The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-16 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY.)
The LORI) CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at the usual hour.

TIIE BALLOT.
Lord TEYNHAAI presented petitions from Tavistock,
Truro, Yorkshire, Bodmin, and other places, in favour of
vote by ballot.

CHURCH RATES.
A number of petitions were presented against the aboli-
tion of church-rates.

THIRD READING.

On the motion of Lord REDESDALE, the Grand Sur-
rey Docks and Canal Bill was read a third time and passed.
BENEFIT SOCIETIES RULES AMENDMENT

BILL.

This bill passed through committee, and was reported
without amendments.
THE NEW FRENCH TREATY.

Lord HARDWICKE presented a petition from the
Shipowners' Association of Liverpool, complaining of the
omission in the treaty of any provisions for the satisfactory
regulation of the navigation laws of France.
Lord TAUNTON rose for the purpose of moving that
their lordships agree with the 'Commons in the address to
her Majesty on the subject of the treaty of commerce with
France, and that the blank in that address he tilled up with
the words "lords spiritual and temporal and." The • oble lord

said he could have desired that the task he had undertaken
would have been taken by some other person of greater
weight in that house than himself, but he must say he never
had a duty to perform more agreeable to his own
feelings. (Hear, hear.) The treaty came before them
under the most favourable circumstances, it hav-
ing received nearly the unanimous sanction of
the House of Commons, which, he thought, on that occa-
sion, merely reflected the opinions of the constituents of
the kingdom on the subject. In Lancashire and the Pot-
teries it had been received with the greatest satisfaction,
and that feeling would be increased on its ratification. One
of the great objects sought by the treaty was drawing still
closer the bonds of amity between the two nations. (Hear.)
He would not weary the house with any statistics, but ho
might state that England exported less to France than it
did to Holland. Mr. Pitt had devoted the powers of his
great mind to enlarge the intercourse, but war and the
event of the French Revolution had prevented his success.
He thought that one of the greatest preventatives against
war was commerce, and the treaty would increase
our commercial intercourse with France, and therefore act
as an additional security for the maintenance of peace. A
short time ago the relations between this country and the
United States were in such a condition that at one time
war seemed inevitable, but that calamity was averted by
the intimacy of our commercial intercourse with that great
country. This fact alone would show the impor-
tance of promoting at increase of trade with
France. There had been a strong feeling against the con-
clusion of any commercial treaty, from the fear that when
concessions were once made we should no longer have them
to offer other nations. He fully recognised the fact that the
days for equivalents were gone, but this treaty was not one
that could be objected to on that ground. (Hear.) The prin-
cipal concessions we had made by the new treaty were
necessary for our own sakes. The noble lord here pro-
ceeded to detail the principal points in the treaty, and
proceeded to remark that in the importance of the changes
proposed it was necessary to remember the present state of
the French tariff, by which almost all our manufactures
were heavily taxed with protective duties—a large number
of our staples prohibited altogether. (Hear, hear.)
It had been said that the duty on French wines
and spirits ought not to have been reduced, but he
thought that the admission of French wines for consump-
tion in this country would be attended with most beneficial
results, by bringing within our reach a substitute for
the strong adulterated alcoholic drinks that had for years
been largely consumed in this country. (Hear, hear.)
Without entering at length into the financial results
that would follow the completion of the treaty,
he considered that our finances were in such a state as fully
justified the Chancellor of the Exchequer in sacrificing the
revenue derived from the wine duties for the sake of the bene-
fits their abolition would confer upon England. Reconsi-
dered he ought to touch upon the clause allowing the ex-
portation of coal about which much had been said.
The stipulation in question is not to put an
export duty on coal for the next ten years. He
must confess he did not view such a provision with the
alarm that others had done, as he thought
that circumstance ought to be looked upon simply as
an item in a commercial treaty. It had at one time been
asserted that the exportation of coal would hasten the
exhaustion of that mineral in our own country,
but that notion, he thought, had been entirely
abandoned. Then with respect to shipping, he thought
the stipulations of the treaty were decidedly advantageous
to British shipping, as it placed both British and French
ships upon the same footing. He had no fear that the ship-
ping of this country would suffer in the slightest degree by
the making of this treaty. The noble lord concluded by
moving and reading the address, which was in substance
the same as that agreed to by the other house.
The Earl of CORK seconded the adoption of the address.
