The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-27 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARL

LAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.)

Lord REDESDALE, as Deputy-Speaker of the House o;
Lords, owing to the absence of the Lord Chancellor, took
his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock.

TILE INCOME TAX IN INDIA.

The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH wished to put a ques.
don to the noble duke as to a statement that had appeared in
the newspapers with respect to the financial scheme about
to be introduced into India. Ire wished to ask whether the
Government would be enabled to place the details of
the plan on the table of the Louse, and also
whether the Government had given their sanction and
approval to the same. -He was extremely anxious about
the sulAject, because there was some mistake among private
soldiers as to whether they would become subject to the pro-
posed income-tax.
The Duke of ARGYLL said if such a scheme had been
proposed his noble friend the Secretary of State for India
was not aware of it when he had last seen him. The noble
earl had given no notice of his question, therefore he was
imrepared to give him any answer in an official manner ;
but he would beg noble lords to abstain from all observa-
tions prejudieialto the scheme till the Government had
given an ..'ccurate account of the subject.
PUBLIC BUSINESS.

The Duke of NEWCASTLE said it would bo no doubt
acceptable if he stated the names of the bills he had alluded
to when ho made that statement relative to the Easter re-
cess. The bills alluded to wow the Income-tax Bill and
the Stamp Bill, both of which it was desirable should re-
ceive the Royal assent previous to the recess. With re-
spect to three other bills—viz., the Customs' Bill,the Paper
Duty Bill, and the Wine Licenses Bill, they would not be
gone on with until after the holidays.
The Earl of DERBY said ho was glad it was not in-
tended to proceed with the repeal of the paper duty before
Easter.

THE ARMY ESTIMATES

The Earl of DERBY said he wished to ask the noble duke
whether there was any truth in the report that the Govern-
ment intended to withdraw the Army Estimates at present
before Parliament, with a view of increasing them ?
The Duke of NEWCASTLE said the rumour referred
to by the noble earl (the Earl of Derby) was true to a
certain extent. It was the intention of the Go-
dernment to withdraw the present Army Estimates,
not with a view of increasing them, but merely to reprint
them. The estimates had been formed upon the suposition
that only a certain number of troops would return from In-
dia, but a larger number having returned it became neces-
sary to make other arrangements. It was to make certain
corrections, and not to make any increase, that rendered it
necessary to withdraw the estimates, to make provision to
meet the altered corrections.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The Leicester Gas Bill was read a second time.
The following bills were read a third time and passed :
Matlock Water, East Indian Coal Company, and Silver-
dale and Newcastle Railway.
CHARITABLE USES BILL.
Lord GRAN WORTH said, owing to domestic bereave-
ment, the Lord Chancellor was prevented being present
that evening. Under such circumstances, therefore, he
should withdraw his motion with reference to this bill until
Monday, the 23d of April.
HARBOURS OF REFUGE.
The Marquis of OLANRICARDE, in moving for re-
turns of the sums expended by Government since 1810, for
the construction of harboura of refuge, piers, breakwaters,
artificial islands, or other contrivances for the protection
of shipping, apologised for having taken up the subject, but
his excuse was, that every professional man who had taken
it up had more or less failed. He had at first given notice
for a return of the number of shipwrecks on the coast, but
that information had since been supplied in another form,
and a more melancholy paper had never been issued. It
might truly be said, that the British coast was the disgrace
of the British nation and the grave of the British seaman.
It appeared, that the average logs of property by shipwreck
amounted to £1,500,000 a year, while the average loss of
life for the last six years was 783. But in 1854 no fewer
than 1,849 persons were drowned—while last year there
were 1,463 shipwrecks, with 10,533 persons on board of
them. Of these 1,615 were drowned, while at least 1,000
more were in peril of their lives. Notwithstanding what
ought to be the increased science and skill of British seamen
the loss of life and property continued to be very large.
The question was, had there been sufficient efforts to afford
to our marine that shelter which our coasts ought to afford.
