The Sun.
London, England, 1860-02-29 00:00:00

EVENING, FEBRUARY 29, 1860.

tions, had brought the powerful influence of this country to
bear on the side of liberty and of justice, they would secure
not only the empathy and gratitude of tens of thousands of j ;
leople in Italy and Switzerland, but they might count gja,
that best reward of any Government, the confidence and ap-
proval of every friend of civil and religious liberty. (Cheers.)

- Sir G. GREY said he did not rise for the purpose of ex-
pressing on the part of the Government any dissent from the
opinions which had been expressed either by the mover or
seconder of the motion, whose observations he believed were
in complete unison with the sentiments both of that house
and of the country. (Cheers.) The question which had been
raised was no doubt one of great European interest, and one
which justly commanded a great share of public attention
in this country; it was one which therefore might well en-
gage the attention of the House of Commons, and it was one
upon which her Majesty's Government was free to admit
they had a right to give the fullest and most complete in-
formation. (Hear.) To the motion, therefore, for the pro-
duction of all the correspondence, he was most ready to as-
sent, merely with the trifling addition of "or extracts" in
the wording of the motion. (Cheers.) However, he could
not help thinking that a protracted discussion could be bet-
ter maintained after the house had been in possession of
these papers, which would show the position of the question
as regarded England, France, and Sardinia. The house
would then be able to judge fairly of the course which the
Government had•adopted. His hon. friend had expressed a
hope that there might be an unanimous expression of opin-
ion on this motion, and although there was no way by which
it could formally be recorded, he (Sir G. Grey) was sure
that no one who rose would offer any dissent to its general
purport. Every one in that house must, he was sure, join
in earnestly deprecating the annexation of Savoy—(loud
cheers)—not only in the interest of that country itself, but
in view of the complications which such annexation might
entail on Europe. (Hear, hear.) He could not but think
that his hon. friend who had seconded the motion would
have adopted a different tone in addressing the Government
had he read the papers which were about to be produced.
He would not have called upon them for any disclaimer of
political views or subserviency to France in ratifying the
commercial treaty, or of the fact that the treaty had the
slightest connection whatever with the questions of Nice
and Savoy. That disclaimer he (Sir U. Grey) was prepared
to make in the fullest manner, and he could assure the
house that the commercial treaty had not the slightest rela-
tion to those matters. (Hear.) Their hands were perfectly
free, and they hadexpressed in clearand unambiguous terms
their opinion of the annexation of Nice and Savoy. (Cheers.)
One word as to the despatch of his noble friend near him,
which had been treated byhis hon. friend as avoluntary pro-
posal for the settlement of the affairs of Europe. His hon.
friend said that they were departing from the neutrality of
England in pressing the annexation of Tuscany to Piedmont
and thus giving an excuse for the annexation of Savoy.
When the whole correspondence was on the table the house
would see that this charge was unfounded, and that his noble
friend had volunteered no plan of his own, but merely im-
pressed upon the French, and other Governments, that to
Italy herself should be left the settlement of her internal
affairs. (Cheers.) The whole object of the English Go-
vernment was, that the settlement of the affairs of Italy
should be left wholly to the people of that country. (Hear,
hear.) He believed the policy of the Government would be
found to have been in strict accordance with the feelings of
the house and the country, and he trusted the influence
which they had used in the matter would not be exerted in
vain. He would only further express ahope that the house
would not enter into a protracted debate on the present
occasion.
Mr. DISRAELI—Sir, although this subject has been
brought before the consideration of the house in a speech of
singular ability by the hon. gentleman who introduced the
motion, I think, on the whole, it will be more convenient
that I should claim the privilege of refraining from giving
any opinion on the subject generally until the correspond-
ence has been laid upon the table. At the same time lam
not surprised the hon. member for Bridgwater (Mr. King-
lake) has made this motion ; because, although we find on
the part of the Government an extreme willingness and
prompt readiness to afford the house all the information in
their power, and even an apparent desire to produce papers,
which certainly is a novel feature in her Majesty's Minis-
ters, I may be permitted to observe that if that feeling had
been displayed at an earlier period of the session it would
have been more satisfactory. It will be recollected that on
the 2d of this month I made an inquiry of the Government
with respest to these papers, when I received a very unsa-
tisfactory reply, and it was not until the chief Minister of
the Crown in the other House of Parliament had made an
admission which seemed afterwards to be regretted, that I
was enabled to learn there certainly hal been communica •
tions between her Majesty's Government and the French
Government on the subject of Savoy. But they were so
far back as July last year, and the impression. conveyed to
the house by the Government was, that the whole question
had died away ; that it was not one of that
ir-gent and pressing nature which it is now uni-
versally recognised to be, and the house was consequently
entirely thrown off its guard. Then came an inquiry
by an hon. member who bad become possessed of certain
information, and it was not until he had produced his in-
formation that we found the Government prepared to meet
the house with frankness. However I may feel it due to
myself and others to press on an inquiry in this important
matter, I shall at present scrupulously refrain from enter-
ing into the merits of the question. When the papers are
in the possession of the house I am sure we shall all feel
that no more important documents could be placed in our
hands, and the time will come when we shall be able to
give the subject our grave deliberation. (Hear.)
