The Sun.
London, England, 1858-05-29 00:00:00

lord consult some member of the late Government in the
House of Commons I (Hear.) Why did he not go to
the noble lord the member for Tiverton ? (Hear.) There
is not, I believe, existing at present such an estrange-
ment between the noble lord and the noble lord the
member for Tiverton as to prevent a frank and candid
communication between them upon the subject. (Hear,
and laughter.) If he had consulted the noble lord tho

member for Tiverton, perhaps he might have found that
that noble lord, as far as his own judgment and public
experience went, would not have agreed with Lord Cla-
rendon as to the impression upon his mind. (Hear.)
Why, what happened two days before the break up of

the late Government ! The hen. gentleman the member
fcr Devizes rose and put a question to the noble lord
then at the head of the Government., having reference to
our policy with regard to France ; and what said the
noble lord ! (Hear.) Why, Sir, he rose in his place and
said—

" Before I answer the question of the hon. gentleman
I would wish to put a question to the house. (Hear) I
would ask the house what is their wish and what is their

intention on a matter of great national importance. Is I
it their wish and intention that those friendly and confi-
dential relations which so happily now subsist between
the Governments of England and France should be
maintained ; or is it their wish and intention to infuse
into the relations between the two countries a spirit of
irritation, of bitterness, and of animosity t"
And the noble lord declined to answer the question.
(Hear.) Now that was, I believe, only 48 hours before
the break up of the late Government, and the noble
lord conveyed to the house, when he declined to
answer the question, that asking that question might
alone decide the issues•of peace or war. (Hear.) Allow
me to recommend the noble lord, who professes such ex-
traordinary astonishment at hearing that three months
ago our relations with France were of a character so
delicate, to consult the noble lord the member for Tiver-
ton upon the subject. Well, sir, at about the same period
the noble lord will remember that the Ambassador of
France quitted the Court to which he was accredited
and returned to his own country • and such a step is only
taken, as the noble lord must know, and as every one
knows, in a critical state of affairs. (Hear.) The noble
lord is astonished that I should hare referred to that
critical nature of our relations with France. (Hear.)
Why, sir, three months have passed away since that
state of things existed, and what has occurred during
that period has considerably—l may say entirely
changed, the feeling which existed in the Cabinet and
Court of the Tuileries. (Hear, and oh, oh !) I make