It appeared to him all had not been done which ought to
have been done. There had been no improvements in the
system of building piers and harbours for a thousand years.
There were various spots on the coasts upon which addi-
tional shelter might be provided for shipping, and there
was a variety of patents and inventions which by repeated
experiments had been proved to be valuable as means of
saving life. The floating breakwater was recommended
by the highest authority, but the Admiralty had afforded
neither countenance or aid to that or other inven-
tions, which :he confidently asserted were able to save
hundreds of lives. The same principle which was ap-
plicable to floating breakwaters was applicable to float-
ing batteries. If there was a possibility of afford-
ing better protection to our maritime population it
ought to be done. The present state of many places was in
respect of efficiency for the purposes intended a disgrace to
the country. The noble marquis proceeded to remark upon
the recommendation of the Harbour of Refuge Commis-
sioners, and upon the details of some of the structures now
in course of erection. Several of these erections were not
correct in principle or applicable for the purposes intended.
The noble marquis entered into scientific details on the sub-
ject to show the ruinous consequences as regarded expense
which had been incurred in consequence of no sufficient ex-
periments having been undertaken before the works were
commenced. The noble marquis concluded by moving for
a return of all public moneys granted by Parliament, or
lent or apportioned in aid of other contributions, towards
the construction or improvement of solid stone piers •r
breakwaters (not including works of fortification) at any
port or on any of the shores of the United Kingdom, since
the year 1810 ; specifying the sums granted and expended in
each case, and the estimated cost of each such work accord-
ing to the first demand and alleged expectation, and stating
how much has been repaid by harbour dues or otherwise in
each case of loan ; and also a return of any sums granted or
lent for experiments upon floating piers, breakwaters or sea
barriers, or artificial islands, or other inventions for the pro-
tection of shipping or the facility of traffic, during the same
time

The Duke of SOMERSET said that his objection to this
motion was, that so much time and labour would be neces-
sary in their preparation that they could not bo ready be-
fore the end of the session, so that they would be useless.
Besides, no sufficient means now existed of ascertaining all
the payments and repayments that had been made since
1810 in reference to piers and harbours. The Exchequer
Loan Commissioners had only existed since 1817, and all
the loans they had advanced in this• country had been re-
paid. That was not the case as regarded Ireland ; but still
some portion had been repaid. He would be most happy
in giving him the first return if he amended it in some de-
gree, but the secend could not be granted.
The Earl of HARD 'WICK E called attention to the great
losses which recently took place at sea, and the necessity of
having breakwaters and harbours of refuge. He alluded
to the Plymouth Breakwater—one of the greatest of modern
works—and wherever such a work was constructed, the
public money would be well laid out ; but other descrip-
tions of harbours, constructed by engineers putting stone
upon stone, it was impossible they could stand for any
length of time. Another plan proposed was floating break-
waters ; but the risk to be run was that its cables might
break, and the breakwater being driven on the ships which
may take shelter behind it, they would all perish together.
The noble marquis then withdrew his motion for the pur-
pose of amending it, and the conversation dropped.
MANHOOD SUFFRAGE AND VOTE BY BALLOT.
Lord TEYNHAM presented 30 petitions from Durham
and other places in favour of manhood suffrage and vote by
ballot, and gave notice that if the Government did not
do so, he would, when the second reading of the Sunday
Trading Bill was brought forward, move that it be read a
second time that day six months.
The Mutiny Bill and the Marine Mutiny Bill passed
through committee.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took tho chair at four o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The following bills were reaTaThirdtine and passed :
Arnbergate, Nottingham, and Boston and Easters Junction
Railway and Canal Company ; Bourton-on-the-Water
Railway; Buckley and Connah's Quay (Flintshire) Railway;
Hinckley and Leicester Railway, London and North-
Western Railway (No. 2), Manchester and Buxton Road,
Manchester Corporation Water, Manchester Improvement,
Scottish Drainage and Improvement Company, and Sir-
howy Tramroae.