Mr. M. MILNES agreed in the prudence of deferring
this discussion, but at the same time he wished to make one
observation. He trusted, in the absence of all authentic
information, the house world not allow itself to be led away
by mere i amours, or to give implicit credit to ' assertions
which, although made in the best possible faith, could be
nothing but assertions.
Mr. BOWYER expressed a strong feeling as to the de-
gradation of the King of Sardinia if he parted with Savoy,
and taunted the Government with trucklinc, to France be-
cause she was strong, while they treated with contempt such
weaker p )wers as Naples and Popedom.
Mr. Warre, Mr. B. Cochrane, and Mr. Kinnaird having
spoken,*
Lord J. RUSSELL said—l can assure the hon. gentle-
man that the papers will be produced as soon as possible.
They are now printing, and in one or two days from this
date I hope they will be-laid before the house. The right
hon. gentleman opposite seems to think that I showed re-
luctance in giving information to the house.
Mr. D I SRA.E Ll—ln refusing the papers—.

Lord J. RUSSELL—The fact is that when a question
was asked on a previous occasion by the right hon. gentle-
man on this subject, I answered him according to the state
of facts as they existed at that time. But when the question
was raised in another place, I placed in the hands of my
noble friend the President of the Council a despatch which
I had received that morning, in order that he might be in a
position to explain the circumstances that took place. I
could not give the right hon. gentleman the contents of a
despatch which had not been received. With regard to the
production of despatches the rule to be observed, I think, is
this : That when in correspondence with a foreign govern-
ment youhave stated the views of her Majesty's Govern-
ment, you should not produce that despatch till that foreign
government has had time to receive it, and if they should
'think proper, to answer it. I wrote a despatch to Lord Cow-
ley, to be by him laid before M. Thouvenel, who had a week
or more to reply to it. I have no objection to produce that
despatch, because if he thought it desirable he could have
given an answer before that time. But it would be unfair
to a foreign government to present a despatch, complaining
perhaps, inquiring perhaps, with regard to the conduct of
that government, without giving time to that foreign go-
vernment to reply. (Hear, hear.) I listened with admira-
tion, as I am sure the whole house did, to the speeches of
my two hon. friends who moved and seconded this motion;
but at the same time, with regard to that family pact of
which they have spoken, I can only say that her Majesty's
Government have no diplomatic information of the fact. The
fact of such a treaty having been entered into previous to the
war has been, and up to the present time, repeatedly denied
by the governments of France and of Sardinia. (Hear,
hear.) That that matter has been, and is still, in agitation,
I cannot deny. The hon. baronet has said, and said truly,
that the powers of Europe had guaranteed Chablais and
Faucig,ny as neutral territory, and that if it passed into
the possession of France that neutrality would be affected.
