The Sun.
London, England, 1858-03-16 00:00:00

to their retirei.nent fro effiee, but ne (Cue Cennoellor ef
the Exeeequer) was b iund to say after a careful extmi-
natitin of the papers 'here was no clue whatever to the
information hen given to the house by the iible lord.
(Hear, hear.) He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
accepted without hesitation the declaration made in Par-
liament by the fir -t minister of the Crown, but it
was impossible for laineself and colleagues not to
feel what must be the inevitanle consequences
of such a declaration. (Hear, hear.) It entailed on
the present Government a great responsibility, which
they did not intend to shrink from--(hear, hear)—and
they had felt it their duty under these new circumstances,
for which they were perfectly unprepared, to submit a
case to the present law advisers of the Crown, They
felt themselves perfectly free from the engagement he
apprehended had bound the Government and State of
England, and when the present Government had ob-
tained that opinion, and duly deliberated on it, it would
be our duty to do what we think best for the interests of
the law and of right and justice. (Hear.) They would then
aet without fear or favour whatever, and do that which
they considered it behoved them to vindicate the rights
of the Sovereign and the rights of our fellow subjects.
Directions had been given for the production of all the
papers and correspondence relative to this question, and
departing from usua! practice the Government would, as
soon as they received the opinion of the law officers of
the Crown, submit them to the house. (Hear. hear.)
He moved the adjournment of the house, to enable the
noble lord to make a statement to the house.
Lord PALMERSTON—I am very glad to learn from
the right bon. gentleman opposite that the Government
feel themselves at liberty to take this matter into consi-
deration, and that they intend to lay before Parliament
the whole of the papers—not only, of course, the opi-
nions given by the law officers of the late Government,
but also, no doubt, the opinions of the law officers of the
present Government. It is perfectly true, as the right
hon. gentleman stated, that the late Government did
practically acknowledge the jurisdiction of the Neapo-
litan Courts. For a considerable time we were unable
to ascertain where it was that the capture was made, and
the impression we had was that the capture was made
within the juri,diction of Naples. There was no
ground, therefore, on which we could dispute the com-
petency of the Neapolitan Courts. After a consider-
able time there same from Naples documents—depo-
sitions, accompanied by a little sketch, which the
right honourable gentleman is well aware of, showing
the place where the capture was made, and that the
vessel was not six miles south-west from the island of
Sapri, beyond, therefore, the territorial jurisdiction of
Naples. We then took the opinion of tje law officers of
the Crown, but there was nothing in the opinion we re-
ceived which led us to think that we were entitled to dis-
pute the competency of the Neapolitan Courts. The
matter remained in doubt on the material point on which
it must turn—viz., whether the capture was forcibly
made, or whether the captain of the Cagliari willingly
placed himself under Neapolitan jurisdiction. The
opinion was that if the capture was made entirely by
force on the high seas we should have a right to claim
the English engineers ; but if, on the other hand, there
was a voluntary surrender, our right would not have
been such as it otherwise would have been. This was
the matter in doubt. It appeared clear that after
the landing of the refugees at Sapri the captain and
crew of the Cagliari determined to go to Naples for
the purpose of giving themselves into Neapolitan
jurisdiction and reporting the whole of the proceedings,
and they were on their way to Naples when they
met the Neapolitan frigates and gave themselves up. On
these grounds we were advisel that it was not that clear
case of forcible seizure on the high seas which entitled
us to make an absolute demand on the Neapolitan Go-
vernment for the surrender of the engineers. A demand
made must of course be supported by force, and we felt
that when a step was tie be taken which might eventually
and probably would lead to the necessity of employing
force to carry it into effect, we should not have stood
jastified in adopting such a proceeding unless we were
informed by oar law advisers that we had a clear case
of right against the Neapolitan Government which would
justify us in resorting to extreme measures. So stood
the matter, and when I stated the other day that
the question was still under the consideration of the
Government, what I referred to was that we were
expecting further documents from Naples and from
the Sardinian Government with respect to the demand
made by the latter for the restitution of the vessel,
because, if that demand were acceded to by the
Neapolitan Government, and the vessel were reetore
then, undoubtedly, our claim for the restitution of the
two engineers would have assumed a different character
from what it had before. That is what I referred to
(some laughter from the Ministerial side), and I think
the right hon. gentleman will find—though I know not
whether information on this head may be before the
Government or not--that we were expecting, so far as I
was informed, further documents from the Sardinian
Government with respect to the claim they were making
on the Government of Naples. I am glad the right
hon. gentleman says that he has no objection to laying
the papers before the house, and when they are pre-
sented hon. members will then be more fully masters of
the case than they possibly can by any verbal statements
made on one side or the other.
