The Sun.
London, England, 1861-07-03 00:00:00

THE Sl7ll LONDON, WEDNESDAY :EVENING,

and districts in England and Wales, and to the amount of
and mode of compensation, if any, to be provided for the loss
of fees or other rights and privileges occasioned to them by
the closing of churchyards and burial grounds under the
said acts.

Mr. WESTHEAD seconded the motion, showing that
the clergy had suffered materially by tho change which had
taken place.
Mr. HADFIELD objected to the words speaking of com-
pensation. He moved as an amendment that the resolution
be confined to the districts within the "Bills of Mortality,"
and that the words relating to compensation be left out.
Mr. NEWDEGATE contended that it was never in-
tended that the alterations which were made some years ago
in reference to intramural burial grounds on sanitary con-
siderations should deprive the clergy of the emoluments
which were necessary to their maintenance.

Sir M. PETO supported the motion, believing that there
was £40,000 a-year in the hands of the Ecclesiastical Cora-
mission which was applicable as compensation to the clergy
in question.
Sir G. LEWIS said that the Act of Parliament which
closed the burial grounds gave powers to parishes to provide
parochial burial grounds, and gave the incumbents the same
rights in reference to them as they had over the church-
yards. There was, however, no doubt that many clergymen
had suffered by the change ; but he was not prepared to ad-
mit that burial fees were a part of the endowment of the
church, or for the maintenance of the clergy. They were a
remuneration for a special service, and if those services
were not performed no claim for compensation arose, and it
was unnecessary to issue a commission, the fact of the issu-
ing of which would affirm the principle of compensation, to
which no fund was applicable, or could be properly created.
Mr. WHITESIDE argued that the Legislature having
done a practical injustice, was bound to repair it.
Mr. ROEBUCK said that the profits of turnpike roads
had been much diminished by railroads which were sanc-
tioned by Parliament, and no compensation had been given
to the lessees of the tollz., and that was a parallel case to
this, in which no compensation had been given.

After some further discussion Mr. HADFIELD withdrew
his amendment, and on a division the motion was nega-
tived by 59 to 48.

POLAND.