If the question was confined to those parts of Savoy which
border• on the Lake of Genera, I think it would not be diffi-
cult to obtain from France a part of those places for Switzer-
land, but we did not look to that object, we looked to pre-
serve the whole of Savoy—(hear, hear)—and we have not
discussed that particular question to Ehich my hon. friend
alluded, and to which Switzerland naturally looks with the
greatest anxiety. Another matter to which the ho-
nourable baronet referred was the fourth point of
the proposition which her Majesty's Government made for
the settlement of the affairs of Italy. I beg of him to con-
sider what was the state of affairs immediately previous to
the proposal of a congress. The Austrian Government de-
clared that if a single Sardinian soldier went into Central
Italy, she, on the other hand, would march her army to
oppose that entry of the Sardinian troops. On the other
hand, the Emperor of the French declared to the Austrian
ambassador in Paris that the moment an Austrian soldier
marched across the-Po the French troops would march to
oppose them. Conceive how critical this position was, and
how dangerous to the peace of Europe. (Hear.) The remedy
for this state of things was to be the congress. This ex•
tremely critical situation of affairs could net last much lon-
ger, because it was thought the congress was about to meet,
and would find a remedy for this disorder. But it was an-
nounced by France in consequence of a communication from
Austria that the conference was indefinitely postponed. At
the same time none of these declarations were withdrawn—
there was the same danger of collision. Was it not natural then
fora Government anxious for peace to make a proposition with
a view to preserve that peace, and to prevent the calamity of
war from occurring? Accordingly her Majesty's Government
made propositions with this view. The first was, that neither
Austria nor• France should interfere in the affairs of Italy
without the general assent of Europe. 'We did not get the
assent of Austria to that preposition, We did, however, ob-
tain a declaration both at Vienna and at London that
Austria meant not to interfere beyond her own frontier;
although she would not give up any of her own rights nor
those treaties which 'bound her to maintain tho rights of
certain sovereigns, yet that it was not her intention to at-
tempt by fUrce of arms to maintain those treaties. This was
itself a great gain and security for the peace of Europe.
(Ileac, hear.) Then her Majesty's Government went fur-

t her in the fourth proposition, which says that if the pro-
vinces of Central Italy were determined upon governing
themselves, or if they chose to annex to Sardinia, we would
object to any force being used to subvert such government,
,ind in thd other case would not object to Sardinia taking
formal possession. This is in conformity with what we de-
clared to be our p.licy from June to January that the Italian
people should themselves decide as to the form of govern-
ment they wished for themselves. The hon, member for
Dundalk had been able to speak his mind. (Laughter.) It
must have been'painful to him, with the whole responsi-
bility of the sentiments of Pope and cardinals resting on
him, not to be able to express them before. (Laughter.) We
have now heard those opinions expressed, and velUat the !lois

gentleman has to say of certain manifestations which took
place. To -besure there are manifestations that are not of
much value—manifestations that are caused by bad govern-
ment, and that are apt to be symptoms of revolution. The
hon. gentleman might have heard of a great manifestation on
Hounslow Heath. The adviser of the sovereign of that day
was asked by the King what that meant ? He (the adviser)
somewhat like the hon. gentleman himself, said, " Nothing ;
it is only the soldiers shouting for the acquittal of the seven
bishops." The King knew what that manifestation meant,
and saw the danger which threatened his throne on that
occasion. It was dangerous for sovereigns to rely on such
advisers as the hon. gentleman. Was discontent to be ap-
peased—was revolution to be prevented by saying that you
would never reform a bad system of Government ? We have
heard of princes who, like the Grand Duke of Tuscany,
violated the fundamental compact by which they sat on the
throne by withdrawing from the country, and the results,
both in this country and in Tuscany, were very similar.
(Hear, hear.) With regard to this immediate question I
cannot but think that although in some violent newspapers
a great deal of excited opinion has been manifested in favour
of the annexation of Savoy to France, that is a course which
the Emperor in his wisdom will long hesitate before he
adopts. (Hear, hear.) I cannot but see what every man
may see, that it would produce distrust for two reasons.
One reason is that such a policy would be in contradiction
with that proclamation—that magnificent proclamation I
must say at the risk even of being accused of flattering the
Emperor—whichhe issued. (Hear.) There is another reason
why such a course would create distrust. Former encroach-
ments of France originated in small beginnings only on one
side of a country, and yet afterwards they were the precur-
sors of conquests and the disturbers of Europe. (Hear.) I
am afraid if Savoy were annexed, even though a meeting
at Chambery was held in its favour, and even though the
powers of Europe gave their reluctnnt assent, it would be
the precursor of a long period of distrust and apprehension.
I believe, finally, it would not Lend to the strength of
France itself. (Hear, hear.) A country like France, in-
habited by a race so warlike, and at the same time possess-
ing in itself such resources, with such wealth and union,
does not depend for its security, its independence, or even
its power, on the question whether the frontier is advanced
nearer to the Alps or the Rhine, but on its own resources,
the spirit of 'its people, that unconquerable spirit of inde-
pendence which rules amongst its people, those warlike
qualities which have been displayed at all times, but which
never more than in the last war have excited the admiration
of the world. (Hear, hear.) Such is the security of France.
