to the direct but
indirect trade, it is a question that must occasion great
anxiety, and the very fact that in the 3d., article navi-
gation should be introduced into the treaty is one of a cha-
racter to create great apprehension in the public mind.
With reference to the article which is the subject of the
present amendment, there is a great objection to that article.
I am told we are incapable of discussing it because it is
legal, but it is a new theory in this house that members of
it should not give a public opinion on a legal subject. As
I understand it, the Sovereign is entrusted with a certain
power, and the advisers of her Majesty have advised her to
part with that power; and now we are told that that being a
legal question members of Parliament are not competent to
give an opinion on it. I believe that the dispensing power
was once considered a subject which members of Parliament
were perfectly competent to give an opinion upon. (Cheers.)
It appears to me to be not at all shrouded in obscurity. ; and
I ask the house to consider how unwise it would bete evade
this question, and by saying it is a legal question sanction
the bases of this treaty. And suppose we evade the difficulty
—assume that we agree to this address to the Crown. We
shall then communicate that address to the other house of
Parliament, which can hardly be prohibited from inquiring
into the legal question ; and what may not probably happen
in the other house of Parliament by our evading the fulfil-
ment of our duty in this house ? The 11th article will be
discussed there, and it will probably be decided by the other
house that it is not possible to carry that article into effect
without an Act of Parliament. The other house, if it
likes, may clearly resolve to address the Crown on the treaty,
but at the same time they may, probably, introduce an Act
of Parliament to carry that 11th clause into effect; but
What humiliation and reproof to this house if we should
have an Act of Parliament sent down to enable us to com-
plete the matter. I will not enter into any' discussion of a
statistical kind as to our resources in coal and iron, to which
the amendment refers. I take it for granted that the right
Ion; gentleman made no statement on that matter of the
truth of which he was not deeply convinced; but we
have also had a speech from one who, on such a subject,
speaks with great authority. He bears the name of one with
When). I was intimate in this house, and whom we all
greatly respected ; but having myself not been altogether
Miscquainted with the district to which.he refers I know
that the railways of the present day have penetrated every
valley in the South Wales district, and a stimulus has been
given to the production of coal, in that part of the country
Which it is not at all likely pan be sustained. But it is im •
possible to settle a question of this kind by local experience.
The question has occupied men of science of the greatest
eminence. I do not pretend to offer any statement to the
house to influence their opinion, and I can only refer them
to those general statements which the highest authorities
have accepted. The general result has always been con-
sidered to be that there are in England and Wales 12,000
square-miles of coal -fields ; that the half of that quantity is
not workable; that every year exhausts 160 square miles;
and therefcre every lion. gentleman can, if he think right,
make out the account. If such a quantity would, at the pre-
sent consumption, last 300 or 400 years, everybody can
,estimate theresult if the produce and exportation from the
coal-fields when doubled. I cannot pretend that the calcula-
tion should influence legislation ; but when the hon. gentle-
man, from his local experience, and speaking under the ex-
citement of the recent explorations made in South Wales, I
Must remind the house that these are calculations which we
should receive with due distrust, and that we must recollect
that there are estimates which are sanctioned by the highest
Philosophers and men of science. There are many ether
PGiute in this treaty which appear to me to prove that it has
not been negotiated with the skill, knowledge, and attention
tit are required in such an instrument, that on the contrary
htlesreare evidences of precipitation and carlessness. There
been no satisfactory twofer to the charges that have

been made. It does appear a very improvident arrangement
that the silk manufactures of England cannot enter France
without being subject to 30 per cent. duty, while at the Same
time the raw material from France is also subject to a
high duty. I have heard no answer to that matter. What
said the President of the Board of Trade last night ?-
He • said, "If you try to settle exacty the rate
of duty on every detail of every branch of manufacture"—
having, no doubt, in his head the celebrated passage which
used tob be quoted from Mr. Eden as to the difficulties of ne-
gotiating treaties of commerce—" if," said the right hon.
gentleman, " we had tried to do that, we should not have got
over the matter by this time." But this is no answer to the
unfortunate silk manufacturer, who is subject to 30 percent.
duty, and receives at the same time the raw material of his
manufacture subject to a high duty. He naturally says,
"Why are there governments ; why are there negotiators ;
why, above all, are there secret negotiators--(cheers)—if
my interests are not considered ?" And, so far as I can learn
—but of course I speak with hesitation on that subje.rt—
t here would have been no difficulty on the part of the French
Government if this claim had been preferred. If the claim
had been preferred and refused, it would not have been in •
dicative of amity on the part of the French Government to
refuse it; but if it was not preferred I say it was great ne-
gligence, We have had no answer to these matters which is
of a satisfactory character. It may seem a little point. I
believe it is a point of great importance when you come,to
the arrangement of a commercial ti eaty. I have not heard
an answer to the complaint of the English brewers, that
when they are sending into this country French wines the
English brewers do not obtain a market in France. lam
assured that if that claim had been preferred ,to the French
Governnient they would not have objected to ;the proposi-
tion. I ask the house is it evidence of sedulous attention
to English intei eats to have omitted a provision of that
kind ? (Cheers.) Why was this state of thingi permitted ?
Would such a request have offend-,d any of the principles
of the new commercial system? Not at all; for even the
hon. member for Birmingham would not pretend that the
exchange of British beer for French wines would have
been contrary to the principles of free trade. But all this
shows me that this treaty has been negotiated with precipi-
tation; and the-very tone of the Government, when you
make your criticisms upon the twaty, confirms that suspicion
for what do they say ? They do not vindicate their instru-
ment. They say, "We are aware of it; we admit that there
is a good deal of truth in what you say, but we have made a
representation to the French Government and there is a fair
prospect of obtaining a remedy for the grievance." But
what was to be gained by this precipitation? My objections
I have now stated shortly against this treaty financially and
diplomatically. Financially it affects injuriously a revenue
in a state of dilapidation, and diplomatically it appears that
it does not fully provide for British interests. (Cheers.) I am
now to consider the political objects of this treaty, and this
is a part of the subject that I cannot avoid, because we arc
challenged to consider this treaty on political grounds. This
is a commercial treaty between England and France I admit;
but it is a treaty between England and France mainly and
avowedly negociated for a political purpose. (Cheers.) This
treaty was not introduced to us by any Minister of the
Crown; we only incidentally became acquainted with its
provisions while involved in the dreary labours of committee
on. the Customs Acts. But we have the basis of the treaty in
a great public state paper, which regulates the principles on
which thenegociation should be carried on, and the character
of the instrument contemplated. To that alone we are in-
debted for our understanding of the nature 'of this instru-
ment, and the objects to be obtained by carrying it into effect.
The noble lord, in language which has been referred to part-
ly, but not completely, in his instructions to the negotiators,
which is in fact th e state paper on which the treaty is founded,
while he talks of the advantages of commerce says, "But
over and above this consideration the Government attaches
a high social and political value to the conclusion of a com-
mercial treaty with France." Political value, and therefore
I am obliged to consider this treaty in a political sense.
Those who have deprecated introducing political conside-
rations into the discussion of this treaty, seem to have en-
tirely forgotten the standing point on which this instrument
rests, and the introductory terms by which the House of
Commons was made acs uainted with this instrument. These
were the words quoted by the mover of the amendment.
