The Sun.
London, England, 1860-02-08 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, IyEDNESDAT EVENING, FEBRUARY 8, P6O.

calculated to frustrate the ohject which we all have in
view in this matter. (Hear, hear.) Hoping that these
questions are likely to receive a peaceable solution, I depre-
cate such language as he has used in reference to some of
the countries concerned. I appeal to him whether he was
justified in using one phrase—namely, in calling upon Sar-
dinia to oppose not merely with her moral influence, but
with her physical power the measure now under discussion.
I apprehend that observation could only have reference to
war ; and I say it would net be just or honourable to call
on Sardinia to enter on a war with this object unless we
were fully prepared to assist Sardinia in that object. My
noble friend followed two noble lords who have spoken
upon this question in a different tone, although they have
had the same object as he had. I can assure your lordships
that while listening to the speech of the noble marquis, and
still more to that of the noble earl (Grey), that Government
have not felt any objection to the discussion of this subject
by independent peers, and if we resist the motion, it is
merely because we are convinced that its adoption would,
instead of assisting the efforts of Government. materially
tend to thwart them, although not to the same extent as
speeches such as that of the noble earl who spoke last will
do. I was distressed to hear one expression that fell from the
noble earl, that he had to complain of the mild language
held upon this subject by my noble friend the President of
the Council and the noble lord the Secretary for Foreign
Affairs. If the noble earl had said that he deprecated, not
the mild language of her Majesty's Ministers, but their
weak conduct, I could have felt that he had indeed some-
thing to complain of. But I apprehend it is the conduct of
wise and good Ministers net to indulge in violent language,
but to express themselves in mild and respectful terms when
addressing other Powers, to use such language as they would
desire to have held towards them by foreign Governments ;
and while offering firm remonstrances, to do so in terms
respectful and considerate towards the Government to which
they were addressed. (Hear, hear.) lam quite sure that
if the language of her Majesty's Ministers had at all ap-
proached or resembled that we have just heard, one of two
events would have happened—a war or the annexation,
which we all deprecate, would have been carried out. We
know, and must remember, that all that is said here is read
across the water, and we should bear in mind what we felt
under similar circumstances. Have we forgotten the knit
anger that was felt when men, far less responsible to the
Government, filling less important positions than members
of the Legislature, held such violent language with regard to
us how great was our indignation, and that the country was
almost ready to take up arms to avenge itself? (Hear.) Ide
deprecate language which tends to cause irritation on the
other side of the Channel, and I feel certain that if the
matter be left in the hands of the Government, and they are
allowed to carry on the negotiation in a firm but respectful
and conciliatory spirit, we have a good prospect of attain-
ing our object. But if noble peers came forward to support
the Government by violent speeches, there can be little
doubt that the annexation which we all deprecate will be
carried out. The noble earl who spoke previously put the
question of English interests upon a proper basis, not as a
separate interest, but a European one, in which England
was jointly concerned with other Powers, and following out
the principle, I believe your lordships cannot doubt that the
Government has from the first done all in its power by re-
presentations, bgth to France and Sardinia, to prevent that
which we al deprecate, and, if permitted, will continue to
do so in the same spirit which has hitherto guided it. (Hear.)
Lord BROUGHAM.—I wish to make the few observa-
tions which I have to offer to your lordships before the
noble earl near me (Earl Derby) rises to address you, be-
cause of the part I have always taken in all questions relat-
ing to Italy. In the first place, allow me to say I entirely
appreve of, and .was very much gratified by the statement
of the noble earl the President of the Council. I entirely
object, as my noble friend does, to what is called the an-
nexation of Savoy and Nice to the French empire—(hear,
hear)—and upon the grounds stated by my noble friend.
Not, indeed, as has been justly observed by the noble earl
opposite (Grey), on account of the comparatively trifling
addition, either territorial or strategical, which such
annexation would give to the French empire, but be-
cauSe it would be a departure from the settlement of
Europe. (Hear, hear.) There are consequences
which might flow from such an act which, without any un-
reasonable alarm, every man ought to consider. If
this annexation should take place after all the declarations
made by the French Government of the abstinence which
was to bo its guiding principle in the Italian war, where is
it to stop ? Where is what is called the principle of na-
tionality, the principle of boundaries, to stop ? What will
become of the boundary of the Rhine ? (Hear, hear.) I
need not go further, but is there any security, if this anne-
xation should take place, against any further alteration or
distribution of power in Germany as well as on the Rhine.
(Hear, hear.) But we are all of the same opinion here, and
we only differ as to our mode of dealing with this motion.
I certainly de agree with my noble friend (the Earl of
Shaftesbury) in one principle he enunciated. I regret the
language he used, the terms he used towards Sardinia, not
of vituperation, but of encouragement to go to war in order
to prevent the annexation. I agree, however, with the
noble earl that there can be nothing more atrocious than
the handing over one country and its people to another ; or,
as he says, handing over a people enjoying free institutions
to a country deprived of all such institutions. The most
atrocious act of modern times was the partition of Poland.
But Igo still further. I object to handing over one country
to another even if not against the wishes of its inhabitants.
While I admit that nothing can be more plain, than the
principle we laid down on the first night of the session—
that the Italians should be allowed to manage their own of
fairs and to settle their own government without any foreign:
interference, still, it must be remembered that interferences:
nut confined to intervention by force of arms, it may be by
negotiation. I agree that the people of those States which
have changed their rulers should be permitted to make their
arrangements for their future government. But the prin-
ciple of non-intervention stops when a people, even it
unanimously desirous to change,—and in the present in-
stance some declare the Savoyards desire the annexation to
France, while others say they oppose it—if that change
gives the other nations of Europe reason to apprehend an
alteration of the balance of power. This is perfectly con-
sistent with the great principle of allowing the indepen-
dence of Italy, and all freedom in the arrangement of their
own internal affairs without foreign interference. Now,
however, to come to the motion before us. The opinion of
this house is against the annexation, but if the Govern-
ment object to the motion I should deprecate a division,
because, even if it were carried, it might appear that there
was a difference of opinion upon the main question. Then
suppose the motion of my noble friend is carried unani-
mously. I concur with the noble duke opposite (Newcas-
tle) that this also would be:inauspicious, that it would tend
very much to obstruct the friendly communications and
shake the friendly feeling between this country and France.
And if it is rejected it might go forth that the adversaries
of the Government of the Emperor had been defeated. In
any case the motion is calculated to disturb the good un-
derstanding between the two countries, and interfere with
arrangements that are most important to the prospects o
peace, and I therefore advise the noble marquis not to pros
that motion to a division.
The Earl of DERBY said—l do not rise for the purpose o
continuing to any length the present debate, or rather wile,
has been not so much a debate as a conversation of the ut
most importance. With regard to the main principle in.
volved in the motion of the noble marquis, there has no
been, so far as I have observed, the slightest difference o
opinion expressed by any one member of this house. Un•