putting an end to, or at least of materially mitigating, the
hardships now entailed on Irish born poor, by their remloval
to Ireland by the parochial authorities of 'England, Wales,
and Scotland ?
Mr. CARDWELL said that the evils of the present sys-
tem were universally admitted, and the Poor-law Board
had taken steps to redress them, but without success. It
was unnecessary for him to state what these steps were, but
he begged to inform the hon, member that the Poor-law
Board intended to appoint a committee to inquire into this
subject, and would adopt the necessary measures as soon as
they were in possession of the report of that committee.
MAGISTERIAL APPOINTMENT IN AUSTRALIA.
Mr. HOPE asked the Secretary for the Colonies whether
he was in possession of any information bearing on a state-
ment which had been made that an electioneering agent
had been appointed a justice of peace in one of the Austra-
lian colonies, he being at the time, and having continued
after his appointment, to be a hired servant, in the employ-
ment of a resident in the district for which he had been
appointed such justice.
Mr. C. FO RTE SC UE said he heard nothing on the
subject officially.
DIPLOMATIC ESTABLISHMENTS IN
FLORENCE.
Lord n. LENNOX asked the Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs what steps it was his intention to take with
regard to breaking up the diplomatic establishments now
existing in Florence ? also, whether he intended any, and
what, change in the position of the Queen's representative
at the Sardinian Court in consequence of the recent aggran-
disement of that State?
Lord J. RUSSELL said with respect to the first part of
the question he had advised her Majesty's Government to
abolish the diplomatic establishment at Florence altoge•
ther, and measures were being adopted for that purpose.
With regard to the next question, on the annexation of
Piedmont, he had raised the mission at Sardinia to the
first class, and he did not know that any other step was
necessary in reference to this matter.
CONSOLIDATED FUND (£850,000) BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
WAYg. AND MEANS.---REPORT.
THE ANNEXATION OF SAVOY.
Mr. LAING brought up the report of the Committee of
Ways and Means.
Upon the first resolution,
Mr. HORSMAN said,—l wish to avail myself of this
opportunity to make some remarks upon the foreign policy
of the country, especially as to the position in which this
house stands in discussing our relations with other Powers,
both towards our Ministry at home and foreign Powers
abroad. In doing this I shall not go prospectively into ques-
tions which are now the subject of negotiation, but shall
endeavour rather to vindicate the rights and pri-
vileges of the house as to the present than revive
unnecessarily questions of the past. When Parlia-
ment met at the beginning of the session it was
well known that various questions, no: of nego-
tiation only but of diplomatic controversy, were pending
between the Governments of England and France—ques-
tions respecting Egypt, respecting Spain and Morocco, and
respecting China. No one can say that the Government
has been hampered by any interference on the part of this
house in connexion with any of those matters. It was well
known that there had been a controversy of so serious a
nature on the subject of the Suez Canal that at one time.
judging from the information given by the authorised
French journals, it had given rise to very considerable em-
barrassment on the part of the English Cabinet. But it
was stated that the Emperor of the French, wishing to put
an end to this state of things, had Postponed the question to
a more convenient time. Although, however, we knew that
such a postponement must sow the seeds of future embar-
rassment to this country, not one word of information has
been laid upon the table by her Majesty's Ministers as to
the correspondence between the two Governments, and not
one question has been asked in this house concerning it.
After that the war between Spain and Morocco excited at-
tention. We know that in the first instance the English
Cabinet took a very high tone with Spain. The French
Cabinet took an equally high tone on the other side in sup-
port.of Spain, and we were again told by the official organs ,
of the French Emperor that there had been what in cliplo •
matic language is called an animated conversation between
the First Minister of England and the French Ambassador
upon this subject, which ended in the French Ambassador
politely informing the English Minister that the Emperor
was not to be diverted by the representations of this
Government from the course on which he had already
determined. Then we were informed by her Majesty
in the Speech from the Throne that efforts had been made
to mediate between Spain and Morocco, and papers on the
subject were promised, but that promise has not yet been
fulfilled, and not one question has been asked. (Hear.)