The noble lord says,—" Its significatipn at the present mo-
ment is that it would powerfully re-assure the public mind
in some parts of Europe ;" but there the noble mover stop-
ped short, and omitted this, " that on these grounds the
Government are prepared to enter into negotiations." I
do not blame the noble lord ; all I say is, that in discussing
the treaty of commerce that is preceded by a state paper of
this character, the noble lord should not cavil with me if I
endeavour to ascertain the soundness of the principles upon
which he proceeded. Thenoblelord has gone out of his way
though I am sure he thinks in due fulfilment of his duty to
inform the judgment of the country what were the principal
considerations in negotiating this treaty, that they were po-
litical—that it was on these political grounds the Govern-
ment were prepared to enter into this negotiation. The
noble lord has received compliments from both sides of the
house for the spirit in which he maintained the character of
a British minister in those negotiations. I am notapt to be-
lieve that any one who occupies the noble lord's position
would be wanting in his duty to the Crown or the country
upon any occasion of importance. (Hear, hear.) lam not
disposed to believe that the noble lord would form an excep-
tion to that rule. But the noble lord will not be offended
with ine if I _do not address him in those terms of compli-
ment and eulogy with which his name has been associated.
The noble lord will not be offended with me if I offer him
some criticism upon a portion of his political conduct as
Foreign Minister. I shall confine myself to facts, and what
is even dryer than facts, to dates, and then I shall deduce
and draw inferences so
strikinglylogical that I am sure the
noble lord himself will be willing to admit their accuracy
Ho will not be offended if, by way of contrast to the
compliments he has received, I shall ask him to give the
house some satisfaction on a matter connected with the
treaty, and that he will afford me that explanation which I
shall require before I give my assent to fhe motion.
(Hear, hear.) The night when the address to the Crown
was first to be moved it was unexpectedly post-
poned. Some discussion, however, then took place upon
the question of our relations with France. I had
not read at that time the papers which were circulated
only that morning, and therefore, I would not
have presumed, even had the discussion then gone on, to
enter at that time into the question. But I have read those
papers since, which have been noticed in different moods by
different speakers. But nobody had made the inquiry of the
noble lord which I wish to-night to make, because until I
have an answer from the noble lord I cannot form a correct
opinion of the state of Europe, which he describes to be so
critical, and which in consequence he considers as &reason ,
ror.enrerlrs into this treaty with France. Now I have read
these papers, and I am bound to say that the conduct of the
French Government upon the question of Savoy, which is
the question above all others that renders the condition of
European affairs so critical, appears to me, so fir as the
English Government is concerned, to have been sincere,
frank, and straightforward. (Hear.) That is my opinion,
and I am prepared to prove it in a very short space of time.
The house will remember in July last, when the noble lord
the present Secretary for Foreign Affairs announced the
preliminaries of the treaty of Villafranca to the house, and
congratulated us on the fact that France 'required no ac-
cession of territory, he referred to the distressing rumour
that had previously prevailed—namely, that it was the in-
tendon of France to demand the annexation of Savoy.
Well, that circumstance showed that the mind of the noble
lord was perfectly alive to that question. And, indet,d, he
must have found in the archives of his office that it was a
question which had occupied in such a sense and manner
the consideration of his predecessor. In July last the
noble lord was aware that the question of the annexation
of Savoy had then been given up, and he justly congra-
tulated the house upon the fact. Well, we have a despatch
amongst these papers, in which the Government are in-
formed, that after the preliminaries of Villafranca had been
signed the Emperor of the French had renounced his
intention of mooting that question, and that the annexa-
tion of Savoy was entirely given up. But it now appears
in those papers before us, by the despatch dated the end of
January last, that in the interval between the despatch
which announced that the Emperor had given up all in-
tention to annex Savoy and the subsequent despatch, that
on more than one occasion, in consequence no doubt of
the difficulties which stood in the way of the carrying out of
the treaty of Zurich, the minister of France had frankly in-
formed.the ambassador of the Queen at Paris that, in the
event of the treaty of Zurich not being carried into effect, the
Emperor of the French would certainly look to the annexa-
tion of the duchy of Savoy and the pi ovine of Nice as a
necessary consequence. (Hear, hear.) That fact appears
clearly in
appears ppers. Now, I want to ask this of the noble
lord. It ppthat the noble lord was fully aware that
under certain circumstances clearly indicated—namely, the
aggrandisement of Sardinia—that is, if Sardinia became a
considtejornabfloerpsouwoehr
aineilrtaeulmy—staFnreaencthe
ewaonunldexraegquire noafstchoorase-
Sensa
that the noble lord
ardinian provinces.frona(Hethara,thineaorra)en How came
a it,
ptohl
iecny,
nexation of those successful
provincesinltalyt,owFouraldneehaivnee-vrietuadhelerV
(tHheeaarn.)
which, if
ensiulont.thTaht
ethneoabglegrlaonrdlise
and
his colleagues were of opinion that it was an English inte-
restnlThe
meat
t o f noblelord
Sardiniaw was
acsl clearly leys
desirable bloep
siderable importance.. Now o t
now. Ihave no doubt the noble
to strengthen Sardinia, and to mleatkeuist
eanPteorwinertooaf con-
Now
con-
troversy upon that point
g
while they
lord and his colleagues, after mature f cEonnsildaenrdattioonp,
uwrseuree
convinced that it was for the interest o
that policy. But this result is inevitable—that,
1 lead to te
were pressing this policy in Italy for the aghgaranvedkinsoemwnentthoatf
Sardinia, her Majesty's Government must
the success of their endeavours must necessari y
eau!"
annexation by France of those two provinces. hveeerrhn.?
Well, if that be the case, how can her Majestyh s
ment now turn round to France and say,
for? You have taken us by surprise; we you all thisare
going to annex Savoy and Nice to France--this is be-
having in a manner which can only be described in the
language used in the despatch of the noble lord
find tahtaist
—that such a course will produce distrust and suspicion
throughout Europe—" it will disturb the settlement of
Europe, and will lead men's minds back to the long and
sanguinary struggles that took place some years ago ; and
perhaps, after all, the result may prove fatal to your own
happiness." (Hear, hear.) But so strange are the facts
contained in those papers laid before Parliament—so much
better informed is every other nation under the sun of its
foreign affairs than is the British public—(hear, hear)—by
a remarkaple circumstance there isno record on the table of
the fact to which I have just referred. I here is not amongst
of
fe
Italy.erd a t tAhte commencement
commencement'
those papers an official document disclosing the attempt of
he
to nr
so b
me
ementoilathe
of theyearto settleyear
the
ala ithe
noble lord produced four propositions for the settlement cf"
the affairs of Italy

Lord J. RUSSELL—They are numbered in tho paper.
Mr. DISRAELI—There is no:printed record of them. At
all events the fact does not affect myargument. But wehave
a despatch of the Foreign Minister remarking and comment-
ing on those four propositions which have been published
to all Europe. But strange to say, owing only to the casual
inquiry of the hon. member for Tamworth, the noble lord
in his place here expressed what those propositions were.
Although this circumstance took place a fortnight, or per-
haps, a month ago, it is only on this evening that they have
been placed upon the table ,of this house. (Hear, hear.)
Now, let us look to these propositions. The gist of them,
if thsy mean anything, is the establishment of Sardinia as a
powerful Government in Italy. The noble lord will not
deny that. the noble 1-ird proposes that it be left to
the voice of the
people in Central Italy to arrange to whom
they shall belong. Surely the noble lord must have lieen
impressed with the conviction that the declaration of the
people would be in favour of their annexation to Sardinia.
Well, as I before said, the gist of the four prepositions is
that Sardinia should be established as a powerful Govern-
ment in Europe. Well, these are offered for the coisi-
deration of France, and France agrees to them and accepts
them all, except in onevoryminor. particular: (Hear, hear.)
But I want to knew, then, from the noble lord—when he of-
fered a proposition for the settlement of Italy to the French
minister, the result of which was that Sardinia should be
aggrandised in this manner, did the Minister of Prance in-
form the noble lord that his Government renounced the con-
ditions they had previously attached to such an event—
naniely, that Savoy and Nice should be annexed to France?