doubtedly, various noble lords have expressed with more or
less force the views they entertain of the supposed policy
or scheme for the annexation of Savoy to France. The
noble earl (Shaftesbury), who always speaks with consider-
able power, in alluding to this annexation, appeared to
think that the measure has been finally determined on. The
noble duke who has just sat down intimates that the policy
of annexation is still undecided ; and I felt some disappoint._
ment that in the address of the noble earl the President of
the Council, while he described the advice—the undoubtedly
friendly advice—her Majesty's Government has tendered to
the G overnment of France, he did not add that the advice
so tendered has been finally and conclusively satisfactory,
and that there is no reason for apprehending that the project,
and
ols
likely
tef
lrytyaheurtegyo withhdbfatoenrgc iebdangerous
se carriedtv
the
Clieondnat
dangerous
ned eqgffueerecontuce.ssmischiefsTtoahiset concerneduoonbfaoslbtltilhteueetaffairsianr
hFa French
in
eo
pointed
ihtinat
tf, is g
Italy,
for
Italian influence in the northern provinces, especially if the
power of France is increased by the cession to it:of the
province of Savoy—a measure that will leave open to France
the gate of Italy. When the late Government was using its
utmost endeavours to persuade the several Powers not to
enter into that unhappy war, it especially pointed out the
consequences that Sardinia and Savoy would have to:apP re-
bend from the outbreak of hostilities. These conse-
quences are now, perhaps, more clearly seen than they
were at that time ; and, however difficult it may be to effect
it, I hope that the unanimous opinion of Europe, firmly
and temperately expressed, may succeed in preventing a
measure that can only lead to interminable complications
or consequences yet more dangerous. In the course of
this debate I think there has been much said that must be
gratifying to her Majesty's Government. It would incur
no disadvantage from the adoption of the motion; if it is
rejected it will not be on a question of principle on the part
of the Government, or even of a difference of opinion on the
subject. If the point had been whether the ground of the
motion of the noble marquis rested on sound international
law, then the introduction of the motion might have in it
something dangerous, whatever is the opinion of her Ma-
jesty's Government, But, even making all allowance for
sanguine language, her Majesty's Government will be t
among the first to admit thatthe present discussion has ex- t

hibit,d a strong and unanimous feeling on the part of every
member of the British House of Peers, that must be a

strong element in the preservation of the peace of Europe
and the continuance of a good understanding with that
Power whose conduct has been most strongly commented

°n
dangers i lords,thyat will a it is not
from h
t necessarye n
discusstaenen of Savoy
atio the evils and
to
France. They are admitted by all parties; one noble lord
has gone beyond another in the earnestness with which he
has pointed them out. But let me express to all concerned
any conviction that the two parties who will suffer most in
ehlractcr and honour by such an annexation will be the two
Powers between whom the supposed compact has been
made. (Rear, he l'.) It has already been pointed out that,
by consenting to such an act the French Emperor will con-
tradict the liberal sentiments he uttcrod at Milan, and belie
the whole course ho has pursued siuce he ascended the
throne of France. On every occasion he has studiously de-
clared, and his actions have never yet been in contradiction
to it, that whatever he might think, that whatever France
might think, of the treaties of 1815,, ho did not intend
to Infringe them, but recognize themas part of the in-
ternational law of Europe. From that conduct the
French Emperor has never swerved. -What course he
might have pursued, had not Austria precipitated the
war in Italy, it is now impossible to say ; how far he
might have been involved with Sardinia it is impos-
sible to discuss. But the precipitation of Austria, after the
declaration of the Emperor that, as long as she continued