Again, various difficulties occurs ed with the French
Government: as to the joint expedition to China. The
official organs of the French Government stated that it was
the determination of France not to assist England in China
unless England would assist France out of her difficulties
in Italy. The joint expedition, however, was finally ar-
ranged, and many persons believe it to be a great error and
a source of much difficulty in the future. (Hear, hear.)
Not a line of the correspondence on this subject, again, has
been laid upon the table, nor has a question been asked of
the Government. I state these facts to show that there has
been no desire on the part of the house to embarrass the
Government, or in any way to fetter their free action.
(Hear, hear.) When, therefore, upon the question of Savoy
greater anxiety was displayed, we had a right to expect
credit from the Government and from the public for inter-
fering there only because it was a matter of great urgency,
in which we thought that the functions of diplomacy were
about being exhausted, and that the interposition of Par-
liament was absolutely necessary in order to avert conse-
quences which the diplomacy of the Government had been
too weak to prevent. (Hear, hear.) As to Savoy, I wish to
call the attention of the house to the points which have
been brought more immediately before us in the course of
the present session. At the close of the last session it may
be remembered the Foreign Secretary stated that the Em-
peror of the French in making peace had voluntarily ab-
jured all ideas of anything like territorial aggrandisement
—(cheers)—and he remarked very frankly and in a very fair
spirit towards the Emperor that he thought it right to make
the statement, because rumours of an entirely opposite cha-
racter had been propagated. The house separated with that
assurance. At the beginning of the present session these
rumours wore again revived, questions were asked as to
their truth, and the answer given was that no official in-
formation had been received on the subject. There then
appeared no belief on the part of the Government in the
Existence of such a report, and for the moment the house
was satisfied ; but immediately afterwards the organs
of the French Government published en open and
avowed declaration of the determination of France to annex
Savoy. Again were the Government interrogated, and
again the answer was that, no doubt, France had indicated a
desire to annex Savoy, but that Sardinia had determined
not to assent. Tho house was again satisfied for the mo-
ment ; but shortly afterwards the hon. member (Mr. King-
lake), supported by the hon. baronet (Sir. R. Peel), showed
that they were in possession of' precise and accurate infor-
mation that Sardinia had agreed to cede Savoy, and asked
whether the Government had any information. The answer
was, that that information had been received, but it was
coupled with the agreeable assurance from the Emperor that
nothing would be done without asking the consent of the
population, and abiding entirely by their decision. (Cheers.)
On a subsequent occasion the hon. member and the hon.
baronet. said they had reason to believe that a treaty be-
tween Sardiniaand France was on the point of being signed
by which Savoy was to be ceded without the consent of the
population. Again they received for answer that this was
quite true, but there was comfort still, because the Govern-
ment had obtained from the Emperor the gratifying assur-
ance that the question should be submitted to the Powers
of Europe, and that nothing should be done without their
assent—(cheers) ;—and it was added that if the house,
which had so far shown forbearance to the Ministry, would
only continue to exhibit that forbearance, and would place
in them the same confidence which the Government re-
posed in the Emperor, Savoy might still be saved. (Cheers.)
This was received with greater pleasure and gratification,
and with more cheering from the benches behind the Minis-
try than were bestowed on any previous announcement,
whereupon the First Minister was so elated by the enthu-
siasm displayed that he relapsed into high encomiums upon
the Emperor, reminding the house of his Majesty's first de-
claration that the Empire was Peace, going out of his way
to assert that nothing which had occurred in the invasion
of Italy was at variance with this deelaration,
and expressing also his opinion that the invasion
of Italy was a noble enterprise. The house rested
upon that assurance; but a few days afterwards the hon.