Earl GREY said he regretted he could not agree in the
conclusions to which the noble lord who had preceded him
had come. He bogged, however, in the first place, to state
to their lordships that it was far from his intention to offer
any opposition to the trest.y being brought into operation.
Much as he disapproved of it, it seemed to him to be too
late at this period of time to attempt to prevent its taking
effect. But the present address was not a step that was
necessary in order to carry the treaty into operation. The
consent of Parliament was undoubtedly necessary to some
of its provisions, but that assent could only be given by acts
of Parliament sanctioning the reductions of duty which
were contemplated on the part of this country. Those bills
would no doubt be placed before their lordships, and he
entertained not the slightest question that their lordships,
acting wisely in accordance with their established rule,
would not appear to meddle with bills involving money
matters sent up to them from the Commons, but would
willingly give them their assent. If that were done, all
would be accomplished that would be necessary in order to
effectuate the treaty, and he ventured to appeal to the noble
and learned lord upon the woolsack to confirm the truth of
this opinion. But although this address was not required,
in order to give effect to the treaty, its effect would be to
cause their lordships, in the most solemn and formal man-
ner, to express their unqualified approval of this treaty, net
only in its general principles, but in its details, and the
question for their lordships was, whether that House of
Parliament was merely to abstain from any opposition to
the treaty, or whether it was to come forward end delibe-
rately express its approval. (Hear, hear, from the Oppo-
sition benches.) He would venture to express to their lord-
ships his reasons for objecting to the latter course; and in
so doing, let him state that he thought this treaty could not
be considered by itself alone. (Hear, hear.) It must be con
sidered as a most extensive part of the general financial
arrangements of the year. He thought he was justified in
saying so, for let him remind their lordships that her Ma-
jesty's Government had taken the somewhat unusual course
of delaying for some days to lay the treaty before Parlia-
ment, although there existed the greatest curiosity as to its
contents. Her Majesty's Government, however, thought it
right to keep it back for a day or two until it could be ex-
plained as forming part of the general financial scheme of
the year. lie did not by any means complain of this course,
but he thought it perfectly clear that the treaty was con-
nected with the budget. (Hear, hear.) Now, the budget
imposed upon the country the sacrifice of a very large
amount of revenue ; and before they were prepared to sanc-
tion that they must know how that deficiency was to be
supplied. He therefore made no apology to their lordships
for venturing to trouble them with some remarks upon this
general financial statement which had been adopted by her
Majesty's Government. He begged, however, to reassure
their lordships that, though he was compelled to make
some remarks upon the budget, he should not trouble them
with a long array of figures. He should confine himself
to the leading features of the measure, because he could not
but feel that the subject had been treated with a skill and
earnestness that was most conspicuous, in a speech of the
greatest depth and variety, which rendered it clear and in-
teresting to all who had the good fortune to listen to it.
(Hear.) As he could make no pretension to such skill and
eloquence he thought it due to their lordships to omit the
details, and to take only a general view of the financial ar-
rangements of the year. The first remark he would venture
to make was, that the scheme appeared to be an ambitious
one. (Hear.) It began by deliberately incurring this large
deficit. Her Majesty's Government proposed that indirect
taxation to the amount of rather more than £3,900,000
should be reduced or entirely abolished. This reduction was
calculated to be met by the increased consumption of some
articles on which the duties are only reduced, and by
the imposition of certain new taxes to the extent
of some £1,800,000, thereby creating a dead loss to revenue
of £2,100,000. This loss arose mainly from the alteration
of the duties upon wines, brandies, and silk. The rest were
ethoTypmar,earteivtealyaimpeiemapteoartianntliAehndthheeyrhet
aladetnhoi,n,loorbosuersite ttlie
be provided for by one of two ways—.
loan
pose of. Therefore, this sum of more
eliithner£c), Oy
anOtOieoiopoantiiunsgt
our resources, directly, or indirectly, in the nature of. ataxa,
or by new taxation. Now, with regard to chinges
by the ifnorcible-
tion, he (Earl Grey) had been much struck
whose experience in these matters were equalled.d by
that changes
remarks that had been made by a noblelordbehintdhhatimef,
no member of their lordships' house. He.s
in taxation were always attended with inconvenience, in
consequence of the variety of interests involved and-the no
cessity of entering into now arrangements ; and considering.
thev tgeneral
dh aelrt dffisehui rt
yw
ehfi cehh
aensuede f(rEe t
arl Gh er
emy reee
fnecitos ne
d-
heenthought that a change of taxation ought not to be lightly
and unadvisedly made. No doubt there were occasions when
the form of taxation might be changed -vith great advan •
tage ; and those who recommended the present scheme were
fond of referring to the precedent of 1842. No one was
more sensible than he (the noble lord) of the benefits that
had been derived from the commercial policy of that year ;
but there was not the smallest resemblance between the cir-
cumstances of 1842 and of the present time. (Hear, hear.)