The motion for the adjournment of the house was then
withdrawn.
THE POLICY OF THE GOVERNMENT.
On the Report of Supply being brought up,
Mr. B. OSBORNE, pursuant to notice, rose to call the
attention ok the house to the course which her Majesty's
Government intend to pursue with respect to the busi-
ness of the session. He said :—lf I needed any justifi-
cation for interposing between the house and the recep-
tion of the report of supply I should seek it in the
unusual course taken by her Majesty's Government. But
if that course was unusual, still more unusual was the
reply made by the right hon, gentleman the First Lord
of the Admiralty, in answer to several hon. members who
called on him to give some sketch of the principles and
policy of the Government. The right hon. gentleman
the First Lord of the Admiralty, to my astonishment,
and I believe to the astonishment of all present in this
house at the time, referred us not only to a statement
made in another place, but to certain speeches made on
the hustings in Buckinghamshire and other parts of the
country. In the first place I believe we have no
cognisance of any statements wade " in another place,"
and gill less of any statements in ide on the hustings
in Backinglaamshire or elsewhere. Therefore, if I
needed to make any apology for interfering on the
present occasion it would be entirely owing to the most
unprecedented and most uuparliamentary course taken
by the right hon. gentleman. He has referred me to a
statement made in another place. Well, even giving
him the benefit of that statement, I nevertheless main-
tain tbat the House is as yet ignorant of any principle
laid down in that statement, and that as yet no policy
has been propounded. That statement was particularly
obscure in itself, and it has not been made clearer by
these references given me by the right hon. gentleman.
If it has not been made clearer by what was stated on
the hustings at Droitwich, it has become still more am•
biguous in Buckinghamshire ; and if any one turns to
North Leicestershire, it will be found particularly
evasive, contrary in King's Lynn, and utterly un-
intelligible in the county of Suffolk. (Cheers, and
laughter.) What was the statement made and the
course taken by the bead of the Government r As
far as we are informed by the public press the
noble lord seems rather to have made an apology for
his present conduct than to have given any indica- ,
tion of his future policy. It seems that the first
persons to whom he appealed to aid him in forming a
Government were two noble lords and a right hon, gen-
tleman, a member of this house, who were always di-
rectly opposed to his policy. So much for his attempt
at constructing a Cabinet, and his own principles. Well,
when these two noble lords and this right hon. gentle-
man did not think it consistent with their position or
principles to a-silt him in forming a government, he then
turned to his more immediate supporters, and, I am free
to say, has constructed an administration which, as far
as the personal characters and abilities of the members of
the Government are concerned, is equal to any Adminis-
tration I have seen iulthis house. ("Hear, hear," from
the ministerial side.) But the question is, not about the
abilities of those hon. gentlemen nor their respectability.
The question is, what have been their principles, and
what is to be their policy / Now, I am aware of the
inconvenience of referring to statements made in " an-
other plaoe," but I have no other course to pursue ; and
as I have been referred to them, let me see what the
noble lord at the head of the Government stated,
with one exception, to be the groundwork of his policy.
The noble lord spoke at very great length, but I think
that the country and the house would come to the con-
clusion that though he spoke much he said very little.
I think that his speech turned more on the exigencies of
his own position than the interest of the country. Now,is
what did the noble lord say was to be the course of h
policy 1 He said
My lords, it would bo idle for me to enteriwnthoicahnyl
general description of the opinions
or the views
abstract declarations of
hold upon public affairs. u
policy are in point of fact of little or no use. They are
mire words which may be construed into any sense, or, as
sometimes happens,into
sense. I can only say, my
lords, that the policy
o n
ftheoGovernment to which I belong
@dual:night naturally be expected from
will be that which I hop
Thienisctormatpi eons
i'tion of the the composition of the A
And there we are left.
look to the Admi-
nistration ! Before, howeve.r,. we
us survey their position
composi-
tion of the Administration, et
and examine their antecedents. A Government has
come into office in an acknowledged minority. It is not
pretended that they are the only possible Government.