within her own dominions, he was determined to give no
material assistance to Sardinia, commenced the war, and
from that moment, whatever the provocation she received,
she precluded herself from calling on Europe to maintain her
territorial rights as fixed by the treaties of 1815. But, if any
Power will suffer more than another, more even than France,
and incur an indelible disgrace by giving up Savoy, tha t
Power is Sardinia. (Hear, hear.) She claimed to be the
champion and vindicator of the liberty of Italy; she always
declared she looked forward to no territorial aggrandise-
ment as a consequence of war. The noble earl (Granville)
has admitted that previous to the war there wart some ne-
gotiation between France and Sardinia on the subject of a
possible annexation of Savoy on certain conditions or con-
tingencies. Now, if such negotiations ever did take place,
I confess it is difficult to give credit to the declaration that
Sardinia engaged in the war without any previous idea of
an increase of territory. You are aware, my lords, that by
a special treaty—the treaty of Turin—to the provisions of
which, I believe, the assent of the other Powers of Europe
was obtained, Switzerland and Piedmont reciprocally bound
themselves under no circumstances and upon no conditions
to cede to any other Power the territory in question, and
Piedmont, having accepted that territory, not simply by
way of exchange or with the object of promoting the peace
of Europe, but by way of affording mutual security as be-
tween Switzerland and herself, would, in my opinion, be
guilty not only of an interference with the'general law of
Europe, but of a violation of a clear and well-defined con-
tract if she were to make over to another State
that province, the maintenance of whose indepen-
dence and neutrality is the very key-stone of
the treaty to which I allude. (Hear, hear.) lam
not, however, prepared to attribute to Sardinia conduct at
once so discreditable and inconsistent with the professions
she has made. I trust, on the contrary, that she will have
the firmness to say to France—" This is a question with
respect to which I am unable to comply with your wishes.
I am bound not alone by the general law of Europe and the
treaties of 1815, but by a specific engagement into which I
have entered with Switzerland, never to yield up to a third
Power this particular territory." Could France, my lords,
in opposition to such a plea as that, by force and without
the consent of Piedmont, take possession of Savoy ? (Hear.)
If she did seize upon that province must it not be either by
resorting to an act of the most unscrupulous violence—an
act of which I am far from suspecting she would be guilty,
or as the result of the base and unprincipled connivance of
the King of Sardinia, who would thus be despoiling his
dominions of that portion of them which furnishes his best
troops to his army and the most loyal and attached subjects
to his throne? (Cheers.) I donot, indeed, think my lords
that the question is one in dealing with which it becomes
his country to use the language of menace.. I am never-
theless of opinion that it does befit England, as one of the
great Powers of Europe, and by the free expression of the
sentiments of this, the highest assembly of a free nation, to
have it placed upon record that the unanimous verdictof the
members of that assembly is, that such conduct on the part
of France as I have described would be inconsistent with
the due maintenance of the treaties of 1815—(cheers)—
that they deem it important, even in the interests of France
herself, that she should do nothing to shake that confidence
which it is so desirable should be established throughout
Europe and without the establishment of which
no good security for the permanent peace the
Continent can be afforded. (Hear, hear.) It it not,
my lords, the armed force of France, great as that
doubtedly is—it is not the important fact that the great re-
sources of that great country are wielded by one absolute
and despotic authority—it is not those combined circum-
stances which create apprehension. No, it is this which
causes alarm—that she has never yet been able to succeed
in inspiring Europe with perfect confidence in the steadi-
ness of her policy, or in the pacific, character of her inten-
tions. (Hear, hear.) Let her, then, show but the slightest
desire to annex to her own a territory, small in extent but
great in strategic impertance.—(hear, hear)—let her but ex-
hibit the smallest indication, now that she has so far suc-
ceeded in expelling Austrian influence from Italy, to per-
petuate her own domination in that country by means of
large standing armies—maintained I know net for what
purpose—and I speak not now of the French garrison at
?Rome—let her, in short, but evince the most trifling dispo-
sition to transfer to herself the authority which Sardinia at
present possesses over Savoy, thus securing for herself a
passage into Italy, and obtaining a resting-place whence
her armies may overrun the territories of an ally whose do-
minions she has been the means of aggrandising, but under
such circumstances of aggrandising, I would say, to the
danger of that ally—let France, I repeat, my lords, but pur-
sue such a course of policy as that, and, then, indeed, that
confidence which is a plant of slow growth, especially among
nations, can hardly be expected to be re-established between
the powerful French empire and the rest of Europe, which
is looking on and watching her movements, in an attitude of
anxious and suspicious hostility. (Cheers.) I must, at the
same time, observe my lords, that a great opportunity is
now afforded to the Emperor of the French to maintain un-
impaired his character for scrupulous adherence to the
principles of good faith. (Hear, hear.) Let him, then, de-
clare that he concurs with her Majesty's Government
in the view which they take of the evils which would be
likely to flow from any infraction of those territorial limits
which have been so long established, and that he desires
the maintenance of the balance of power and the peace if
Europe. (Hear) Let him prove to the world that he went
to war—as he declared it to be his intention to de—for the
liberation of Italy from foreign control, and not with the
view to wield himself that power the exercise of which he
condemned in another ; let him show that he respects Eng-
land, and that right of self-government and independent
action which we freelyrecognised in the case of that mighty
empire over which he reigns by the choice of its people:;
let him make it plain to Europe that neither upon this side
of the Rhine nor the Alps is he to be tempted by any vain
idea as to-what may seem to him the natural boundaries of
France to depart from those joint principles which are far
more patent than any natural limits whatsoever—(cheers)
—let him frankly and avowedly take that course, not under
menace, for menace-no nation would venture to offer him ;
but' acting on the friendly representations of a country with
which it is his boast that he is on terms of close intimacy
and alliance, whose policy he declares to be identical with
