The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-29 00:00:00

FOREIGN AFFAIRS.

Lord J. RUSSELL, after having laid on the table some
promised tmheaksetattheeosftaotuermfeonretiNgvnhiachfralirhs,avine
preference to answering various questions which arise from
I
had we not arrived at such an advanced period of the ses-
sion.y
I would still have postponed that statement had I
to have postponed that statement
expected that before Parliament rose there was a prospect
that some definite settlement would have been agreed to,
either by the other powers or in concurrence with Great
Britain, which I should be able to announce to the house.
But in the present state of affairs I think it would not be
right to withhold from Parliament a statement on the pre-
sent state of those affairs ; and,
in beginning that
state-
ment, I am glad to find that in the Ilfoiiiteur of this
day
there is an announcement that the Emperor of the French
is about to reduce his land and sea force to a peace footing.
(Hear, hear.) I hope that announcement will be the augury
of continued peace. (Hear, hear.) I will not go into any
details respecting events with regard to which the house is
a somewhat familiar.
sudden
dd e
n housean ids
unexpected well a w are
-manner.that peaceH
(waesa made in
r
hear.
The house likewise is aware that statements were made by
the contending parties—by the Emperor of the French on
the one hand, to the effect that he had expected that if the
war had continued, its arena would be greatly enlarged, and
that he might have to contend on the Rhine as well as on
nieagtiootn
the Adige. The Emperor of Austria
on the other hand,
declared that the neutral powers were about to pro-
pose
less acceptable to Austria than the terms of peace which he
obtained
by
of
direct a mediation,
negotiation
French. Now, though I think that both these reasons have
a certain validity—because no one can say that the Ger-
man Powers might not have entered into the war before any
tN:o'i: hitch with hasa
the s would have been
Emperor of the
long time had elapsed ; and it was impossible to say that
the neutral powers might not agree to some plan of media•
tion ; yet in neither respect
were the events thus foreseen
and foretold matters of certainty. with regard to the
neutral powers, at all events, that concert had been agreed
upon by, I believe, any of them
certainly not by her
Majesty's Government, either with Prussia or Russia, or
both. There had been overtures of mediation made on the
part of Prussia both to London and St. Petersburg. The
despatch of M. von Schleinitz has been published in Ger-
many, and the papers I have just brought up contain the
answer of her Majesty's Government to that proposition.
But though these considerations have no doubt weighed
with the contending Emperors in favour of peace, yet I be-
lieve there is a reason which has not been given in the state
papers, but which, nevertheless, had its weight, and I
should say considerable weight, both with the Emperor of
the French and the Emperor of Austria. I think it was im-
possible that a sovereign who had never been on the battle
field could have failed to have been struck with horror
upon being present in a field of battle where mole
.than
40,000—between 40,000 and 50,000 men, most of them in
the prime and vigour of life—lay killed and wounded. I
believe that sentiment had an effect upon the Emperor Na-
poleon, and I believe it made an impression on the Empe-
ror of Austria; and for my part I think it no disparagement
of great sovereigns who have rule over mighty empires,
that, while they maintain the policy of sovereigns they
have the feelings of men. (Cheers.) The treaty of peace
which was made at Villafranca on the 11th of July, con-
sists of two parts which are very different in their nature.
One part is that which made peace between the Emperor of
the French and the Emperor of Austria on the
consideration of the cession of Lombardy to the
Emperor of the French, which was to be imme-
diately delivered to the King of Sardinia. Now with
respect to that matter, I do not think it is for us,
who have taken no part in the war, to comment on or criti-
cise. (Hear.) If the Emperor of the French thought that
he had made sacrifice enough of French blood and treasure,
and that the further prosecution of the war would lead to
an immense waste of life and property, I think he was fully
justified and authorised in concluding a treaty of peace.
(Hear.) On the other hand, the Emperor of Austria had
no doubt a full right, considering
the further sacrifice of
men and treasure he would have t,o make, by the cession of
a province to purchase peace. That is a matter which was
for their own consideration. The cession of that province
does not snake any such disturbance of Europe as to give
the powers of Europe a right to interfere' with regard to
that settlement. Put the other part of the treaty is of a
very different nature. It proposes an organisation for the
future government of Italy. I observe that a noble friend
of wine (Lord Elcho) has given notice of a motion with
regard to this country entering into any conference upon
that subject. Now I observe the notice is given in terms
which I must say do not at all apply to the proposition that
has been made to this house. The proposition is :—" That
it would be consistent neither with the honour nor the dig-
nity of this country, which throughout the late negotiations
g which
has preserved a strict
dandimas used its earnest endear
yoursten to din
pr parties, anpahrtial neutrality between the
n
vent an outbreak of hostilities, to take part
in any conference for settling the details of a peace, the
preliminaries of which have been arranged between
the Emperors of France and Austria." This is a pro-
position in which everyone will agree. It is now merely
a question of arranging the details Of pt peace on which

these two sovereigns had agreed. There is not a doubt
it would not become the dignity of this country to enter
into the settlement of these details. But when it becomes
a question with regard to the future of Italy—when the
whole fortune:of Italy for years to some will depend on
what may be done either by the sovereigns of France
and Austria alone or by the states of Europe sitting in
congress, the question is one of a very different complexion.
(Hear, hear.) The Earl of Clarendon, in 1856, when
attending the conference of Paris to deliberate on the ques-
tion of peace between Great Britain and France on the one
side and Russia on the other, thought it his duty, in con-
junction with the Ambassador Plenipotentiary of France,to
bring the subject of Italy before the consideration of the
conference. He did so on the ground that the state of Italy
was important to Europe, and be declared that so long as
the existing state of afiairs continued, and Rome was occu-
pied by foreign troops, they could expect nothing but revo-
lution. He said it behoved the wisdom of the Powers of
Europe to consider what remedies they could provide. That
was a statement on the part of her Majesty's Government
which I have never heard impugned in this house,.that the
state of Italy was a matter for their consideration, and that
She peace of Europe might depend on the solution. On a
question which affected the peace of Europe, the opinion of
England ought not to be left in doubt. I will now, sir,
state what is the proposal which has been made to us on
the part of the Government of the Emperor of France ; it
is not, as my noble friend the member for Haddington sup-
poses, thatthe Government of Great Britain should enter
into a congress or conference for the purpose of consi-
dering the details of the treaty of Villafranca ; it is
of a very different nature. Ido not think I can give the
house a better conception of the nature of the proposal than
by reading an extract from Count Walewski's despatch to
Count Persigny, of which he left me a copy. I cannot
produce the preliminaries of peace which he has also left
with me ; they are signed only by the Emperor of Austria,
and are altogether informal documents, and will require to
be turned into a treaty to be hereafter signed. The articles
of the treaty are nearly word for word the same as
those which appeared in the newspapers, and therefore it
is less necessary I should produce them ; but if there is
any wish on the part of the house that I should produce the
entire despatch from Count Walewski, I have no objection to
do so. He says :—" A French and Austrian plenipotentiary
are about to meet immediately at Zurich to convert into a
treaty of peace the bases decided upon between their Majes-
ties. You are aware by my former correspondence that the
Government has always desired to see the great Powers
concur for the definitive settlement of, the affairs of Italy.
His Majesty's intentions have not altered in this respect,
and we hope that the powers will be able to meet, either in
a congress or_a conference, to confer on all the questions
raised by the actual state of things in Italy, and which are
connected with general interests." I will repeat the last
words to show what it is we are asked to do. "To confer
on all the questions raised by the actual state of things in
Italy, and which are connected with general interests." I
The house will observe the terms are perfectly general,
there is no reference to any treaty of peace. He adds—" I I
need not add that the very nature of the new relations to
be created in Italy will imply a preliminary understanding
between the different states of the Peninsula, who will ne-
cessarily be called upon to assemble in order to deliberate
upon the bases of the Confederation, whose establishment
the two sovereigns have mutually agreed to further." Now,
sir, with regard to the course which her Majesty's Govern-
ment have thought it their duty to pursue, we have not
thought it necessary at present to give any precise answer
to the despatch. We have thanked the Emperor of the
French for the communication, but we have intimated, not
in•writing, but through her Majesty's ambassador at Paris,
that there are one or two other things necessary to be under-
stood before a conference is agreed on. One is that we
should see the treaty of Zurich, which is also to be agreed
on. We are told it is still a matter of doubt whether the
treaty of Zurich is to confirm, under the signatures of the
plenipotentiaries, the articles agreed on by the sovereigns,
and deal with the details of the general principles they had
agreed on. The treaty, however, may contain less than
the preliminariss ; it may merely confirm the peace between
the Emperors and the King of Sardinia, and not enter into
any of the other articles, except the cession of Lombardy.
It will depend, of course, on which of these courses is taken,
and which will not be known until we see the treaty of
Zurich, whether her Majesty's Government will find them-
selves in a position to advise her to accept the invitation.
