The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-16 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS—(YEsTERDAY).
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his sett, on the woolsack

at five o'clock.
THE RIOTS AT IZINSALE.
1 The Marquis of CLANRICA.RDE asked whether the
Government had received any infornnalon with respect to
the late disgraceful outrages whichhad been committed by
regiment of Antrim militia against the inhabitants of Kin-
sale. The outrage was of the most disgraceful character,
as the officers knew well the Orange opinions of the regi-
ment.
The Earl of RIPON. said information had been received
at the War Office that a riot had occurred on the 12th July,
between the Antrim Artillery Militia and the inhabitants.
The most active steps had been taken by the magistracy,
and the Antrim militia had been remo%ed from the place.
Itwas theintentimoif Lord Seaton to institute a most search-
ing inquiry into the whole of the circumstances connected
with the riot, and he trusted, on the report of the inquiry
being received, it would turn out that the reports which
had s_t_ppeared in the newspapers were greatly exaggerated.
LONDON AND NORTH •WESTERN RAILWAY.
On the motion of the Duke of DEVONSHIRE this bill was
sent back for recommitment.
THE BIRKENHEAD, LANCASHIRE, AND
CHESHIRE RAILWAY.
The debate on this bill was further adjourned.
THE ITALIAN QUESTION.
- - -

Earl GRANVILLE, with reference to the motion which
bad been given by the Earl of Malmesbury for the produc-
tion of two circulars signed by Count Cavour, dated the
14th and 16th of June, and Count Cavour's reply to the
despatch of the Earl of Malmesbury to Sir J. Hudson,
dated the ith of June, was understood to suggest the post-
ponement of the motion, as the production of the papers at
the present moment might be attended with inconvenience.
The Earl of MALMESBURY felt that these were times
when the discussion of foreign affairs was anything but de-
sirable in their lordships' house, and had no hesitation in
saying that if his noble friend thought such a discussion
inconvenient at the present moment he would withdraw his
motion. At the same time, a portion of the observations
which he had intended to make related to a subject which
could not be productive of any inconvenience, and that was
the future state of the Duchy of Parma. He believed that
the dignity with which the Duchess of Parma had encoun-
tered the difficulties before her had excited the admirationof
all parties, and that it would be an act of injustice to her if
she was not reinstated in her position, supposing that to be
the wish of her people. Before the late Government left
office he made an appeal to the Sardinian Government on
the subject, and in the answer of Count Cavour to the pre-
sent Government statements were made in which he could
not agree. He was prepared to meet these statements one
by one, and refute each and all of them by dates and do-
cumentary evidence. But it was of less importance that
he should do so now, seeing that the Minister who signed
that reply, and who had published two circulars bearing on
the subject, and containing equally unfounded assertions,
was no longer Minister of the kingdom of Sardinia. He
should, therefore, do no more at present than protest
against the statements which had been made by Count
Cavour, taking another opportunity, if it thould be neces-
sary, of entering into the discussion. It was possible that
he might not have any opportunity during the present
session of touching upon foreign affairs, and, although he
willingly acceded to the request of his noble friend, he must
not be misunderstood if, speaking generally and abstractedly,
he said that it was not so inconvenient as some of their lord-
ships appeared to think for the house to enter into foreign
affairs, and discharge them even if a crisis should exist.
When he was Minister for Foreign Affairs he should have
been spared many misrepresentations if he had had the op-
portunity of explaining the policy of the Government, and
he thought it was far from being a disadvantage to the Go-
vernment from time to time to ascertain the opinions of the
house and the country respecting foreign affairs. Of course
that must be a question of discretion, and he was convinced
that his noble friend would not ask him to postpone his
motion without sufficient reason. He trusted that a discus-
sion would take place before the separation of Parliament,
in order that the Government might ascertain the feeling of
the country, and also state to the country their own opinions.
There was neutrality in peace as well as neutrality in war,
and it was of the utmost consequence that the country should
understand what line of policy and what degree of interfer-
ence the Government meant to adopt. •
The Marquis of NORMANBY, understanding that there
was no objection to the production of the despatch from Lord
John Russell to Sir James Hudson on the subject of the
alleged annexation of
,the Duchies of Central Italy by the
Government of Piedmont, would merely state that, consi•
dering the personal character of the Duchess of Parma,
and the attention she had always shown to the welfare of
her subjects, he trusted no attempt would be made to dis-
possess her of the status which she had hitherto held.
Earl GRANVILLE did not wish to be misunderstood.
Nothing was further from his intention than to suggest as a
general rule that matters of general foreign policy ought not
to be discussed. On the other hand, there were cases which
it was desirable to refrain from discussing, and that was pre-
cisely the
,case before their lordships. If their lordships were
to enter into a debate they would labour under the disad-
vantage and inconvenience of discussing a subject respect-
ing which at the present time they possessed very imperfect
information.
'The Marquis of C LAN RIC A.RDE said it was impossible
not to infer from the remarks of the noble earl opposite
(Malmesbury) that he, looked upon the retirement of Count
Cavour from office with no regret. Now he (the Marquis of
Clanricarde) thought no Minister of any country had come
out so well as Count Cavour. He might, perhaps, have been
indiscreet in some respects, but he had been animated
throughout by strong feelings of patriotism and liberality,
and it was a matter of regret that he had retired from the
office which he had so ably filled. (Hear.)
LOrd BROUGHAM believed that her Majesty's Govern-
ment Were not more ignorant of what was going on than.
the Governments of Fiance and Austria. (Laughter.) All
three sets of Ministers were equally ignorant of the inten-
tion of the two Emperors, who carried on their business
without Ministers. That was a degree—he would not say
of despotic Government—but it was a degree of unlimited
monarchy such as had never been known before in any other
country except for a short period during the career of the
first Napoleon, and even then there was more communica.
tion than at present. lie understood that Count Walewski,
the Minister of Foreign Affairs, received his first and only
intimation of what was- going on from the Empress, who
had received a despatch from the Emperor. It was a most
melancholy thing to have the fate of nations, the question
of peace or war, depending upon sovereigns who had such
absolute power that they not only had no control exercised
over them by Parliament, by the press, or by public discus-
sion, but not even that moderate sort of control which the
existence of an Administration imposed. (Hear.) With
respect to the war, it was one of false pretences, not one
single pretence of which had been fulfilled by the success
of that war. As we happily had had no hand in the war,
so happily we had had no hand in the peace, and he con-
gratulated the Government on being wholly irresponsible
for the terms of the extraordinary arrangement which was