(llear, hear.) That is a question which we must have an-
swered by the ;noble WO.; The noble lord was aware six
mouths ago, by a letter from Lord cowley, that in case of

Sardinia being aggrandised in this manner France would
claim' Savoy and Nice. (Hear, hear.) Now Ido not think
the noble lord will rise and say that the French Government
had announced any intention of changing their original po-
licy in this respect. (Hear, hear.) But is that all ? The noble
lord-sent his propositions to the great powers, to Austria,
Russia, and Prussia. I ask him, when he sent those pro-
positithas to the great powers for the settlement of the affairs
of Italy by the annexation to the dominions of the King of
Sardinia of the central states of Italy, did he inform those
great powers that if that policy were adopted it was within
his knowledge that France would demand an expansion of
her frontiers in the direction to which I have referred
(Hear, hear.) But if the noble lord, with the posses-sion of
that-knowledge. did not impart it to those powers, I ask the
house to say whether that is the mode in which the diplo-
macy of a great country like this is to be carried on ? (Hear,
hear.) These are subjects upon which, when we are asked to
agree to a treaty on account of the critical condition of Eu-
rope, I think we are bound to demand the fullest informa-
tion from the noble lord. There is one point in regard to
the subject of these dispatches I consider to be of the utmost
importance, on which we should have the fullest information
from her Majesty's Government, and that is the manner in
which very important information oozes out which otherwise
never could have reached the ear of Parliament, and that is
by what is called "private letters." (Hear, hear.) Now, I
am willing to admit to the noble lord that it is not only of
the utmost advantage, but of the greatest importance, that
the'most unreserved communication should exist between
the Secretary of State and the ambassadors and minis •
sters of the Queen at foreign Courts. (Hear, hoar.) Our
ambassador in France has sometimes to write as often as
three, or four times a day. There were many observations
and views which it was his duty to communicate to the
Secretary of State, and which ought to form the subject of
a private letter and not of a public despatch. (Hear, hear.)
But it-is right-that the house should understand what these
private letters are, and that the private letters of an ambas-
sador to the Secretary of State are purely private, as the
epithet implies; and that the Secretary is not bound to
show these letters to his colleagues. (Hear, hear.) Rarely
are they shown to any of his colleagues, with the exception
of the Prime Minister. Indeed, they came so rapidly that
his colleagues could not afford the time to read them all;
but as a matter of usage he is not bound to show them even
to the Sovereign. When he quits office he takes those
letters with him, and they form no part of the regular dip •
lomatie correspondence, or of the records of public business.
It would be a most unwise step to put an end to this confi-
dential communication between the Ministers and the agents
of his Sovereign. No man would undertake the responsi-
bility of Such an office as that of Secretary for Foreign
Affairs if he were deprived of such advantageous means of
carrying his duty into effect. (Hear, hear.) But from the
very nature of those confidential communications it is not
right that a Secretary of State or an ambassador should, in
his public despatches, fall back on his private letters.
(Hear.) I find, however, from those papers, that the most
important information is contained in private letters which
do not appear. (Hear.) We should have no evidence that
the French Minister, subsequently to the despatch which
announces that the Emperor had renounced in July his in-
tention bf annexing Savoy, neutralised and qualified the
intimation of that renunciation, but for the private letters
of Lord Cowley. (Hear.) Here we have an ambassador
sending a public despatch, in which it is positively an-
nounced that the Emperor has given up the intention of an-
nexing Savoy ; and it is only by these private letters we dis-
cover afterwards that circumstances having been changed,
the French ministers have with perfect frankness informed
her Majesty's ambassador, at least once, that the treaty of
Villafranca not having been carried into effect, the Empe-
ror should turn back to his original intention. (Hear.) A
diplomatic narrative placed before this house should be a
complete narrative. (Hear, hear.) I think that the highest
interests, of the State are involved in that principle. Suppose
there had been a change of administration at the beginning
of this year, the first duty of the new Ministry would have
_been to consult on the affairs of Italy. It might have been
their opinion that the policy that would be most advanta-
geous to England and Europe would be to strengthen Sar-
dinia and establish her as a power of considerable import-
ance ; but so far as the records in the Foreign-office wore
concerned,. they would have been completely in the dark on
the fact that the carrying out of that policy would necessarily
have led to the annexation of Savoy and Nice to France.
(Hear, hear.) It now appears that from the month of July,
or a little' afterwards, her Majesty's Government were per-
fectly aware that if the treaty of Villafranca was not virtually
carried into effect the intention of France was to again claim
the annexation of Savoy and Nice. All this time her Ma-
jesty's Government were pursuing a policy which, for the,
sake of argument, though I do not agree in it, I will
grant was an advisable one, but which certainly was one
that would have led to the annexation of Savoy and Nice to
France. (Hear, and cheers.) Under these circumstances
it is that her Majesty's Government have asked the house to
enter into this treaty with France, perfectly well aware as
they were for so long a period before, that it was the inten-
tion of France to annex those provinces. Mr. Grey, her
Majesty's Charge d'Affaires at Paris, in a despatch of the 9th
January, communicated to the Government the alarm that
existed in- Switzerland on the subject of the annexation,
Still the negotiations for the treaty went on, and no attempt
was made by her Majesty's Ministers to instruct Mr. Grey
on the subject or to take or adopt any other proceeding, and
it was ndt till the 27th or 29th, or some day near the end of
the month of January, that the noble lord the Secretary of
State for Foreign Affairs wrote that despatch for which he
has received the compliments of several hon. gentlemen. Is
that despatch any compensation for the negligence of the
Minister? Is it right that after all the mischief is done he
should take refuge in a grandiloquent despatch ? (Hear,
hear.) I should like a despatch in that spirit to have been
sent to the French Government months before. The Em-
peror of the French is a Sovereign who is said, and I be-
lieve with justice, not to be insensible to public opinion.
That is a quality not to be despised, but we do not see that
any effort was made by the noble lord. He was silent. Yet
the noble lord commences this session by placing upon the
table a denatch which is to be the foundation of a treaty of
commerce between this country and France, which he re-
commends on account of the critical position of the conti-
nent, and of the significance of the treaty, because it would
reassure the public mind in the various countries of Europe.
These are questions which require explanation when we
are asked to consent to a treaty of the nature of that- now
under discussion. (Hear, hear.) With all due respect to the
house, I must say that I think it has been placed in a very
embarrassing position, brought about by a lashes which I
think it will ultimately regret. I endeavoured at the time
to call attention to our true position, but unfortunately the
house was not then sufficiently aware of the circumstances,
and the matter was hurried on, not, I believe, to the advan-
tage of the Government, and I am sure greatly to the dis-
advantage of the house. (Hear.) Had we only understood
then what we are beginning to understand now, what was
the course adoped in 1787, we should not be at present in
the position in which we mow find ourselves. If the treaty
had been put before the house first, not in a committee on
the Customs Acts, but in a committee on the commercial
treaty, all this embarrassment would have been
avoided. That was the motion which I made, not in
form, for the rules of he house would not allow of that,
but in effect. The Government might, if my motion had
been adopted, have carried all their resolutions in commit-
tee on the commercial treaty, and after that might have
addressed the Crown. (Hear, hear.) And under such cir-
cumstances the revenue would not have been disturbed;
the resolutions would have been only provisional, subject
to the approbation of the tl•ca,ty by the house. (Hear, hear,
and cheers.) It is idle now to think that you are in a po-
sition to enter With effect into this most momentous subject.
