The Sun.
London, England, 1866-07-21 00:00:00

STATE OF THE NAVY.

Mr. SAMTJDA directed attention to the present state of
the navy, and to the very small progress that has been
made, especially of late years, in its reconstruction with
ironclad vessels, and compared these results with the great
augmentation that has taken place, and is still taking place,
in the armour-clad navies of other States. He recommended
that 12 new armour-clad ships should bo built with all ex-
pedition. Of these, two ought, in his opinion, to be of
2,500 tons each, and 1,000 horse-power, capable of steaming
15 knots an hour, and furnished with two cupola turrets
and the heaviest armament they could carry. ' Tke re-
maining 10 ought to be of 1,500 tons each, and 350 horse-
power, and all should be protected with iron plates six
inches thick.

Sir J. PAKINGTON recognised the great importance of
the question raised by Samuda, and felt that the time
had arrived when experiments should cease and action
be taken. Iron-plated ships and turret armaments ought
not to be neglected, and he hoped to utilise the recess by
making our naval defences as efficient as possible in those
respects.

Mr. T. G. BARING claimed for the late Board of Ad-
miralty the credit of having worked hard to increase the
number of armour-plated ships.
Sir J. HAY expressed his opinion that the cupola prin-
ciple had been triumphantly vindicated, and must be ac-
cepted as a complete success.
After a few words from Mr. LAIRD, Sir S. M. PETO
spoke as usual in condemnation of the reckless dockyard
expenditure which had characterised the Admiralty for
many years past.
Lord J. HAY defended his late colleagues from the cen-
sure cast upon them by the last speaker.
The debate was continued by Mr.GuAvEs and Mr. Alder-
man Lusx.

OUR FOREIGN POLICY.

Mr. LAING inquired of the Foreign Secretary whether
he could give the house an assurance that no step would
be taken which might commit this country to any inter-
vention in the war now proceeding on the Continent with-
out giving Parliament a previous opportunity of express-
ing its opinion as to the policy of such intervention.
Mr. HORSMAN followed with a commentary upon the
general situation. He characterised the proceedings of
Prussia as a wanton and deliberate aggression, and ex-
pressed his opinion that the general feeling of Englishmen
in reference to the war was to see Venetia given up to
Italy and an Austrian army in Berlin. One of the contin-
gencies which might call for the intervention of this
country had already occurred, and that intervention had
been evoked by one of the neutral Powers. Those Powers
were now standing in doubt and hesitation, and at such
a moment a timely declaration of the English Cabinet
might be valuable in the interests of peace. He
asked, therefore, whether her Majesty's Govern-
ment had received any invitation from that of
France to address any joint communication to the
belligerent Powers; and, if so, whether the English
Government had expressed their readiness to concur with
France in recommending Austria to accept the two con-
ditions proposed by Prussia as the basis of peace—the
surrender of Venetia, and ceasing to be no longer a mem-
ber of the Germanic Confederation.
Sir G. BOWYER said he admired the ability of the
speech to which he had just listened with great regret.
The right hon. gentleman stigmatised the policy of Prus-
sia in the present war with great truth as unjust and
aggressive, and said in the opening of his speech that he
would rejoice to see an Austrian army in possession of
Berlin. In that wish he heartily joined the right hon. gen-
tleman. (Laughter.) But the right hon. gentleman was so
influenced by the power of success, which often made all
the difference between a hero and a scoundrel—(laughter)
—that he actually concluded with a panegyric upon Prus-
sia and an invective against Austria. He (Sir G. Bowyer)
believed there was no Englishman, whatever his political
opinions might be, who did not look with reverence and
admiration on the heroic conduct of Austria. (Oh.) An
hon. member said " Oh," and he was ashamed of him.
(Laughter.) The man who could not admire military
prowess, and the endurance of defeat with undoubted pluck
and undiminished resistance, did not deserve any observa-
tion he could address to him. (Laughter) He believed that
the position of Austria was looked upon in this country
with respect. (Hear.) Austria presented a spectacle
worthy of the admiration of the gods—the spectacle of a
just man suffering the infliction of injustice. (Oh, oh.) In
what position was France placed? The Emperor held him-
self out as the arbiter of Europe—a political Jupiter, who
by his will could influence the course of human affairs ; but
what had happened ? Austria ceded Venetia to him and
accepted his mediation ; but the Emperor of the French
was told by Prussia to mind his own business, and the
Italians continued their operations as if nothing had occur-
red. In fact, the Emperor was snubbed by both Powers.
(A laugh.) All Europe waited in expectation, and they saw
the Emperor of the French completely defeated ; he suc-
ceeded admirably in making the famous step from the
sublime to the ridiculous. Some people said there was a
conspiracy between France, Prussia, and Italy. He could
not believe it, but there had been a conspiracy between
Prussia and Italy. What did they find about a week two ?
A speech was made by Prince Napoleon in which he said
that the French empire was the triumph of modern demo-
cracy —the triumph of a revolution which had been retarded
for 15 years by the Restoration and by parliamentary libe-
ralism. He meant to say that the time was come when the
banner of the revolution must be unfurled ; that the pro-
gramme of the revolution was astruggle against Catholicity
—that it must be carried on till democracy founded on the
principle of universal suffrage was triumphant. The first
obstacle to this was Austria, the most powerful supporter
of the Roman Catholicreligion, the supporter of federalism
against unity, and of parliamentary institutions as against
democracy. Yet after giving utterance to these senti-
ments, Prince Napoleon was sent to Italy on an important
mission by the Emperor of the French. One object, there-
fore, of the French Emperor was a religious war against
one form of Christianity, and another revolutionary war
for the principle of democracy against parliamentary libe-
ralism. He felt sure England would not countenance any
policy which had such objects in view as a war against one
particular form of Christianity, and against parliamentary
liberalism. This brought him to the principle of non-
intervention put forward by the right hon. member for
Wick. He did not wish to see England plunged into a
war, but he could not shut his eyes to the fact that, as
Austria now was, England might at some future time be
called on by two great foreign powers to adopt the prin-
ciple of democracy, founded on universal suffrage. It was
all very well to talk of nationalities in connexion with the
principles professed by the right hon. gentleman, but it
was a different thing to talk of nationalities founded on the
principles put forward by Prince Napoleon, and now en-
forced against Austria. (Hear, hear.) He thought that
England was bound to raise her voice diplomatically
against principles which were opposed to the peace of
Europe and the constitution of this country. He did not
believe this country would sanction the oppression of Aus-
tria, our ancient ally, and her exclusion from the Germanic
ck Bismarcke s
scimplaensh.nae The unprincipleder
in wnhieh
properlyh ee o n and
s
toCiusoetnrdfa,egdaeseor auwstei loclonan sOdnut hest: ofcri such
pe
dt ug cc at
ea (1.- the war, and in which he took advantage of his success. It
had been laid down by writers on international law that
war should cease when the object of the war had been at-
tained. Now, the object of the present war was the vin-
dication of the supposed rights of Prussia to the Elbe Prin-
cipalities ; but she was not satisfied with that. Owing to
the success which she had obtained in consequence of the
ingenuity of a gunmaker, she acted on the principle of a
mere buccaneer. Talk of fatherland. Why, she was de-
vastating fatherland; sho was taking its princes and shut-