(Hear, hear.) There is another point to be considered I
hold it would be utterly useless to go into any conference
unless the Emperor of Austria was a party to it ; it is un-
derstood he objected, at the time he signed the treaty of
Villafranca, to any conference or congrese whatever. As
to a conference of the great Powers, from which the repre •
sentatives of Austria would be absent, and probably the
plenipotentiaries of Russia also, it would be totally useless
to call that an assembly of the great Powers, or to attempt
to settle the affairs of Italy. On these two questions, sir,
depends a third. What will be the points which the con-
ference or congress would have to consider ? The treaty of
Villafranca, I think, with regard to these questions has left
the state of Italy quite unsettled. While these are matters
of doubt, no advice given by the conference would be of any
use, and in order to settle them there must be a community
of views between the powers ; it would be just as good not
to enter into it at all as to enter it with a view to breaking
off on-a divergence of view which should arise at an early
period. There are three matters of very great importance
touched on in the treaty, and in my opinion in any treaty
intended to settle the affairs of Italy these should form the
foundation of its conception and execution. It is impos-
sible to say that the treaty itself contains any settlement of
those matters which in 1856 raised tho anxiety of her Ma-
jesty's plenipotentiary at Paris, which in 1857 and 1858
have been matter of deliberation among the powers of
Europe, and which were the cause of the very short and
very bloody war which has just been terminated. The first
question is raised in consequence of the strong opinion of
the Emperor of the French in favour of the project of a
confederation. The articles of the treaty do not say in
terms that a confederation shall be formed, it only states
that the two sovereigns will favour or will further the crea-
tion of a confederation. Novi sir, I believe the conception
is a wise one ; it has this foundation—the evil of Italy has
been that for centuries she has been a prey to the contend-
ing armies of foreign Powers, and if she could have an
organisation of her own, if the several states of Italy could
be united by a bond of union, bound by a federal bond,
which is ono of a defensive character, such a federation
would be strong enough to withstand aggression, and
there would be no danger of, and no necessity for, the in
tervention of foreign powers. I believe, then, it was a wise
conception, but I must, at the same time say, I doubt very
much whether the time has come when such a confedera-
tion can be carried into effect. Let us see what members
are to constitute it ; it is proposed to make the Pope the
president of it ; the Emperor of Austria is to be a member
likewise, the two archdukes, and also the King of Naples
and the King of Sardinia. Now, sir, I own Ido not con-
ceal my belief that a confederation so formed is hardly for
the benefit of Italy ; it is the nature of a confederation that
those who constitute it should consider in concert all gene-
ral subjects. (Hear.) Sardinia, as we all know, and as we
have observed with satisfaction, has for some years enjoyed
free institutions, and the prosperity that belongs to them.
How could it be expected that the Pope, as chief of such a
body, and the Emperor of Austria, or one of the archdukes,
as a member, could follow such a course or favour such
views as would be put forward by the King of Sardinia or
his minister ? Take, for instance, the question of liberty
of worship. a question much favoured in this country; we
have viewed with applause the establishment of freedom of
public worship at Turin and in all the territories of the
King of Sardinia—(hear)—in all his states there is now
freedom of worship ; in Tuscany there is what is called li-
berty of conscience; an Italian who leaves the Catholic
Church and becomes a Protestant;will not be allowed to
assemble for public worship ; when the confederation come
to meet and to lay down rules on this matter, how will it be
possible to reconcile the opposite views which the Pope and
the Emperor of Austria approve of with the liberty which
the Piedmontese enjoy ? It appears to me that, although
a confederation would be a good system if established in
Italy, yet the proposition made by the peace of Villafranca
will hardly fulfil the condition on which we could form a
defensive united federal union. Then, sir, there arises
another question with regard to the mode in which this
treaty is to be carried into effect ; with regard to
that it would be necessory to have a full and
complete understanding, before her Majesty's Government
would be in a position to assent to any reference to a confer-
ence of the great Powers. We all know that by an article of
the treaty, very short and somewhat ambiguous, it is de-
clared that the Grand Duke of Tuscany and the Duke of
Modena are to be restored to their states. There is great
anxiety to know in what way they are to return. (Hear,
hear.) The Grand Duke of Tuscany is in this position, not
very dissimilar from one once occupied by a Sovereign in this
country : he reigned by virtue of a constitutoin ; he violated
and suppressed that constitution; his people made repre•
sentations, and called on him to abdicate; he did not, but
withdrew from the country. He is in the position of a
Sovereign who has violated a fundamental law, and with-
drawn from the territory over which he presided.
. That is a
position very unfavourable to his return ; but it may be that
the people of Tuscany, who enjoyed many years of happiness
under may ppnea
under the mild rule of the Archduke Leopold,a __cdesire to
recall the son of the Grand Duke whohasa abdicated. y
In-
quiry has been made with regard to this ,
tell
the house that, although I havveervno official assurance,ma in
good reason to believe
fact, I feel convinced, and have
that the Emperor of the French has no intention to employ
French troops for the restoration by force of the Grand
Duke. (Hear.) I believe likewise from all I can learn, that
the Emperor of Austria has no intention—at least, he has
not avowed any—of using his troops for the purpose of re-
storing the two Grand Dukes. I think I may presume that
if he did intend, the Emperor of the French would not con-
sent. This being the case, shows at once, great difficulty
in carrying the treaty int effect;
Tuscan doubtful what
the result will be. Thep opl of
.y are now about
to choose representatives according to the constitution
which the 'Grand Duke had abrogated. They will
consider for themselves whether they will, as we did in
this country once, recall their Sovereign ; if so, her
Majesty's Government would not oppose it; but if the
representatives of the people of Tuscany, meeting to
declare the wishes of the people, declare that under a
certain Government, and under that alone, they can live
happily, it would be impossible for any representative of
her Majesty to go against that declaration. (Hear, hear.)
Sir, with regard to the Duke of Modena there is a great dif-
ference of opinion. Some say he would be received with
acclamation by his people ; others, that he can never be
restored except by force. These are all points on which we
must have the clearest understanding before we can go into
a conference. There is yet another question the most diffi-
cult of all in Italy—l Mean the temporal government of the
Pope. With regard to his supremacy, the declaration of the
Emperor of the French and of the King of Sardinia has
produced a change in Bologna and the neighbouring pro-
vinces. For the last ten years they have been kept in obe-
dience to theftpe by an Austrian garrison which has kept
order in wn and district. Lord 4rndhurst lately
stated the number of persons that had been put to death ay
the Austrians under martial law. I do not doubt the greater
portion of these had committed robbery, or other serious
rious
crimes; but go people like to have their criminal justice
ad-
ministered by forelon troops—their own law set aside, and
martial law to be applies) iustps4. 'f Consequence was that
as soon as the Austrian troops itkp Bologna, the Cardinal
Legate immediately followed them. 11 e
.went away
quietly in hi§ poach, no one molested him, but lie found he
must leave as soon as the Austrians want. The ease puts me

in mind of a story I have heard of a previous Cardinal Le-
gate of Bologna. Every one knows they often are the
authors of very refined and witty sayings with regard to po-
litical affairs, of which, however, they are bad legislators
and administrators. The Cardinal Legate was asked how the
city of Bologna was going on. He said, " Very well, indeed,
very quietly; but as to persons attached to the government
of his Holiness, there is nobody but the Vice-Legate and
myself, and of the Vice-Legate I am not very sure." (A
laugh.) The government of Bologna had since been carried
on by the citizens, and when Massimo d'Azeglio, a man re-
vered and beloved by all Italy, arrived with a commission
for the King of Sardinia, it was calculated 70,000 persons
attended his reception, and he was received with rapturous
applause. How is the government of the Pope to be made
palateable to the people of the Legations ? The Emperors of
France and Austria say they will recommend the Pope to
make indispensable reforms; but the Pope may say, as he
has said, " I may be driven from my throne to the most
humble village ; even there I will maintain my authority ;
but while I am on the throne I must govern according to
the dictates of my own conscience." It will be difficult to
deal with this. I am told the Pope is not averse to the con-
federation, that he has even accepted the presidency ; but
what will then be his position ? He has always said he
ought not to mingle in affairs of war, and it is not his part
trbe at. the head of a confederacy hich must be formed
with a view to kindle warlike operations. These, sir, are
some of the difficulties which attend this question: The
King of Naples, I am happy to learn, although he has not
done all that the friends of popular institutions would de-
sire, has made a beginning of putting an end to the system
which prevailed under the late King. It is said that amongst
the institutions of the late King—worse even than the dun-
geons in which his victims were placed—was a sort of law, 1
which resembled rather the custom of denouncing suspected
persons under the Reign of Terror in France. Under this
law it was said there were in Naples 30,000 persons under
the constant surveillance of adespotic tyrannical police, and
in the provinces so many as brought the whole number to
about 100,000. These persons were unable to practise any
learned profession, unable to leave their towns or dwellings,
constantly dodged by the police, who by the arbitrary powers
vested in them, became more powerful even than the sove-
reign, more powerful than the landed aristocracy, more-pow-
erful than the Ministers of the Crown. The present King
of Naples had made a beginning of putting an end to this.
