The Sun.
London, England, 1858-03-02 00:00:00

18NS,

attempt had come on his life or security. In such a case
the injured friend would say :" An attempt has been made
upon my life ; I know that you did not wish it success ;
and I am sure you will do all in your power to prevent its
repetition." What would your lordships have thought of
the person so addressed were ,he to reply, " I am s Pay that
these people have attempted to kill you, but yqu must take
care of yourself, and, as you presume to allude to them,
I can tell you that nothing shall induce me to alter my
domestic regulations." Clothe it how you will such was
substantially the answer which her Majesty's late Go-
vernment was required to return to Count Walewski's
despatch. lam aware that after the vote of the House of
Commons my noble friend opposite will not write such a
despatch. (A. laugh.) I could almost write the despatch
myself. I did not answer it, and I say "I" because I con-
sider that on me rests the responsibility of not answering
more than upon any member of the Government. Why did
we not answer it? We felt that great allowance was to be
made for the feeling that was universal in France, stagger-
ing as she was in her escape from an imminent danger.
We wished to avoid going into any unnecessary contro-
versy, and we thought we should better exhibit our sym-
pathy with France by considering what our course should
be, without attending to any of the nonsense which was be-
ing talked or written on the subject. It would have been
easy—the opportunity was, as it has been said, tempting
—to have written a despatch which would have made a
good figure in the blue book, and have used that despatch
as the justification of a restrictive measure. But we were
not anxious to figure in a blue book, and, besides, to make
our answer to Count Walewski satisfactory, it was neces-
ears that it should be time, and that we should be able to
disprove his assertions. Now, I assert that they could not
be disproved, and for this simple reason, that they were
true. (Hear.) Count Walewski says "It was in Eng-
land that Pianori formed the plan of striking the Empe-
ror; it was from London that, in an affair, the recollec-
tion of which, is still recent, Mazzini, Ledru Rollin, and
Campanella directed the assassins whom they had furnished
with arms. It is there, also, that the authors of the last
plot have leisurely prepared their means of action, have
studied and constructed the instruments of destruction
which they have employed ; and it is from thence that
they sat out to carry their plans into execution " And
then proceeds to say:—" But, M. le Comte, how diffe-
rent is the attitude of the skilful demagogues established
in England. It is no longer the hostility of misguided
individuals, manifesting itself by all the excesses of
the press and all the violences of language ; it is no
longer even the work of the factious, seeking to rouse
opinion and to provoke disorder; it is ainassination
elevated to doctrine, preached openly, practised in
repeated attempts, the more recent of which has just struck
Europe with amazement. Ought, then, the rights of
asylum to protect such a state of things? Is hospitality duo
to assassins ? Ought the English legislation to contribute to
favour their designs and their plans, and can it continue
to shelter persons who, by their flagrant acts, place them
selves beyond the pale of common right, and under the ban
of humanity ?" That, my lords, is strong language, but it
is literally true. My noble friend answered the question by
saying that we had a law against conspiracy, but it could
not be brought into operation, because there was not, suffi-
cient
evidence against the perpetrators of the crime. We
have had at ono time publications brought under our
notice, which we would have prosecuted but for the insuf-
ficiency of evidence. At anot her time the substance of a
speech advocating the murder of the Emperor has been
transmitted to us in English, but we could not prove the
French words. It was only very lately that a most dan-
gerous publication was circulated at a meeting, half of the
expenses of which was paid by Bernard, and as the law
stands we could not approach it. Now, knowing all this,
although Count Wale wski did not, how could I as an
honest man say he was mistaken in saying that assassina-
tions were concocted in this country—(hear, hear)—and, on
the other hand, what good purpose could have been served
by admitting the truth of the assertion, and at the same
time expressing our regret that we wore unable to grant
any redress? Such being the state of things, I suggested to
my noble friend at the head of the Government that it
would be better to be content with the explanation which
I had offered to M. de Persigny, and not to enter into a
written controversy which might continue that exacer-
bation in France which all friends of the alliance should
wish to see calmed. I said that it would be much better
to wait for the report of the law officers of the Crown,
and see whether a bill could be introduced and passed
through Parliament. We should then have had the
benefit of the debates in Parliament, which would show
to the French Government and the French people to what
extent the people of England were prepared to go, and
beyond which they would not move. I thought then,
and I think now that that was a friendly and cautious
course. I know how we were condemned for our silence in
another ;dace, and how Lord Hawkesbury's despatch has
been used against us and set up for a model, but any one
who knows the history of the two periods must be aware
that there is no possible parallel between them. Recollect
that in Lord Hawkesbury's time the First Consul was at
enmity with this country and lookingfor a pretext to quar-
rel, and, besides, made the most extravagant demands upon
the British Government. On the other hand, Count Wa-
lewski carefully abstained from making any demands on
us, a difference which I wonder did not occur to the House
of Commons. In 1802 the French minister, M. Otto, wrote
to Lord Hawkesbury on the 17th of August, making the
following demands --First, that effectual means should be
taken to repress the newspaper attacks ou the First Consul;
seconds that two French bishops should be sent to Jersey ;
third, that Georges and his adherents should be transported
to Canada; fourth, that the Bourbon family should be re-
commended to repair to Warsaw ; and lastly, that such of
the French emigrants as continued to wear the decorations
of the old regime should be sent out of the country. (Hear.)
Such conditions required an energetic answer, and Lord
Hawkesbury's answer was certainly energetic; but it must
be remembered that then we had an Alien Act, and neither
is it to be supposed that in consequence of Lord Hawkes-
bury's answer nothing was done. On the contrary the First
Consul, although refused his first demand, the English Go-
vernment declining to take any steps to alter the laws of the
press, obtained apromise of the removal of the bishops should
they attempt to stir up the French people to rebellion. The
British Government also premised the removal of Georges,