In 1842 there was a considerable deficiency in the exchequer,
and it had not only been proved by experience that the
amount that could be raised by indirect taxation had reached
its maximum, but there were unmistakeable signs that the
industry and trade of the country were suffering greatly
from the pressure of the existing restrictions. Accordingly
the policy was commenced—most wisely and yet most cau-
tiously commenced—of remitting indirect taxes by means
of the imposition of an income tax. He need not tell their
lordships how successful that experiment had turned out;
but its very success was an argument against
the existence of any necessity for its repetition at the pre--
sent time. (Hear, hear.) For, he would ask, was indirect
taxation any longer burdensome to trade or manufacture,
or had it reached the limits of productiveness Far from it.
Every successive year the Chancellor of the Exchequer—
whoever he might happen to be—was enabled to say that
the productiveness of the revenue had exceeded his most
sanguine expectations, and so far from the present fiscal
system oppressing the trade of the country; they were con-
gratulated on all sides—and by none more than by her Ma-
industry.
u appeared
e
Ma-
jesty's ministers—upon the extraordinary prosperity of our
ared (hi
teoa (hear,
be
limited,
e d
noto w -4dsays tradelrsnt
uaTr demand, l manufac-
ture
u r
by afty difficulty in finding a profitableuy
outlet for our pro-
ductions, but by the difficulty of obtaining hands to direct
our machines and raw material for those machines to work
up. (Hear, hear.) Was that a state of things in which it
t
was necessary to enter upon a hazardous and perilous ex-
penmen ? (Cheers.) But they were told there was a rea-
son for the scheme that was now proposed. He must say,
however, that in the whole course of his now pretty long
experience he had never known a reason advanced that was
so purely fanciful. For what was this reason ? They were
toi
ld that Parliament was bound to repeal a certain amount
confessed he
of indirect taxation because £2,000,000 of Long Annuities
fallen in. Why they should repeal indirect rather than
direct taxation under such circumstances be

could not see ; but he passed that by. it was Bela that the
country had long been looking forward to this year for a re-
lief from their taxation, and that Parliament was therefore
bound not to disappoint them. Well, he quite concurred
in the reasonableness of stich an eXpefliatiofi oft the part pf
the public, and it was much to be regretted that it should
not be fulfilled. But how under present circumstances
could it be realised ? If upwards of £2,000,000 was struck
off the annual charge for the public debt; it must be re-
membered that two thirds of the gain had been an-
ticipated by the interest on the loan contracted
during the Russian war. Out of the £2,100,000 that
would be saVed iVe had to pity £1,400,000 byway of interest
on the new loans; and the remaining £700,000 would go but
a little way towards the increased expenditure that had
come upon the country within the last few years. Under
such circumstances, to say that the expected relief from
taxation must still be given was, as he had already said,
not an argument but a more fancy. Let them suppose the
case of a gentleman who had a good estate burdened with
a heavy life annuity, who had long groaned under the
weight of the charge, and who had promised himself that
when it expired he would make some addition to his estab-
lishment that would contribute to his comfort. chubt
it would be a great disappointment if he found, when the
annuity at last fell in, that now charges to a still greater
amount had come upon him. But would any man with the
sligh' est claim to good sense, who happened to be placed in
such a position, think of s " I have always promised
myself that when I got rid of that detested annuity I would
indulge my fancy in such and such a way; and though it is
true that my means are not after all increased, but are actu-
ally diminished—though I can afferd the expense less than
ever—still, I will not refuse myself the gratification to
which I have looked forward ; and I will provide for it by
some arrangement with regard to my property, which I
have hitherto considered too improvi%tent and too danger-
ous to be entertained ?" Yet that was precisely the way in
-whieh the Government proposed to act. (Cheers.) Succes-
sive Chancellors of the Exchequer (and amongst them the
distinguished gentleman who filled the office at the present
moment) had declared that the duties now proposed to be
taken off ought not to be given up—not because they were
not objectionable, for, indeed, he (Lord Grey) had never
yet known a tax that was unobjectionable—but because
they could not be spared. Nevertheless the right hon. gen-
tlernaa now said that these very taxes must be repealed,
because the people had been led to expect a diminution of
the indirect taxation when the Long Annuities fell in.
