The Sun.
London, England, 1866-06-12 00:00:00

where the honourable gentleman had obtained his
information, but ho might say that that being the
opinion of her Majesty's Government it was no secret
to Austria, as she was well aware that that opinion
prevailed seven years ago. it was the opinion
of Lord Palmerston in 1848, and notwithstanding
the most friendly feeling entertained by Great Britain to-
wards Austria, her Majesty's Government felt that they
ought not to recede from that opinion. He thought it was
most unkind and uncalled for to cast this matter in the
teeth of Austria when she was involved in another and
distinct misunderstanding with another Power. While
entertaining a good feeling towards Austria on the first
point, he could not say that their sympathy extended to
her second position. With respect to the question of the
hon. gentleman as to the preservation of peace, he regretted
he could entertain no solid opinion that such a state of
things existed, and with respect to the failure of the Con-
ference it arose from the assurance denianded by Austria
that no territorial aggrandisement was intended not being
given. Re could only express his deep regret that the
meeting of the conference was prevented by obstacles that
it was impossible to remove.
Mr. D. GRIFFITH asked whether any compensation
for Venetia had been suggested to Austria in the Danu-
bian Principalities ?
After some remarks from Mr. B. CocRRANz and Mr.
SANDFORD,

Sir G. BOWYER regretted that the Chancellor of the
Exchequer had expressed an opinion on the part of the
Government that Austria had better give up Venetia. He
wanted to know, not only whether the Government or any
members of the Cabinet had in any way intimated that opinion
to Austria, but whether the Government, in the private or
surreptitious manner of which they were so fond, or in
any public manner, had intimated that opinion to the Court
of Florence, or given that Court to understand that they
would use their influence with Austria to give up Venetia.
(Hear, hear.) He feared that this was the case, and that
there were private letters which would not be laid before
Parliament, but which, like the postscript in a lady's letter,
contained thingsllsf more moment than the public despatches.
He regretted to observe a disposition to throw upon Austria
the blame of the Conference not being held, but nothing
could be more unjust. Austria could not, with any sense of
dignity or justice, accede to any Conference in which the
affairs of Venetia and the demands of the Court of Florence
could be entertained. The Government itself must see that
to entertain such a question must be subversive of the law
of nations, because it would imply that the Government
held that the Court of Florence had some right to Venetia.
He contended that the Court of Florence, or rather the King
of Sardinia—for he would call him so still—(" hear, hear"
and a laugh) —had no more right to Venetia than to Middle-
sex. To recognise such a principle would lead to the utmost
confusion of all notions of right or wrong between nations.
Did they suppose that Austria could give up the Quadri-
lateral with any regard to her own safety ? The Quadri-
lateral was one of the bulwarks, not only against the en-
croachments of the Court of Florence, but also against the
possibility of tho encroachments of France. They all know
that Italy was now a province of France. Italy had no real
unity, for it was composed of discordant elements that
would not be held together except by force of arms. If the
cession of Venetia ought to be considered at the Conference,
why not, also, the case of the Danubian Principalities ?
What had Venetia to do with the question of Schleswig-
Holstein ? The peace of Europe depended upon Schleswig
Holstein and not upon Venetia. Why were the rights of
Austria sought to be compromised by a question not rele-
vant to the matter at issue ? Tobring the question of Vene-
tia into the Conference must be the greatest obstacle to the
settlement of the Holstein difficulty. That question was
troublesome enough of itself without bringing in the ces-
sion of Venetia. He was afraid it would turn out that it
was her Majesty's Government who were responsible for
the failure of the Congress, and not Austria. The noble
lord (Earl Russell) when he was at the head of the Foreign
Office was always fond of giving advice to other nations
how to manage their own affairs, and his policy was very
well described by the noble lord in the other house as a
meddling and muddling policy. The present seemed an-
other instance of this policy. (Hear.) If her Majesty's
Government must give advice, why did they not advise the
Court of Florence to be quiet? They were ruining them-
selves by the course they were pursuing, although he (Sir
G. Bowyer) cared very little for that. (A laugh.) Their
finances were a disgrace to Europe, and they were approach-
ing a state of national bankruptcy. The Government ought
to have advised them tolook at home, and especially tolook
at the south of Italy. If it were for the good of Austria to
give up Venetia, it was ten times more desirable for the good
of the Court of Florence that they should give up the Two
Sicilies. If hon. members would look at the correspondence
of the Times of that very day, they would find it plainly
asserted that what had been thought to be brigandage was
not brigandage, but reaction ; and that a guerilla warfare
was being carried on. In the south of Italy there
were actually committees of private persons whose busi-
ness it was to hunt out people who were in any way sus-
pected, and to accuse them to the authorities. They were
then arrested and thrown into prison, where they suffered
greater severities and hardships than were inflicted upon
Poerio, the friend of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
The King of Sardinia governed by force of arms in the
south of Italy, where, according to the Government, he had
been welcomed as a deliverer. If that were so, tranquillity
would long since have been restored to the country.