Mr. HENNESSY, on rising to call attention to the re-
cent events in Poland, with reference to the treaties of 1815,
and to move for copies of certain despatches, said he had
endeavoured to make his notice as comprehensive as pos-
sible, including not only the Eastern question but the whole
foreign policy of the Government. It was impossible to
touch upon any branch of foreign policy, more particularly
upon anything relating to the Eastern question, without
finding that our ignorance of everything relating to Poland
was a barrier in the way of our arriving at the truth. There
were two principal points to be considered—the partition
and the incorporation of Poland—and it was to the incor •
poration chiefly that he wished to direct attention. Public
opinion in England seemed to be under the impression that
in showing sympathy for the Poles we should have to deal
with the three great Powers, Russia, Austria, and Prussia,
among whom Poland was originally divided; but that was
not the case. In 1814 one of the first subjects discussed by
the allies was Poland. Russia was then desirous of making
a Russian province of part of Poland, but Lord Castle-
reagh not only recognised fully the justice of the claims of
the Poles, but was also fully alive to the importance of
making of Poland a strong barrier to the west of Russia.
In 1815 both England and Austria, however, seemed to
have held opinions different to those they entertained the
year before, but Russia still continued steadfast to her
former policy. The treaty of Vienna stipulated that the
civil rights of Poland should be maintained, that the
nationality of Poland should be preserved, that the com-
mercial system of Poland should be continued, that the
Diet should be summoned every two years, and a bud-
get laid before. them every four years, that no Russian
official should hold office in the administration of Poland,
and that the rights of the Catholic and the Eastern Greek
Church should be preserved. It was alleged by Russia that
these conditions were broken by the Poles when they rose
in insurrection in 1831. The treaty of Vienna was the
title-deed by which Russia held Poland, and be defied
any friend of Russia to maintain that the trusts of that
deed had been broken by the Pales before they were broken
by Russia. The Poles rose in insurrection to defend their
rights from the breaches of the treaty committed by Russia.
The statement of the Poles to that effect had never been
denied by any Minister in that house. We were, however,
in total ignorance of what the conduct of England had
been in regard to these events of 1831 and 1832. Many hon.
members had asked over and over again for copies of the
despatches which passed between the Courts of St. James's
and St. Petersburg, but none had succeeded in getting
them. He hoped the Foreign Secretary would not now re-
fuse to produce them. Russia then incorporated Poland,
and the Emperor addressed the Poles in a speech at War-
saw, telling them that he did so as King of Poland no
longer, but as Czar of Russia. Austria at that time was
friendly to the Poles, and even during the insurrection
assured them of her support if the other great Powers would
join her. The French Government, at the suggestion of
Austria, not only took up the case of Poland, as Austria
had done, but addressed a despatch on the subject to the
British Government. He hoped this despatch would be
furnished by the noble lord, but M. Louis Blanc, in his
" Ten Years," gave the reply of the then Foreign Secretary
of England to Prince Talleyrand. In this despatch his
lordship stated t bat the object of the note presented to him
by the French Ambassador was " to induce the British Go-
vernment to interfere in concert with France in the affairs
of Poland, for the purpose of stopping the effusion of blood,
and of procuring for the country a political and national
existence." This course, the noble lord said, his Majesty
I refused to take on account of the frank and amicable rela-
tions existing between the courts of St. Petersburg and of
St. James, being also of opinion that the time had not
arrived for adopting the proposals then made "against the
will of a Sovereign whose rights are incontestable." He
(Mr. Hennessy) hoped for the credit of Eng-
land that this despatch was not genuine. What !
Talk of the rights of the Czar over Poland as
being incontestable, those rights resting upon a treaty
every important part of which bad been violated in the face
of Europe I The proposal of France must have been to
establish Poland as an independent and a self-existing
Power, and the noble lord's despatch, if correctly set forth