and expressed itself quite willing that the Bourbons should
rem ove to Warsaw, although not prepared to deny them the
right of asylum provided they did not disturb the peace of
the country. The trial of Peltier was promised : and with
respect to the emigrants wearing decorations, Lord lia wkes-
bury said their number was so few as to make them of no
account. Yet that is the despatch which is considered to
have preserved the honour of the coantry. But, although I
,did not send an answer to Count Walewski's despatch, I
repeatedly and in great detail informed my noble friend,
our ambassador in Paris, what were our views and opinions
respecting it, what we were able to do, and what we could
not du in reply to it. The French Government were thus
made aware of our views and intentions, and if they had a
desire to invite us to a means which would be repugnant
to the honour of England, they were informed confiden-
tially that it would be totally impossible to grant it. The
despatch which had reference to those private letters is
now in the possession of your lordships, but in order to give
your lordships an idea of what these private letters were,
I have referred to them this morning in my letter-book,
and I trust the house will permit me to quote them. Oa
the 21st January I wrote—" The morel think of the whole
matter the more allowance I make for the feelings of the
French, who believe themselves to be in imminent danger,
and that England, if she choose, might put then in safety.
W e kunw that this is not the case, and that we cannot
prevent conspiracies; but this cannot be understood by
men who are profoundly ignorant of our laws and customs,
and who reason respecting England by analogy with other
states, where police regulations and measures of public
safety are alwaya passively submitted to. Such men think
only of their own perils, and of the unfriendly obstinacy of
England in doing nothing for their protection. I have,
therefore, been perfectly frank with M. de Persigny, and
have spoken to him in the sense of what I have written
above. He brought me to-day a despatch from Walewski,
which ha I been seen and approved by the Emperor. It
was, I think, more moderate in tone, much more so, I
think, than our mat %Us mutandis would have, been. It is
impossible for any one to behave more loyalement and like
a gentleman than M. de Persigny does upon this painful
matter; for while he is in a state of extreme agitation, and
fully shares the feelings of his countrymen respecting the
attentat, he makes as much allowance for our difficulties
as you or I could do." On January 23d I then wrote:—
" The refugee question has been discussed in every possible
form, and l may with truth say that there has been an
earnest desire to do something which will both clear this
country from unjust imputations, and at the same time
give some satisfaction to public opinion in France ; but the
difficulties, when one comes to the practical point of what
that something shall be, are beyoud imagination great, and
everybody agreed that to ask for authority to send away
every or any foreigner when a foreign government may
suspect, or say they suspect, without even adducing any
proof of guilty purpose, is utterly out of the question.
We might just as well ask pr rliarnent to annex England
to France." On the 2d of February I wrote.—" A bill is
to be introduced when parliament meets which will make
conspiracy to murder felony, and you must rely upon it
that if the bill passes it will be amply sufficient for the
purpose, and immeasurably better than if we passed a
power to send away people on suspicion ; for what is to con-
stitute suspicion, or to make a man suspected ? --a denun-
ciation from the French police ? If so, it is clear that we
should be perpetually asked to send away people on mere
rumour, or perhaps the personal vengeance of spies, and
that the only result would be ill-reeling between the two
goverements. Parliament, however, would never grant
such a permission; because, setting aside all other reasons,
it would be inverting the fundamental principles of juris-
prudence in this country, where a man is al ways considered
innocent until he is proved to be guilty, and we should
have to propose that ho be considered guilty until he could
prove himself to be innocent." And on the 4h of Feb. I
added :—" What I foresaw has occurred, and the excite-
ment, or rather, I should say, the indignation caused by the
publication in the Moniteur of the regimental addresses, is
universal throughout the country. People here care no-
thing about abuse ; we are much too free ourselves with our
liras
ar bard words,heat and
there wanhdicohunr resentinghtomngaunet!roeticlai:korofwi
there is no risk or danger to which Englishmen will not ex-
-1 stand
your attention, but
lords, it is not my object to trespass on
pose themselves rather than submit to menace." Now, my
merely to show what were the commune.) diens which were
made to the French government. Lord Cowie was con-
resolution of the House of Commons. Now certainly
doomed for writing that despatch, and it was censured by
athere may have been one or two sentences in that despatch
which I had rather see omitted ; but I thought it better
to lay it on the table eutiro than .merely to give what
would have been called extracts. (Hear, hear.) But that
is a minor question ; the important point s whether the
matters contained in that despatch were true; and it is
hardly to be supposed that Lord Cowley woeld write that
which could be disproved by the very persons to whom he
applied for confirmation, no less persons then the Emperor
and his council of state. I think your lordships cannot
doubt the accuracy of that statement ; and I ask you
whether any rational man, not bliu led by party spirit,
could say that in this matter we toted in a way derogatory
to the national honour? (Hear, hear.) It is now five
years since I received the seals of the foreign department,
and although I am not going to enter into the general ques-
tion ofour foreign affairs, I can with confidence say thet
during these five years, perhaps the most anxious of the
alliance, the honour of the coup ry has not been tarnished
in my hands. (Hear, hear.) This bill has been mist e-
presented ; it has been called an Alien Bill, whereas it is
no more an alien than it is an English bill (A laugh.)
It has been called a French bill ; whereas, as I told you,
it was in the laboratory of the law officers betore Count
Walewski's despatch was reoeived, and before the ad-
dresses of the French colonels were published in the Mont-
teur. And even at the last moment this error seems to
have continued, for in the address of the Attorneys Gen-
eral, published this morning, it is said that the bill is "an
invasion of the principle of independeet action which has
hitherto been held sacred. by the Parliament and the
people," whereas by a -majority of 200 the bill was read a
first time in rho other house, and that after the despatch
was received,
Errora and misrepre-
sentation, it eves well
of
known,Count
h a
IW,
lahlte whsekoia-
answered.
indeed, has followed this bill from the earliest
to the lenient moment, I rejoice to gay that hero this