Year after year greater disinclination was displayed in the
Neopolitan provinces to submit to the dominion of a people
and a King whose language they did not understand. The
people of that country had always been greatly attached to
their native princes, they wished to see those native princes
restored (" oh, oh !"), and by the progress of events they
would be brought back again. Charles 111., an ancestor of
the present King of Sardinia, was still remembered and
celebrated as a patriot because he had delivered his country
from the rule of the Spanish Viceroys. Tho condition of
Naples at the present day was calculated to awaken sym-
pathy. With a population of 400,000, and properly the
fourth capital in Europe, it was reduced to the position of
a country town,with a decaying market place. (Laughter.)
So visible, indeed, was the decay that the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, were ho dealing with it in a Reform Bill,
would surely take away its members; and it might be said
to have been " grouped " already. (Cheers and laughter.)
Plainly, the King of Sardinia could never keep his present
territories. He should therefore advise him to give up the
Two Sicilies and the Papal dominions, which he bad
acquired contrary to the law ofinations, and restrict him-
self to the limits of his ancient monarchy. The people
groaned under the pressure of taxation, and exceptional
laws were necessary to make them submit to his govern-
ment. If, then, he could not govern what he had got,
how was it possible that he could hope to govern
Venetia ? The transfer of that province would only con-
summate its ruin ; and the Government in stimulating the
Italians to look forward to its acquirement was doing its
friends anything but a service ; it was encouraging wild
hopes and undermining those rights and laws without which
the peace of nations could not exist at all. Sooner or later
a break up was inevitable. The:people of Italy wanted their
native princes. (Oh, oh.) Ho was not surprised to hear
that cheer from hon. gentlemen oppposite, sitting below
the gangway, for he knew many of them held principles
utterly subversive of the law of nations. The Royal family
of Naples were at one time French, no doubt, in the same
way that our Royal family were originally Germans ; but we
no longer spoke of them as Germans,—we always called
them our native princes. (Hear, hear.) It was true that,
while they still reigned at Naples there were, as there
always would be, discontented people in the country.
(Hear, and laughter.) Yes, he repeated it. Look at the
history of the Old Testament. (Laughter.) When the Jews
were governed by God Almighty himself—(laughter, fol-
lowed by loud cries of " order, order ") —they were discon-
tented and called for a King. It could not, therefore, be
matter of surprise that discontent should exist in any State.
clarevethparit
He would tell the Government what would happen if the
nitcewsadsidnencoetssray
ertutfmortothltealy.
preservation France o would optalladesdien-
the south of Italy that she should march an army of occu-
pationin_t?
.t.hoesocounrtry.. She would thereupon take pos-
sessionsienies of those
hepeozinces. The Kingdom of the Two
a French Prince.
The Chancellor of the os
Was
aFrencb, probably be governed by
Exchequeree attained? (Hear, hear.)
this a result which her Ma-
jesty's Government wished t
this question of Italian policy st.tf had arrived upon
part
of
his
disposition,
conclusion, and
they all knew it to be
once made up his mind, he was reckless of
of theconsequences.
that having
;tthat
(Cheers and laughter.) The ChancelloriEj.chequer
would allow him to say as an old friend—(laughter}—that
he was so clever he often deceived himself ; by
self-persuasion he arrived at a belief to which he thenssex-
pected everything to give way. With regard to Reform,
the Chancellor of the Exchequer had plainly determinedto
listen to no remonstrances, but to force the measure upon
the house. (Cheers, and cries of " Question.") He was bent
on carrying the bill, though he believed if the votes of
members could bo taken by ballot it would be rejected by a
very large majority. (Cheers and laughter.) In the same
way, with regard to the affairs of Italy, the right hon.
gentleman began by deluding himself with the fable about
Poerio, invented by clever men at Turin, and he had since
encouraged the Italians, not merely to the brink of ruin,
but to actual ruin itself. To ask Austria to give up Venetia
people
Chancellorwh
was a monstrous iniquity and absurdity. Were she to do
SO, it could only consummate the final overthrow of the
ofo wereth et hEexparticularandfriends c
oaluleda
gcreatures
.o f the
against the present Sir R. PEEL concurred with the hon. baronet in the
was one of those
belief that a strong
cnuseof the Ringof ,o at first 1).-A,
fooling of discontent existed in Southern
Italy
wh Government. He (Sir R. Peel)
in which h© had
buineeticial to Italy, strongly aclvor•AtJ.l the
until he bad seen the treachery
edxopuebettwathioeutisle:o4:l::_:.,ooia:rked, and then be had begun to
this country
nfally failed.
government of Italy, and
owfolutaldlyPh:hona:e
soif,gtohoedlionse of Commons and of
ofth esthOeplpitiositiYtion.) He had y. He believed the
information which assured him
(Hear, hear, from
that in Naples and other partsno a things existed far
worse than before the union of thasttaimtepoofrtant "province with
Sardinia. He entirely dissented from
Chancellor of the Exchequer in crloin th(3
ep
noticer
14
fe cattiohnfagt hh; discussionbhi.oocutsew bays
'view taken by the
of the subject brought under
the hon. member for Bridge water.