by M. Louis Blanc, appeared to recognise and to advocate
the treaty of Vienna, for it declared " that his Majesty
will insist upon the maintenance of the political existence
of Poland as established in 1815, and of her national insti-
tutions." So far with regard to the years 1831-2. Since
that time the Polish question had undergone some phases.
In 1841, he believed the Russian Government issued ukases
still further pressing on Poland. But the event of the
greatest interest to the country since 1831 was the Crimean
war. Now, he was informed that the Austrian Government
told us at that time that they were prepared and were most
anxious to re-establish Poland, and actually asked the
allies for a contingent of 100,000 men for the purpose.
France approved of the policy, but what did England do ?
An HON. MEMBER here moved that the house be
counted, but as, including incomers from the library and
smoking-room, 40 members were found to be present,
'Mr. HENNESSY resumed—He said that we were with-
out information as to the language held by the English Go-
vernment at the time of the Crimean war with regard to
Poland. But some time ago Mr. Nassau Senior made known
a report of some remarkable conversations, one of which
took place in May, 1854, with a General Sharnofski, who
said : . . . .

" I have reason to believe that Austria is thinking seri-
ously of reconstructing Poland. Ever since she joined with
Russia in the partition of Poland she has felt Russia press-
ing more and more heavily on her. I have lately seen a
letter from Bourqueney to a friend of mine in Paris, in
which he says that the Cabinet of Vienna proposed to join
England and France, on condition of their lending them-
selves to restore Poland."

He hoped that her Majesty's Government would to-night
give them some information with reference to this subject.
The intimate alliance existing between England and Russia
before the Crimean war might to some extent account for
the extraordinary conduct of England. In 1850 the Mar-
quis of Lansdowne said that upon some, of the important
questions which then agitated Europe, and more especially
affected the interests of the north of Europe, the community
of feeling, sentiment, and action between the two countries
was as perfect as at any period of their history. The pre-
sent Foreign Secretary made similar remarks. He said,—
" There is no week passes that my noble friend is not in
communication with Russia with respect to points of policy
on most important subjects, on which the two Powers are
fully agreed." . • •
No wonder, under such circumstances, when the Crimean
war gave England such an opportunity that England neg-
lected it. But it might be said, was it an English question
, at all? That was a very narrow ground to take ; but he
would call attention to the increase of the military expendi-
tureocrtontahoietf
odtnehaei r
uPwociecurhsopof foplEoa
nlu Europe
aaaEn dlveefont f
bEi
nyn gt
Lordhl Eland dh
half-and-half
l f
Castlereagho-n
n
and-half
and the Treaty of Vienna she was intended to be a barrier
to Russia. The truth of what the first Napoleon said was
remembered, that if Russia destroyed Poland England
would lose India. The action of Poland in the Vest
would check Russian encroachments
andwin allth e
the East. s t
a t e
sTmheant
was the opinion of Lord Castlereagh
of his day. And from the time Poland estroyed an ex-
traordinary increase took place in the smilitarydestroyed
of Europe and England. The committees t
to 1820 inquired into the expenditure, in their reportsr laid
don't]. the principle that, as a rule, the expense of the mili-
tary armament of England should not exceed £5,000,000
a-year ; and up to theperiod when Poland was incorporated
into Russia a reduction of the military estimates took place
year by year. After that incorporation, the estimates, mili-
tary and naval, began to increase, not merely in England,
but on the continent of Europe also. An increase in one
country led to an increase in others. The lesson that had
been taught them by this rivalry of the European Powers
was one they ought to take to heart ; and they could traee
it to the effect of the incorporation of Poland with Russia,
and the removal of the great Western barrier to that Power.
Again, how had that measure affected the commerce of
England ? That inference was not lost sight of at the time;
but a few years afterwards, in Sept., 1842, it was said :
"One of the fundamental conditions on which the king-
dom of Poland was constituted and handed over to Russia
was the freedom of commercial intercourse by land and by
water throughout all the provinces which had formed a