I will take upon myself to say that there are several
hon. gentlemen on both sides of the house who, if they
had been oalled upon, could have formed a Government.
(Laughter from the Minister:al side, met by cheers from
the Opposition.) It must not be supposed--and I think
it wou'd be a most mischievous thing if it were sup-
posed—that the Government of this country depends on
one, two, or even three individuals. (Cheers.) Let- us
see, then, what is the position of an Administration
which numbers a considerable minority as its supporters.
(Laughter and cheering.) This Government call upo
n
the House of Commons for three things—for time,
for-
bearance,on and money. (Laughter.) Now, before grant-
ing any of these demands I think we are bound to ask
what claim the Government have to make them, and
what their past conduct has been. It appears to me we
have reached a new era in Parliamentary history. For-
merly contests in this house were conducted not merely
in order to obtain places, but for the establishment of
rival principles. (Hear.) What do we see now t Wos?:
on the opposite (the Ministerial) benches a party whoa. in
opposition systematically thwarted and opposed
o. 2,istshe
No,
measures of the late Government. (Loud cries t A
no," from the Ministerial side, and cheering from the
Opposition.) I repeat that a party. which systematically
thwarted the
late Administration-awn (renewed cries of

"No, no")—have ~o oe into their pl.SeeJ, ahel; not een-
tent wite ini,,gir.g forward Hoch Mee-Tires as were upon
the severe of the leou,e,
holee of their
predecessors with the view of pr,..
are rarieack7N the pigeon-
posing mea-mres whioh have nut" their confidence.
(Cries of "No, no," from the Ministerial 1nd...) In
answer to that "No," I will presently prove ley
aes,-ition. Since I have been a member-of this house,
if there is one thing which more than annther I have
heard insisted upon by the leaders of the present
Government, it is the necessity that a Minister should.
have a policy and a principle. (Cheers.) Over and
over again have I heard the right hon. gentler:lieu oppo-
site (Mr. Disraeli) denounce a Minister who had neither
a policy or a principle. Over and over again have I
heard him, in most magnificent language, and in peri-
phrastic phrases, denounce that hand-to-mouth system
which characterised the Whig party. (. laugh.) As
we have been referred to speeches made at the hustingr,
however, I may quote the language of the right hon,
gentleman the First Lord of the Admiralty (Sir J.
Pakington), who in his speech at Droitwich put the
same idea into more homely phrases. The right hon,
gentleman said,—" What Englishmen like is that whe.
ther a man be right or wrong he should have an opinion
—(a laugh)—and, having an opinion, should stick to it,"
(Laughter.) New, let us sea what are the opinions of
the right hon. baronet, and whether his adhesion is to
his past pri, ciples or his present position. (As laugh.) I
must call to the recollection of the house the conduct of
the noble lord at the head of the Government at the
commencement of the present session. On receipt of
intelligence of the guilty enterprise in Paris which we
all mourn, tbat noble lord called upon her Majesty'a
l
Government in very strong language to bring forward
some effectual measure for repressing such attempts in
this country. A measure was proposed in this hcuse by
the late Administration, and what was the condect of
the present Government ? When the hon. member for
Bridgwater (Mr. Kinglake) moved his amendment, which
I regard as the twin brother of the amendment pro-
posed ten days afterwards, what was the course taken
by the thee Opposition ? (Hear.) The present Lord
Chenoellor for Ireland (Mr. Napier), with all the solem-
nity which distinguishes him—(a laugh)---caled upon the
house to pass the measure. "Be Just," said he, " and
fear not." The present Chancellor of the'Exchequer was
loud in support of the bill. He treated the qtestion as
.lutist one of French feeling, and give his earnest sup.
port to the introduction of the measure as being agree-
able to the Emperor of the French. The amendment of
the hon. member for Bridgwater met with no support.
It was withdrawn, and the introduction of the bill was
triumphantly carried. Ten days afterwards my right
hon, friend the member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Mr. M.