now in progress.
The Earl of DERBY said his noble friend opposite, al-
though aware that peace had been concluded between France
and Austria,Was ignorant of the circumstances which had led
to the peace, the terms of the peace, and the diplomatic dis-
cussions which were taking place. It was understood that
France had entered upon the war as the ally of Sardinia,—
not as the principal, but as the subsidiary to Sardinia—and
he wished to ask his noble friend whether, along with the
information of the conclusion of peace between France and
Austria, he had received any information as to the conclu-
sion of peace between Sardinia and Austria. (Laughter.)
Earl GRANVILLE knew nothing more on the subject
than was known to their lordships.
The Marquis of NOR3IANBY then moved for the pro-
duction of the despatch of Lord J. Russell to Sir J. Hud-
son, and stated that if any motion was brought forward re-
specting Count Cavour, he should state his reasons for
differing from the opinion of Lord Malmesbury.
Lord EBURY expressed a hope that this country would
fully carry out the principle of non-interference. He had
conversed with many diplomatists on the subject, and their
opinion was, that if England would only wait, and not in-
trude her advice—would not perpetually interfere and ad-
vise—she would be applied to, and her opinion would then
be much more respected. (Hear, hear.)
The Duke of RUTLAND was of opinion that inter-
ference wag not at all times desirable, but still thought there
were times when it was the duty of the Government to in-
terfere. As a noble lord opposite entertained such a high
opinion of Count Cavour, perhaps he would endorse the
following exPression used by the Count on receiving the
intelligence Pat.her Majesty's Government had not re-
signed office in consequence of the recent vote of the House
of Commons :—.O Ir. was heartily glad to, learn this deci-
sion, for he thought it would be a public misfortune if the
Cabinet of whili Lei,d Derby is the chief, and which has
recently taken so prominent a part in the promotion of a
congress for settling the Italian question, should quit office
almost at the moment of commencing the discussion of the
vodka upon which it has Pronounced a strong opinion."
He (the Duke of Rutland) did not
generally
concur in
opinion with Count Cavour, but he Am so moat cordially in
that remark. (Hear, hear.) -
Lord STRATFORD de REDCLIPPE thought the
objection was rather to the manner to „moil
interference
took place than to interference itself. As this
conversation
referred to the affairs'of Italy, he might be allowed more
particularly to call to mind the affairs of Naples.
When he
was lately in that country, he was much struck with the
consequences of the particular mode of interference Which
had recently been adopted there. It appeared to him that
in consequence of the manner in which that interference
had been effected, notwithstanding. the immense advantage
we had of acting in concert with our French ally, by our
want of judgment in the manner of doing it, we forfeited
that advantage, and the result was most unsatisfactory. It
would be remembered that we withdrew our Minister from
the Court of Naples, and the French Government did the
same, in consequence of the line which the King of Naples
at that time took with his own subjects, and which he did
not abandon in consequence of our interference. He thought
if that interference had been confined to good advice, sup-
ported by the excellent example of this country, and if we
bad. not placed the King in a false position with his own
subjects, we should have obtained a much better result.
Notwithstanding all that could be alleged against the con-
duct of the Sovereign, and all that we had justly felt about