part of that unfortunate State before the first partition. Car-
tel treaties, commercial prohibitions, frontiers hermetically
sealed against the ingress of merchandise and the egress of
men, and allj.he machinery by which jealous States protect
what they call their interests, formed no part of the system
of government which was promised to the several portions
of Poland. But in defiance of stipulations Russia has now
advanced the strict cordon of her prohibitive system to the
furthest western limits of the Emperor's dominions."
English goods were once admitted into Poland with a
duty of 5 per cent. ; now they were practically prohibited,
and were so at the period mentioned. What was the loss
to the commerce of England by the prohibitory laws of
Russia in Poland? It was calculated at £1,000,000 per
annum. But that calculation did not take into account what
would have been the effect of the free trade policy England
adopted 15 years ago. Poland was one of the great corn-
growing countries of Europe; and the free trade policy of
1845-46-47, had much increased that loss of £1,000,000. But
that was not all. Russia prohibited the export of corn from
Poland so strictly that the production was diminished. In
many places it was not grown, because it was not allowed to
be sent out of the country. Russia did this to develope the
resources of other portions of her corn-growing dominions.
The interest of England went beyond the preservation of
treaties ; and she had had several opportunities of support-
ing Austria and France in procuring the independence of
Poland ; but England had purposely evaded those opportu-
nities, and they now saw the state of Poland. He did not
wish to encourage revolution. He did not regard this as a
revolutionary question in the slightest degree ; it was rather
Conservative. If the preservation of the faith of public
treaties was Conservative so was the question of Poland ;
if the preservation of the ancient traditions of a kingdom,
and, above all, if the preservation of right against despotic
force and truth as opposed to fraudulent diplomacy, was
Conservative, so was this question. He asked the noble lord
to give him the despatches that passed between the Govern-
ment of England and that of Russia in 1831 and 1832. He
had said that England had been to blame throughout the
whole of this business. When Lord Clarendon touched the
Polish question he did it damage. Lord Aberdeen and
others rather injured it. But the Minister who had from
the beginning to this hour done the most against Poland
was the present Premier. It might surprise the house to be
told that when other great Powers were anxious to assist
Poland the noble lord stepped in and prevented them. Had
he himself heard such a statement some time ago he should
have been surprised also. But this session he had seen
what he thought should lessen the confidence the country
reposed in the noble lord. He had seen him rise in his
place and lose his temper when accused by one of his own
supporters of falsifying Sir A. Barnes' despatches. Proofs
as to the Po'ish question were thickening; he asked the
Secretary for Foreign Affairs to supply the links that were
wanting. He particularly asked him to give the correspond-
ence between France and England in 1831 and 1832 ; and
any between France, England, and Austria relating to Po-
land at the time of the Crimean war. He also wished to
ask whether a circular letter addressed to the Cabinets of
Europe, in April last, by Prince Gortschakoff,was authentic ?
He did not ask the noble lord to produce it ; he knew the
answer would be the stereotyped one, that it referred to
recent events in Warsaw, and that it would be inconvenient
to give it. He only asked, therefore, whether the circular
was authentic ? Having said so much of the past history
of the question, he would now ask the house whether the
recent events in Poland and the present attitude of the
people did not justify some consideration of the subject?
If England was a party to the oppression of Poland,
if England did not avail herself of the oppor-
tunities there had been for giving Poland its in-
dependence, did not these facts justify the house
in showing that country some consideration ? Some
members of that house seemed to have a fear of Russia, but
if an independent kingdom of Poland was formed it would
be a curb upon Russian ambition in the East and Russian
intrigues in Europe. Probably on another occasion some
member of greater influence and position than himself
would make some important motion on this subject. If they
did not he should himself take that course. At present ha
confined himself to moving that an address should be pre-
sented to her Majesty, praying her to direct that certain
correspondence, which took place in the year 1831 and 1832
with reference to Poland, should be laid on the table of the
house. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. M. MILNES—I rise to second the motion of my
hon. friend opposite. I need hardly say that there was much
in his speech with which. I by no means agree; but in the
substantial part of it—viz., as to the importance of from time
to time directing the attention of this house to the condition
of Poland, I entirely concur. No one feels more than Ido
the impolicy of interfering captiously with the administra-
tion of foreign countries, even if it be wrong; but if treaty
rights are to be respected we have certain responsibilities
with reference to the condition of Poland which we cannot