I believe he is sincere in his desire ; but as yet the police
have been in a great degree able to thwart his wishes, and
in many places have not carried out his desire. He has now
however, chosen a minister, the Prince of Satriano, better
known to us as General Filangieri, a man of decided views
and firm conduct, and I believe that under his advice the
state of Naples will be greatly ameliorated. Well, sir, things
have now come to this position, that there is a treaty about
to be made at Zurich, and a confidential agent of the French
Government has been sent to Vienna to settle with the
Emperor of Austria what the conditions shall be. As far as
I can learn the Emperor of the French is most anxious that
the treaty should enable the Italians generally to have the
privilege of self-government. Now, sir, whether that be
probable under one sovereign or not, or whether the re-
forms would be more secure if there were two or three
powerful states, I am convinced, and her Majesty's Govern-
ment are convinced, that an independent Italy composed of
independent states in Italy would tend to the welfare of
Europe, would avert many dangers which have arisen from
the contests of foreign powers for its fair land and fertile
provinces, and would give security for the future of Europe.
I cannot say it is impossible that there may be a conference
or congress; but this I will say, that it would not be wise of
her Majesty's Government, and would be still less wise for
this house to come to any absolute decision on the subject.
(Hear.) It would never do for the Ministers of the crown
of Great Britain, who have taken a part in every great con-
ference in Europe since 1815, who took a great part under
Mr. Canning in the formation of the kingdom of France—
who took a part under my noble friend the Secretary for
Foreign Affairs in the formation of the kingdom of Belgium
and its separation from Holland—l say it would never be-
come us now suddenly, and without any reason, to with-
draw from any such meeting, any such assembly of the
different powers of Europe, if there is any chance that the
situation of Italy may be improved, peace confirmed, and
the independence of States secured. (Hear.) At the same
time, all the conditions I have mentioned must be well
considered before any such assent is given. I must say no-
thing could be worse than to act in the way my noble friend
the member for Haddingtonshire (Lord Elcho) supposed a
Government could—to sit in a conference to settle the de-
tails of a treaty which had been agreed on by the other
sovereign. No such thing has been contemplated. No
such proposal was ever made by the Emperor of the French.
He also said, and said truly, that Italy has been a source of
constant danger, and the seat of periodical revolution,' and
that the danger could not be averted, and revolution stayed,
unless the powers of Europe in general then consented to a
settlement, to which the people of Italy could give their
consent, and which would command the approval of rea-
sonable and just men in all parts of Europe. Such being
the views of the French, and such being the difficulties on
our part, before we can take part in any such conference I
will only say that, although the right hon, gentlemen op-
posite treat the regeneration of Italy as an illusion, and
deem it worthy of a sneer, I must say that if a country so
beautiful and so fertile, so endowed by nature, in which
have arisen so many men of genius of every kind—that
country which has been the subject of the same melancholy
chaunt, from the days of Petrarch in the 14th century, to
those of Leopardi in the 19th—if that country can be placed
in a position which shall give her some scope for her talents
and her energies, and shall enable her to take the
_place she
ought in Europe as one of the European family, I for one,
and I apprehend the whole of her Majesty's Government,
will rejoice to see it. (Cheers.)

Mr. DISRAELI—There was one portion of the noble
lord's address which appeared to me to be somewhat more
obscure than the house will be disposed, to deem desirable.
I allude to that portion of the noble lord's speech in which
he spoke of terms supposed to be offered to the Emperor of
Austria by his allies, and by him regarded as of a severer
nature than these which were extended to him by his op-
ponent. Now it would, I think, be desirable that the noble
lord, having touched upon that subject, should have given
the house, with respect to it, more information than I for
one have been able to gather from his observations. The
position of affairs is so critical ; so much depends upon the
conduct of the Government of this country at the pre-
sent moment, and the influence of Parliament owing to
the period of the year when our attention has been drawn
to these important matters is necessarily so limited, that
I shall offer no apology to the house for follow-
ing [the noble lord through some of his remarks.- In
doing so I shall I think be simply discharging my duty to
the country and my constituents, for it is but right that
the public should be made aware of the sentiments and
opinions of the house on this great question. The noble
lord stated to the house, though in terms of a somewhat
ambiguous nature, that a declaration had been made by the
Emperor of Austria to the effect that he had consented to
conclude the present peace, which all sides appear to think
unsatisfactory, because it was shown to him that he must
expect to receive severer terms if he were to have recourse to
the mediation of his natural friends and allies. Now, I can
not help pressing the Government for information on that
point somewhat more clear and satisfactory than any which
we have as yet received, and I trust they will not grudge
the communication of such information to the house. Were
there not, let me ask, certain projects of settlement laid
before the Emperor of Austria which he found more severe
than those which he has accepted ? Nobody can suppose
that this matter is a pure invention of so great a personage
as the Emperor of Austria. It would, therefore, be ex-
tremely satisfactory if the noble lord could assure the house
that no projects of settlement emanating from the neutral
Powers had by their agency, or the agency of her Majesty's
Government, been brought under the notice of that Sove-
reign. The declaration of the Emperor of Austria, how-
ever, is precise. A very important neutral Power, Prussia,
has come forward and stated that she knows nothing of
such a scheme having been submitted to her notice. I do
not collect from the noble lord that her Majesty's Govern-
ment were equally ignorant of that circumstance. I want to
know whether they were in possession of such s scheme. I
want to know whether, through the agency of her Majesty's
Government, that scheme was placed before the Emperor
of Austria. (Hear, hear.) I think that when Ministers
come forward upon a critical occasion like this, and wish to
influence not merely the opinion but the conduct of this
house, we have a right to require from the Government liberal
communications as respects their conduct. (Hear.) It
has reached me—it may be perfectly unfounded, but it
would be a source of satisfaction to this house and the coun-
try if they were assured that it is unfounded—it has reached
me that the scheme for the settlement of hostilities which
the Emperor of Austria, comparing it with the terms offered
by his enemy, found so repugnant to his feelings and inte-
rests was brought to his cognizance through the influence
and agency of her Majesty's Government. That, surely,
is a communication which ought not to be concealed from
this house, or treated, if true, in the ambiguous manner in
which the noble lord has slightly touched upon it this even-
ing. It may be 'said that this plan for the settlement of
Italy, which reached the noble lord as the responsible
Minister of the Crown, and which he in his discretion took
measures to place before the Emperor of Austria, was pre-
sented without offering any opinion of his own, and that
her Majesty's Government were not, therefore, bound by it.
But if this be so, I think hon. gentlemen wil agree with me
that the very fact that her Majesty's Government were the
organs of communication by which propositions of this na-
ture were laid before the Emperor of Austria is in itself a
species of sanction of the plan which was presented. (Hear.)
And if my statement be correct—if her Majesty's Govern-
ment so far agree that what I have stated is not incorrect,
and if they defend their conduct on the plea that they gave
no opinion of the terms which they were the organ of laying
before the Emperor of Austria, it will be satisfactorytb mo-
ment the house, for it is of the utmost importance at
ammenpltethknat:wwleedgsehooufldthbee
sionhipeeosts.ess( authentict a
willd
assure us that they made no
instructed
possession of
be satisfactory to the house if at the sammeuutimioaettioue Minis-
terstober
those proposals;
Minis-
ter to recommend Austria to
accept t consider, if what I
hear that it is utterly
Majesty' Minister at Vienna nor instructed that
oade mut etwon d
be correct, whit
have becausee
ta lette d then
stated—and
house see]
mfllo r
bae
probable result is this
is the probable result ?.
unfounded—if what I hTavebgeml
has obtained easier terms from
his Emperor of Austria
from
those whom he has
his enemy than he had . de-
scribed Her Ma' ty'
his natural allies. les s Government
as
have, in fact, again committed the same mistake which
in 1848. (Hear, hear.) At that they committedtime a
ede by the Austrian Government
proposition was made
have been, through the influence similar
to the terms which lllfiuence of
the French Emperor, accepted. At that time the proposi-
tion was made to close disturbances in Italy by the relin-
quishment
bloody war have become the bases of peace. (Hear, hear.)
Her Majesty's Government then was, I may say, this very
identical Government, because affairs of this nature are
carried on by two Ministers, the First Minister and the
Secretary of State, and the only difference in the two re-
sponsible individuals is this, that the noble lord was then
First Minister and the present First Minister was then
Secretary of State. (Hear, hear.) Let the house observe
how completely, if this account be true, it is a repetition of
the fatal blunder of 1848. Then we repudiated the propo-
sition of Austria, and said that Venice and the Venetian
territory must be a
.part of the territory relinquished by the
Emperor of Austria. We made that a sine qua non. In
the present instance these propositions, so slightly noticed
by the noble lord, were couched in the same vein, and con-
ceived in the same spirit. This neutral power—this
natural ally—would not interfere to mediate except en
terms of that severe character. But in the meantime the
enemy of the Emperor of Austria biers himself milder
terms, The Emperor of A• those terms,
..,ustria accepts
What our Posit' affair is toed without our,
The
on ? T
interfern
and without having obtained those WTO4

which we were the organ of introducing to the Emperor of
Austria's notice. But what would our position have been.
if when those terms of mediation were offered to us instead
of giving them the sanction of our transmission, and in:
degree of sanction involved
in recommending them through the instrumentality of
our Minister at Vienna to the acceptance of the
Austrian Government —if free froth all prejudice and
all passion, which unfortunately, as it appears to me,
influence the English Government when this question is
before them—if we had said to -France, " Those terms
which you offer are too severe; although in their general
spirit we agree with you they must be modified, and we will
then recommend the Emperor of Austria to accept them?"