his own, and with which he does not hesitate to announce
that he acts hand in hand and side by side. (Cheers.) Let
him, my lords, I repeat, pursue that course; let him pro-
claim to the World that no Violation of the existing boun-
daries of Europe is to be apprehended at his hands, and that
he has given England the most solemn assurance that, in
common with her, he will proceed upon the principle of ab-
solute and entire non-interference with the affairs of other
countries. (Hear, hear.) If he so acts, then indeed, my
lords, will he have nobly availed himself of the opportunity
which is now presented to him of reaping that best and
most priceless fruit of the victories which he has won—the
establishment over the minds of his fellow men of that
moral authority which, unlike his great military power, is
only to be attained by the observance of good faith, by scru-
pulous integrity, and by a strict adherence to tho principles
of justice and the rights of nations. (Loud cheers.)
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY, in offering an explana-
tion as to the policy which he had in the course of his
speech contended that this country and Sardinia ought to
pursue in reference to the question under the notice of the
house, expressed his regret that he should have used the
word " physical," to which the noble duke opposite (the
Duke of Newcastle) had alluded.
Lord STRATFORD DE REDCLIFFE said the re-
marks which had just fallen from the noble earl (the Earl
of Derby), who had spoken in terms so eloquent on the im-
portant subject under discussion, rendered him desirous to
address a few observations with respect to it to the house.
The noble earl had stated that every noble lord who had
taken part in the discussion had in reality given expression
to the same sentiments, modified although those sentiments
might be by the form in which they were conveyed. It had
so happened, however, that, with the exception of the
noble marquis by whom the debate had been opened, no
noble lord practically connected with the diplomatic service
had ventured to address the house upon a question which
in so eminent a degree came within the sphere of that depart-
ment. As one therefore, who had some experience in diplo-
matic affairs, he might perhaps be permitted to lay before
their lordships very briefly the views with respect to the
present motion which he entertained. He should, then,
in the first place, observe that he entirely concurred with
the noble earl opposite (Lord Derby) in the opinion that
it was for the interest of Europe at large that we should
enter our protest against the addition of Savoy to the
territories of the French Emperor, for it was impossible
with justice to say that France by obtaining possession
of that province and Nice would not be furnished with ad-
ditional power of extending her influence over Italy ; and
although it might be said that England had no special
interest in the latter country beyond that which related
to hor commerce, yet it was of the utmost import-
ance that foreign influence should not be employed
there in a manner prejudicial to us, especially if that
influence were to proceed from a quarter which
afforded indication of a readiness to pursue a policy unfa-
vourable to this country—a policy on which ho hoped the
present Emperor of the French would never act, although
it must be borne in mind that such had been the traditional
policy of the French nation from the earliest times. With
regard to the territorial transfer now said to be contem-
plated, in proportion as it might be inexpedient to hazard
the peace of this country and of Europe ley our opposition
to that transfer, so it was incumbent on Parliament at the
proper time to express its opinions on the subject, and thus
afford to the Government a support which would enable
them when the time came to act up to their declarations.
These declarations, though slot quite so strong and so em-
phatic as had just been heard from other parts of the house,
made it evident that the Government perceived the danger
to which this annexation might lead, and felt themselves
bound to take whatever measures could in prudence be sug-
gested to prevent it. It could not be denied, that in addi-
tion to the increased influence which would accrue to her in
Italy, France would derive from the acquisition of Savoy
and Nice advantages infinitely superior to those which we
had lately been accused of aiming at. What importance,
for example, was attached by some of our neighbours to
that miserable island at the entrance of the Red Sea, and
what irritation had been produced by our supposed desire
of acquiring it 1 The possession of Perim was, indeed, of
little importance as compared with the possession of Savoy
and Nice; but even these considerations, important as they
were, became comparatively trivial by the 'side of the ques-
tions of general policy which had just been so eloquently
commented upon by the noble earl (of Derby). It was in
this point of view that the strange and pernicious principles
which had lately been put forward across the Channel were
chiefly to be regarded. We had certainly no right to at-
tribute these principles to the constituted authorities of
France ; yet they bore about them some marks of recogni-
tion by the authorities, and could not, therefore, be di-
vested of importance. When their lordships remembered
these things, he could not help thinking that the mo-
tions of the noble marquis and the discussion which it
had evoked were such as to inspire the strongest feelings
if satisfaction ; and he must therefore add his testimony to
.hat of others as to the service rendered by the noble mar-
luis to this house and to the country by bringing the ques-
tion forward. (Hear.) In the debate which had taken
place he had heard nothing inconsistent with the language
which a great assembly like this was entitled and was, in-
deed, bound to use. (Hear.) It seemed to him that just in
werecountcrayllfedrelunpboenintog dpoluenvgeeryd tiheitnegwvedi,icelei
ye
which struck at the root of all international obligations
elpitixtipbogpieheeostalitpni aoreensvat aer
more
strong ght urgent duty on the part of Parliament to
he
opiniow when principles were enunciated
and of all international confidence. (Hear, hear.) On such
eprovince
aof e
etuhni st odueseel
earned_
of Pam
ne, eerlai
which)ne wistuetruoe
dny
operatesei te
twa e'
u c hi in
pptr iehnne
other countries,
an'll;*et
per-
haps, thereby be the means of checking designs which
'
twhoeu
courseld be n
ee
f thisc ear
debatey toop a
justpose evtertie tribute
ethhee
dhabzmannow at theaernd
paido to the
war. In
honour and the consistency of the great m
bheetad weeonf
tthhee
tFwroenecelennemtlipeiere.
wereA esefnaeer erns
etdhe ,tdhiiievetrit
breulteatiwonese
no doubt just and well-founded. But at the same time no
tehneereeehniadd beenh el p e
eobserving
n eteheat t d i
neu,rbi during h t
hte side,e l last te
ef ere years
speak,
of the direct and public transactions between the two coun-
tries, which had excited astonishment, combined with some
degree of distrust, not only here, but throughout Europe.
When these matters were brought before Parliament, and