member (Mr. Kinglake) got information of a still more
precise and alarming character, which was, that not only
was the annexation determined on, but that Savoy
deputies were actually on their way to Paris to do homage
to the Emperor. (Hear, and laughter.) The hon. gen-
tleman showed me his telegram, and did me the honour to
consult me whether, considering the impatience—and, I may
say, the intolerance—which had been shown by a part of
the house, he should be justified in again intruding himself
upon its attention. My opinion was, that the statement which
ho had to make was so serious a one that it was his duty
again to bring it under the notice of the Government. He
accordingly did so, and with what result ? A despatch was
gravely read, announcing, not only that the annexation of
Savoy was determined on, but that the assent of the great
Powers of Europe was not to be required—(cheers)—and the
noble lord, on the impulse of the moment, speaking as he
did under great emotion, told us that as soon as ho had
written an answer to that despatch, and her Majesty's ap-
proval had been obtained thereto, it would be laid on the
table. That despatch has been written—it has been trans-
mitted—but when we ask the noble lord to let us see it, we
are told that the Cabinet does concur in the fulfilment of the
pledge which he gave, and that despatch has not been pro-
duced. I must say, that this is to me only another indica-
tion that the spirit of the noble lord is not the spirit that
guides the councils and rules the foreign policy of this coun-
try. (Hear.) What is the reason that is now given for the

. -
non-production of that despatch ? We are told it would
subject the Government to hostile criticisms. But any'cri-
ticism that might follow the despatch would naturally fol-
low from its character and spirit. (Hear.) If it be a de-
spatch in harmony with English sentiments and feelings,
no criticism need be feared, and the very fact of its being
kept from our sight in order to shun criticism is not to my
mind at all favourable to that despatch. (Hear.) But, while
we are not allowed to learn the nature of the despatch from
our own Government, a description of it—but, I hope, not
a true one—has been given to the world'in the journals of
France. (Hear.) The character given of it is exactly that
which the enemies of the Government abroad, and those
who wish to make a tool of our Government, would give ;
but it is a protest couched in friendly terms. (Hear, and a
laugh.) M. Theuvenel wrote a despatch, but he did not
fear criticism, and why ? Because the Emperor of the
French knew that, by the publication of his despatch, he
would produce a great effect upon Europe--that he would
depress Germany—he would (or at least he hoped he
would) dispirit Switzerland—he would cow Savoy, and
coerce Sardinia. But while the people of Europe are look-
ing for the counteracting despatch from thiscountry stating
what is the spirit and policy of England, we are told that
that despatch is to be kept back for fear the English publie
might indulge in disagreeable criticisms. (Hear.) Now,
there is one indication, and I hope the only one, of a plea
which is' put forward in some quarters, that the action of
the French Government has been precipitated by the dis-
cussions in this house. I can imagine how that might be
in one case. I can imagine the Emperor saying to his
Council, f' AS long as the House of Commons is weak and
docile, neglecting its own interests, choosing to leave this
question entirely in the hands of their Governinent, we
may proceed at our leisure, because they will do the work
as well as ourselves." (Hear.) " But," ho may say, " I
see notices of motions by independent members of the house
which, if carried, may be very embarrassing to the plan we
are pursuing. It may rouse Germany, may inspirit
Switzerland, may encourage Savoy, and may thwart and
discourage the policy of France, and therefore it is for our
interest to move, rapidly, and to anticipate events which
might be very inconvenient for us." I hold that the
rule which ought to guide this house towards the Go-
vernment in relation to its foreign negotiations is a very
simple one, and one that cannot be mistaken, and I hope
the house will lay down some rule for itself by which it
will vindicate the high privilege it enjoys of free speech
concerning the Government at home and Governments
abroad. The rule I take to be this—when complications
arise and danger threatens, it is right to leave unfettered the
course of the Government, and generously to conclude that
the threatened evils may not bo leased, and that the Go-
vernment may be able to avert the threatened danger. But
it is a different thing when the opposing Power is not diplo-
matizing merely, but is acting. (Hear, hear.) When that
occurs the point for Parliamentary interference has passed
by. This question of the annexation of Savoy has passed
through a succession of phases, each of which has been of
itself an act, and from the first disavowal of the design to
the last apparent accomplishment of it, the artifices, the
frauds of diplomacy, have one by one been superseded by
more effective action. The Emperor has made a speech
avowing the accomplishment of that design, the Ziinister
has written despatches to Europe in the same spirit, troops
have been marched to Savoy, ships of war have appeared off
Nice, and the event is actually accomplishing at the very
moment when her Majesty's Government think they are
still negotiating about it, and ask us still to forbear, to have
that confidence in them which they had in the Emperor of
France—(hear, hear)—and even at the eleventh hour Savoy
might be saved.. I must say, recollecting what occurred last
session as to the relations between this house and the Go-
vernment, that, contrasting the course taken by the hon.