If her Majesty's Government had done that if they
had been the means of the Emperor. of Austria accepting
the terms [which ultimately from the Emperor of the
French he accepted, in what a different position we should
stand to France and Austria. We should be in a great po-: sition. We should be a powerful mediator between France
'and Austria for the general welfare of Europe, and Austria
would not look upon us as one who had deserted her, Aus -trio would not look upon us with ill will, though speaking
of us as her natural ally, but as one to whom she was in-
debted for the terms which she now only owes to her great
opponent. (Hear, hear.) • I think that is a point upon
which her Majesty's Government ought to deign to give
more information to the house. (Cheers.) If it be true
that her Majesty's Government, with all the experience of
1848, with the immense advantages which they have had
in dealing with this question which they had not 10 years
ago, have repeated the same blunder, renewed the same
mistake, and placed the country with regard to this ques-
tion in so unsatisfactory a position, they owe much expla-
nation;to Parliament. (Hear.) Let me turn now to thepress-
ing business of the moment. No doubt, if not to-night,
on some other night adequate information will be afforded
upon the point on which I have touched. But let us look at
the treaty of Villafranca and this proposition, with whioh we
become acquainted for the first tithe to-night, for England
to assist in carrying that treaty into effect, because that is
he real question. Any conference or congress after articles
_ _

of peace are concluded, attended by a Power who has had
nothing to do with the war either by action or by advice, is
in fact being called in to carry a peace intoeffect with which
that Power has nothing to do, and arising out of a war in
which she has not in any way been connected. Ido not
mean to say that there are not grave circumstances which
may justify such a course on the part of the Government of
this country. I wish to treat the question with that tempe-
rateness which it requires, and in which spirit, from its se-
rious character, it behoves us to approach it. The noble
lord says that this Treaty of Villafranca must be considered
under twe heads. In the first place, he says there was a con-
siderable change of territory from this peace,- but it was not
a change of territory' whieh in any way, or Materially, af-
fected the balance of power. Therefor,t, so far as that con-
sideration was concerned, it was unnecessary for England
to attend the congress. I think it will be found, as a general
rule which should guide us in these matters, that it never is
the interest of this country to attend a congress unless what
is called the balance of power is materially affected. The
balance of power is a phrase sometimes treated with deri-
sion by those who do not understand it—(laughter)—I mean
by it a change of territory which might create a pre-
ponderance of a Power perhaps alreadytoo powerful. I agree
with the noble lord that there is nothing in the fact of the
transference of Lombardy from Austria to Sardinia 'which
at all affects the balance of power, and therefore, on that
head, I agree with the noble lord that our interference for the
present cannot for a moment be recommended. I maintain
as a general rule that we should attend no conference where
the balance of power is not affected, and the instances which
the noble, lord mentioned at the end of his speech confirm
and do not impugn the accuracy of that principle, because
the balance of power might have been materially affected by
the construction of the kingdom of Greece, and no one canfor
a moment contend that it was not materially concerned in the
settlement of Belgium. (Hear.) But, says the noble lord,
although the balance of power is not concerned in this
transference of a single province from Austria to Sardinia,
there is a second head under which we must consider this
Treaty of Villafmnca, and to what it will lead, and that is,
what the noble lord calls the future of Italy. Now the future
of Italy is a subject of very great interest. The noble lord
says I have treated the future of Italy with a sneer. I have
so often had opportunities of speaking on this subject in this
house, and I have had the misfortune to differ from the
noble lord so frequently upon it, that I will not take the
trouble now to vindicate my opinions, as I wish to speak on
the points of business before us. But I tell the noble lord
this—that it is his misfortune to believe that there exists
throughout Italy a Whig party, and until he gets that idea
out of his head he will never be able to consider the question
in a manner becoming a statesman of his degree. (Hear.)
It has always been the fashion of the noble lord, when speak-
ing of Italy, to speak of establishing a sort of Brookes's
Club at Florence, and that he calls poetry. (A laugh.)
Whenever he begins to speak of Petrarch I know what it is
going to lead to. (A laugh.) Several
,times he has done
this when we have discussed the question before, and the
noble lord will allow me to refer him to some observations
which a little nettled him some years ago when we dis-
cussed this question. I told the noble lord then that the course
he was recommending was one which must end in the con-
fusion of Italy—(hear, hear)—and which would bring into
active operation all the secret societies of that country—
(hear, hear)—and that, if he thought the regeneration of
Italy could be effected by the secret societies of that coun-
try, he would find that he was only playing the game of
some great military despot, who would reap the profit.
But now, says the noble lord, we must look to the future of
Italy. We must look to the future of Italy, because, when
my Lord Clarendon attended the Conference at Paris, after
the Russian war, her Majesty's Government were commit-
ted to a policy which acknowledged that it was their duty
to counsel, and, if possible, to effect changes in that mis-
governed country. Well, but what was the position of Lord
Clarendon after the Russian war ? It is very true that
Lord Clarendon, knowing that at that time, as had often
before been the case, but especially so at that time, the state
of Italy was one which might lead to public disquietude,
like a wise man—and I give his colleagues credit for shar-
ing the same sensible views—thought that that wasa period
when, generally speaking, something like a wide settlement
of the various parts of Europe should be made by the con-
ference, and that Italy should not be omitted—that that
was a moment in which to recommend a course of policy
which would prevent future disturbance and trouble. Ido
not, of course, object to the course which ho took. As I
stated the other night, it was exactly the same view which
induced the late Government to recommend a congress with
regard to the affairs of Europe. What you recommend be-
fore a war takes place, and much more what you recom-
mend in order to prevent a war, is a very different course
.from what you ought to sanction and recommend after war
has broken out, has been waged, and is concluded. (Cheers.)
Why a congress is a very dangerous thing at all times, but
it is never more dangerous than in such a case as the pre-
sent. War is a thing which no one in the abstract approves,
and which, generally speaking, we endeavour to avoid, but
does not follow because war is generally to be avoided that
you ought not to go to war if necessary. If a congress was
the course which, when there was a chance of preventing
war, ought to be recommended, it was the duty of the Go-
vernment to recommend it. But the policy which Lord
Clarendon recommended and supported at the Conference
of Paris, though to a certaid degree it might involve in-
terference in Italy, which, con-idering that at that time
there was imminent danger of some disturbance,
offered to assembled Europe an opportunity of
preventing it. But, says the noble lord, after
offering a great many [arguments, the general tendency
of which was to prove that if we wanted to go to the con-
gress we could not go—(a laugh)—a congress, speaking in
the abstract, was the proper mode of settling this matter.
The noble lord acknowledges that he cannot accept this in-
vitation unless a like invitation is made by the Emperor of
Austria, and we have not heard that any invitations of that
kind have been offered. But if the noble lord interested in
the future of Italy were at once, in consequence of the
treaty of Villafranca, to attend the conference in order to
advance the future interests of that country, would he not
be bound by the conditions contained in that treaty with
reference to the future government of Italy ? What was
the great object recommended at Paris by the French Go-
vernment, and I believe by the English Government ? It
was to establish in Italy a secularisation of the Roman
States. (Hear, hear.) The great point was virtually to
reduce the Pope to the exercise of his spiritual power. But,
by the treaty of Villafranca, I contend that the Pope is to
be the head of a great confederation. The two policies are
exactly contrary to each other. If you go to this congress,
will you deal with the Duchies ? The noble lord says the
Duchies are not to be dealt with; and though he has no
authority for saying so, his instinctive feeling
is that France
will not interfere by force in favour of the jeve that
rejected rulers of
the Duchies. He has reason to hope and believe
Aus-
tria also will refrain from using force in their favour, r
I think very properly. Well, how is the affair to be settled
Why, it is not be settled by the interference of any Power
in Italy. The noble lord says that the people of this coun-
trytheir thrones.