The hon. gentleman who moved the address accused me of
thinking that the most advisable thing we could have done
would have been to consider the treaty before we addressed
the Crown. No such nonsence ever entered my head. (Hear,
hear.) How could you consider the treaty but on a motion
for an address to the Crown ? What I said was—" Do not
go into committee on the Customs duties till you address
the Crown; because I knew if you did so, movmg the ad-
dress would be an idle ceremony—(hear, hear)—and an idle
ceremony it is to-night, for whatever may be my opinion on
the treaty I feel it is idle and impossible now to oppose it on
diplomatic grounds. You cannot refuse to address the
sljnti
eehse(svui
ehiasgne
rar.
iwGo)tsuhtohnavLeatdneeessr
ntortbnefhmecsiaceesaffnnuatitisl
rryaeesraeyebt
understandx
iyoe nueswnot hwaaasasvetultehanahlleai
announced
u ntgnr ergwuoacpuhdef
oodyni
nerdhtl
ohtowohusanteert
wyCtwaorhebuarilnirl
decision.eeF hdva
rene
tornDomfiuAbonie
eaeaa.
e
aepalngue
adrvisempiresentdinseettndhso—huuhacan:hscu
re
oeandnatural boundaries. Who can foresee what
will be the resuhaealoottsechotoarfnitnseuech a policy ? We know that at the
0.
must Majesty'sfitrtfiiefill
el
knowT
nG oo svtt
Europeehr Government
wtamnii
tteghhne tars
dangerous
ihshi
spae
suspicion,
et
nehntr,
describedec ape n tr ebe de-
lo
withn g
the
ed
fatesan sanguinary ndayr yn a
swt
iaerss. , with
(Hear, th e
hear.)fall e f empires,Thi
This
s
yourand
appre-
hension and distrust—as one that has been associated with
description of the critical condition of Europe, aad it is
under these circumstance's that we are called on to ap-
prove this treaty with the power which the noble lord
has described as the power of disturbance and
distrust. Sir, all the circumstances are changed since the
right hon. gentleman introduced to us his financial motion.
We are not influenced by the same feelings, the country is
not influenced by the same considerations ; all is altered ;
all is altered from the day when I endeavoured to' lead you
to a safer course—(cheers fram the Opposition)—which
from Ministerial
Asilibneiss,tearsiailtbiesncmheets)n—owwhwicihthwansntmheeannminegt
everybody now feels and in private acknowledges—(derisive
awhi at
he r r
laughter. (Hear, hear.) But, sir, I hope we shall at least
have the satisfaction, before this address is voted, of hearing
noticy o
some explanation from the Secretary of State of the incom-
prehensible passages in his despatch to which I have called
attention. I hope we shall hear from him why, being in
thathe didpol France
possession—full and frank possession—of the policy of
anFrenchd eve Government,n precipitated communicatewhiitchtohuesandour allies, why he followed a policy in Italy which favoured
him-
self disapproved of, and why, when he placed these papers
before us, he placed them in such a manner that it is with
the utmost difficulty that we can arrive at'the policy of the
Government, but of which, under these circumstances, I
will only say of it what the noble lord has said of the Em-
peror of the,French—that "it fills me with distrust; and I
believe will lead to disturbance:: (Loud cheers.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, who was
received with cheers from the Ministerial benches, said—l
think, Sir, that the house will be of opinion that the time
for the full discussion of the important matters that have
occupied the greater part of the speech of the right hon.
gentleman has not yet arrived—(hear hear)—but will be
afforded at that probably early period when we shall be
invited by the motion of the honourable member for Bridg-
water toenter on the consideration of the conduct of the
Government, and of the position of the country with
reference to the province of Savoy. (Hear, hear.) At pre-
sent it is necessary for mo to sa but very little on that
or yif any other question of
point. If the question of Savoy, f
foreign policy upon which a difference of opinion with the
French Government might possibly arise, was before the
Cabinet of her Majesty at the time when the substance of
this treaty was negotiated, it was before us as a compara-
tively remote and hypothetical difficulty • , and I hold
that, inasmuch as, in the state of European politics
which exists at the present day, you cannot expect a
uniform concurrence of opinion between two great and in-
dependent countries like England and France, therefore
if we were to contemplate the possible occurrence of cases
in which it migh be our duty frankly to express our dissent
from any proposition of France, and to point out to her the
evils which might follow its adoption, the very best mode
of strengthening our own position for all events was to unite
cordially with France in a great act of policy, fraught with
benefittcrhoth countries; to which we were frankly invited
by her, and which, whatever might occur, was the best
preparation for friendly relations between the two Go-
vernments, because it tended not only to create these
friendly relations between the Governments, but also to
give! them a broad and deep and solid basis in the
friendly sympathies of two nations. (Hear, hem
Tk"
Itu respect to the course of the debate I must confess

should be, perfectly content to rest the argument for the
treaty of commerce with France, irrespective of the 41e
speech made by a member of the Government, upon the
various speeches which have been delivered by hon. gentle-
men, most of them, though not all, sitting on this side
of the house, beginning with the admirable spell'
of my hon. And the member for Middlesex, ea
ably seconded by the hon. ' member for Leeds, and fol-
lowed by a long list of gentlemen who brought to the sup-
port of this treaty every gift of knowledge and ability, ailid
among whom if I do not include the hon. baronet the moil-
bar for Tamworth it is only because of the much tpo
favourable and flattering terms in which he thought fit Ito
allude to myself. (Hear, hear.) At the same time' I
an sorry to say that there was one speeeh which, ifl I
estimate it aright, stands in striking contrast with the
general tone of the debate. I refer, of cousse, to t e
speech of my honourable friend the member f r
Stroud. (Cheers.) Her Majesty's Government have been
unfortunate beyond description during the present ses-
sion in attempting to win the favour of my right honour-
able friend. (A laugh.) Scarcly had the session Opel*
when he complained that never did a Government pit
sent to Parliament so scanty a programme of busi-
ness ; but scarcely had it proceeded three weeks more
when he again complained that such was the crowd and mass
of business forced upon the attention of the house by the
Government that they were greedily and irrationally
demanding from private members a portion of time which
did not belong to them. (Cheers.) My right hon. friend
told us to-night that he is an older Freetrader than any
gentleman except one who sits upon the Treasury bench—
(cheers from the Opposition)—and yet almost in the same
breath he informed us that the country which diminishes
its import duties makes a present of its revenue to the
foreigner., (Cheers and laughter.) Two millions, says he,
of import duties we shall have made a present of to France
before France begins to act upon this treaty. Such is the
mode in which my right hon. friend illustrates his old ex-
perience and his happy conception of the doctrines of free
trade. (Cheers and laughter.) My right hon. friend says
that the Government have contrived in this treaty to betray
the interests of England, and at the same time to ruin the
interests of France ; for, he tells us, whoever supports the
plans of the French Emperor is, in the opinion of the
French people, ruining the interests of France. He says,
again, that by the 11th article of the treaty my noble friend
the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, who is necessa

rily in a peculiar degree responsible for every treaty, and
the entire Government have abandoned and betrayed the
highest and most vital interests of this country ; and yet he
is perfectly satisfied, as. he declared in another part of his
speech, to leave in the hands of my noble friend the conduct
of our foreign relations. These are the declarations of my
right hon. friend, but they are declarations of secondary
importance, because they merely express the criticisms of
an individual member of Parliament on the conduct of the
Government. There were graver matters involved in his
speech—(hear, hear)—and, as a member of the House of
Commons, as an Englishman, and not less as one
holding office under the Crown, I must take leave to
enter my respectful protest against the whole tone and
language of my right hon. friend, when he described
the character, policy, and conduct of a neighbouring
and friendly nation. (Cheers.) My right hon. friend,
in drawing a contrast between England and France,
said that the policy of France was "aggression, aggrandize-
ment, and war." (Cheers from the Opposition.) I admit
to my right hon. friend that if the time has really come
when it is the duty of a member of the British Parliament,
of a man of ability and experience like my right hon. friend,
thus to describe the permanent and standing character and
policy of a neighbouring and friendly nation, then, indeed,
it is inappropriate to be discussing either treaties of corn •
merce or amendments to treaties of commerce, not to speak
of some paltry amendment relating to tie export of coal,but
we ought to have a sweeping and unmistakable vote of con-
demnation passed at once upon the treaty that has been
made and upon the Government that has made it.