(Hear, hear.) It seemed to him (the noble earl) that to
argue in that manner was to treat the people like children,
and not like sensible men who could take a sound
view of their position. (Cheers) In considering the effect
of the Government's scheme, the honsA must forgive him if
he did not confine his view to the financial year which was
about to open. (Hear, hear.) It was quite true that the
Chancellor of the Exchequer showed a small balance of
ways and means over the estimated expenditure ; but if they
looked in the most cursory manner at the way in which the
expenditure had been computed, their lordships would see
that it had been calculated in a very sanguine temper, to
say the least of it. For instance, the expense of the Chinese
expedition was set down at the small sum of £500,000, in
addition to a trifling increase in the army and navy
esti-
mates. He was told that already the vote of credit had proved
insufficient, and that the £500,000 had grown to £850,000.
But did anybody believe that its growth would stop there ?
When he looked at the expenditure that was goingon, when
he saw that in the North of England ships were taken up
to carry coals to China at freights varying from 4 guineas to
90s. per ton, so that the cost of the coal by the time it
reached China could not be less, reckoning the waste, than
£5 per ton; when he remembered that we had no fewer than
90 pennons in the China seas, and reflected how vastly the
expense of considerable hostile operations at a distance al-
ways exceeded the estimate—he thought they would be for-
tunate if the £500,000 proved to be more than a tithe of the
actual outlay. For his own part he should say that if the
cost of the war stopped at £5,000,000, the house would have
much reason to be congratulated on the result. (Hear.)
Then, again, he observed that but a small sum was charged
for fortifications, whereas it was reported that the commis-
sioners who had been appointed to considerthis subject had
not only recommended a very large outlay, but had recom-
mended that it should be incurred at once. Was it possible
that there could be truth in another report which had
gained ground, namely, that the expense was to be provided
by a loan ? Was it possible that this improvident mode of
providing in time of peace for such an expenditure
was to be recommended by the same Chancellor of the Ex •
chequer as had pressed upon Parliament with so much
earnestness and eloquence the duty of providing by the
taxation of each year the greater part of the sum required
even for the purposes of a European war? (Hear, hear.)
But, laying aside all such questions, and assuming that
there would really be a surplus, how was that surplus
arrived at ? It was arrived at, in the first place, by re-im-
posing the income-tax at a high rate of 10d. in the pound ;
in the next place, by re imposing what were called the war
duties on tea and sugar, and lastly, by calling in credits on
malt and hop duties to the extent of £1,400,000. (Hear,
hear.) He (the noble lord) contended that this last would
be as much an absorption of capital for the purpose of in-
come as if they were to contract a loan to the same amount.
(Cheers.) The income tax and the tea and sugar duties were
only to be re-imposed for a year, and therefore the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer would have to meet the House of
Commons in 1861 with a deficit of no less than £10,000,000
or £11,000,000. '
A NOBLE LORD—XII,OOO,OOO.

Earl GREY had no doubt that that would lie the real
sum ; and he submitted that the prospect was a very serious
one. They were deliberately preparing to start the year after
next with a deficiency of £12,000,000 ; and in providing that
sum they would have to put indirect taxation pretty nearly
out of the question'. The bargain they had entered into
with France embraced so many things that it would prevent
the re-imposition of the duties they were about to repeal
(cheers), and the staple articles of the customs revenue were
already as highly taxed as would be convenient. With re
gard to eireiee, they ware to abolish that duty whichof all
others interfered least with manufacturing industry, a duty
which yielded a growing revenue, and the objections to
which might have been dhsily removed. They would
have no alternative but to re-impose the income-tax at
the rate of a shilling in the pound. (Hear, hear.)