WWII

opinions were frankly interchanged there respecting them,
he thought their lordships had a right to expect that in-
stead of being treated as causes of offelict or of quarrel by
other Powers, these opinions should, en the contrary, be
regarded as arising from a just sense of duty not only
towards cur own country, but towards Europe at large,
and from a sincere desire for the continuance of that peace
which was of so much importance to us and the whole
world. (Hear, hear.) This free expression of opinion
on all subjects affecting our foreign relations was not
only of value in preventing bloodshed, but in extending
also these great commercial interests which strengthened
the friendship of nations ; and he hoped that the present
discussion would so be regarded, and would net fail of that
happy effect. (Hear, hear.)
The Marquis of NORMANBY, in reply, after observing
upon the unanimity of feeling which had prevailed in the
house on the subject of the motion, said that he neverthe-
less thought the objects their lordships had in view would
be best attained by a withdrawal of the motion.
The motion was accordingly withdrawn, and their lord-
ships adjourned at half-past eight o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.
NEW MEMBER.

Mr. CARNEGIE took the oaths and his seat for Forfar, in
the room of Lord Duncan, now Earl of Camperdown.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The standing orders were declared to have been complied
with in the case of a large number of private bills.
The following bills were read a second time :—Epping
Railways (Ilford Lines, &c.), Hay Railway, Hereford,
Hay, and Brecon Railway, Horsham and Guildford Direct
Railway, Liskeard Water, North British and Peebles and
Jedburgh Railway Companies, North Eastern and New-
castle-upon-Tyne and Carlisle Railway Companies Amal-
gamation, Scottish Drainage and Improvement Company.
South Kensington Railway, Stockton and Darlington Rail-
way, Thames Tunnel Railway, and Wimbledon and Dork-
ing Railway.
Sir J. ELPHINSTONE moved that the proceedings on
the second reading of the Ness and Beauly Fisheries Bill
be null and void.—Agreed to.
PETITIONS.

Several petitions were presented, chiefly from the pro-
vinces, against the unconditional abolition of church-rates ;
against hostilities with China ; against the present increase
in the military and naval expenditure of the country; in
favour of national education and tenant-right in Ireland ;
in favour of the total abolition:of church•rates ; from the
shipowners of Montrose in favour of an inquiry relative to
the burdens affecting the shipping interest, &c.
CHURCH DISCIPLINE AMENDMENT BILL.

Mr. H. SEYMOUR said that he would postpone his
motion for leave to bring in this bill, which stood on th•
paper for this evening, till this day fortnight.

SAVINGS BANKS.

Mr. LAING moved for returns from each savings bank
in England and Wales, Scotland, and Ireland, containing,
in columns, the names of the officers, their respective sala-
ries, and other allowances, if any ; the amount of security
each gives ; the number of accounts remaining open ; the
total amount owing to depositors; the total amount invested
with the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National
Debt ; the rate of interest paid to depositors on the various
amounts of deposit, and the average rate of interest on all ao -
counts ; and the total amount of the separate surplus fund on
the 20th November, 1859 ' the rate per centum per annum
on the capital of the bank for the expenses of management ;
the annual number of receipts from depositors ; the annual
number of payments; the average amount of receipts; the
average amount of payments ; the number and amount of
annuities granted ; the annual expenses of management,
inclusive of all payments and salaries, for the year ended
the 20th day of November, 1859 ; also the year in which
business commenced in each bank, and the name of the day
or days and the number of hours in the week, on which
the banks are open for the deposit and withdrawal of moneys.
—Ordered.

CAPE OF GOOD HOPE.
Mr. A. MILLS moved an address for copier of extracts
of all correspondence which had taken place between the
Colonial-office and Governor Sir George Grey respecting
his recal from the Cape of Good Hope, and his subsequent
re-appointment to the government of that colony.—Ordered.
HOPS.
Mr. JOHN LOCKE moved for returns of the total
number of acres of land in the United Kingdom under the
cultivation of hops in the year 1859; distinguishing the
number of acres in each parish; and the number of pounds'
weight charged with duty in each collection; and the
number of pounds' weight charged with duty in each
parish : of the amount of duty charged on hops in
each collection of the growth of the year 1859 ; dis-
tinguishing the districts, and the old from the new duty in
each district ; showing the average amount of duty per acre
in each collection; of the quantity of British hops exported
from the United Kingdom to foreign countries, from the
Ist day of January to the 30th day of June, and from the
Ist day of July to the 31st day of December, 1859, respec
tively • distinguishing the countries to which the same
have 'been exported, and also the quantities to each
country, with the dates of the years in which the
hops were grown ; of the quantity of foreign
hops exported from the United Kingdom to
foreign countries, from the Ist day of January to the 30th
day of June, and from the Ist day of July to the 31st day
of December, 1859, respectively, distinguishing the coun-
tries to which the same have been exported, and also the
quantities to each country ; of the quantity of foreign hops
imported into the United Kingdom, from the let day of
January to the 30th day of June, and from the let day of
July to the 31st day of December, 1859, respectively, dis-
tinguishing the ports where imported and the countries
whence exported.—Agreed to.
QUEEN'S PRINTERS' PATENT.
Mr. BLACK asked the Secretary of State for the Home
Department if the patent of the Queen's printers for print-
ing Bibles and Acts of Parliament had been renewed ; and,
if so, what were the terms on which it had been renewed
And, it the patent had not been renewed, on what condi-
tions were Bibles and Acts of Parliament now printed ?
Sir G. C. LEWIS said that the committee on this subject
recommended the appointment during the present session
of another commission. With reference to the printing of
Bibles, the patent had been renewed during her Majesty's
pleasure ; and with regard to the public papers, an arrange-
ment had been made by which they would be printed at a
reduced rate.
THE COMMERCIAL TREATY WITH FRANCE.
In reply to Mr. S. FITZGERALD,
Lord J. RUSSELL said that, although the version of
the text of the commercial treaty with France which ap-
peared is some of the journals was partly correct, still it
was impossible to understand so complicated a question
without being in possession of the text of the treaty. It
was not the intention of Government to lay on the table the
treaty before Friday next.
THE ITALIAN QUESTION.