Eng-
land in order to place the rejected rulers upon
neca.hiswshoiunchd
that is the case what is the use of going
would not for a moment tolerate an interference by Eng-
(Hear, hear.) If
upon three points on which he thinks discussion will arise
to the conference? (Hear.) The noble lord has touched
if tis conference takes place. First of all, he says there is
the principle of confederation which he approves of; but he
says, practically it would not work well in the present state
But these
of Italy. Then the noble lord mentioned a variety of
circumstances with which, at present, he said, the principle
to which
'would be matters to
goinecaotinfonesdeolfurtoirgiownsoultdolourantisaontisanfacdtofrrielye
wcooprae.hip
ch(Hseeaparar, htef doveTrnhement. Confederation,
the noble lord referred would not come under the control of
in
coon is adapted to a
'the noble lord urged against a
country if the people of that try could work it out ;
and
the
cedes
ideanfthe dee confederation.
objectionswtiyeh
confederation would not apply. with all his anxiety to
effect the regeneration of
--y, and with all his equal
anxiety to attend the congress for that object, the noble lord
to-night has urged objections against that part of the plan
which I hope may be practical, but which at least is recom-
mended by many high political considerations. Well, then,
if according to the noble lord's views the confederation
principle is not to be acknowledged, if according to his view
there is to be no interference in the Duchies, if, in the third
vernmentinstance, all that is left to be dealt with is the Papal Go-
y, I ask, is it advisable that we should be
drawn iuto this congress? (Hear, hear.) The state of Italy
as sketched out by the articles of the Villafranca treaty is
deemed, I know, by many gentlemen on both sides of this
house to be of an unpromising character. If the congress
is to proceed according to the articles of the Villafranoa
treaty, our Government in accepting the invitation to attend
the congress would accept a responsibility which I am sure
no one here would wish to sanction. If we are to enter into
conference in order to bring about a state of society in Italy
not contemplated by those who have carried on this war,
I ask this house for a moment to consider what is to be
the issue of our labours. Either we shall fail in our
object or we shall not. If failure be the result all will
regret our interference; but if we carry our objectin2
effect—if we establish in Italy a state of society at like the programme of Milan or the programmeto the
of
Tiverton—we must do so by offering inducements
other great Powers which I am sure Parliament
would not
approve of, If, under all circumstances,_rences and o
we
should be
chary about the engagements which
nf
has been waged,
con-
gresses always lead to, surely when
a waro
when it has been closed
on a sudden, when the responsibility
of which we entirely disapproved,
of
all that has occurred
e of which this Government
is completely clear,
and of all that may occur -is
onbe the height.of rashness and.
precipitation by any act would it
or any advice of ours to involve
ourselves in the responsibility
of a settlement occasioned by
not y a war for which we are answerable. (Hear.) I trust,,
therefore,therefore, that
the feeling of the house will b e so direct arid
distinct upon this subject that her Majesty's Ministers vozll
not feel it their duty to recommend her Majesty to send tiny
representative to this projected conference. I have no doubt
immense difficulties in consequence of the war ;and
inhere are consequence of the peace. We had nothing to do nrith
the war ; we had nothing to do with the peace, and if d iffi-
culties arise in which we roust interfere, we shall interfere
-with much greater eifeet and much more dignity if we are
not introduced in the last act in order to save other persons
from difficulties which they had created, and for which we
are answerable. (Hear, hear.) There is oniy one•ob-•
servation which I would make in consequence of thei
nuttier" which the noble lord gave us, that la telegram

arrived from Paris that it was the intentionof the Emperor
of the French to reduce his armaments both by sea and
land. Well, that is excellent news, and its value depends
entirely upon the manner in which that policy is carried
out. I should not have noticed that, considering that all
the information which we had was merely by telegram, had
not a Minister called our attention to it in his place at the
moment he rose, and evidently with the intention of in-
fluencing the opinion of the house. I think myself—in-
deed, I ventured to make the observation the other night—
that it is of great importance that the armaments of the
grmt Powers should be reduced. (Hear.) I did not when
made that observation lay claim to any originality. I was
not aware at the time that I was at all trenching upon the
peculiar manor of the hon. gentleman the member
or Birmingham. He informed me afterwards with
great exultation that the proposition to reduce armaments
after war was an original principle in politics invented by
himself. (Laughter.) I observed that articles of peace were
never yet signed, or at least no peace was ever yet con-
cluded, without members of this house pressing upon the
Government to avail themselves of the opportunity of re-
ducing their armaments, and, knowing that our predeces-
sors in this assembly for 150 years, to my knowledge, recom-
mended that policy, I certainly was astonished that the hon.
member for Birmingham, although he spoke, I must say,
with considerable courtesy of me as his pupil—(a laugh)—
should have taken that opportunity of informing the house
that he himself was the inventor of that policy. (Laughter.)
I remember some very absurd observations made by the hon.
gentleman 10 years ago upon this subject, in the course of
which he maintained that peace was the natural state of
man in the present day, because the commercial principle
was stronger than the political, and in which he said that
France could never go to war again in consequence of the
alteration of the tenure of land in that country, there being
then about seven millions and a half of proprietors . I re-
minded him then—in the year 1848—that the same tenure
obtained in France wider the Republic and under the first
Empire ; that there were then also about seven millions of
proprietors, but that did not prevent the French go to
war. He then expressed other opinions, whi I had Chingped
for his own sake were quite forgotten, and therefore I shall
not now touch upon them ; but when peace is announced
by a Minister, as it was announced in this house, a peace
between two great military monarchies of Europe, espe-
cially at a time when the taxation of this country has been
greatly increased in consequence of the adoption of very
necessary means of defence, there was nothing very wild
—there was nothing, I think, very unwise in suggest-
ing that our ally should take this oportunity of esta-
blishing in the eyes of Europe, and especially of this
country, the sincerity of his friendship for England—
which I, for one, have no wish in any way to doubt—
by the reduction of his armaments. It seemed to me
to be a very natural policy, a policy which would pro-
mote the Emperor's own interests, and one which, if he en-
tertain it, he will, I have no doubt, carry out with sincerity.
The Emperor ought, however, to understand if that is the
policy which the English Parliament wishes him to adopt,
that if he does adopt and pursue it with sincerity we are
prepared to respond to it in a reciprocal spirit. He ought
clearly to understand that we suggest that policy from no
wild sentiment, but in a plain business-like manner ; and
that if he agrees to it we, on our part, are prepared to carry
it out in a business-like manner. But then we must know
what the reductions are. (Hear.) We must see that re-
ductions are being made in his forces, as clearly as he will
know what are the reductions which we are making. He
must not suppose that it is because what is called the peace
principle is prevalent in this house that such a policy is re-
oommended, because if he thought that he would have the
feeling which some attribute to him, but which I do not be-
lieve he entertains ; he might then treat the House of Com-
mons like children, and hope that by telegrams made up of
unmeaning phrases he could influence the policy of this
country. That great Prince is too sensible a man to enter-
tain such an opinion for a moment ; but, as the question has
been introduced to us by the Secretary of State, I think
there should be no mistake as to the opinion of the House
of Commons upon the reduction of armaments by the Em-
peror of the French. The reduction of armaments is a na-
tural and proper policy, and one which we may fairly ex-
pect to be followed when peace is concluded. It is a policy
which this country would hail with satisfaction, and which
would give us that security which, under such circum-
stances, our ally might be expected to give ; but it must be
a real, absolute, undoubted reduction of armaments—(hear)
—and not a mere exchange of fine, vague phrases. If that
is, as I believe it is, the sincere policy of the Emperor, it
will be met with equal sincerity on our part ;it will put an
end to great misconceptions as to the views and conduct
of that Prince, which I, for one, am more than willing
to believe have no foundation whatever ; and then,
indeed, we may regard as an event which has effected
some good for humanity even this war, which, though it
has been a bloody has been a brief one, which has brought
many persons to their senses, and may tend to restore and
establish a good understanding between England and
France. (Cheers.)
Mr. BOWYER said that no speech could have been
more calculated than that of the noble lord (J. Russell)
to prevent any advantage arising from a conference. He
had no confidence in the present Government with regard
to this matter, for they had been for years connected with
the revolutionary party in Italy. He believed they were
equally without the confidence of the Continent—even of
the Liberal party there. (Hear, hear) The noble lord
said that a difficulty arose because Sardinia had a constitu-
tional form of Uovernment. What did the noble lord mean
by that ? Did he mean to say that because the Government
of Sardinia was constitutional that Sardinia should have it
all her own way at the conference ? Federation was said
100 have something to do with liberty of conscience. But
federation had no more to do with that than it had to do
with the paving and lighting of the various federal States.
That was a matter for each State to settle for itself. The
war broke out in consequence of the breach of international
law on the part of Sardinia. Sardinia received deserters
from the Austrian army contrary to international law, and
contrary to treaties existing between the two countries, and
that was the real reason why Austria went to war. ith
respect to the duchies, they found the Sardinian minister
a most diszraeeful revolt, and

WE I' IVI-C11,47 GLEN Lat cos, -
encouraging, through the secret societies, officers and sol-
diers to violate the oaths which they had taken to their
Sovereign. (Hear, hear.) Neither was it true to say that
the Grand Duke left his duchy in the way that James 11.
left England. He was compelled to depart, and the Sardi-
nian Minister was placed at the head of a provisional
government. The noble lord had told them that Bologna
wished to be united to Sardinia. (No.) He (Mr. Bowyer)
could not believe that statement. Bologna, under the Pope,
was exempt from the conscription and lightly taxed, and
was the seat of a university which was closely connected
with the Papal court. United to Sardinia, she would have
the conscription, and would be heavily taxed, whilst, de-
prived of her university, she would be much in the same
situation as Oxford, should such a deprivation happen to
the latter city. Under these circumstances, he could not
believe that the Bolognese wished to be separated from the
Pa States.
Lord J. RUSSELL—I never said that Bologna
wished to be united to Sardinia.
Mr. BOWYER—Surely the noble lord could not have
contemplated Bologna setting up as an independent state for
herself, and it should be remembered that Signor d'Azeglio
had already been accredited to these states as commissioner
from the King of Sardinia to foment revolution and levy ar-
maments against the rightful sovereign, He did not believe
in the ovation to d'Azeglio. It was easy to create a mob and
to call it an ovation, nor neither did he think there was any
foundation for the noblelord'sfunnystoryabout the cardinal.