We -know what has happened to France in our own day.
In 1792, before she acquired Savoy—when her people were
in a state of disorder and apparent anarchy—she was at-
tacked by a formidable league, which extended from Turin
on the one side to Berlin on the other. She was, however,
able, by her own innate strength, and by the careful mili-
tary disposition of her forces, to repel those invaders and
to conquer the very territories from which she had been
invaded. (Hear.) The tide of conquest rolled on, until at
length her frontier extended from Hamburg in the north to
Rome in the south. Was she then more secure ? On the
contrary, three years after these frontiers had been so ex-
tended her enemies entered the capital of the empire.
(Hear.) Therefore I say it is not the right or the secure
policy of France to attempt to extend her frontier. Her
present ruler, without attaining to those brilliant conquests
of his uncle, had perhaps more sagacity and prudence.
(Hear, hear.) I have watched that character, and I cannot
believe that—seeing the distrust likely to be created—see-
ing the apprehensions and feeling of hostility which might
arise in Europe by the pursuance of such a prospect—l
cannot but hope that it will be abandoned in deference to
the general sense of Europe. (Cheers.)
The motion was then agreed to.
THE SERPENTINE.
Mr. COWPER obtained leave to nominate a select com-
mittee to inquire into the best means of cleansing the Ser-
pentine.
Mr. DISRAELI asked, before the house went into com-
mittee on the Customs Acts, if the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer would explain, according to custom, an additional
article in the commercial treaty with France, which had
been added by the Government.
MINES REGULATION AND INSPECTION BILL.
This bill was read n second time.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS MORTGAGES
BILL.

This bill passed through committee pro forma.
CUSTOMS' ACTS (WINE DUTIES) REPORT.
Mr. MASSEY brought up the report on the Customs'
Acts agreed to on the previous evening relative to the wine
duties, which was agreed to.
CUSTOMS' ACTS,—PROGRESS.
The house having gone into committee on the Customs
Acts, Mr. MASSEY in the chair,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
wished in the first instance to make an explanation respect-
ing the additional article of the treaty, as was very properly
asked by the right hon. gentleman the member for Buck-
inghamshire. The object of that article was very simple, and
was fully explained in the article itself. It proceeded upon
the principle that where a commodity would be liable to
excise duty in England, the same article if imported from
abroad shall be liable to a customs duty equal to the excise
duty of it was produced at home; it would be likewise liable
for any money charges according to the excise regulations.
Upon a strict investigation it appeared that the differential
duty of 2d. between colonial and home made spirits, the
allowance by way of compensation to the British distiller,
did not amount to a full compensation. On- that account it
became necessary to make some regulation to put the
British distillers upon an equality as nearly as they could
with the distillers abroad, more especially as they would
now be subject to a general and sharp competition with
other countries. Her Majesty's Government having made
this fact known io the Government of France, they were
met in a spirit of the greatest liberality. The change made
in the scale of duties upon spirits he should explain more
particularly when they came to vote upon that article. He
would now move resolution No. 4 in the printed paper,
which referred to the application of customs duties upon
certain articles therein stated.-
Mr. NEWDEGATE wished to be informed whether this
article of the treaty was applicable to the produce of France
only, or the produce of the whole world. He could not see
the necessity'for a treaty at all. This treaty bound us under
an obligatiod to France to admit the produce of the whole
world, which was a manifest absurdity. The French Go-
vernment would be in a position to say to the Zollverien, to
Spain, Austria, and Portugal, if Parliament consented to
this treaty--.-to say to them, England was bound by treaty
obligations to France, and therefore they need not trouble
themselves if they were to exclude euery article of British
manufacture from their ports.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
hon. Member had raised a question as to the construction of
the treaty, and had given an opinion that by the first words
of the sth article the Queen contracted an engagemsnt with
Franca, to abolish duties on certain articles, not only im-
ported from that country but from all parts of the world ;
so that if •goods came from Japan we should be bound to
admit them on the same terms. It Was true the words of
the sth article were general, and did not say expressly,
‘ being the produce of the empire of France." if tb e treaty
in express words stated this, we should admit those articles
irrespective of their origin, and then articles from Japan
would coree under the same head. But the words were
general, and did not contain any express covenant as to any
particular . country. This was the view the U overnment
took, and were advised to take, of this article ; but of course
itwas open to the hon. member, if ho thought fit, to raise a
question upon it.