.(Hear,
hear.) Again, says my right hon. friend, it is not the best
way to secure peace with the French people to wound and
irritate their feelings. That is one of the dicta necessary
to make up the budget of inconsistencies and contradictions
which my right hon. friend has exhibited to-night. "It
is not the best way to wound and irritate their feelings." I
ask him to put himself in their position, and then to inquire
of himself whether, if he had heard suck a speech delivered
by a subject of a nation in peace and alliance with his own,
his feelings would or would not have been wounded and
irritated ? (Cheers.) But my right hon. friend endea-
voured to save himself by drawing a minute distinction be-
tween
the Government and the nation, and he told us that
we were conspiring against the French people with their
ruler. Does he really imagine that, in order to soothe the
feelings of the French people, he has only to draw these
distinctions between them and their Government, which no I
foreign nation has a right to draw ? We have no right, I re-
peat, to draw such distinctions. It is not only an interference,
bait it is an interference of the most offensive kind—(cheers) I
—and if there be in France one spark of that patriotism which I
we weretold to foster in England, every Frenchman must I
read, as every Englishman wouldread,withindig,nationmuch
of what has been said to-night. (Cheers.) It appears to me that
there is no great difficulty in construing the passage whichhas
been quoted by the right hon. gentleman opposite from the
despatch of Lord Cowley on the subject of the treaty. I
think he gives it too narrow a construction if he intends it
to be understood that the *pinion of the Government was
that only on polibic.l grounds was this treaty to be judged.
Wo have always frankly admitted that the treaty must be
tried upon its merits with reference to commerce and trade,
and with reference -also to the indirect effects which com-
merce and trade would produce. (Hear, hear.) 'With re-
spect to political grounds, we could not, undoubtedly, be
insensible to the fact that there was much at the time when
these negociations were going on in which France and Eng-
land had a common feeling, and in which France and Eng-
land jointly were the main European champions of the
principles and representatives of the Powers by which alone
we could hope to see the affairs of Europe settled. When
we looked to Italy, which has long been a suppressed vol-
cano, certain to burst out and to produce most dangerous
complications in Europe, no impartial man could deny that,
whether tho Emperor's title to make war in Italy was good '
or bad, no inconsiderable effects had been produced by the I,
war, whether th"y were duo to the valour of France or to I
the moderation of Austria, and no inconsiderable progress 1
made towards the settlement of Italian affairs, which upon
every ground of European interest and of British feeling
was a consummation much to be desired. (Hear.) Take
the state of feeling in Italy. It surely could not be
possible for any rational man to see the state of things that
prevailed in Italy and not to desire to make an effort, in
itself beneficial, but likewise recommended by the likeli-
hood of its being successful, for the purposes of applying a i
remedy, or at least a palliative. We had the greatest alarm
and apprehension in the public mind on the scero ef military
preparations. Wo had an immense and constantly growing
increase of our own expenditure, connected verymuch with
that alarm and apprehension. Last year it was the painful
duty of the Government to propose a great addition to the
burdens of the country, and we had the prospect of furtherad-
ditional expenditure in the present year and for a long suc-
cession of years. Was not that a reason for endeavouring to
act upon the alarm and apprehension which prevailed, not
by the discontinuance of measures which the safety of the
country required, but by the adoption of a process which,
like the silent and ceaseless processes of nature herself,
would bring into play a thousand beneficial influences on
the side of peace, and which from day to day and from year
to year would counteract the prevailing alarms by under-
mining their causes, and by substituting for whatever re-
mained of panic on the one hand or undue military spirit
on the other those solid habits and usages of friendship
which are cemented and strengthened by the peaceful
in-
tercourse of commerce and trade? (Cheers.) But the
political part of the treaty I will not dwell upon, and I will
go to those portions of it which are more within my own
proper sphere. And here I have listened with great satis-
faction to the course of the present debate, because I take it
for granted that the best objections that could be made to
the treaty have been made. And what do they come to ?
We have heard something of bargains, and we have been
told that this treaty is a bargain, that we have asked for
equivalents, and that we have not got them. Sir, I deny
that this treaty has ever been a bargain, for it is of the es-
sence of a bargain that you give away something which it
would be of value to you to retain, and that you receive
something which it is important to the otter party to keep.
(Hear, hear.) This is a reciprocal instrument if you like,
but a bargain it is not, for you are giving nothing to France
that is not a gift to yourself, and you are receiving nothing
from France except measures by which France confers a
a benefit upon herself. (Cheers.) 'ln the first place it
would be unnecessary, and in the next place it would be
mischievous, to inquire the precise measure of percentage
on this article- or on that—whether the restraint on the
exportation of rags is duly balanced by the duty on
paper, or whether the duty which France leaves
on the raw silk she sends to us shall be removed
when we are sending her enormous quantities of
raw silk without any duty at all. All these propositions it
was unnecessary, and much worse than unnecessary, to en-
tertain. The hon. member for Stamford fell into a ludicrous
error last night. He speaks of the slovenliness of the treaty
with regard to the export drags. He says we have covered
that by obtaining the removal of the prohibition, but that is
only one fault in the treaty, and there are 20 others. But
that is not a fault in the treaty. We have never attempted
the impossible task of constructing such a system of equi-
valents. We have had warning enough in the experience
of former years. And what says the hon. and learned mem-
ber for Belfast, who finds fault with us and comes forward
to instruct us? He finds fault with us for not having en-
tered into these minute adjustments—for not having settled
how much duty should be levied on linen goods, and then
he says, "Why not go to Spain and see whether she will
not enter upon these minute and endless discussions ?"
will tell him why. Because we knew quite well that, if there
were any means of obstructing the progress of free trade, it
was by entering upon these negociations in the spirit of
bargain that he recommends. And even that is not all, for,
not only would ho have been entangled, if he had had the
management of these negociations, in hopeless complica-
tions that would have made 'lira times out of mind pray his
stars that he had never meddled with it—(cries of "
—but while he was involved in the attempt to disentangle
these inexplorable difficulties and complications—and I
really pay him the compliment of saying that he was the
man to de it if it could be done—the whole of these proceed-
ings involving millions of revenue, would have become pa-
tent to the public, and the last result of that blessed under-
taking would have been a total paralysis alike of trade and
of revenue, and of no inconsiderable portion of the commerce
and industry of the country. (Cheers.) These, sir, are
the reasons why we declined these negotiation, and it is
no blot on the treaty that it does not provide for the
free export of rags. We came to the conviction
that if France once frankly, sincerely, and de-
cisively entered upon the career of freedom of trade, her
own experience of the commencing stages would be a secu-
rity for her proceeding onwards towards its confirmation
such as we could not by any other ;news obtain, (Cheers.)

That is the meaning of the treaty, and that is the reason of
the avoidance of these minute arrangements, which, hope-
less and impossible at any time, would have been mischie-
vous and absurd under the particular circumstances, be-
cause they would have led to a total misconception of the
fundamental principles of the treaty. That is the reason
why the treaty has been framed such as it is; and not such
as has been recommended by the hon. and learned gentle-
man opposite, I will only say one word on what fell from
the hon. member for Norfolk, who says that the increase of
the income tax is due to this treaty. I must say that is a
very inaccurate statement of the case. In the first place it
must be recollected that the loss really due to the treaty is
extremely small in amount. In all the stages of our pro-
ceedings we never have given it with precision—I have
never heard any computation of the exact loss of revenue
we shall incur by the treaty with France, because we have
endeavoured to deal with it conjointly with the whole loss
arising from.the treaty. But France is not to be charged
with the benefit arising to Spain or Portugal through the
admission of their wines at a low price, nor are we, so far as
I am aware, bound by any treaty to extend unconditionally
to those countries the benefits we extend to France. The
whole annual amount of loss of revenue under the treaty on
our commerce with, France cannot, I think, even at the
outset, be estimated at more than'£6o,ooo or £70,000 a year
—that is, including the ultimate fall of the wine duties,
which will not take place before the expiration of 9 months.