Lord C. HAMILTON asked the Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs, if it was true that Lord Cowley bad been
instructed to communicate to the French Government a
project for the definitive settlement of the Italian question ;
and, if so, whether he had any objection to communicate
the details of that project to the house_
Lord J. RUSSELL said that it was necessary, in order
to satisfy the hon. member, to enter into an account of what
had already taken place„with respect to the affairs of Italy.
At present I cannot produce the papers, because negotia-
tions are still pending. What has passed is this :—The
house is aware from her Majesty's speech that herMajosty's
Government were invited to take part in a conference or
congress respecting the affairs of Italy. At a certain period
when it was expected the congress was to meet, we received
intimation from the French Government that it was ad-
journed sine die, but that we should be informed if there was
any intention of its meeting hereafter. It was said that the
delay, or rather the entire postponement, of the congress
was owing to the publication of an anonymous pamphlet at
Paris. Be that as it may, her Majesty's Government felt
that it was a very serious thing that the Italians, who had
hitherto been waiting in expectation that Italian affairs
would be solved by the congress, should have no regular
Government and no apparent means of terminating the
condition of uncertainty in which they were placed. Her
Majesty's Government, therefore, made propositions to the
Governments of France and Austria, with a view to the de-
finitive solution of the Italian question. Those proposals
were contained in a despatch to Lord Cowley, elated the
14th of January. The first prorosal was that, as the rivalry
of France and Austria had led to great evils in Italy and
great danger to Europe, those two Powers should agree not
to interfere by force in the Italian Peninsula without
the consent of the five great Pewers. By the second
proposition it was proposed that the French troops should,
at a convenient time and with all proper precautions, with-
draw from Lombarday and Rome. By the third proposition
it was proposed that the Governments of Europe should
not interfere in the internal government of Venetia—that
. . . _

no proposition should be made to qualify the internal go-
yernment of Venetia by the Emperor of Austria. To these
three proposals the Government of France, with certain
modifications as to the time and season for withdrawing
their troops, gave their ready consent. Upon the fourth
proposition they begged time to consider, and time to com-
municate with the Government of Austria. The fourth
proposition was to the ,effect that the King of Sardinia
should he asked not to send any troops into Central Italy
until there should be, by a new election of the States and
provinces of Central Italy, a clear and unbiassed declaration
of their wishes with respect to their future government—
that if that wish should be in favour of annexation to Sar-

dinia, then the restriction to which it was proposed to ask
the King of Sardinia to submit should be removed, and no

objection made to his introducing troops into the provinces
• . _

of Central Italy—meaning, of course, those provinces which
have declared they will no longer be governed by their late
rulers. The French Government has acccordingly commu-

nicated with the Government of Austria upon that subject,
but no official communication of the decision of Austria has
yet been given. This very morning I received a despatch
saying that Count Rechberg promised to take the Emperor
of Austria's orders, but that he could not give an official
answer without receiving the. Emperor's instructions
and commands. With respect to ourselves, the Austrian
Government, on receiving the communication of the three
propositions to which they were asked to consent, made
objection that it was not in conformity with their views
and opinions as to the rights of sovereignty to make any
absolute engagements with regard to non-intervention.
With regard to the fourth proposition, although they could
not acknowledge the state of things in Central Italy, at
the same time Count Reehberg declared to Lord Augustus
Loftus and Count Apponyi has declared to me that the
Austrian Government have no intention whatever to inter-
fere in the affairs of Italy, that they are not going to send
, any forces beyond their own frontiers, and that they shall
confine themselves strictly to the defence of their own pos-
sessions, which are bound by treaty to be part of the demi-
nious of the Emperor of Austria. These declarations, com-
bined with the willingness of the French Government to
entertain the three first proposals, give great hope that we
shall arrive, by these means, at a settlement of Italy which
although not immediately acknowledged by all the Powers
of Europe, will at the same time be a pacific settlement,
and prevent a renewal of war. Imviiediately after communi-
cating with the Governments of France and A.ustrial I di-
rected communications of the same proposals to Prussia
and Russia for their information and subsequent decision.

With regard to Russia I have not received any answer
whatever. The Prussian Government has not made any
objection to the proposals, but delays making a definite an-
swer until the opinions of France and Austria have been
ascertained. This is exactly the substance of what has
hitherto passed. The noble lord will see that it is the be-
ginning of negotiations, and I cannot at present be autho-
rised by her Majesty to place the papers on the table of the
house. (Cheers.)