It seemed to be what was vulgarly called a cock-and-bull
story. (A laugh.) He (Mr. Bowyer) denounced the whole
of the proceedings of Sardinia as a violation of the law of
nations, and thought that if they were to be held good, Vattel
and Grotius and Paffendorf must be superseded, and an
entirely new treatise written. The noble lord never lost an
Opportunity of stigmatising the Roman Government as the
worst in the world. (Cries of " Hear, hear.") He (Mr.
Bowyer) asserted that to be a calumny, and asserted that that
Government had been an improving one for many years—
(laughter)—that it was a good Government--(continued
laughter)—that it was a progressive Government. (Great
laughter.) One fact he had to tell the right hon. the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, and that was that the Pope
had got a surplus revenue. (Much laughter.) In conclu-
sion, he implored the noble lord to take ne part in the con-
gress, which in no way concerned the interests of this coun-
try. He believed that the greatest Italian name was that of
the Pope, and the Pope had been the head of the Guelphs
in former times who formed the Italian party. Pope Julius
11. said to the Ambassador of Venice, " Only two really
Italian things remain, your ducal cap and my tiara." The
tiara was now gone. (Loud laughter and cries of Hear, hear.)
He meant the ducal cap, and the Pope was all that remained
of the ancient nationality of Italy. He was, therefore, the
fittest head that could be thought of for an Italian confede-
ration.
Lord PALMERSTON—I refrained from answering at
once the questions put by the right hon. gentleman opposite,
because I was unwilling to interpose between the house and
the gentleman who has just spoken, knowing as I do the
strong interest he takes in at least one part of Italy, and in
one of the governments which unfortunately rule in that
country. (Laughter,) In my opinion the statement of my
noble friend was perfectly clear as to the views of the Go-
vernment; •but the right hon. gentleman opposite wants
still to know whether the powers which were neuter in the
war, including, of course, the British Government, made
any proposal to Austria of terms less favourable than those
which were subsequently voluntarily conceded by France at
Villafranca. My noble friend stated that no proposal had
been made by the British Government, in so far as he was
aware of, or by any of the neutral powers, but the right
hon. gentleman seemed to have pretty accurate information
from some quarter as to what really passed, and that which
did pass was as he imagines it, with one exception. At one
period of the war the French ambassador gave my noble
friend a small paper, upon which certain terms of arrange-
ment were written out very generally, asking my noble
fridnd that the British Governmet should transmit them
to that of Austria, recommending them as a basis
upon which a treaty of peace might be concluded. My
noble
be unbecoming bec eolfri d- thought that, on the one hand, it would
in this Government, anxious as it must
have been for the cessation of war, absolutely to decline
being the channel of communication ; but, on the other
hand, he, and we, felt that the position in which the two
contending parties stood at that moment did not justify us in
actually interposing. We therefore took the course which
I think was the proper one.
We said, "We will, as you
wish, communicate to the Austrian- Minister the contents
of this paper, containing as it does your notion, not ours, of
an arrangement, but we will not accompany it by any ad-
vice or opinion of our own. We shall distinctly say that it
comes from you, not from us, and we think it our duty
merely not to suppress it." That was all that passed. My
noble friend gave the memorandum to the Austrian
re sal was not ours,
Minis-
ter, telling him that the p Po but that of
the French Government, and that Austria could deal with
it as she pleased. We did not refuse to be the channel of
communication, but we gave no advice nor did we express
any opinion as to the provisions contained in the memoran-
dum. But the right hon. gentleman seemed tbo saoyurthat
this proposal came from us, or was accompanie y
'emnronndation, and I have only to repeat that on this. t
poreint.
.he was completely misinformed. He also said, reverting o
a topic which is often alluded to on that side of the house,
tb at we were likely to fall into a mistake similar to that of
010 Government of 1848 respecting the affairs of Italy. Now
that transaction has been repeatedly misrepresented, even
after the papers had been published completely explaining
it. The truth was, that at that time the Government of
England had no control over the powers that were waging
war in Italy. Baron Hummelauer came here with a pro-
at the time when Austria had been driven out of Lom-
Var?ly, and when a Provisional Government had been estab-
lished, so that for us to have supported such a proposal
eAould have been a mere mockery on our part. The same

proposal was made at Milan by an Austrian agent, and was
treated with scorn and derision. Baron Hummelauer then
offered another arrangement, in which he said he was not
authorised by his Government, but that, if we thought Sar-
dinia would accept it, he would go back and recommend it at
Vienna. We suggested that no arrangement would be com-
plete which related only to Lombardy. At that time Venice
was in revolt, defending itself against Austria, and I thought
it unlikely that any proposal would be accepted that did not
include that State. The state of things, however, soon
altered, and the fate of war turned in favour of Austria.
General Radetsky won great victories, and recovered Lom-
bardy, and therefore any proposal previously made fell to
the ground. I hold that the decision we took was the sound
one, considering the state of things that existed when the
proposal was made. The right hon. gentleman is now of
opinion that we ought not under any circumstances to go
into the conference, considering that if a representative of
this country were to be there we would have only to regis-
ter what the other powers had previously settled between
themselves. Now, my noble friend had already explained
that there are two completely distinct branches of the ar-
rangement between France and Austria ; the one including
the stipulations relating to Venetia and Lombardy, the
latter having been ceded to France to save the honour of
Austria, but being ultimately to revert to Sardinia ; and in
this branch, no doubt, the two parties are entitled to decide,
relating as it does to territory which has formed the subject
of the war. But there is another branch ; there were other
conditions relating to parts of Italy which the contending
armies had not occupied, and with which the contracting
parties had no authority to deal. (Hear, hear.) What,
then. my noble friend stated was, that before we adopted
any decision as to taking part in the conference, we should
wait to learn what had been done at Zurich between France,
Austria, and Sardinia. My noble friend stated the vari-
ous difficulties that might arise in consequence of the ar-
rangements that had been sketched out at Villafranca with
regard to the confederation. Austria and France might pro-
pose such a confederation, but it could not be carried out
without the consent and goodwill of all the States to which
it referred. (Hear, hear.) The difficulties, in fact, in the
way of this arrangement must strike every one. How, for
instance, can it be expected that the representatives of Sar-
dinia and Austria will sit like friends at the same table, or
the Pope's Nuncio, seeing that the King of Sardinia has been
excommunicated by his Holiness ? (Laughter, and " No,
from Mr. Bowyer). Not personally, it is true, but every
one who entered the Papal territory in a hostile fashionwas
excommunicated, and under that ban the Marquis d'Azeglio
entered the legations and took possession. It does not re-
quire much logic or acumen to prove that the King of Sar-
dinia lies under the excommunication of the Pope. (Hear,
hear.) But, even supposing' actual excommunication not
to have taken place, I am sure that the hen. and learned
member for Dundalk will allow the relations between the
two Powers to be not so agreeable as to render it probable
that their respective representatives could sit at the same
board in amicable consultation. (Hear, hear.) As my
noble friend stated, the questions of religious toleration, of
the liberty or license of the press, might arise, with the dif-
ferent degree of freedom to be accorded in political matters,
and these questions would have to be discussed at a diet at
which Austria must sit beside Sardinia, and Rome, Naples,
and Tuscany. How could they expect such a confederation
to work harmoniously? (Hear, hear.) These are our ob-
jections to the confederation, and until we see our way to
their removal it is plain that it will not be expedient for
this Government to enter into this conference. On the other
hand, if we do see our way towards moulding thoee general
arrangements so as to modify the existing evils, and laying
the grounds for future improvements, then I think not only
that it would be advisable, but that it would be the duty of
her Majesty's Government to use its influence in the hope
of moulding these different arrangements. (Hear, hear.)
The hon. and learned member for Dundalk has told us that
the Government of Rome is much maligned ; that it is, in
fact, one of the most improving and progressive govern-
ments in Europe. How is it, then, that for the past ten
years, but for the presence of foreign troops to preserve
order, the Roman Government would have been overthrown?
(H ear.) (" No, no," from Mr. Bowyer.) Well, the hon. and
learned gentleman may not think so, but it certainly has
been the opinion of the Roman Government itself,
(Laughter.) I suppose its members know as well as the
hon. and learned member the state of relations between
them and their subjects. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Well.
it is not in the nature of man to wish to overthrow govern-
ments without some reason. It is true that man is called
a destructive animal, but certainly not to that extent. We
find that in this country, when in 1848 some revolutionary
symptoms were exhibited, 100,000 well-disposed citizens of
London turned out and armed themselves, not with stilettoes
and swords, but with honest English bludgeons, to keep
down insurrection. Solelythrough their exertions the peaee
was as well preserved on the 10th of April as it had been
on the day before, or could be the day after. So it would
be in Rome if Rome were well governed, but the discon-
tent of the people and their distrust and want of confidence
in the Government and all that belongs to it is the most
decisive proof that Rome is not only not well governed but
that the Government of Rome is amongst the worst in the
whole civilised world. In 1831 the great Powers of Europe
gave good advice to the Government of Rome. It was said,
I am aware, that the Protestant Powers should not inter-
fere to give advice to the ecclesiastical Government of Rome ;
still in 1831 that objection did not prevent England, Prussia,
and Russia, and other nations from joining with France
and Austria in recommending to the Government of Rome
certain changes and improvements, which if they had been
adopted at the time would have saved years of misfortune
and difficulty, and many other evils which have since fallen
upon Italy. (Hear.) I do not see why the same ccurse
should not again, when the proper occasion presents itself, be
followed by those Powers. And if the united voice of Europe
should have any weight with that excellent Government—
that Government which, according to the hon. and learned
gentleman is so well disposed, so beloved by its subjects, in
smoothing away its difficulties and inducing it to go a
little faster—l do not see any reason why some useful
advice should not be given. (Hear, hear.) The
hon. and learned gentleman does not believe a statement
made by my noble friend as to the number of people in
Naples and in others of the Italian states, who are under
the surveillance of the police. I am sure my noble friend
would not state anything that was not based upon good in-
formation, and as the tact which he has stated is well
founded, I say that of itself is strong proof of the degree in
which the governments of those countries render wretched
those unfortunate people who are subject to their sway.