that statement without fear of being contradicted by any
person of authority. ("Oh, oh ! " from Mr. Rich.) is
the hon. gentleman who cries " Oh, oh! " prepared to
contradict it (Mr. Rich—Yes.) Well, then, upon so
grave a subject I hope that he will come forward with
those proofs which the house has a right to expect.
(Hear.) Sir, the relations which existed between Eng-
land and France three months ago are very much
changed, I may say entirely changed ; and there subsists
at this moment, as is shown by the accord which now
prevails between them in the management of great
transactions, a closer approximation to that entire good
feeling which was prevalent a year ago, and for a long
time prior to that date, and which at present forms a
marked contrast to the tone and temper that pervaded
the two countries when we acceded to office. (Cheers.)
Bat, says the noble lord, it is not merely the right hon.
gentleman's statement as to France that requires expla-
nation ; a similar explanation is require 1 as to the state-
ment respecting Sardinia. And following the ingenious
hut not very candid tactics which have characterised
the whole construction of this not very terrible
attack, the noble lord sought again to convey to the
House of Commons that in what I had said in Bucking-
hamsire with regard to Naples and Sardinia I relate-
seated that an attempt had been made in this house to
upset her Majesty's Government by encouraging a war
between those two countries. Now, that is not true. I
don't, of course, use that word in an offensive sense ; I
only mean to say that the noble lord has got up his
charges without sufficient care and reflection. (A laugh.)
The tact is exactly the reverse of what he alleges. I did
not assert that the House of Commons had endeavoured
by exciting a war between Sardinia and Naples, to over-
turn or inconvenience the Government. What I said
was, that there are persons who did this and who are
trying to do it at this moment. (Hear, hear.) I entirely
avoided it, because I felt it would be unjust, to lay this to
the charge of the House of Commons. On the contrary,
when the attempt is made, as I have no doubt it will be,
and when the influence of these arch-intriguers may to
a certain degree be felt in this assembly, I shall again
appeal on the part of her Majesty's Ministers to the
sense and spirit of the House of Commons, and even of
those who are opposed to our general policy, for their
support to enable the Government to prevent the break-
ing out of hostilities between those two Italian States.
(Cheers.) The noble lord represents that I have gone
down to the country to attack and malign the House of
Commons. Now, is it not true that when I alluded to
the late great debate, on which the fate of the Ministry
seemed to hang, I called the attention of England to the
extraordinary fact that, while the vote of censure upon
the Government was undergoing full discussion, and
when that vote had expanded under the marvellous and
felicitous handling of the learned knight for Aylesbury
on the last evening of debate into one of general want of
confidence, night after night thus " weak Government,"
this Government placed upon its trial, was defended by
the first men in this assembly, the first men in autho-
rity, in intellect, and in eloquence, not connected tee h
them in politics, not bound to them by any ties of poli-
tical co-operation or association—by men speaking from
their earnest convictions and lending their high autho•
rity, unbiassed and uninfluenced, to the maintenance of
truth and the defeat of a cabal ? (Cheers.) Was that an
attack upon the honour:or upon the conduct of the House
of Commons ? Was it not a publie declaration on the
part of her Majesty's Government that they had full
confidence in the generous justice of the House of Com-
mons—that confidence which they still retain ? And it
is in the spirit of that confidence that I trust I shalt be
able, with my colleagues, to baffle those intrigues which
I know are already commenced to inconvenience, if pos-
sible, her Majesty's Government. (Cheers.) But the noble
lord tells us he was extremely surprised—and this also
demanded explanation—at the observations I made re-
specting our policy towards the people of India, He
says I stated that we had prevented a policy of extermi-
nation in India, that we ourselves were oppo ed to that
policy, and that I had attempted to convey to the coun-
try that those who are our competitors for power were
in favour of extermination. Now, sir, neither in this
house, nor in the county of Buckingham, nor in any
other place, have I ever heard the word "extermina-
tion" uttered. But with that ingenious spirit of per-
version and that dext. rota tone of exaggeration which
have to-night distinguished the somewhat penurious in-
vective of the noble lord, and which have led him to
state that I went into the country to vilify the House of
Commons, when in truth I offered it the sincere homage
of my respect, he has here again distorted what was a
mere declaration of our hostility to a policy of confisca-
tion into an accusation that our opponents were in
favour of a policy of extermination. (Cheers.) I said
in Buckinghamshire what I have said in this house more
than once, and what I am at all times prepared to up-
hold ; that we are opposed to a policy of confiscation—
that we are in favour of a policy of discriminative
amnesty, of a policy that will respect the religion, re-
spect the property, and treat with a decent and due re-
regard the-rights and customs of the natives of India. I
regret to have again to reiterate these sentiments, but it
is forced upon me by the unseemly attack of the noble
lord, which prevents us from going into committee of
supply. (limo, hear.j But, continued the noble lord,
all these unauthorized observations on foreign affairs
and India policy subside into nothing eompared with the
unconstitutional declaration of the Minister to his con-
stituents that if Parliament had not supported them a
dissolution would have been the consequence. Now,
the noble lord may read my speech again, and perhaps
he will favour me with the passage in which that state-
ment is made. (Laughter.) He began by boldly de-
elariog that I had informed my constituents that if on a
the majority had gone against the Ministry there would
have been a dissolution of Parliament. At the end of
his address he told us it was very unconstitutional be-
cause I bad intimated that if the Government bad not
been successful "there probably would have been" a
dissolution. Well, that second version of my statement
makes the matter not quite so unconstitutional as the
first. All I can say is that I made no such declara-
tion as the noble lord has described, and that what I
did say on that subject was so guarded and so constitu-
tional—(laughter)—
that I think it is the right of any
gentleman to allude to such a contingency as not impos-
sible or even improbable. (Cheers.) No position, however
responsible, wisi,oh any individual may occupy, can, po -
sibly deprive him of the privilege of making a reference
so guarded in its terms that no man can fairly torture it
into an absolute declaration from a Minister of the
Crown. What I stated was, I believe, literally this—
" If, as might have been the case, we had found ourselves
upon the hustings, I should have appealed with confi-
dence again to your support, and I have no doubt the
verdict of the country would have been given in our
favour." (Cheers.) But the noble lord went into many
precedents against the policy of a dissolution, and he told
us that in 1852 he had never counselled the Q leen when
he was in a minority to dissolve Parliament. Well, it
would have been a v ry bold thing if he had—(a hes))
—for the noble lord had then, I think, be. n six years in
office, and he had several intimations that the House of
Commons wanted to get rid of him. (Laughter.) More-
over, be had resigned a year before, and the Parliament
at that time had been- elected under his own auspice P.
(Cheers.) That a Minister who has enjoyed the high pri-
vilege of having a Parliament elected under his own aus•
pleas, who finds that Parliament so dccilo that it sup-
ports
strteshoi for five yesirs, and though, when its pa' iei ce
is quite ex'iati led, it compels him to reign, 3• t
by the moist fortunate combination of luck in the world
vtiLa. renewal t a
_fell.
of his
lot of a Minister, it is willing to give
suiclis lease for another 12 months--thata Minister in
! ,:seosition should at the end of six
years claim the apra,of the Ruse of Commons and
co
the approbation of the
nt because he did not take
upon himself to advise
her
o Majesty to dissolve Pa• La.
meat appears to me one of theremarkable instances
of self-complacency which the annals of
though
of this nation can
produce. (Laughter and cheers.) ta
the noble
lord was evidently very sore on this subject
eictinof a dis-
solution, and though he bad exhausted
by the previous adroit perversions in which ingenuity
by
indulged, yet as his theme advanced he could not,
from the natural candour of his disposition, help
admitting that neither in this nor in the other house had
there been any declaration of a kind which could untron-
stitutionally influence the debate or the division. And
here the noble lord spoke only the truth. Neither in the
House of Lords nor in the House of Commons can it be