THE ADMIRALTY.
Mr. KINNAIRD begged to ask the Secretary of the Ad-
miralty what steps the Board of Admiralty had taken, or
were about to take, to carry out the recommendations con-
tained in the report of the committee of inquiry on the eco-
nomy of her Majesty's dockyards, presided over by Admiral
Smart, and in the report of the committee on steam machi-
nery, presided over by Admiral Ramsay ?
Lord C. PAGET said the Admiralty had under their
Serious consideration the report of these two committees.
They had been able to carry out various recommendations,
but with regard to one of the most important they had
thought it right to call for the opinions of the principal
officArs of Somerset-house, as well as the superintendents of
the dockyards. The observations of those o The
he hoped
to be able to lay on the table te-morrow, The Duke of
Somerset had given the greatest consideration to the recom-
mendations of the committees, and had drawn up a memo-
randum, which had been laid before the lioard-of Admi-
rtity. lie also hoped to lay that paper with a board minute
attached, on the table to,morrow. The committee on the
dockyards recommended that there should be laid before
Parliament statements of the annual poet of all ships of her
Majesty's navy. He hoped to be able to lay on the table that
return, which he thought was of some interest, in a few
days. (Hear, hear.) But he was bound to state with can-
dour that the return was not so perfect as he should wish it
to be. It was a novelty, and perhaps the details of cost had
not been kept up in a satisfactory manner. When the hon.
member for Newcastle brought forward his motion for in-
quiry into the shipbuilding of the Admiralty, he ahcalld be
able to go more fully into the subject.
Sir 3. PAKINGTON asked whether the memorandum
referred to both eonunittse9,
Lord C. PAGET said the report of the principal officers
was upon the retort of Admiral Smart's committee, The
memorandum o 2 the Duke of Somerset related to both.
THE DIVORCE COURT.