(Hear, hear.) And when it is said that we are the advocates
and encouragers of revolution in Italy, I reply that it is not
we that are the advocates and promoters of revolution, but
those governments whodistrust their people, and drive them
to resort to dark conspiracies, and those other crimes which
men who have no other hope are often led into to relieve
themselves from the calamities and sufferings which they
are condemned to endure. The right hon. gentleman says
that my noble friend taunted him with having treated the
idea of Italian liberty with a sneer. He did nothing of the
kind ; but the right hon. gentleman retorts that my noble
friend is always under the delusion that in Italy as in Eng-
land there was a great whig party. That is perfectly true.
There is a great constitutional party in Italy, as there is in
this country, which has made way year after year against
the party that is opposed to liberty, and being numerically
the more powerful, must continue to make progress. But
the similitude between Italy and England is even greater
than according to the right hon. gentleman my noble friend
represents it to be. Not only is there a great Whig party in
Italy, but there is also a great Tory party there. (Hear.)
That Tory party happens to be the party in. the Government,
and it is the conflict between the great Whig majority and
the Tory minority that is in power, that is the cause of all
the difficulties and all the evils to which Italy is exposed.
Unfortunately there the resemblance ceases, for Italy not
having the advantage of constitutional government, though
the Whig party are the majority, they have had no means
of carrying a vote of want of confidence in the Government
(a laugh)—and were censequentfy still writhing under the
arbitrary power of the governing minority. (Hear, hear.)
Under these circumstances we naturally feel that sympathy
which the right hon. gentleman no doubt ridicules we do
feel sympathy with the constitutional party in Italy, and
frankly avow that we should be glad to see a constitutional
government established in that country, and that rational
freedom insured upon which alone the safety of a nation
depends. (Hear, hear.) Then I say that we have not yet
come to any decision in the direction of the conference, nor
can any decision be come to until it is known more com-
pletely what are the proposals to be made at Zurich, and
how far the parties may propose to deal with matters that
they have no real authority to deal with, and how far they
will leave open to their allies other matters upon which,
although they may have no power to pronounce a decision,
they are at least entitled to recommend and to notice. But
the right hon. gentleman may rest satisfied that we shall
not go into any conference with the view of carrying out
those embarrassing arrangements which he deprecates. At
the same time I must say that the course which the right
hon. gentleman and his friends now take is not very con-
sistent with that which they took before the war broke
out, and when they were in office. (Hear.) Then they
advocated a congress, though now condemning a conference,
and although the one was proposed before the war actually
began, and the other is proposed after hostilities have
ceased, that does not constitute, as far as I can see, any
valid objection. A conference usually follows a treaty of
peace, to settle and modify arrangements which, if left in-
complete, would probably lead to the renewal of war. But,
says the right hon. gentleman, "do not go into this con-
ference and embarrass this country with any prospective en-
gagements." Excellent advice. If you refer to the blue-
books you will see the right hon.. gentleman and his friends
were ready to guarantee Sardinia for five years from any hos-
tile attack. (Hear.) Now, if there can be a prospective en-
gagement that would be all but certain to embarrass this
country it was that. If the contemplated attack was to come
upon Sardinia from some power over which you exercised a
controlling influence, well and good ; and though you might
have measuredsthe expense and counted the damage, you
might have set against these disadvantages the advantages
to be gained on the other side, and upon the balance you
might have said, " It is a hazardous undertaking, but we
feel that we can fulfil it." But how would the right hon.
gentleman have fulfilled such an engagement so as to pre-
vent Austria from attacking Sardinia ? Would helave sent
an army to Genoa to assist the Sardinians, or would he
have sent a naval force to attack Venice ? (Cheers.) But
the right hon. gentleman will tell us, no doubt, that it was
not an engagement to be entered into by England, but by
England and France conjointly. That was, that we 'were
to be parties to the guarantee, but France was to bear the
burden of furnishing the army. But the French Govern-
ment very naturally said, " We will not enter into any
such guarantee ;" and the engagement fell to the ground.
I merely mention this to show that while we are told to
abstain from taking part in the conference by those
who urged and were ready to take part in the congress,
when we are warned from entering into embarrassing
engagements—those who press that advice upon us were
themselves ready to enter into prospective engagements of
a nature which could not have but occasioned embarrass-
ments whenever they were required to he fulfilled. Our
wish is simply the well-being of Italy. We think it is a
country deserving offreedom ; it is a country endowed with
every gift of nature, and requires but good government to
make it one of the happiest countries in the world. The
hen. gentleman says the Italians are not like ourselves—
that we must not treat Italians as we would treat English-
men—that we must not expect public opinion can be called
forth in Italy as in England. Unfortunately that is too
true ; but there is no reason why Italy should not be treated
as England —there is no reason why Italians should not be
Capable of appreciating the same institutions and attaining
to the same state of happiness with which Providence has
blessed Us ; arid if the great European powers by any ar-
rangements hich the Governments that may be
brought intocommunication for that purpose
.may devise
should be enabled to
produce such a result, they will deserve
the praise of all who value the peace and happiness of the
world. (Hear.)
Mr, H. BAILLIE said that the interference of this
country in the affairs of other countries had always ter-
minated disadvantageously
revolution
ANytishictilaat
that had been seen. Thfeorruse,":.
ul
the noble
elonrddedoprisassitetro(usLoiryd
foPraltmheersltwelanhas
had excited
while we
had seen an Englishmrn cut down in the streets of
Florence, and our relations with Austria became such as
to render it almost impossible for Englishmen to travel in
that empire. He could not conceive upon what grounds,
therefore, we should be advised to attend this mimes.

In his judgment, it would be far better for us to attend
to the state of our defences, than to think of entering
into some of those eagagements which in past times had
led to so much embarrassment. Whilst on that part of
the subject, he would take occasion to ask the noble lord
whether there was any truth in the rumour that it was in-
tended to effect a mutual disarmament of the forces of Eng-
land and France. He had heard with considerable sur-
prise that the right honourable gentleman the member for
Buckinghamshire recommended a mutual disarmament.
Disarmament in England and in France meant totally dif-
ferent things. In France it meant simply this, that the
Minister issued an order giving to 100,000 men, who had
served only three or four years of their time, their conge,
and those men returned to their villages and immediately
engaged in agricultural pursuits. But should there be any
sudden need of their services, on a new order being issued,
they would be forthcoming to a man in the space of ten
days. He could hardly suppose that the Government
could have consented to reduce our standing army, when
with all our efforts we could scarcely bring 35,000 men
into the field, or that they would reduce the newly-formed
navy. If such arrangements, however, were to be carried
out during the recess, he could assure the Government that
the people of this country would not give their consent to
them, and would take the earliest opportunity of manifest-
ing its strong disapprobation of such policy. (Hear).
Mr. M. MILNES said that if by neutrality was meant
that England was to stand by quietly and see foreign
Powers dispose of the destinies and interests of continental
States at their will and pleasure, he was sure the people of
this country would never accept the principle in that sense.
There was every reason, moreover, why England should
wish to see Italy satisfactorily settled; for the present ar-
rangement of that country rested very much upon the trea-
ties of 1815, to which we were parties in a very distinct,
and, he feared, a very unfortunate manner. The Emperor
of Austria of that day regarded the annexation of Lom-
bardy to his dominions as a most unfortunate event, and it
was only carried out in consequence of the persistance of
the other Powers. So far from the loss of Lombardy being
a source of weakness to Austria, he believed it woule ren-
der her a greater, safer, and happier Power. The future fe-
deration of Italy must depend on the power with which
Sardinia entered it. If she entered it alone, she might be
overridden by other States, but if she were assisted by the
neutral Powers, there was some hope that constitutional
principles might prevail in Italy. He quite agreed that the
right hon. gentleman the member for Buckinghamshire had
used a most inappropriate expression in speaking of the
Whig party in Italy, as the Government party included
only the ecclesiastical classes; while the Liberal party em-
braced the middle and higher classes. The Italian people
were well versed in politics and diplomacy, and so far main-
tained their 'ancient reputation for it, that they made the
fewest political theories of allmodern nations, and they now
awaited the settlement of their country. (Hear.) That
peace of Villafranca might be so guided as to produce a
lasting benefit to Italy. It was not the business of that
house to decide whether her Majesty's Government should
enter upon a conference or not. That was a matter of peace
or war, and depended solely upon their own responsibility.