On commercial grounds, then, I put against a very small
loss of revenue for a year the promise of a very great exten-
sion of trade. (Cheers.) Wish regard to the great staples
of France, wine and brandy, the reduction of duty is such
as to promise a
_great increase of trade. As regards our-
selves I wish to call the particular attention of the house
to this—that we have long acted on the principle
that all differential duties are impolitic and bad, and that
there is not even a single duty of any moment—l am not
sure there is even one of the very smallest that we abandon
under the treaty with France that is not strictly a differen-
tial duty. (Cheers.) I look to France, and I must say
that I can conceive no measure more qualified to attach the
people of France than a treaty like this. We have been told
that the people of France, forsooth, are opposed to thistreaty.
So far as I have had opportunities of judging, I should say
it appears to me the case is this—that there is a limited and
powerful class in France to which, at any rate for the me.
ment, the treaty may be obnoxious. But you have hardly
any country where so large a mass of the population are so
directly interested, not only as consumers, but also as pro-
ducers, and whose productions would immediately receive
so greatly increased a value from a commercial treaty, and
you will have another most powerful agency that willattach
the people of France to this treaty and l'all connected with it.
France is likely to receive a very large increase of, Customs
revenue under this treaty. What can be more beneficial to
France than a treaty which will enable the Government to
reduce the additions to the direct taxation of that country ?
I believe that even the hon. member for Birmingham will
admit that the people of France are not so enamoured of
direct taxation as not to see with pleasure the prospect of
its remission. (Hear, hear.) I must confess I have the
strongest conviction that there is another great commercial
benefit not alluded to in this debate, but which may be anti-
cipated from this treaty. Should circumstances be favour-
able to its development, I do not think that anything could
withstand the moral contagion of France and England acting
together in the sense of liberty of commerce. (Cheers.) As
long as England stood alone it was easy to say—" This na-
tion has grown old and great by protection, and she can
afford to throw away the ladder by which she has mounted
to eminence." That is the current language. I admit that'
the admirable example we set has been but slightly,
reluctantly, and partially followed, and I believe that the
right hon. gentleman, who, I admit has spoken with mode-
ration, is in error in supposing that the Emperor was about
to introduce a system of an analogous kind by independent
legislation in France. Such an opinion is totally contrary to
the information we possess. It rests upon no documents.
The right hon. gentlemen has, I think, mistaken the nega-
tive promise of the Emperor, that no prohibitions should
be removed before a certain date, for a positive promise of the
Emperor that at that date those prohibitions shall be re-
moved. It was not a fraud practised on the people, but we
enabled the Emperor to hold out to France additional in-
ducements by which the system of prohibitions might be
altered. But the advantages to be derived from this treaty
will go far beyond France, for I believe that the example of
France joined with England in one course and policy will
spread far beyond the limits of those two countries, and the
results which the changes in this treaty ought to achieve
will be not merely making 2d. into 4d., as an hon. member
has said, but knitting together the hearts and minds of men,
and the benefits will spread from region to region and from
country to country. (Cheers.) We must now consider
shortly what are the articles on which many of the hopes of
the opposition to this treaty are founded. Great hopes which
had been entertained with regard to one item were dispelled
by the prudent and kindly announcement we were per-
mitted to make the other evening on the part of the French
Emperor—(cheers)—but, though rags have failed, yet some
hopes were entertained until a recent period on the -subject
of shipping. The hon. member for Sunderland very frankly
admitted that when he first read the article with regard to
shipping—the 3d article—he, in common.with the rest of
the world, totally misunderstood it--(laughter)—but he
congratulated himself that he had by study extricated
himself from his error, whereas a portion of the world are
still wandering in darkness. (Hear, hear, and laughter.)
We have had unfortunate proof that such is the case. My
,hon. friend the member for Stamford showed last night that
he did not understand the article, and the right hon. mem-
ber for Buckinghamshire, following hini to night with
ready confidence, has likewise exhibited a similar unac-
quaintance with the spirit and intention and whole effect
and character of this article. The hon. member for Stam-
ford 'began by ascribing to Government a defence of the
article which the Government did not make, and having
set up a lay figure wherewith to fight, he, of course, had no
difficulty in knocking it down. (A laugh.) He said that
the Government defended the article by asserting that it
related to the indirect trade. My right hon. friend last
night did not so defend it. I say that it does not refer to
the indirect trade, but to the direct trade only. I want to
give an example of the extravagancies into which ingenious
men are led—(ironical cheers from the Opposition)—when
there is something or other to which they must object.
" Now mind," it is said, " you must object to the 3d
article ; handle it, turn it over, see what you can make of
it, but object to it you must ;" and so my hon. friend oppo-
site detected a deep plot in this article, and urged that the
Freneh Emneror had outwitted_and gutrannetbe
negotiators. The article secures differential duties on
French shipping; and it is 'true that these differential
duties are not paid by British shipping; but my hon. friend
says that the meaning is obvious, and that the French Em-
peror, having got the treaty of commerce, will give notice
to terminate the treaty of navigation, land then the diffe-
rential duties will be applicable to British shipping. An
argument more far-fetched, or more contrary to nature and
reason, there could not be than one which supposed that
the man who with almost unpiiralleled boldness has under-
taken to negotiate this treaty in France, in the teeth of
so much interested opposition, would the day after pledg-
ing himself in the face of his people the principles of free
trade,. reverse the only instrument which prevents the
unlimited protection of shipping, and revert to the old
state before the treaty. But that is not all, for what
would
be the effect if the Emperor exercised this cun-
ning ? It is perfectly true that, if the treaty of navigation
were at an end, this 3d article would enable the Emperor
to impose against English-shipping the differential duties
which now exist in the French law,—that is to say, that by
terminating the, treaty of navigation he would obtain a
limited power of imposing differential duties.' But what
should we get ? That proceeding would give to us the un-
limited power of imposing duties on French ships, for then
there would be nothing to prevent our prohibiting the en-
trance of every French ship into our ports. (Hear, hear.)
Let me give to my hon. friend the real, natural, and true
account of this article. So far from having to apologize on
account of this treaty to those who represent British ship-
ping, the Government maintain that the treaty does much
for British shipping. What will be the increase of the coal
trade under this treaty ? What is the meaning of your
alarms and fears for the exhaustion of English coal in 300
years? At any rate, as long as it lasts a great many more
English ships will be employed in carrying it. (Cheers.)
Perhaps you think that French ships will carry it all. On
the contrary, of the shipping employed in the trade 69 per
cent. are British ships, 28 per cent. French ships, and the
other 3 per cent. are foreign ships. Tlidge list, going from
English ports to France, are in the indirect trade, and lia-
ble to the differential duties ; and the article was inserted to
prevent competition with the French shipping in the in-
direct trade on the part of Swedes, Danes, and others ; se
that there is a small pinch of the powder of protection in
favour of French shipping and likewise of British shipping.
(Hear, hear.) At any rate the hon. gentleman opposite
will not think that that part of the treaty was written in
Bedlam. (Laughter.) Ships constituted one of the points
on which great hopes long turned, and those hopes have
not been abandoned to 'night by the right hon. member for
Buckinghamshire ; but I trust that he also is now satisfied
as to the object and scope of the article. Everything else
having blown down, there still remained the subject of
coal, which has been thought strong enough to bear
the weight of an amendment. I do not think that
the right hon. member fir Stroud has done justice
to himself, for this is but a narrow conclusion to a broad
speech. His speech went much further, and the conclusion
ho has arrived at is, compared with the speech, so inade-
quate that I am afraid the right hon. gentleman cannot go
home easy to-night. (Laughter.) At any rate, he has the
consolation of reflecting that he made a gallant struggle to
save one of the most vital interests of England. (A laugh.)