Was it desirable that an income tex of such an amount
should be perpetuated ? For his own part, he looked for-
' ward to the prospect before then with great alarm, for they
had been deliberately informed that the question of future
taxation should be left to the new House of Comuions,
.which would in all probability be elected by a larger pro-
portion of those who did not pay the income tax, or, indeed,
direct taxes at all. (Cheers) But was it for the peace of
' the country, or for the continuance of a good feeling be-
tween the different classes of society—was it wise or pru-
dent to allow a question of this description to arise at the
very first moment after the assembling of the new Parlia-
ment ? (Hear, hear.) The budget was defended by a
reference to the policy of 1842. Was it part of that policy
to create an enormous deficiency without shOwing how that
deficiency was to be provided for ? On the contrary, before
one step was taken towards reducing the most objectionable
of the then existing taxes, the income tax was imposed for
three years, the period during which it was calculated (and
experience had shown that it was truly calculated) the
stimulus given to production and consumption would re-
pair the loss to the revenue. (Hear, hear.) Invariably
the repeal of indirect taxes was preceded by the imposi-
tion of direct taxes which were calculated to fill the void
that would otherwise exist. The plan pursued in this in-
stance was exactly the reverse. No man believed that
the void now created would be filled up in time. In the
first place, the paper duty would be taken off altogether.
And then with regard to the wine duty, the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, in his more prudent days, in 1853, when
it was said that the duty was a bad one, told the House of
Commons fairly that the reduction of it would be an un-
wise measure, because it. would be some years before the
loss caused by the reduction would be made uy. He had
now dtated the objections that he felt to this treaty, or
rather he had stated a part of them. He might go much
further, for he felt that if he were to go into details, ho
could make the case a great deal stronger, but he would not
do so. He had promised to avoid details, and he was con-
fident there were those who were able to supply the void.
But he asked their lordships if he had not said sufficient to
show that this budget was a dangerous measure, and that
the treaty which rendered it dangerous was not entitled on
financial grounds to their approval. He would now pro-
ceed to consider certain other objections to the treaty, and
here he was inclined to say that there was a great deal in
the able speech of the noble lord who moved the address in
which he entirely concurred. When he described so forcibly
the great advantages that would arise from increased inter.
course between this country and France, and the good feel-
ing that would be created, and the interests that would
spring up—in all that he said on these topics he entirely
concurred. No man was more anxious than himself to ex-
tend and improve that intercourse. But the fallacy was this,
that the noble lord confounded the advantages of an in-
creased intercourse between the two nations with the ad-
vantages of the treaty. (Hear.) His noble friend omitted
altogether that part of the argument which showed that
this treaty was the best mode of promoting that increased
intercourse. He (Lord Grey) would not abuse the great in-
dulgence which their lordships had shown to him by going
over again the same ground, but he might be permitted to
say that his noble friend had said nothing to prove that this
treaty was the best means of promoting the intercourse of
the two countries. Let him remind them that the obstacles
to increased intercourse were almost entirely on the side of
France, and that what really protective duties we had
might have been removed without incurring the financial
difficulties involved in this scheme, and without any treaty
at all. If we had opened the doors as widely ad possible to
French produce without any treaty at all, without creating
any difficulty in a financial point of view, no one would
have approved more heartily of such a policy than himself.
But he said that this treaty was calculated to increase the
apprehensions of the French people that a change was
to be made in the system of protection, which it was
their object to maintain. Because, he must remind them,
France had made a very small advance towards a more
liberal system; she had only advanced as far as Mr. This-
kisson's first propositions, which were to remove prohibi-
tion and substitute a duty of 30 per cent. ; because, he said,
when they went beyond that amount the smuggler stepped
in and took the benefit. He believed that this treaty was
calculated to increase the apprehensions of the French pro-
ducers ; and he was much struck with an observation of the
noble lord who seconded the address, who pointed how sin-
cere and how strong was the apprehension entertained by a
numerous portion of our own countrymen at the abolition of
protection in this country, and how firmly they believed that
ruin would come upon them. No doubt they did, but he
asked whether they thought the intensity of the opposition
made to those changes would not have been greatly increased
if it had been represented in this country at the time that
the changes were to be made not for our own benefit but for
the benefit of some foreign nation and to serve a political ob-
ject ? If Mr. Chowler could have been able to state that
the corn laws were to be repealed in order to promote cer-
tain political objects with America and France, he wished to
know whether his speeches at market dinners would not
have had a much more powerful effect ? Ho believed that
the apprehension that. French industry was to be sacrificed
to British objects would increase the opposition to any re-
form of
in the French tariff, and that this treaty, insteadl
being a step to the unreserved intercourse which his noble
friend was anxious to establish, would on tthtehceore wasntrar ano-
y be a
difficulty in the way of establishing it. 811
ther subject that must not be lost sight of. Suppose it were
right to have a treaty at all, was this treaty_ a properene? He
had a strong opinion that there should be no such bargains,
but if they were to have a_ treaty there ought to be some ap-
proach to reciprocity, and lie asked if that was the case with
regard to this treaty ? Let hi point out what the treaty did.