member for Bridgwater with that pursued by the Govern-
ment, the contrast is as favourable to the one as it is unfa-
vourable to the other. The accuracy of my hon. friend, his
early information, his predictions of danger to be appre-
hended, the consequences which he said might follow, but
whicla.might be averted, the warnings he gave of events that
hava since occurred, combined with the earnestness and
moderation of his statements, all, I think, contrast most
favourably with the conduct of the Government—their
apparent ignorance, their reluctance to give information,
their evasion of discussion, their blindness to events that
are happening, and of which they have been warned.
(Hear, hear.) I think my hon. friend is, for the past, en-
titled to the thanks of the house, and, for the future, to its
confidence, and support ; but our experience makes it im-
perative upon us to watch vigilantly every single move-
ment of the Government, and to inquire into every act of
theirs in these negotiations, in which lam bound to say
neither in courage nor in duplicity can they rival their
imperial ally. (Hear.) So far as regards our relations with
the Government at home ; but there is another question.
What is to be the limit of our privilege of free speech in this
house (hear, hear), in criticizing the policy and the acts of
Governments abroad ? In the course of last session, when
I had occasion to enter at great length into the question of
our relations with France upon the subject of our national
defences, I laid down a rule which I have always observed
when discussing the policy and acts of the Emperor of the
French. I said then that the Emperor is the chosen of the
French people; they trust him, they admire him, they
obey him, they think him a great benefactor to them, and,
from a From& point of view, ha is entitled to their grati..
tude and respect, and, as far as his acts relate to the internal
government of France, we • have no business to make any
remarks. (Hear, hear.) But I said, as to his external
policy, it was the duty of this house never to take off its
eyes from that policy. I described that policy as one of
war, aggrandisement, and aggression. (Hear, hear.) Two
of these have been already fulfilled—the aggression has
taken place, the aggrandisement ;s in course of accomplish-
ment, and who can say how distant is the war? (Hear.)
During the administration of the noble viscount, and under
the very peculiar, and I might say unprecedented, existing
relations between him and the French Emperor, there has
been a new doctrine laid down—that we must frame our
speeches, not according to what we consider to be for thein-
terest of England, but according to what may not be hurtful
to the feelings of the Emperor. That is a doctrine which I
hope this house will at once and for ever repudiate and set at
rest. (Hear, hear.) As to the Emperor, his views, and our
manner of discussing them, I think our course is clear. As
long as the Emperor refrained from action, I think it was
right and reasonable to give him credit for honourable
motives, but when it is notorious to all the world, except to
the members of the. Cabinet, that he is proceeding to
the accomplishment "of his designs, then I say it
would be not merely folly but hypocrisy on our parts
if we were not to charaeterise as it deserves the
policy he has pursued. Silence in such a ease implies indif-
ference, if not worse—our complicity. Can it be said for a
moment that because we are characterising, as we believe it
deserves, the policy of the Emperor of the French, that we
are doing that which is irritating? I say we are acting in
self-defence. It is the only way to bring him before the
only tribunal which he dreads. He cannot complain that in
the Parliament of England his policy is discussed, and the
Ministers of England should be the first to vindicate the
right of free speech which is the highest privilege we can
possess, and with which we will never part. (Hear, heir.)
At this time any attempt to suppress the expression of opi-
nion here, when Ministers cannot defend facts, would re-
duce us to a system of weakness, and justify the imputation
that is made abroad against us of unworthy sycophancy;
and the more adulation is heaped upon the Emperor of the
French from that (the Ministerial) bench, the more neces-
sary it is that truth should be heard from other quarters.