T must say, however, that I do not think my right hon.
friend relies much on what may be called the extra-com-
mercial part of the case. He did not enter into details on
that part of the subject relating to the prerogative of the
Crown, nor will I now attempt to do so. I will satisfy my-
self with stating that, so far as we are 'advised, with re-
spect to the rights of the Crown no duty arising out of any
obligation that appertains to it is in the smallest degree
compromised, qualified, or surrendered !by. this treaty.
(Hear.) The question we have to consider is entirely a
commercial question. It is the question whether we ought
to enter into an engagement, even for the period of 10
c
to lay no duty on the exportation of coal to France. (Hear,
lyoenn gr se
ws
hhoi Uh al
d ab
s
co
ol
nu
tt
ie
nl
y
b
u aninced sus
of the during
treaty bteh ar
et pe
s lvre od
do— nil —r
hear.) It is clear, however, that we could not enter into
any treaty of commerce with France without having assur-
ance of her and she of us that we would not be subjected to
exceptional legislation. I think, therefore, no one will take
the slightest objection to the 19th article, by which France
is secured against any exceptional legislation on our part.
The question, then, is whether we have done wisely or un-
wisely in undertaking that for a period of 10 years at least
we shall impose no export duty on the 'Article of coal • arid
whether or not this is a fit subject for such an amendment
as my right hon. friend has proposed. I trust the house
will not entertain that amendment, on any other except
the very strongest grounds. Thehouse is going to the foot
of the Throne to express its loyal sense of duty at this com-
mencement of an arrangement which it declares, willin its
judgment, be beneficial to the interests of commerce and of
peace ; and in such circumstances no person would obtrude
such an amendment as is now proposed, except from a very
strong sense of duty. (Hear, hear.) And what is that sense
of duty ? That I had better leave inscrutable. (A laugh.)
But what I will ask is—What is the object or policy my
right hon. friend hopes to defeat by pressing upon the house
the adoption of this amendment -I hope the notion has
been disposed of tbat the object of France iu regard to the
article of coal is a military one. lam sure that in the mind
of any impartial person it is impossible that such anotion
could remain for a single moment.' (Hear.) the first
place, France has contrived at this moment to secure a fleet,
by means of which fleet she has considerably shaken the
ith
nerves of a portion of the population of England
t
the favour of any stipulation on our part not to prohibit the
o
export of coal. (Hear.) The whole extent f. the naval
consumption of France is 160,000 tons, representing
letntang a value
of £200,000. (Hear.) The whole affair is u
insigni-
ficant. (Hear.) Why, as large a quantity has been raised
from a single mine, and we have been told that at one iron
w au-se of a single week. (Hear.) For
piovrskmaosutmhuicnhthceoactl has been consumed as useless at the
the description of small coal here referred to a good market
at
t foundfmroafrom
in
sa a France.t
difference
m a may underotfh
is a tinestion of cost, e t h t (Hoar.)
a estimated
i mTa tneids
French
point of view,
will be les, a ton, Wile Frencli expect to gain 100, a ton •
cost,is tr
e lookedat yanbed

and from tat very estimate ,it will become evident to th
house that a great deal of coal is certain to find a ,market
in France. (Hear, hear.) Let me state in a few work
what is the rational eonstruction of this article, and what
the motives of France are with regard to it. It may be
true that the Fiench Government might have been inr
duced to surrender or qualify this article, but I should
have been ashamed to demand such a concession—(hear,
hear)—for thete is no article of the treaty More 'beneficial
in a commercial point of view, or one that will more
powerfully tend to knit together in kindly feelings the
two countries. (Hear.) To prohibit the export of coal is
impossible, except the limited prohibition that might arise
with respect to war. It it altogether outside the view of
1 this article to stop the exportation of coal. Te do so is just
as impossible as it would be to prohibit the import of cotton,
or to pi-event iron being dug out of the bowels of the earth.
(Hear, hear.) France has abundance of coal for those pur-
poset that may be termed political. For the domestic use
of the rich and for all the purposes of the State her coal is
abundant; but for commerce her coal is scanty, and the
physical conformation of France, and the wants of her manu-
facturers have gone far to determino_ the manufacturing
enterprise of the country. Easy access to the raw material
and abundant. supplies of fuel led to the creation of manu-1
factures. Put these two together and you have the com-
bination that makes South Lancashire' a *manufacturing
county, with the great town of Liverpool behind it. The
part of France in which there is the best access to the raw
material, and therefore so far is the most desirable for her
manufactures, is, the seaboard of the Atlantic; but then it
is farthest from her supplies of fuel, that lie on the south
coast. But give, Franco this treaty, .and an assurance that
fir commercial purposes she can depend on a supply of coal,
and then the cheapest part for obtaining coal in France will
be that part that gives easiest access to the raw material.
(Hear.) The places where cotton and other articles that
come across the sea are to be found will also be the places
where the coal will be lowest in price. (Hear, hear.) I
have been inforthed that there are already migrations con-
templated in France from Ole centre and eastern parts
of the country to localities on the Atlantic seaboard,
where cheap coal is expected to be obtained. That is
the process that goes on in this country, where the
iron trade has gone to the neighbourhood of the coal-
pits, and where the cloth manufactures of Wiltshire
and Dorsetshirs has moved into Yorkshire. (Hear, hear.)
You can conceive no process more beneficial for the com-
mercial interests of France than this, or one better calcu-
lated to promote the advantage of the great mass of labour
in both countries and to secure the peace of the world.
(Hear.) The house will understand, then, why I declare
that we could not take advantage of the offer of the French
Government at one time, that rather than, allow the treaty
to be lost they would consent to an alteration of this article.
(Hear, hear.) But there seems to be au honest fear that,
after all, we ought not to part with our coal as it is so valu-
able. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman (Mr. Dis-
raeli) most ingeniously laboured to cut down that estimate
of coal, though he seemed rather afraid to state the result
of his figures. He rather evaded the, point, and could not
see the termination of our coal in less than some centuries.
I am only sorry that my hon. friend behind me (Mr. Vivian),
whe so clearly disclosed the facts of the case, was not heard
by a larger number ofhon. members. (Hear, hear.) There
is in the minds of the class of persons most closely con-
nected with coal-mining in England not the slightest ap-
prehension of an exhaustion of the stock. I have before me
a letter from one of the best, most instructed, and most ex-
perienced coal-viewers in the north of England, in which
I am informed that we have coal in this country to last for
upwards of 2,000 years. I allude to Mr. Nicholas Wood.