Their only hope was that the Government would combine
the consideration of the question of neutrality with those
necessities which attached to them as one of the first na-
tions of the world.
Mr. WHITESIDE was anxious, in consequence of
allusions which had been made to a matter in which he had
been personally concerned, to offer a few observations to the
house. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in a very lumi-
nous speech, had pointed out the necessity which existed
for imposing new burdens on an overtaxed people, and the
noble lord at the head of the Government and the noble
lord the Foreign Secretary, speaking in succession, had
practically refuted the arguments of the right hon. gentle-
man. The expenditure of the country did not depend on
Dover or Galway contracts, which, to borrow a poetical
phrase which had been lately used, were only fleabites but
on the expense of our armaments, and their nature and ex-
tent depended our foreign policy, and it was to consider
the conditions of that policy that they were invited to-night.
He had heard reference made to Greece and Rome, but he
was not inclined to go back to the exemplar states of an-
cient history, or to interfere with the right of the Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer to dealwith the descendants of Ulysses.
He wished to understand that which was the question be-
fore the house—the condition of foreign affairs. His right
hon. friend (Mr. Disraeli) had asked whether the Govern-
ment had transmitted to our ally, as he was called, the Em-
peror of Austria, propositions which contained terms diffe-
rent to those which were embodied in the treaty of Villa-
franca ? He did not ask whether the Government them-
selves had of their own motion submitted such a proposition
—but whether they had been made the catspaw of some
other power which was not named, and which had induced
our Government to submit to Austria a paper the contents
of which were not stated, and in which it was not stated
from what neutral power it came. His right hon. friend
was substantially right, and the Government had virtually
assented to the terms contained in the paper.
Lord PALMERSTON—I beg the right hon. gentleman's
pardon. I positively stated that we gave no advice and
stated no opinion, and said that we had nothing to do with it.
Mr. WHITESIDE—That was no answer to what he had
stated. He did not say that the Government had, given any
opinion, but he spoke of the fact that the Minister of Eng-
land, in forwarding a document to Austria, that power would
naturally infer that it had their assent. (Hear, hear.) His
right hon. friend said that the paper required Austria to give
up Venice and the Venetian territories. It was of course in-
tended that the paper which reached Austria should be known
to the Emperor of the French, who would be able to say that
from that Austria might see what her allies would do for her,
and that she would find in the victorious conqueror in seve-
ral battles amore merciful diplomatist than her allies. He
believed the Emperor of Austria acted upon that paper, and
he repeated that the English Minister had been made a cats-
paw of by some power in an important matter which led to
the peace of Villafranca. His right hon. friend had said that
the blunder of 1848 had been repeated, and the noble vis-
count, in that jesting manner in which he treated serious
subjects, had answered him (Mr. Whiteside), as he was the
person who had originally made the statement, and saidthe
charge could no longer be sustained. He ventured to think
that the noble viscount would not again repeat what he had
said to-night. The noble viscount from the beginning, that
is for the last ten years, had pursued one consistent policy,
and that was to extirpate the power of Austria from Italy.
That was the principle always maintained by him, although
the noble lord within the last few days had said that " no
one he ever heard of meant to deprive Austria of her terri-
tories in Lombardy or Venice, which had been awarded to
her by the treaty of 1815." The noble lord spoke thus at
Tiverton, and he (Mr. Whiteside) had had the pleasure of
purchasing the revised edition of the noble lord's address at
a railway station. The hon. gentleman who had just sat
down had truly said that which no one knew better than
the noble lord, that in 1815 Austria did not desire to have
Lombardy, but the great Powers obliged her to take it, in
order that the French might be driven out of Italy. Austria
by a solemn treaty obtained Lombardy, and she was our
ancient ally. He admitted that the Austrian rule in Italy
was what M. d'Azeglio called the government of the
stranger. Many of the minor states of Italy were inclined to
join themselves to Austria on account of the mode in which
justice was administered between man and man in her
dominions, which was not the case in many of these states.
But her government was that of the stranger, and it was,
therefore, not popular. In 1848 disturbances broke out. He
admitted that at that time Austria was in trouble. He
would take as his authorities, one statesman, one historian,
and one emperor ; the statesman was the right hon. gentle-
man the member for Carlisle ; the historian Sir Archibald
Alison; and the emperor was the Emperor of the French.
They all saw the policy of the noble viscount ; and it ap-
peared that the noble lord must have forgotten what he
wrote and did. Who was our ambassador at Vienna in 1848?
Lord Ponsonby ; and he supposed the veracity of that noble
lord would not be denied. What was the condition of
France ? She had been through one of those usual revolu-
tions which were the blessings of that country. He believed
that Cavaignac was then up, and was occupied in fighting
for the existence of society against republicanism and so-
cialism. What was the :condition of Austria? She was
looking to the noble viscount, and believing that in him she
had a faithful friend. What was the condition of Sardinia ?
Much what it was now—looking out for what she could
get—(laughter)—and looking for a pretext on which she
could seize her neighbour's property. Lombardy, he ad-
mitted, had thrown off the yoke of Austria, and had what
was called in the language of revolutions a provisional
government. In 1848 that provisional government wrote
to the noble lord asking what they were to do with regard
to Austria, and he having commuhicated with Lord Pon-
sonby that noble lord stated to him the substance
of a conversation which he had with an important
personage at Vienna, in which he said : "The fate
of Italy is in the hands of England ; you are at pre-
sent the sole power who has influence there ; it is the
greater because it is single. The easy overthrow of Louis
Philippe, the establishrhent of a republic in France, have
produced a real panic ; but while admitting your
power, which you certainly have no right to complain
of our doing, allow me at the same time to assign to you
the responsibility of events, at least as regards ourselves."
Lord Ponsonby referred the noble lord to what had led to
the outbreak. He said, "What the Piedmontese have
done is an intervention in the Austrian territories, for the
purpose of giving support to rebels against the Austrian
i
legal authority. It is n contradiction to the recognised
principle of non-intervention, for there is no act even as-
serted bythe Piedmontese to have been done bythe Austrians
injurious to any Piedmontese interests, or dangerous to the
Sardinian King's rights or territories. Vague reports
circulated by the Sardinians themselves, of designs enter-
tained by:the Austrians to attack Piedmont, which reports
have proved to be unfounded, are not justifications for real
attackaupon a neighbour." That was the opinion of Lord
Ponsonby. It was true that Baron Hummelauer had
visited this country; but before he did so the noble lord had
received all necessary information from Lord Ponsonby.
He (Mr. Whiteside) did not know if the royal word of the
ruler of Austria was to be believed, but he fount that Lord
Ponsonby, in the most distinct manner, informed the noble
lord as follows':—" That the Archduke John had said that
the Lombards might have the absolute disposal of their fate
—they might have Charles Albert for their King and their
own form of Government." Mark the line of the Adige,
not the line of the Mincio. Lord Pensonby said further :
—" It was necessary to protect Trieste, and the Arch-
duke authorised him to state this, and he was of
opinion that the Archduke was right in saying that
unless the line of the Adige was preserved it would lead
to a contest in Italy. Lombardy, by the retreat of the
Austrians, was able to complete the course taken by the
Modenese. As to the proposition withregard to Venice, there
was no strong feeling against the proposed arrangement."
The next day Lord Ponsonby wrote a letter to the noble
lord, having forgotten to state what had been stated with
regard to Venice, and he said "I neglected to say that, sup-
posing Venice was to continue under the rule of Austria,
she would be governed under a free constitution." What
followed ? The noble lord, in the multiplicity of his occu-
pations, forgot that all this had been describ"Ed by the his-
torian. The noble lord said that what Baron Hummelauer
offered was, that Lombardy should remain under an Aus-
trian archduke. After what he had read was such a pro-
position surprising ? Baron Hummelauer arrived, and en •
tered into communication with the noble lord, and having
stated his proposition in conversation, no doubt the noble
lord desired him to put the proposition in writing, which
was to be submitted to the noble lord, and by the noble lord
to be submitted to the cabinet of which he was a distin-
guished member. He accordingly did so, and he stated
shortly what he wished ; and what the noble lord now said
with reference to the archduke was a mistake, for what was
said was this. The document was dated the 24th of May,
and it stated that Lombitrdy was to be independent, was to
be allowed to choose her own government, to be united with
Piedmont if she liked. He (Mr. Whiteside) admitted that,
as regarded Venice, he made the same proposition as was
stated by Lord Ponsonby; that its connexion with Trieste
made it impossible that it should be made independent, but
that it should have a free constitution, under the govern-
ment of an archduke—should have a national army, and a
representative at Vienna who should represent its interests.
The noble lord took from the 24th of May to the 3d of June
to consider the matter. The date of the 3d of June was im-
portant in reference to the provisional government at Milan.
On the 3d June the noble lord wrote a despatch, which was
very creditable to him, in which he stated that according
to the treaty of 1815 he had not.a word to say with regard
to the offer as to Lombardy, which was may
satisfactory)