In England no duty whatever was to be imposed on French
manufactures.
We agreed to make
.a very large, and at
the present moment a very inconvenient, sacrifice of
reve-
nued brandy,t upon the articles of wineand French
ship-
ping was to be admitted on the same footing as our own
both in home and foreign ports. We could not possibly do
more. We debarred ourselves from the power of again rais-
ingahe duty on wine or brandy. But no one article of Eng-
lish produce was to be admitted free into France. The most
important articles were still to be subject to so high a duty
as to offer temptations to the smuggler. Our shipping was
to remain subject to existing restrictions; and the only arti-
cles in which any considerable concession was made were
those which France had occasion for for her own manufac-
tures. And during the negotiations we never appear to have

even asked for a removal of the prohibition to export raw
material from France. The exportation of raw silk and rags
was still to be prohibited. A few days ago we wore told that
the prohibition to export rage was removed, but it now up-
peered that a duty was to be imposed which would practi-
cally operate as a prohibition. Was it just to our paper ma-
nufacturers that they should not have the same facility as
the French manufacturers of obtaining the raw material,
And at the same time be compelled to enter into unrestricted
competition with them? But thenwo were told that the en-
portatioti of rags and raw silk was a matter we could not
deal with in a treaty, and the negotiations for an equivalent
would have led to no result, and her Majesty's Government
were fully aware that to enter into negotiations of this kind,
on the principle of bargaining, was to throw the greatest
obstacle that could be thrown in the way of the treaty.
These were arguments that he himself had used in order to
show that it was inexpedient to make the admission of pro-
duce a matter of bargain. It was better for each country to
fettle for itself what it would do. But if this were the opi-
nion of her Majesty's Government, why had they a treaty
at all? Really her Majesty's Government ought to take their
choice between ono or other of two opposing aoctrurs. A
i
bargain was either a good thing or a bad thing; t might be
either politic or impolitic. He thought it was impolitic. He
was not for negotiating at all, but was for each country
acting according to what it conceived to be for
its own interest. If Government said it was ti
good thing, and that they ought to make a bar 7
gain, then they wore bound to see that the bar:: ain was A
fair one, and when they were told it was a bad bargain they
were not to turn round and say that was not the way in
ourselveswi. toby
look at it. But if that wore so, let us not fetter
such n treaty, let us keep the power, if we
wanted to replenish our exchequer, to re-establish the wine
duty. Let us not have the dieadvantage of help..' bound
and the disadvantage of being free at the same time. Before
he concluded there was one other point to which he would
allude. it was one to which ho alluded with great pain
and with great regret, as it was a matter of great delicacy.
He meant the question of Savoy. If he thought this treaty
less objectionable in other respects he should think that
her Majesty's Government were greatly to blame for hav-
ing signed that treaty without having obtained from the
Goverment of France some formal disavowal of the inten •
tion to add Savoy and Nice to the French empire. They
now knew, what was not admitted at first, that before this
treaty was signed her Majesty's Government were well
aware that this scheme was in agitation. (Hear, hear.)
They bad distinct warning that in the event of certain ar-
rangements taking place in Italy, which were certain to
take place, France would think herself entitled to take pos-
session of Savoy. .Knowing this important fact, her
Majesty's Government incurred a perilous responsibility in
consenting to sign this treaty without obtaining from
Franco a disavowal of her intention to annex Savoy and
Nice. He believed, with every one of their lordships, that
the annexation of Savoy and Nice to France was a misfor-
tune not only to England but to the whole of Europe.