(Hear.) It is for that reason that I vindicate in this assem-
bly the right of free speech, which there has been an undue
attempt to fetter, and that in the exercise of my privilege as
a member of this house I denounce the recent policy of the
Emperor of the French in Italy as a policy of deceit. (Cries
of " Hear, hear.") I say that he has deceived the English
Ministers, and has made them his tools for deceiving the
English Parliament. (Cheers.) I say that he has treated
them with a duplicity which they had not the candour to
avow, and with a contempt which they had not the spirit to
resent. (Renewed cheers.) And, speaking of his proceedings
in Savoy and Sardinia, and the manner in which he has an-
nounced his policy to Europe, I say he has added insolence
to aggression, and perfidy to injustice. (Cheers.) Am Ito
bo rebuked from that bench (pointing to the Treasury bench)
for this language P Whypl look around that bench, and I
see such an array of Ministers as never sat there before, so
associated with parliamentary censures and of " horrible
and heartrending" disasters. (Cheers.) In 1855 there
was a Cabinet occupying that bench apparently stronger
than the present, and with quite as reliable a
majority, though I don't think it was quite so intolerant of
all who differed from them as the majority which sits be-
hind them; but in one night a storm of indignation arose,
and the Cabinet, by an unprecedented majority, ceased to
exist. In 1858 the noble viscount was at the head of a still
stronger Cabinet, but it was stated openly that he had
truckled to France, and because he had done so he was cen-
sured, and his Cabinet was swept away. And now I would
warn those who would attempt to fetter the freedom of
speech in this house, that the spirit which on two occasions
came to the rescue and vindicated the honour and interests
of nations is still alive, and it may inflict a third penalty as
sudden and more severe than any which has preceded it.
(Cheers.)
Lord J. RUSSELL, who on rising was received with
cheers, said—The right hon. gentleman has raised up a great
many spectres, with which he has fought much more than
he has combated with any reality that exists. (A laugh.)
First of all he supposes that we have been continually com-
plaining of the freedom of speech in this house, and endea-
vouring to suppress it. That is an entire imagination on
the part of the right hon. gentleman--(cheers)—and I think
he has given us to-night a tolerable specimen of the man-
ner in which the freedom of speech may be exercised, whe-
theras to Ministers at home or Sovereigns abroad. (Cheers.)
The right hon. gentleman, indeed, has imagined that we
have been continually rebuking the house for the freedom
with which they speak of foreign affairs. I don't think that
we have so presumed with regard to the freedom of speech
in this house. I think, on the contrary, with regard to
gentlemen opposite, we have every reason to be satisfied
with the forbearance that has been shown, and with the
unwillingness they have displayed to enter upon any
general discussion of foreign affairs, or, at all events;
to impede the action of negotiations that 'nigh
be actually pending. (Hear, hear.) I thought at one
time the language of the hon. gentleman
the member
and
member
for Horsham unbecoming the position
he
hadsds hold ,
but on a
the responsibility that must attach to his l
subsequent occasion the hon. gentlemanmade
of good a'speech full
of moderation and, if he will allow
meto
fault say,with him. But
in-
tention, and I have no reason to sad
I must say that, as the right hon. gentleman the member
warning and advice, and so
for Stroud has given us much warning
to give hint one
much objurgation, I may P
piece of advice—that,
indisposition seeing there is on the other side of
the housaan
to enter upon any violent
course
of opposition, or any
factious misrepresentation, I wonder
that he does not himself take his place on the front seat of
-,(Mi (Ministerial nistera cheers)
the Opp:wigs* bench —and endeavour
to show. to the shame of the right hon. gentlemen opposite
what faction can effect. (Renewed cheers.) The right hon.
gentleman has certainly imagined a good many anecdotes
with which I was perfectly unacquainted. He tells us with
respect to Morocco that we had intended to lay the papers