(Cheers.) But, as my hon. friend (Mr. Vivian) observed,
that does not represent half the case ; for you don't reckon
the unworked seams ; you don't reckon the deeper seams
which are accessible ; you don't take into view the hun-
dreds of cases of new beds of coal which are discovered from
Month to month in England. But, after all, is my right
lion. friend sincere in this amendment? It does all very
well as a subject for a speech in this house—(a laugh)—but
are we really afraid I Does my right hon. friend econo-
mise the use of coal in his own house ? No. (Oh I) An
hon. member says " Oh." I agree with his sneer. The
consumption of coal is 70,000,000 tons; the quantity sent
to France is 1,000,000 tons; if you are alarmed about the
exhaustion of the existing stock you will economise on the
remaining 69,000,000. (A laugh.) It would be absurd, it is
said, when we consume 70,000,000 tons of coal at home,
that we should export to another country 1,500,000 tons,
which may increase to 3,000,000; we cannot afford it ; and
therefore, we must retain power to restrain the export. Sir,
these are not the grounds on which this house will carry an
amendment to the foot of the Throne. (Cheers.) But I have
done with this consideration. The hon. gentleman the mem-
ber for Norfolk says he thinks a War with France and Eu-
rope would be better than this treaty should receive a final
sanction. (A laugh.) It is not often we have the benefit of
hearing a gentleman stand up and with engaging frankness
state calmly and coolly in this house that he would rather
have a war with France and Europe than see this treaty
ratified—adding, in the same breath, that no man is more
alive than he to the blessings of peace. (Laughter.) I must
confess I don't feel at all disappointed at the course of the
discussion with respect to this treaty. I hope the hon. gen-
tleman will not think it all disrespectful to him if I use free
language, and if I confess I think that that one sentiment,
and one or two others which he has used in these debates,
are not worthy of the high standard of legislative wisdom
which I am sure he would seek and desire to attain. (Cheers
and laughter.) Much has been said in the course of these
debates that will not bear sober examination. Let us go back
to the debates of 1787, and there we shall find that all the
same foolish things and a great many others were said, and
said too by very wise and distinguished men ; but timecasts
a light on the events of those days. The mass of the coun-
try, at any rate so far as it can be tested by the ordinary re-
cords of the expression of opinion, has no share in these
apprehensions. 1 don't wishto overstate the case, but when
the right hon. member for Buckinghamshire travels backto
a debate which took place three weeks ago, and rather glo-
rifies himself on the advice he then gave to the house, but
which the house refused to follow, he ought to recollect
that that refusal was uttered not only by the members of
the Government, not only by the majority which a party
can supply; but that into that majority there entered many
of the most able and respected members from the opposite
side of the house, who usually vote with the right hon. gen-
tleman himself. (Cheers.) He appeals to the future—to
the future we also appeal. We cannot presume to predict
the course of events. The experience of Mr. Pitt would
warmais against any anal' preeuraptiOn. But althOUgh tltn-
instrument which he concluded was not intended to last, it
did not on that account redound with the less honour to his
name; we don't the less believe that even for the time it
existed it may have done much to allay the excitement
which in both countries followed the close of the American
war, and to produce greater feelings of self-command among
the English people in the earlier stages of the French Re-
volution. It is not for us to presume to say that this treaty
will work with such power as to control future events, but
if, by the blessing of the Almighty, the spirit of justice,
prudence, and moderation shall prevail in the councils of
Europe, then, looking to the state of Europe—to the power
of every country to attain strength and eminence through
the development of its internal resources, and to the absence
of all legitimate causes of strife and collision, we ought to
hope that that state of circumstances may remain under
which this treaty may produce beneficial effects beyond any
power of judging; and I must say that in that case I cannot
but cherish the cheerful and sanguine expectation that
it will of itself do something to make the year 1860 one
memorable—memorable because fruitful of blessings—in
the annals of Europe and mankind. (Loud and prolonged
cheers.)

Mr. NEWDEGATE, amidst cries of "Divide I" was
understood to ask whether the sth article of the treaty,
which touched the larger number of commodities, was to
apply to commodities imported from all countries, or from
France alone ?

Mr. HORSMAN, in explanation, said the Chancellor of
the Exchequer had mistaken him in supposing that ho had
said upon his own authority that there was any difference
of opinion between the French Emperor and the French
nation. He had quoted the language of the Emperor him-
self and of the French Journals. (Hear.) As there was a
feeling that the carrying of any amendment upon the 11th
article might effect the whole treaty—(laughter and cheers)
—under those circumstances, in compliance with the wish
that had been expressed by the majority of those who agreed
with him, he should not press his amendment. (Divide.)
The house then divided, when there appeared
56
For the amendment
282
Against ..
226
Majority
The announcement of the numbers was received with
cheers.
Mr. NE WDEGATE inquired whether article 5 of the
treaty would apply to goods imported from France alone, or
to the goods imported from all countries.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said this
was a point on which the hon. gentleman had before refused
to accept his statement, and had expressed a strong opinion
of his own. If any point should arise which required to be
elucidated, reference would be made to the law officers of
the Crown.
The motion for an Address to her Majesty was then
agreed to, and a committee appointed in conformity with a
resolution to that effect to prepare the terms of the Ad-
dress.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and
the house adjourned at 25 minutes to 2 o'clock.

[ADVERTISEMENT.]—Mr. Benson, Ludgate-hill,
published anew illustrated pamphlet en watches has just
(free by post
for two :stamps). It should be read by all who are about
buying a watch, as it contains prices and important informa-
tion as to—What watch to buy ! where to buy it ! and how to
use it t
[ADVERTISEMENT.]—ItoIIoway's Pills, a certain cure
for headaches, bile, loss of appetite, and lowness of spirits.
These Pills can be taken without danger from wet or cold,
and require no interruption of business or pleasure. They
act mildly on the bowels, strengthen the stomach, and pro-
mote a healthy action of
the liver, whereby
blood, cleanse the skin brace the nerves and invigorate
the whole system. They effect a truly wonderful change
in a debilitated constitution, as they create a healthy aPPe''
tite, correct indigestion, remove bile, giddiness, headaches,
and palpitation of the heart. Plain directions for using
these Pills, at once so mild and efficacious, accompany each
box, llolloway's Pills may be fearlessly taken by the most
delicate,
[ADVERTISEMENT.]—Mothers and nurses will find Du
Barry's delicious Revalenta Arabica Food admirably
adapted to remove all disorders of the stomach and bowels to
' which infants and children are state all times liable, such as
indigestion, flatulency, colic, dyry, diarrhom, consti-
pation, debility and restlessness. It strengthens, nou-
rishes, and is used with more advantage than milk in
rearing infants. We quote a few out of many testimo-
nials :—" Amsterdam, 31st Dec. 1852.—Dear Sir,—Our
child, up to the age of eleven weeks, was very delicate, and
wasting away, and milk, sago, and arrowroot turned sour
on its stomach, causing great suffering. We then fed it
upon Du Barry's Revalenta Arabica, which agreed won-
derfully with her; and she is now, at tho age of nine
months, a plump and lively little girl.—Daniel Serval."
" Wildervank, Holland, 20th Sept. 1853.—Dear Sir,—Our
baby, which Heaven presented us with ten months back,
was attacked, when four weeks old, with a disease of the
stomach and glands, by which our seven previous infants
had all been carried off, and this last child seemed destined
to follow its sisters and brothers before many days, for our
doctor, a very able practitionex, had, during three 'a eels,
exhausted all his skill, and was at a loss what to prescribe
next, when he ad vi:;cd Du Barry's llevalen la ,t,
which, I am happy to say, worked a great change for the
better in a few days; and in six weeks time the child was
perfectly well, and is now a cheerful blooming boy—a
source of the greatest happiness tons all.—L. 11. Vaalmau.,,
In tins, at ls. 6d. ; 11b., 3s. ; 21b., ss. 9d. ; 51b., 12s.4;oul2elosbnt.
~
265. The 101 b. and 121 b. tins carri7a,gjet free,egen receiptot_nseet,id
of p
office order. Du Barry and Co., 763, Piccadilly
an, ; Regent-street,
60,
Fortnum, Mason, and Co., 182,
Gracechurch-street ; 4, Cheapside ;
Orford-
street; ; 330 and 451, Strand ; 49 and G, 150, Oxford-
Bishopsgate-
street ; 85, Tottenham-court-road.
_Also at Dublin,
Bewley 'and Draper; Edinbaur , Rahnes and Co.;
at Liverpool, Nixon and Thew; t Dianehester, Sharp and
Scott; at York, Ralmes, f-B1
at Snutk-
amptclOtandea and son. me Ard, and Co.;