Gibson) moved another amendment, which was singularly
ingenious—(a laseb)—but which, ifyou, sir, (addressing
the Speaker), had not decided it to be Parliamentary, I
should have said was highly irregular. (Laughter from
the Ministerial side.) The right hon. member for Ashton
had hitherto taken a different course. He bad always
been the eloquent and able advocate of principles which
are supposed to be symbolised by the lamb--(a laugh)
—but on the occasion to which I refer he mounted the
lion. (Loud laughter.) The opportunity was too
tempting to the right hon. gentleman opposite and his
party. He lost no time in getting up behind the right
hon. member for Ashton —(a laugh)—and by good ma-
nagement and considerable address—aided, I am sorry
to say, by the somewhat careless conduct of the noble
lord lately at the head of the Government—(loud laugh-
ter and cheering)—he deceived, I was almost going to
say jockeyed, the noble lord. (Laughter and cheering.)
Now, I don't charge the hon. gentleman who did this
with intrigue, but I do say that it was a manoeuvre die.
creditable to a party, and will not add to their reputes-
tion. (Cheers anti laughter.) I will not detain the
house by going into any discussion of the Conspiraoy
Bill. For my own part I lament that the noble lord
(Palmerston) did not send an answer to the Walewski
despatch—(general cheering)—but I look upon that as a
venial error, and, however strong my opinion may be,
I do not think the omission called for the withdrawal
from the noble lord of the confidence of this house.
(Hear, hear.) Now, sir, one word about this cele-
brated Walewski despatch, of which there have been
so many various readings. I find that no two gentle-
men agree about it. The right honourable gentleman
the present Chancellor of the Exchequer in his speech
here the other night called it an unfortunate lucubra•
tion ; the present Attorney-General for Ireland called
it an insulting despatch ; but what did the First Lord
of the Admiralty (Sir J, Pakington) tell his constituents
at Droitwich ! He eaid to them, "After all, my opinion
is that the despatch has not been well translated.
(Laughter.) I feel certain that too much has been made
of it, and that no offence was intended by the French
Government." Well, if that was the opinion of the right
hon. baronet he was bound, on such an occasion as the
last debate to have expressed it in this house. (Hear.)
He was, I think, bound to tell the house that in his
opinion no offence was intended, and that the despatch
had not been well translated. He was probably think-
ing of his own translation, but he ought not to have de-
ferred acquainting us with so important a fact until he
appeared on the hustings upon his acceptance of office.
I think the Walewski despatch has been made more of
than it deserves. I believe that if the counsels of the
noble lord (Palmerston) had been followed an answer
would have beeneent to that despatch, but as the house
has chosen to expel that noble lord from power on suoh
a ground, I, for one, am satisfied and bow to its deci-
sion. (Laughter.) We have been informed by a noble
lord (Lord Derby) in another place of only one measure
which he intends to submit to Parliament—viz , a new
India Bill. I think no one who recollects the course
taken by the present Administration on the introduction
of an India Bill by the late Government could fail to be
struck witb such an announcement. What was the
course pursued on that occasion ? It is, I believe, con-
sidered discourteous to oppose the introduction of any
bill, even when proposed by a private member; but the
hon. member for Huntingelion (Mr. Baring) would not
permit the India Bill to be introduced, and in another
place my Lord Grey, to whom the noble earl (Derby)
applied for assistance in forming an Administration, pre-
sented a petition from the East India Company against
legislation, before the bill was even submitted to this
house. On that occasion--the 12th of February—the
present President of the Board of Control (Lord Ellen-
borough) after abusing the Directors of the East India
Company, made this very remarkable declaration:--
" I think the time for making any change is peculiarly
inopportune; if there had been any obstruction on the part
of the Directors to the measures of Government, if they
had not made themselves in all respects ancillary to the
Government, then there would have been a necessity for
instant legislation; but I have never heard it even sug-
gested that there has been on their part the slightest ob-
struction to any measure proposed by Government. Stand
as sovereigns of the country before you think of forming a
new Government.. . . I regard with distrust the measure
whatever it may be, which the Government intend to pro-
pose. I most say I always view with great distrust extem-
porised constitutions. Time and God's Providence alone
make constitutions of great empires ! When men in their
self-sufficiency and arrogance think they can at once strike
off a constitution which is to be the foundation of the hap-
piness or misery of millions of our fellow creatures they are
baffled by their own weakness and the littleness of mind
Such
which
pperrseotnens defeatdstog hrtasepir ownso vast
objects," andtrortant a subject.