altogether set aside, and certain duties to perform which
we cannot altogether neglect. That the independence of
Poland formed a substantial part of the Treaties of Vienna,
and that if those treaties are to be appealed to at all that
independence must be respected, are facts upon which it is
not necessary to expatiate ; but at this moment I think it
would be well if the great Powers of Europe who rest so
much upon the treaties of Vienna would remember that if
this question of the independence of Poland is to remain
' unsolved, and if such as outrage as the destruction of the
' Republic of Cracow is to continue unremedied, it is impos-
' sible for those Powers with an unfaltering voice to ask
France or any other Power to respect those treaties. If we
are, as it is said, upon the eve of great changes ; if French
ambition, not, perhaps, so much that of the Emperor as of
the nation, is likely to lead that country to endeavour to
recover its natural frontiers, I cannot see how England
could be called upon to assist those Powers in protecting
what they consider their legitimate rights, unless they each
do what they can to remedy the infractions of the treaties
, which have taken place. I cannot agfee with my hon. friend
that the conduct of England towards Poland has been such
as he has described. The question of the nationality of
Poland has always excited deep and permanent interest in
the minds of the people of this country—(hear)—a singu-
larly permanent interest, considering how little intercourse
there has been between the two countries, and how little
material interest we have in the fortunes of Poland. There
was, however, about- the disruption of Poland in the last
century a culd-blooded immorality which shocked the con-
science of Europe, and the feeling of which, despite the
great events which have since occurred, the shock of the
French Revolution, the wars of the Empire, and other im-
portant and stirring movements, remains now as strong,
and perhaps stronger, than it was when that act of spolia-
tion was committed. The interest which is taken in the
affairs of Poland is entirely disproportioned either to the
political importance of that country or to the political con-
tingencies which might occur upon its disruption, because
it rests upon a deeper basis than anything connected with
political circumstances. The events which have lately oc-
curred at Warsaw have greatly shocked the people of Eng-
land, because we thought we had reason to believe that the
Government of Russia under the new Sovereign would do
nothing to shock the opinions of the nations of Europe.
We saw the Emperor of Russia engaged in one of the most
noble and, at the same time, one of the most difficult opera-
tions that have ever been undertaken by a Sovereign—de-
termining, almost in the face of a hostile aristocracy, to
liberate hie people from serfdom. I only wish that that
Sovereign could be made sensible of the feeling of deep dis-
appointment which was shed over this country when we saw
that while with one hand he was labouring in this great and
glorious work, with the other he was striking cruel blows
of physical force upon the defenceless population of Poland.
All that we can do is to implore the Sovereign and rulers of
Russia to remember that the great social questions which
they are agitating do in a certain degree require for their
settlement the moral confidence an i the moral assent of the
people of Europe. Russia is no longer separated as she used
to be from the rest of Europe. Every day by railways and
other means she is brought into closer physical contact with
oiler European nations, and it will be impossible for her to
maintain much longer the sort of almost Chinese exclusion
which at one time separated her from the rest of the world. '
The Russian Government, enlightened and w ell informed as
it is, cannot fail to perceive that the one question which is
now agitating the public mind of Europe is that of the
orderly direction of the national spirit of peoples. They
must see what an effect the feeling of nationality produced
in Italy, and what results it is slowly working out in Ger-
many. In the face of that feeling of nationality, rising even
in places where it was supposed to be extinguished or o eer-
laid by other intellectual processes or moral feelings, can
the Russian Government suppose that any good is to be
done with Poland, which has maintained that feeling un-
broken and unehattered through such a series of years,
except by in some degree recognising and regulating it ?
If there is one country which owes more than another to
national feeling it is Russia. When the events of our time
become the history of the world, the defence of Sebastopol
by the Russian nation and the Russian army will be re-
corded as one of the most glorious instances of national feel-
ing and national sacrifice which have ever been witnessed.
Let not, therefore, the Russian Government, which owes
so much to that feeling, believe that it can, with the appro-
bation and assent of Europe, continue and keep down and
utterly destroy the national feeling of Poland. There is no
reason why these nationalities should be antagonistic or re-
pulsive, or why one should lead to the destruction of the
other. On the contrary, if they are to be properly recog-
nised, and duly regulated, they may be advantageously
united and prove a source of strength where now there is
only weakness. (Hear, hear.)