ting them up in prisons, and acting in the spirit of acom-
plete buccaneer. He threw much of the blame of what was
now taking place in Europe on the Government of Lord
Palmerston and the Government of Earl Russell who encou-

raged these violations of public law, These Governments
considered that perfidy, fraud, and violence were legitimate
if they were successful. Thus they encouraged Count

Cavour, and Count Bismarck had only followed in the steps

of Count Cavour. Ho was indeed more successful because

he was more powerful. The Governments of Lord Pal.

merston and Earl Russell had demoralised the politics o:

Europe, and they did all they could to overturn those

principles on which English statesmen used at least
to pretend to act—(laughter)—on which they had
the decency to pretend to act, and on which if they did not
act they were at least ashamed. He understood that in

-----
another place an appeal had been made to Lord Derby with
regard to the state of affairs in Europe, and the noble lord
said he had just come into office, and these things which
had happened were caused by the policy of his predecessors,
and he was not responsible for them. Ho (Sir G. Bowyer)
I trusted the Government now in office would be actuated by
more generous sentiments than that which preceded it, and
he trusted it would not be attracted by that enthusiasm for
success which his right hon. friend the member for Stroud
had been influenced by. He trusted they would consider
the interests and the rights of our ancient ally Austria, and
would not entertain so preposterous a notion as her exclusion
from the Germanic Confederation. He trusted they would
not fall in with the views Of France, which ensued to be