(Hear.) He believed that it was pregnant with mischief,
and while that design was on foot we ought not to have
given to France so signal a proof of our confidence and sup-
port as was conveyed by our agreeing to this treaty. But
further than that, it was impossible under these circum-
stances, and with the knowledge of what was intended, to
sign this treaty without inflictinga stain upon the honour of
England. For how was this matter regarded by foreignnations
and 1w France P He was informed yesterday by a gentle-
man on whose judgment he placed the moat implicit- reli-
ance, and who had just returned front France, that the
manner in which this subject was viewed there was this—
they believed, as foreign nations had long believed, that our
whole policy was directed to the one object of selling our
produce; that political considerations were as nothing in
comparison, and they believed that this commercial treaty
had been conceded as a sop—(hear)—to induce us to sub-
mit with patience to the annexation of Savoy. They believed
that our resistance to it was a sham. He knew that they
were wrong. He did not do her Majesty's Government the
injustice to believe that they were capable of such baseness
as that of writing high-sounding despatches merely for the
purpose of laying them before Parliament, while they really
did not wish to oppose the arrangement which had been
carried into effect. He did not impute such baseness to them,
but this was the feeling which gained ground in the minds
of the people of France, and he feared not only in France
but in Europe. Such a feeling was calculated to lower
the position of England, and to degrade us in the eyes of
Europe. He was fortified in this conviction, because in the
elaborate report of the treaty by the French Minister by
whom it was negotiated, which was published not many
days ago, there was a statement that it was entered into
with a view to encourage industry and commerce. There
was an old proverb, " qui s'excuse s'accuee," and he be-
lieved that this statement of the motives cf the treaty by
the French Minister was an illustration of that proverb.
They well know that the whole previous course of Franca
had been one of aggrandisement, which made her such a
curse to Europe and herself. That old spirit of the first
Empire was not yet extinct. While that state of things
continued it was impossible for this country, with a due
regard to its ewn safety, to diminish its army or navy—
(hear, hear)—and, consequently, this projected annexation
of Savoy imposed upon us enormous burdens. And when
they were threatened with a change of that kind they had
a right to say to the French Government, "we hesitate
to throw away more than £1,000,000, while you impose
upon us these increased burdens." Ho had now only to
thank their lordships for their great indulgence in listening
to him—(hear)—and he would only ask whether he had not
shown good reasons why that house, without attempting to
interfere with the treaty, would yet decline to share with her
Majesty's Government the responsibility of such an objec-
tionable measure. (Hear.)

Lord WODELTOU SE said his noble friend commenced
by saying that this treaty was a part of the budget and the
general financial measures of the Government, but he should
recollect that he himself had been most forward in calling

upon the Government to afford that house an opportunity to
discuss this treaty. He quite agreed with his noble friend
that it was necessary to show that the measures adopted by
Government were good in themselves inde? endently of the
treaty. His noble friend said the budget of the Chancellor
of the Eichequer was a dangerous and ambitious one. Ho
thought his noble friend somewhat overlooked the fact that
the policy of 1842, which he so much commended, was upon
many points open to the same objections. In 1842 Sir R.
Peel, finding there was a deficit of over £2,500,000, proposed
a large remission of duties, the result of which was that he
changed the deficit into a surplus ; and the Chancellor of
the Exchequer in 1853 took precisely the same course as
the noble earl now blamed. Whatever might be the opinion
of political parties in this country—whatever might be the
opinion of tha country with regard to Savoy—no perscn who
read the despatches in the blue-book would believe that this
treaty was not made oncommercial grounds alone, and for the
commercial advantages which it conferred. The noble earl
said they ought not to conclude the treaty at such a period.
They did not in the present time speak as they did in 1787
of the " natural hostility" between this country and
France, but some of the acrimony and jealousy of that
period seemed to be imported into their discussions. Mr.
Pitt was not deterred by the language of his opponents
from entering into a treaty of commerce in 1787, only four
year a after the peace of 1783, which was considered one of
the most disastrous that this country hal ever made, and
to which France very much contributed. The edifice which
was begun by Mr. Pitt was left for 40 years in ruins. The
time had now come when they should endeavour to re-con-
struct it, and if moderate, reasonable, and patriotic men
on both aides of the Channel would afford time for the com-
pletion and consolidation of the work, he believed that not
only would the friendship of the two countries be connected,
but that the peace of Europe and of the world would rest
on a surer basis than it had ever been the case before.
The Earl of MALMESBURY said he was anxious in as
few words as possible to state why he supported the views
of the noble earl (Grey), and could not concur in this ad-
dress to the Crown. The noble baron who had just spoken
was not happy in his allusion to tho two great men whom
he quoted. He said that the conduct of Sir R. Peel in 1842
was precisely the same as that of the present Chancellor of
the Exchequer, because he created a deficit. But there
was this groat difference between the two cases, that Sir R.