Mr. NEWDEGATE reiterated his objection to the
articles of the treaty as they stood, and expressed a hope
that the Atturney- General would assist the committee with
the weight of his authority, as he could assure them the
opinions he expressed had been entertained by a high
legal authority. • •
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL referred generally to
the provisions of the Ist, sth, and 11th articles of the treaty,
as well as to the general construction to be put upon the
treaty itself. This was a contract between two nations,
France did not contract on behalf of all the nations of Eu-
rope, neither did Great Britain bind any other nation in
Europe, but France alone. It would be a great absurdity for
France to contract on behalf of the great Powers of Europe,
or for Great Britain to contract with France, without any
engagement with them to do so. The result was that the
treaty as a contract could not bind any other power in
Europe ; its obligations rested with them alone. The treaty
was between two parties—they were the domini—they
could alone release, altar, or discharge, that contract. The
motive for or key of the treaty was plainly enough de-
scribed in the preamble, in which the motive which
animated the two high contracting parties was declared to
be to promote the mutual interests of the two countries and
draw closer the ties of friendship between them.
Mr. BLACKBURN wished to know whether a deputa-
tion had not arrived in London from Manchester for the
purpose of pointing out that the duty on Manchester goods
imported into France woual be 45 per cent., instead of 30
per cent., as provided by the treaty.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
no such deputation had been to him, nor did he know any-
thing of the matter. The rates of duties would be fixed by
both Governments, and not by one only.
Mr. TURNER said the prosperity of Manchester had
teen great for some time past, but not to the exaggerated
extent stated by the hon. gentleman. He thought the esti-
mate of value calculated on the prices of the last six months
would be erroneous for the purpose of fixing the duties.
Mr. BLACKBURN said it appeared he was not so very
wrong after all in describing the prosperity of Manchester,
even if it had not been so great as he had stated. If it were
true, however, that the prosperity of Manchester had been'
so very recent as the hon. member described, the Manchester
manufacturers would gain no advantage at all, for the me-
dium price during the last six months was to be taken as the
advalorem duty,_

Mr. HALIMMTON asked whether it was to be under-
stood that goods direct from Algeria were to be admitted
into, England, whilst goods from the British colonies were
not to have the same privilege of admission into France F
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that whereas we
stipulated for the productions of the United Kingdom
generally, France stipulated for those of France, and also,
by a separate article, for those of Algeria also. To that
exTent Algeria was a favoured colony.
Lord J. MANNERS inquired why it was that Algeria
was favoured by France, whereas no mention was made of
the British colonies ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER explained
that Franee was in a condition with respect to Algeria very
different from that in which we were tjwards our colonies.
England could not deal with her colonies as France could
deal with Algeria. Canada had been raising her duties
lately upon imported goods, which had been considered by
some persons a kind of protective measure against British
manufactures. But the exclusion of the British colonies
was a proof of the political liberty which they enjoyed.
(Hear, hoar.)
Mr. lIA.LIBURTON said he understood then that the
honse had no power to grant privileges to a colony. (Mur •
murs.) The privileges of a colony were not to be considered,
because they could not deal with a colony. (Murmurs of
dissent.)
Mr. BL A.CK BURN asked whether, if goods were shipped
from Ceylon to Britain, and thence to France, they would
come under the same regulations as the produce of England
itself'
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, said he
must answer that question with some hesitation and reserve,
as the question was not approached by the treaty.
Mr. BLACKBURN said that admission proved that there
words in Article I. respecting "British manufactures im-
ported from the United Kingdom into France" did
late to the British colonies. (Hear.)
Mr. DANBY SEYMOUR observed if that were so then
therl would be need of a supplementary treaty.
The following articles, to be made free of duty (under the
treaty), were then agreed to—agates or c zaelians, Sce.
Upon the a tide of apples,
Mr. B ENTINCK rose (amidst sornelaughter) and said
ho
thought the inexplicable Gordian knot of this treaty would
have to be unravelled some day or other with the sword. He
thought the question of apples was one of considerable im-
portance. (A laugh.) It seemed to him that free traders,
whether of the old original school, as the hon. member fo;
Birmingham, or the Chancellor of the Exchequer, his con-
vert,
of late years ignored altogether the existence of the
rural districts of this country. Ho was no great produce of
apples himself—(laughter)—bat he recommended hen.
gen-
tlemen •'
who represented the rural districts, or rathe