founded upon some agreement between Prussia, France,
and Italy for the purpose of making their profit out of the
misfortunes and troubles of Europe, and he trusted they
would no forget what was dee to the south of Italy. The
Government of Florence had not gained Venetia by their
own prowess, for they had been defeated by the Austrians,
and if they received Venetia they would receive it through
a conspiracy with Prussia. He hoped the Government
would not take example from those who preceded them,
and would not sanction principles which might be turned
against ourselves, but would maintain things as much as
possible as they were, and not countenance the aggrandise-
ment of one power at the expense of another.
Mr. GLADSTONE—Sir, it appears to me that my hon.
friend has been somewhat severe and unsparing in his de-
nunciations towards those with whom I have the honour to
act. He has been so liberal of them that I hope I may not
be thought intrusive in venturing a comment or two on his
speech. My hon, friend delivered a tirade against the Emperor
of the French, of such a nature and character that I think
when the intelligent Frenchman reads it in the columns of
the British newspaper he will read it with much the same
feelings that we occasionally read the reports in the French
papers, of the speeches of a certain marquis—(laughter)—
that is to say with feelings of no resentment or displeasure,
but with feelings of considerable amusement, and yet more
considerable surprise, that members of legislative bodies
should be found to stray so far beyond the exercise of their
legitimate functions. (Hear, hear.) My hon. friend having
denounced the Emperor of the French, having denounced
Countßismarck and Count Cavour, says there is somebody
worse than all these. They are but secondary representa-
tives of the true principle of evil, and the true principle of
evil all this time and the true seat of responsibility has pre-
sided in the late Government of England. My hon. friend
has one faculty which is truly enviable, and that is the
power of delivering accusations in themselves the most
violent, and invectives the most extravagant, with a de-
gree of good humour which is always to be admired, and I
only wish that my hon. friend who exhibits thisunbounded
good humour towards us would exhibit it towards that
country of which he never speaks with good will— I mean
Italy. (Hear, hear.) I own I was astonished when I came
to the passage of his speech wherein, appealing to the Go-
vernment, he said he hoped they would not forget what
was duo to Italy. When I heard him say that I thought
for the moment that he was going to claim for Italy some
consideration and advantage. I did not think that after
having, in the earlier part of his speech, eulogised the en-
durance of defeat, he was going to praise the Italians for
the manner in which they had endured their defeat. But
my hon. friend has not a grain of admiration, or sympathy,
or pity for them. When he came to describe what was due
to Italy he at once destroyed all ground for a charge of in-
consistency against him, for that which, according to the
hon. member, is due to Italy, is that the influence of the
British Government shall be used to tear her in pieces, and
undo, so far as it is in our power to undo—and I thank God
it is neither in our power nor our will to undo it—one of
the noblest works. It has gathered together the fragments
of an ancient and distinguished race. (Hear, hear.) It has
made a country which was formerly the arena and battle-
field of the contending passions of European powers, and
assumed the form of a solid unity, and promises within
itself to be one of the great pillars of European liberty.
I am satisfied that the Government will remember what is
due to Italy, but that they will remember it in a sense pre-
cisely contrary to that given by my hon. friend. (Hear,
hear.) My hon. friend who has just sat down says that a
little while ago Prussia had in view an object in the war
which at any rate, if not just, was fair Now, that is a
distinction which I do not understand, but he said that she
had a fair object in view, and that the war only became
abominable and execrable in his eyes when it assumed this
double character. First, it came to be associated with the
liberation of Venetia ; and secondly, it came to be a war
for the unity of Germany. (Hear, hear.)
Sir G. BOWYER—I did not say that.
Mr. GLADSTONE—That at any rate was the construc-
tion I put upon the words. If the hon. baronet wishes to
explain them I shall be happy to hear the explanation.
Sir G. BOWYER—What I said was, that the legitimate
object of the war, if not a just object, was at least a fair
subject for dispute, the question of the Elbe Duchies, but
that after Prussia had met with great successes, she went
on with what I call a system of buccaneering, overthrowing
sovereigns, making and maintaining conquests, in a manner
which was utterly inconsistent with international law and
alien to the war itself.
Mr. GLADSTONE—I am glad the hon. gentleman has
stated distinctly what he meant, but it does not alter the
case, because we do not know that up to this hour Prussia
has overthrown a single sovereign. I know it not.
Sir G. BOWYER—Saxony and Hanover.
Mr. GLADSTONE —I know it not. It may be that she
has coerced those states for the purposes of the war, and
there is no doubt about that; but I say the condition of
the sovereigns of those states remains the subject for
future settlement, and no one can determine whether with
respect to those states Prussia deserves the charge of
buccaneering until we know much more than we do.
Let my hon. friend descend into the arena of argument and
consider what has been the condition of Germany. In my
opinion, as far as I can pass an opinion on the history of
the last half century, it has been a deplorable condition,
Germany, instead of being the strength has been the weak-
ness of Europe, the perpetual cause of difficulty and appre-
hension. The time has been when millions have been
added to the military estimates of this country for no other
cause than a fear of what would happen to Germany.
(Hear, hear.) Is Germany in such a condition that she
ought to be dependent for her security upon millions being
added to our estimates ? Why, the Germans are the most
numerous race in Europe— one of the most intelligent—
perhaps the most highly intellectual—united by close jux-
taposition, famous in history, having old traditions inferior
to those of no other people—surely Germany ought to be
able to defend herself. And why has Germany been weak?
Because she has been subject to the constant struggles and
the constant rivalries of those two powers, to neither of
whom has its high station been beneficial, on account of
those struggles and rivalries, while the effect of those
struggles and rivalries has been that Germany has been
deprived of the influence and strength she ought to have
possessed in Europe, and prevented from rendering to
Europe the solid service we had a right to expect at her
hands. It was not for us to determine in what way the
great German problem should be solved ; other influences
had to determine it ; but there was a great German pro-
blem. It was impossible for any intelligent Englishman to
regard the state of Germany, so weakened in her useful-
ness and neutralised by her internal dissensions, and by
the minute subdivision of her parts among smaller States,
for influence, in which Austria and Prussia were continu-
ally intriguing, without thinking it was to be determined
by other influences. I cannot but say that, instead of a
state of things in which Austria and Prussia were continu-
ally contending for supremacy in Germany, 1 believe
it would be better for both if one of those Powers
only should be in a position to wield the influence
of Germany. I can understand my hon. friend calling upon
us and the Government to use its influence in maintaining
the position of Austria as a portion of the Germanic Confe-
deration, if that old state of things had been a beneficial
one. But what has been the position of Austria for the
last forty or fifty years ? It has been most unhappy. In
her own dominions, formed of races difficult to combine
under one head, no doubt she has had great difficulty in
combining them, and her chance of doing so would be far
greater if relieved from her false position in Germany and
Italy. I confess, as far as Austria is concerned, it appears
to me that she made a great step towards her transition
from the place she occupied 100 years ago, when she re-
nounced the ancient and venerable title of the Empire of
Germany. That was an enormous change. It was a
change which to the common eye appeared to consist
simply in a name, but it was a name full of the power of
ancient and venerable traditions. Since that she has had
nothing to sustain her against Prussia excepting her own
policy and strength ; and undoubtedly there has been a
tendency on the part of Prussia as a progressive power,
weighed down as Austria has been, to gain ground. But
supposing that Venetia ceases to be an Austrian province,
what will be the position of Austria ? What will be her