g

Colchester — 190' 450,
Harwich — 240
Leigh ijj 899 -- I
Malden I 4561 394( 163

......
5C
/568.

KIRKCALDY—FEB. 27.
We had good supplies of grain to-day of all kinclo• Sal"
quick, and prices of barley and oats 6d to is per qr higher
than the rates of last week.
Wheat. Barley. Oats. Beaull!.
First 4Bs Od I 30a Od 248 Od Os Od
Second 43s Od I 28s 6d I 23. Od r Os 01
Third 32s Od I 22a Od. i 18. Od 1 Os Od

COIL $44 iii( tql.—kteatorf 1.
Pricos of Coale per ton at the Cosa of. the market
B. d., Walloond, &o.
Walker Primrose .... ..... 12 61 o 8.
Ward's West Hartley ...16 01Fietton
......... I _
Riddell .......... a
Wantland, tic, Lambton ...................... 4 ;
Goeforth l7 6 South Hetton ....... '4
South Durham ~ ....19 0'

Ships at market, 16 ; sold, 17.

BIRTHS.
Buity—Oa the 27th ult., at G, Park terrace, Westbourneo
park, the wife of Edward Bury, Es., of a daughter.
HIINTSR—On the 26th ult., the lady of Kuala Hunter°
Esq , of a daughter.
#i 37,
JARRETT—On St. David's-day, Mrs. Griffith Jail"
Poultry, of a eon.
JONES—On the 27th ult., at Upper Westbourne-total
Hyde park, the wife of W. H. „Tones, Pq''
daughter.

ltonß IthAeG2EsthS.
MORRISON —PHILLIMPSI-ti , And,
Luton, Robert, the fifth son of Win. MOrrison, -r-ti"h•
Cliitoi-vill a, P kb an
ec am-rye, to Laotitia, second a cy
ter of Wm. Phillips, Esq., of Luton, Bedfordshire.
....r_.‘
STAFF—DALE—On the 27th ult at Lambeth Church, Jot
ttlt , at S"v,, of
Frkneis Et ward Staff, of Lawson-street, Great Dovlto
road, to Mary Elizabeth, eldest ,laughter of the late Der
R. Dale, of the Lion Brewery, Lambeth.
DEA Geo.
APED—On the 24th ult ,at the Charter-heuse, Mr.
Aked, aged 93. . Eaward
BAAJGR—On the 27th ult., at Eastbourne, Lieut. '-)
Baugh, it.N., aged 62. „rola', 13'
BLAKE —On the 28th ult., at the Grove, CanlP"
Blake, Esq., M.D., R.N., aged 76. „dry,' th•
CEOFTON—On the 23d ult., at Clifton, Vlce-Au"--
Lion. George A. Crofton.
__.........—.-__:_r--'rm----

-------
.01,7D0N : Printed and Publithed by MIJRI3O Y•-•t
of No, 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Otiicer ty
112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, ist the c°llll
D4ic1,01943a, Tuesday, Alvirgh 2, 1858.