Lord J. ItUSSELL.—I cannot say that I am surprised
that the hon. gentleman should have brought forward the
question of Pelanll. (Hear, hear.) It is a country which,
after all its vicissitudes, has preserved its national spirit,
which must cause every one to respect it. At the same
time, by some unhappy fate, it seems impossiVe—almost
impossible—that she should be able to unite her scattered
provinces under one Government, and with a national Go-
vernment of their own. The hon. gentleman has alluded to
various points in the history of Poland. It seems that there
hasbeenalways something which has prevented the recogni-
tion of an established Government—of the independence of
Poland. One might have thought that the first Napoleon,
who disturbed so many countries, who gave away provinces
and crowns, that he might have thought it an object of ambi-
tion worthy of his great powers and extended fame to re-
store Vas, national existence of Poland. We know well that
his opinion was, that, although he might raise a legion of
Poles yet that as Russia, Austria, and Prussia were all
possessors pf Polish provinces, it WO beyond even his

JULY 3,

1861.

power to hope to establish permanently an independent
Government of Poland. The honourable gentleman has
alluded to the period of the Congress of Vienna. I must
say I think that everything that could be done by British
diplomacy was done by Lord Castlereagh at that time. It
is evident that Lord Castlereagh wished, when Europe was
to be reconstructed, that Poland should rise from her ashes,
and should again possess an independent Government. We
may observe, in the correspondence of the time, that when
the Emperor Alexander I. expressed a wish that there
should be a kingdom of Poland, and that he should be the
possessor of it, Lord Castlereagh always said he desired the
independence of Poland, but that he could not conceive
that that independence was consistent with Poland being
placed under the dominion of the Emperor of Russia.
Whatever Lord Castlereagh, with the assistance of France
and Austria might have done, was completely thwarted and
set aside by the event of the landing of Napoleon from Elba.
From that time all the Powers of the Continent began again
that work which they thought they ha I carried to a com-
pletion the year before. Their whole attention and their
most mighty efforts were devoted to checking the ambition
of Napoleon, and to confining within due limits the power
of France. At that time, therefore, the independence of
Poland was not thought of, and I must say that although
there was a wish, as was shown by the articles of the
Treaty of Vienna, that the Polish people should have cer-
tain liberties, and certain privileges, that wish has been
very imperfectly accomplished by the terms of the treaty
which was agreed to. It was agreed that Poland should
be united to Russia by a constitution—that she should have
national institutions and national representation, but it was
said in a subsequent part of the article that those national
institutions and that national representation should be given
by Russia, by Austria, and by Prussia in the manner which
those Governments should think most suitable. That, of
course, left a very wide scope for interpretation, but beyond
that there was a feeling which acted from that time, and
which is acting at the present time, namely, that while the
Emperor Alexander I. wished to retain his power
ever Poland, at the same time he wished to grant to
Poland large privileges and to make it, at all events, a
flourishing province under the name of the Kingdom of
Poland, but the general feeling at St. Petersburg, the seat
of power, was that Poland ought not to be indulged with
privileges more large and more liberal than were granted to
Russia. The consequence of these opposite feelings was
that to which the hon. gentleman has alluded. The hon.
gentleman has said that the Treaty of Vienna was violated.
Ido not wish to enter upon that question. We are certain
of this, that dissensions between the Government of Russia
and the people of Poland broke out into insurrection and
civil war, and a conflict was for some time carried on. At
the termination of that contest the Emperor of Russia set
about, not to utterly incorporate Poland with Russia so as
to abolish the name of Poland, but he did deprive the
Poles of the privileges which they had hitherto enjoyed. He
deprived them of a national representation—of anything
like representative institutions, and of a national army,
which had hitherto been their greatest pride. Russian in-
stitutions were imposed upon them, and many grievous
wrongs were suffered by them. (Hear.) During the administra-
tion of Earl Grey my noble friend who was then Secretary
of State for Foreign Affairs, addressed several despatches
to the Russian Government. The hon. gentleman asks for
those despatches. They were written 30 years ago, and
I don't think there can be any public injury arise from
giving those despatches. (Hear, hear.) The house will
then see that my noble friend contended that the Treaty
of Vienna was still to be carried out in its true spirit; that
by its spirit Poland ought to have a separate constitution,
and the house will see how it has arrived that the Govern-
ment of Russia has put forward a species of right of con-
quest, and assumed the right of abolishing all the privi-
leges of Poland under the treaty. The hon. gentleman,
alluding to a subsequent period, has said that England had
declined the task of reconstructing Poland, and that, there-
fore, she was guilty of contributing to the evils which
Poland has suffered. I do not think that charge is justified
by anything that has occurred. The hon. gentleman will
see that to the partition of Poland Great Britain was a
stranger, and my belief is that if, at the time of the Crimean
war, it had been proposed to restore Poland with all her
former provinces, both Austria and Prussia would, in all
probability, have joined Russia to prevent the accomplish..
meat of such a plan. (Hear, hear.) Now, as to this ques-
tion, I must say I hope the house will consider what is be-
coming the dignity of this nation, and what is the duty of
the British Minister mho is to represent it. There are
Powers with whom you may hold most friendly communi-
cation, even with respect to their own internal arrange-
meats, but with regard to Russia, as I have said en former
occasions, I cannot believe that any representation we could
make upon the subject of the Russian Government in Po-
land would be met in any other way than by a declaration
that the Government was conducted in the best manner,
and that the advice of England respecting it was quite out
of place. If that be the case, would it become us to make use-
less representations ? Is there anyone who will say that we
ought to interfere further—that we ought either by our-
selves or by endeavouring to form alliances with other
Powers to break with Russia—to make war, in fact, with