brought
rpresent
n into
Government.this house, L
wTI ae
wWaesllt„hwe hcoenurstheetabkilel wnbays
the p
right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer
said :
"I say again you are beginning at the wrong end ; you
ought to have adopted the course which I recommended
last year. When you had put down the rebellion you
ought to have sent to India a Royal Commission with
plenary powers, &c. Then when you had made yourselves
when the country had made itself master of the situation,
then it would hive been high time to legislate."—(The
Timm' report, February 19, 1858.)
But there was one speech made by a right hon. gentles
man who did not take the objection that this was an im!
proper time to legislate. He, forsooth, was for continu-
ing the present government of India for all time. The
right hen. member for Enniskillen (Mr. Whiteside)
answered the speech of my right hon. friend the late
Chance:lor of the Exchequer (Sir C. Lewis) by quoting
the observations of another right hon. friend, the mem-
ber for Halifax (Sir C Wood). Sir, I propose to
answer him by quoting his own speech in the same
manner.

The SPEAKER—It is irregular to quote in this
hosie speeches made here during the same session of
Parliament. (Cheers.)

Mr.B. OSBORNE—I quote these speeches as they
appear
laugh.) in print out of this House. (Hear, hear, and a
~.
The SPEAKER—Certainly quotations from lump
papers of speeches made in this house during the same
session of Parliament are not according to the rules of
this house. (Cheers.)
Mr. OSBORNE—I bow at once to what you hart
laid down as the law, but it is the irst time I have
ever heard it enunciated. (" Oh, loh 1") However,
lion, gentlemen wiil not easily forget what was said on
that occasion. The right hon.
gentleman the member
for Enniskillen denounced the Ministry in the strongest
language for interfering with the East India Company
at all. He said it was the most perfect Government
that could be imagined, and he likened the Ministry to
a weathercock for altering their opinions within four
years. What is their course now My Lord Derby
says he has great re=pect for a majority of this house.
Whence this sudden reverence! When we recollect
that the admission of the Jews to Parliament— (cheers)
majorities, r
—has been
I passeday it hereia bayp
eon
inems eorfo uhsy ap
on
cdr
iossyertwo helm irg
ipretend
that a majority in this house has altered his opinion u
to the proper time for bringing in an India Bill. (Hear.)
The right hon. gentleman who has referred me to his
speech at Droitwfoh found fault with her Majesty's late
advisers for their vacillation and weakness. I ask him
is there no vacillation in his own Cabinet 1 What coarse
do they intend to pursue with regard to the Bank Act /
Hon. gentlemen will recollect that in December of last
year a committee was named for inquiring into the
operation of this Act. The present Chancellor of the
Exchequer opposed the appointment of that cop:mitts:
He said there was no occasion for further inquiry, assd
he added that he was ready for instant legislation.
ple,ll
the right hon. gentleman, have they settltead_
talks of Tali:
U.
lotion, I ask him what course do
among themselves ! Then, again, when he
church rates ! (Hear,
tend to pursue with regard to
er
cburch-ratee, and has,
(Lord. Stanley) votes (against
in
favour of their total
I believe, written a p ik
Government is.
hear.) The noble loradintphemedmobthe fearoKyeir:Lityninn.
abolition. (Hear.) Then, what
ton) when he has brought
tend to do respecting education ! The First Lord of
the Admiralty (.!ihrtJb•oPrhak
g
eingtletnun the
swered
by the right alathees
forward a motion on this subject, ha/
Pa l
rweas
iydse
nbeen
swered by the right hon. gsutleinu the President of
Board of Trade (Mr. Henley), and by the right hon.
gentleman the present Vice-President of the Committee
of Council for Education (Mr. Adderley). 'Then, agair,
I should like to put a question with reference to the
Jew Bill. There are three right hon, gentlemen now Lei