Lord J. MANNERS moved for leave to bring in a bill
to enable the Court fir Divorce and Matrimonial Causes to
hold its sittings with closed doors. He contended that the
details published in the newspapers in respect to the trials
at this court were calculated to demoralise the community
to a considerable extent. The object of his bill was
to confer on the judge of the court the privilege of
sitting with closed doors in cases where he conceived it
would be conducive to public morals to adopt that course.
A clause to that effect had received the sanction of the
House of Lords and the present Attorney-General; and was
in conformity with the power possessed by the old Ecclesi-
astical Court, the House of Lords, and even the Court of
Chancery.
Mr. JAMES said his reason for taking the rather un-
usual course of resisting the introduction of the bill was that
the matter had been fully discussed and decided in the last
session of Parliament. The Divorce Court Bill came down
with a clause introduced by the Lord Chancellor, with the
object of accomplishing that which was proposed by the
present measure. It was supported to some extent by the
Attorney-General ; but the feeling of the house had so
strongly manifested itself against closing the doors of this
court that the clause was rejected without a division.
After this express decision, he believed the house would
now declare its opinion that the present bill was inexpe-
dient and unnecessary. He imputed no motives whatever
to the noble lord; he believed that he was actuated alone
by the sincere desire of suppressing what he considered in-
decent reports of the proceedings in that court; but he
hoped to show the house in a few sentences that such
a course would be highly injudicious. The noble lard
had referred to the practice of the Ecclesiastical Courts and
the Court of Chancery ; but if ever the Court of Divorce—
' which as at present administered enjoyed the sanction and
confidence of the public (hear, hear)—were to have the
same opinion entertained with regard to it which had existed
of the other Courts to which reference had been made, it
would soon fall into utter contempt. The Lord Chancellor,
it was true, equally with the Judge of the Divorce. Court,
had power, with the consent of counsel acting for both
parties, to retire into a private room and hear the case, if he
thought proper to do so; but he entertained great doubt
whether the Lord Chancellor could close the court against
the public—(hear, hear)—and he believed that if a case of
trespass were brought by any person who had been excluded,
it would be established by the constituted authorities that
the Court of Chancery was a publio court, and the Lord
Chancellor hai no right to close it. (Hear, hear.) Why,
if it were known that a sort of mysterious Court was sitting
at Westminster-hall, whose avenues were unapproachable
to the public, and that cases were going on there which
might not be reported, a prurient curiosity would at once
be engendered, and they would have all sorts of erroneous
reports furnished either by reporters in wigs and gowns or
by attorneys or their clerks ; and a morbid desire to procure
them would be evidenced on the part of the public. Was the
noble lord, who had cited no instance which had occurred
since last session in support of his argument, prepared to
extend the principle of his bill to the police courts, and other
courts of criminal jurisdiction in this country ? Yet a charge
of perjury had arisen out of proceedings in a suit before the
Divorce Court, whieh it became requisite to try before one
of the criminal tribunals, and the details of which occu-
pied day after day the columns of the public journals.
(Hear.) The better course, he believed, was to repose
confidence in the taste and good sense of the press—
(hear, hear)—which, since the decision in August, had
not abused the power of publishing cases from that court.
Hon. members who had acted as counsel in cases of this
nature would bear him out in the statement that no details
of a filthy or disgusting character had been given to the
public. (Hear, hear.) The debates in that house were at
one period forbidden to be published ; and Dr. Johnson
told the translator of "Demosthenes" that he got from the
door-keepers and uniformly published imaginary debates ;
and that he a'ways took care that " those dogs in wigs"
got the worst of • it. (Laughter.) The noble lord was of
opinion that by the reports which appeared from the
Divorce Court a public scandal was occ:sioned ; but he
considered that a vital principle was at stake in the matter,
and that although the maxim might be trite it was still as
true as when Bentham wrote it, that publicity was vital to.
the administration of English justice, and to the confidence'
which the people of England reposed in it. (Hear, hear.)
The hen. and learned member concluded by moving, as an
amendment, the previous question.
Mr. ROEBUCK said a remark had once been made by
Swift, which the present motion of the noble lord fully
verified. This was, that "the nicest persons had the
nastiest ideas." (Laughter.) The proposition of the noble
lord he believed to have originated in the same state of
feeling that possessed the American lady whose sentiments
of modesty were wonderfully offended by the naked legs of
her pianoforte. (" Hear," and a laugh.) If the noble lord
had taken into account the end which was sought to be at-
tained by the Divorce Court, he would, he thought, have
arrived at a different conclusion. Tbat court had been
created for a mixed object; it affected not merely private
rights and obligations, but also public obligations. It not
only determined whether a man should be divorced from
his wife, but it went further, and declared why he should be
divorcee, and by that means it affected public morality.
(Hear, hear.) f the court was shut up, one of these great
moans of influencing the public would be utterly taken away.
He was aware that the English notion of morality was
confined to picking a pocket and seducing another man's
wife. But there wore other things which he read daily in
the papers by which he was much more affected. He con-
stantly saw in the reports of the Police Courts that men
were brought up for thrashing their wives, almost beating
out their eyes and nearly taking away their lives. These
things went on from day to day, and disgraced the people of
England in the eyes d Europe and of the world. (Hear,
hear.) Another great object which had been effected by
the publicity of proceedings in the Divorce Court was the
dispelling of the idea that immoral practices were confined
to the upper and lowest classes of society; and it had been
shown that among the middle class what was particularly
recognised by Englishmen as immorality was as rife as in
any other—(hear, hear)— and he thought this a very great
benefit—(laughter)—he hated shams, and he believed the
morality of the middle class to be as great a sham as had
ever existed. There ought, then, to be a degree of healthy
hardihood in a man's character which would enable him to
bear this exposure. The noble lord had stated that it was
impossible to put a newspaper into the hands of one's
wife or daughter. This statement he denied altogether;
and he maintained that nothing had been more creditable
than the conduct of the public press on this question. They
had the most filthy details before them—aye, and from the
middle class too, and they had not shocked any decent man's
or woman's mind by what they had disclosed. But let the
truth be told; was it right that the middle class should
continue to appear as models of angelic purity, when they
were as earthly and immoral as any other class ? (Hear,
hear.) The noble lord stated that the judges of the crimi-
nal courts had the power of shutting out women and chil-
dren. Yes ; but how was it done P In a criminal case, the
judge has the depositions before him, and knows what is
going to be proved is of a character that women and children
had better not hear. The Judge of the Divorce Court could
not do this ; and as a judge would act only on his indivi-
dual caprice, he would ask the house whether it could ex-
pect from a court of justice the advantages it was intended
to produce, if it was left to the caprice of the judge to de-
cide what was fit to be made public. Each judge would act
on his own opinion ; one might exclude the public, the next
might take a different view of the case. Then they might
have a prurient judge—there were such things—(hear, hear)
—who might delight to make jokes before his Court that he
would not dare to utter if the press was present. (Hear.)
Even now, with the control of the press, he could put his
finger on judges whose jokes did no honour to an English_
court of justice. (Hear, hear.) One great use of a court of
justice is to serve as a guide to the morality of the people.
t
If the proceedings were secret, they would seem be a
thousand times worse than anything the public was likely
to read. The, motion of the noble lord, therefore, tough
made with the best possible intentions—hell was paved with
them—would do the greatest possible mischief, and he should
oppose it.
Lord C. CECIL said notwithstanding the insinuation of
the hon. and learned gentleman, he should support tne mo-
tion of the noble lord.

Sir G. C. LEWIS said,—lt is the ordinary practice of
the house to agree to the motion for leave to introduce a
bill, and to proceed to the other stages of the measure with
a knowledge of its contents. In this instance the noble lord
has treated the question as if we were taking the debate on
the second reading, and has made a speech of a somewhat
controversial nature ; he lies thus left us without all doubt
as to the nature of the bill he seeks to introduce. There.
fore, though contrary to the most convenient practice of
the house, i am disposed, to give my vote in favour of the
amendment of the hon and learned member, (Hear, hear.)
I will now proceed to discuss the question As if this were
the debate on the second reading. The purpose of the noble

lord's bill is to creates privilegiuin for the Court of Divorce.
He does not propose to alter the ordinary law of the coun-
try with regard to trials in which indecent matter, unfit for
general perusal, may be given in evidence, commented on
by counsel, or stated in the judge's charge to the jury. The
bill is not a general measure, including all the criminal
courts and the proceedings before the trfitgistrates. It only
establishes a separate rule for the Court of Divorce, my
objection to the bill rests on its being 4 !Articular and dis-
criminating measure. Had it be a general measure, af-
fecting all the courtg of law, I might have been disposed to
vote fqr going to a second reading. But unless the nob'e
lord is prepared to call on the house to lay down a unive;
sal rule, there is a great objection to singling out the Court
of Divorce for exceptional legislation. On what ground