Russia with the view of establishing the independence of
Poland ? I will not go into general principles, nor will I
enter upon a consideration of the evils that would be caused
by a principle of constant interference, but I will only say
that I think, with regard to Russia, that it would lead to a
disastrous war, and, in the present situation of Poland, I do
not believe that her independence can be achieved by such
means. And therefore, whatever may be our sympathies for
Poland, I believe her interest points to tranquillity, and to
petitions and requests for a more liberal form of Government,
and for institutions similar to those granted at Vienna, and
not to any hardened insurrection against the power of Russia.
I believe, moreover, the confidence of Poland would be en-
tirely misplaced if she expected that any of the Powers of
Europe would join her in such an attempt. Still, looking
to a distant period, one cannot btu think that for a people
endowed with so much courage, and which has so long kept
alive the holy flame of national existence, a time is reserved
when she may recover her ancient glory, and take her place
among the nations of Europe. A matter to which my hon.
friend the member for Pontefract has alluded gives us en-
couragement with regard to this subject. Within a very few
years we have seen great changes in several of the nations
of Europe in the direction of representative constitutions, of
greater freedom of person, greater freedom of the press, and
greater encouragement of those powers which bad Govern-
ments take away, and which good Governments are delighted
to see their subjects enjoy. (Hear, hear.) Russia has made a
step in that direction. The Emperor of Russia, with great
boldness as well as with great liberality, has declared that
within a period of two years the institution of serfdom shall
be completely abolished. One cannot but think that modifica-
tions will be consequent on this great organic change ; and
that if, as seems to be the case, constitutional and represen-
tative governments are to prevail in France, in Italy, and in
Germany, in Russia also the germs of representative go-
vernment will at length take root, and finally grew up into
a healthy plant. One cannot but think that in Russia also
these advantages of free communication of thought, and of
guarantees for personal liberty will be acquired by the im-
proved and enlightened condition of her nobles, and by the
popular spirit which will grow up when nobles and serfs will
no longer be placed in antagonism. Whenever a change of
that kind takes place in Russia the feeling will no longer
prevail which is now entertained by nearly every Russian—
a feeling of jealousy towards Poland, and a desire that she
should not have privileges and liberties which are totally
denied to the en:4in to which he belongs. But while I
look forward hopefully to the future history of Poland, I em
convinced that any hasty, premature intervention on the
part of this country would be neither justifiable nor wise.
I cannot say that I wish to maintain any relations with
Russia but those of a friendly nature, and from the extended
relations of ccmmerce between the two countries, I believe
it is for the interest of both that, they should remain on
amicable terms. It is not, as I conceive, either for our own
interests, or for the interests of Poland that we should be
continually making representations to Russia with regard
to her mode of government. I offer no opinion with re-
gard to the institutions which have lately been given to
Poland, but they are institutions which seem to me to de-
rive all their au.hority, and to depend for the spirit in which
they are to be administered upon the will of the Emperor—
(hear, hear)—as they are all to depend for their existence
upon his pleasure. Still, it is impossible that district and
provincial councils and municipal bodies can continue to
act and be elected without effecting improvements in the
condition of the people, and indeed the most patriotic Poles
have of late years turned their attention to national objects
under the guise—I will not say under the disguise, because
I believe their efforts in that direction are genuine—but 'an-
der the guise of agricultural improvement. The amend
ments which must thus be accomplished in the condition of
the people by the promotion of knowledge and of education
will all tend to the progress of the nation, and, therefore,
while I do not think any active co-operation on our part
would be wise, I believe Poland, so far from being destined
to political extinction, will by a gradual and peaceful course
of enlightenment, at length resume her place among the
nations of Europe. (Hear, hear.)
Sir H. VERNEY said the speech to which the house
had just listened was the most hopeful sign for Poland
which he remembered in the course of a long Parliament
tary experience. That the spirit of that nation was ad-
mirable had been shown by the late events at Warsaw,
when, instead of flying to arms, the population tranquilly
exposed themselves to be shot down, desiring no more glo-
rious fete than to suffer for the independence of their
country, and, by their martyrdom, to attract the sympathy
of the nations of Europe. While nothing could be more
dangerous than to allow themselves to be deceived by any
expression of opinion in that house into the belief that
Englsnd would rush into war for their sake, the Poles
should never forget that in any peaceful efforts for the
establishment of their liberties England and France would
gladly co-operate.
Mr. WHITE could not join the hon. member for Buck-
ingham in his exuberant eulogy of the noble lord's speech,
which he must say abounded in the feeblest platitudes
that could be uttered on a great question. From that
speech one moral was to be gathered—viz., that if a grcat
Power were guilty of any enormity or atrocity its conduct
would not provoke a protest from this country, Despatches
were freely written respecting the late King of Naples, re-
peeting Greene, Turkey, Brazil, Spain, and Portugal; but
when a great Power was concerned a remarkable reticence
was observed, which induced people out of denrs to think