Peel created a deficit from a surplus, whereas the present
Chancellor of the Exchequer added a considerable deficit to
ono already existing. The noble baron also said that Mr.
Pitt made his treaty of commerce with a view of insuring
peace and amity with France. If such was Mr. Pitt's view
in making that treaty he must have been grievously disap-
pointed; for before three years elapsed war broke out be-
tween this country and France. Nay ram, the Govern-
ment of which he had the honour to be a member seven
years ago, did enter into negotiations with France, with a
view to conclude, if possible, a treaty with that country.
But not being pedantic to those particular principles of free
trade which were advocated there and elsewhere--that no
bargain should be made—he was sorry to confess that they
did not think the terms proposed by the French Govern-
ment sufficiently satisfactory to induce them to proceed
further in the matter. Their wish was to come
to some arrangement by which the commerce of
the two countries could be extended. It was idle to
say that this treaty was not a bargain. (Hear, hear.) It
was au agreement, convention, or covenant between two
parties, one of whom said, "I will do this if you will do
that." This treaty was not only a bargain, but it was a bad
bargain; and it was because it was a bad bargain that he
could not go through the farce of complimenting her Ma-
jesty on such an arrangement. The Chamber of Commerce
of Leeds and the French papers admitted that the duty .
levied on English goods under this treaty would amount to
a prohibition, or at all events be a great protection to
French manufactures. He should like to know why the
Government were in such an extreme hurry in
wait
this
treaty in the present year. Why did they not wait till next
year, when the hands of the Emperor of the Frenmcihthwtreld
be free, and when he could proceed poi
in removing duties. The French newsptahpeePraGsBsosavuiedmtliniaetntthrsof
boon was given not to Englasal, but to
of
the
eL°errdtain body Palmerston,i
n th eii whichJn e stoodo fc orn
tu_ needn4. t
was,support
therefore, of a
t hp ;to
ro l
reme
no
efl
h:t he _en
edt
enwot
auho t
neuc
tornrauoylnb,
btl reewi
velhoes
yrt,
ad bgd utteiastt
not
betweena treaty
thea ty betweenE m
pootnhtdihsing advant ages from
0t lt.reh Francee head ofwtehrpero r the
o
I.' l
with m regardeeneGovernmentttnbsiest tantmhtehi t entecadot here.ruri rneat bee verages of this coun-
nFortenGeoeve
try.? It was the more incumbent n
from which
press and to
insist upon this, because the malt which these beve-
rages were made was highly taxed. The Chancellor of the
Exchequer calculated that the loss
especiallyosstothereve a revenue wouldbe
£700,000. That might or might not be the case,
het,bo right
tighbet
fill u pSucteheessfvuel en in the
in pro-
hthe
preferred arguments to prophecies,
phoneo.igeeenhtelemmeadne hinad
Insoot3. Tobeen very
revenue which this treaty would produce,
this
sy would
have to drink twice as much wine i
as they did now, and half as much beenr. (Laughter.)cntiY
mOnore. the
e Butconi trnheerncioalblePabratroonf treatyatahteonished hint he
ie say no
that this was no political treaty, and that it •was entered
into on commercial grounds only. Why, on the 17th of
January, the noble lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs
wrote of this treaty, that "it was significant at the present
moment, when the condition of some parts of the continent
WEIS so critical, to reassure the public mind in various parts
of Europe." If that was not a political view of the treaty,
he did not know the meaning of the English language.
(Hear,Fore Foreign
n h esaecr .r)e t
alr\yrams i
1s itt Italy
have
1l ilong which
ng. ita
ago
wolf
tshi bseasvi
ogy-
ne sig-
nificant, c
ma netn,
doartini
iint
fiSivaos
Journal des .Debats of the 10th of that month say ? That
rth(eHear, hear.) What did the
journal was once remarkable for the harmony of its princi-
ples and its periods, but it appeared that the mighty were
fallen, and that a once important and influential organ was
now playing second fiddle in the French press. If that
was so, the extract he was about to read was of more im .
portance. [The noble earl here read the extract, the point
of which was that by the treaty of commerce France was
sustaining the English Government.] The noble lord the
was to be annexed, and yet he it was who made those re-
extension of Sardinia, which
he must Le well aware would lead to that annexation. It
was no wonder that the noble lord did not speak out for so