population ? She will still have, I imagine, a population
of some thirty-two or thirty-three millions. She will still

have a country of enormous fertility. She is not so fa-
voured as other countries with regard to the command of
sea-coast, but I take it for granted that she will retain her

great sea port upon the Adriatic. I will not say what
might be reasonable after a long protracted war; but if
these things are tobe settled by equity, or any other power
but the sword, it appears that no nationality or historical

geography would justify them in including Trieste in Italy.
(Hoar, hear.) Sho will have vast space of undeveloped
territory, and vast amounts of undeveloped resources. She
will have all those millions agreeing together and combined
together under the influence of good institutions. She has
shown herself—and I give her the greatest honour for it—
under the influence of an enlightened ministry, in the last
12 months, superior to one of the most tenacious prejudices
that still fetter the human spirit in regard to freedom of
commercial intercourse. It is impossible too highly to com-
mend the Austrian statesmen for the spirit which they in-
t atht
this
the
country.t iin e when they ehf effected tivh eetrll, eaty o
sf
h e commn
ot e
br
ec e-
sc:it et
hd
fore her a hopeful and noble work ? (Hear.) Is there
anything to prevent her continuing to be what she
has t.. 0 long been, and I hopealways will remain, one of the
great Powers of Europe ? Is it not even possible that she
may find that this curtailment of territory, this loss, this
cession of certain parts and characters which she was un-
able adequately to fulfil, though apparently loss will prove
to be a real gain. (Hear.) I know not whether this is
too hopeful a picture. In times of wholesale bloodshed
perhaps it may be an unnatural deduction to anticipate
favourable results to be wrought out through the miserable
process of a bloody war; but when these favourable re-
sults do appear to rise up before us it is not too much to

hope that the three parties to the war—namely, Germany
on the north, Austria, and Italy—will be both strongerand
happier, and in better harmony together after the war than
they were before it. That blessed consummation, I think,
we should all desire, and whether much or little be in our
power, we should do nothing to impede or prevent it.
(Cheers.) _ _

Lord STANLEY—This debate has lasted for some time,
and, as was to be expected, many and various opinions
have been apnea I hope it will not be supposed that