that our Government was prepared to interfere in the wrong
cause and at the wrong time, and very reluctant to do it for 1
the right cause and at the right time.
Mr. SCULLY, while concurring in all the generous sen-
timents which that debate had elicited, wished that those
who gave utterance to them on behalf of a distant country
would not refuse to practise them nearer home. He trusted
the Poles would not be induced, in consequence of that dis-
cussion, to place themselves in collision with the great
Powers which now ruled over them, because if they did so
they would find that they would receive no support from '
England beyond a few spirited speeches. It was true, as
the noble lord said, that the Czar was acting nobly in libe-
rating many millions of serfs, but that act of enfranchise-
ment extended to Russians, not to Poles. In this country
we had a most liberal Government, which did everything
liberal for England, but which did not assist in removing
the oppressions under which the sister island laboured.
Ireland was an exact parallel to Poland, with this only dif-
ference, that it was a very much worse case. (Laughter.)
When he had been requested to advocate the cause of
Poland in that house, he had asked those who made the
request to come down there and see the reception he would
meet with in attempting to bring forward the wrongs of
Ireland, and they would find that the grievances of any
country in the world would awaken a better response than
thos,, of Ireland. When 250 destitute human beings were
turned out upon a bleak mountain side, and their charac-
ters blasted, an inquiry in their case was denied. If hon.
gentlemen were sincere in the generous sentiments they
enunciated on behalf of foreign nations, they would surely
place a couhtry which was under their own rule upon an
equality with the rest of the kingdom.
Lord PALMERSTO N—As the despatches now moved
for are those which I myself wrote when at the Foreign-
office, I wish merely to take the opportunity of saying that
I entirely agree with my noble friend in respect to their
production. I then entertained the opinion which the British
Government of that time entertained and expressed as to
the course which the Government of Russia adopted towards
Poland ; and that opinion, couched in terms befitting the
relations then subsisting between England and Russia, was
that the course so taken was a complete and decided viola-
tion of the stipulations of the Treaty of Vienna. (Hear,
hear.) I agree with my noble friend that it is impossible
for anybody who has any admiration for high national
qualities for patriotism, endurance, love of liberty, not to
admire the Polish character. And it is equally impossible
for anybody who has any sense of wrong not to lament those
misfortunes which have befallen the Poles from the time
of their first partition down to the present moment. (Hear.)
That partition was a gross violation of national right.
(Hear, hear.) The stipulations of the Treaty of Vienna
were broken almost as soon as concluded. (Hear, hear.)
The British Government, upon every occasion on which it
was called on to pronounce an opinion, or on which it
thought it c ould pronounce an opinion usefully, declared
that to be its view. And when the hon. gentleman (Mr.
White) says that the English Government interferes in
some cases by opinion and advice, and does not interfere in
others, I must tell him that the English Government inter-
feres in proportion as it thinks it can do so usefully--(hear,
hear)—that when it thinks its opinion may prevail it ex-
presses it in the form which it believes the most likely to
prevail. But when the Government feels that its opinions
will not be attended to, and that the result will be that it
will either have to submit to a refusal or to ask the country
to take up arms—an appeal which the Government knows
full well the country would not answer---why, prudence,
and even the interest of the parties concerned, would lead it
not to exasperate where it is unable to convince. (Hear.)
The hon. member who made this motion thinks the Bri-
tish Government has neglected several opportunities when
it might, in conjunction with other Powers, have restored
Poland to independence. Why, the occasions to which he
alludes were occasions on which war must have been made ;
and I ask any gentleman present whether, in the course of
his memory, any period ever arose in which he believes
this country would have been induced b enter into an
European war for the emancipation of Poland, how-
ever much we may have sympathised with her wrongs,
and desired to see her independence re-established. (Hear.)
Take the Crimean war. During that war we were engaged
in operations which had the security of Turkey for their
object, and all the military and naval resources which
England and France could command were directed to the
Crimea and the Black Sea. Had we sent any of the
forces which were engaged in those operations to Poland,
we might have failed in accomplishing that for which we
had undertaken the war, for a most important considera-
tion in naval and military operations is the concentration of
your forces to one point. (Hear, hear.) Therefore it is
manifest that it would have been extreme folly to attempt
warlike enterprises in two such distant quarters, even if we
had the means of doing so. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gen-
tleman thinks that Austria would have been a willing and
powerful ally at that time for the emancipation of Poland.
Does the hon. gentleman remember that Austria, supported
and encouraged by Russia, committed the greatest viola-
tion of the Treaty of Vienna perpetrated by any of those
three countries ? (Hear, hear.) 1 will take the liberty of
saying that perhaps the greatest violation of a treaty that
has ever taken place in the history of the world was that
which occurred in the case of Poland—(hear, hear)—be-
cause there were three Powers who undertook by treaty
to support and defend the independence of the republic of
Cracow, and yet those trustees and guardians of that re-
public combined to destroy that independence, and to in-
corporate the republic itself with the empire of Austria.
(Hear, hear.) I do not think the case was a hopeful
one for our getting the assistance of Austria to achieve the
independence of Poland ; but, be that as it may, we were
engaged in another country, and we had not the
means, even if this country had the will, to embark in such
an operation. I concur with my noble friend in thinking that
' a nation which, under such a long course of oppression, has
resisted all attempts to destroy its national spirit must be
destined, some day or other, for a better fate ; but if the
object of the hon. gentleman was to induce the Government
to takenaore active steps than are involved in the expression
of opinion, I would say, in the first place, that I do not
think we should be supported in such a proceeding by the
people of this country, and, secondly, that the Government
are not prepared to ask the country to make those sacrifices
and engage in those operations by which alone active mea-
sures for such a purpose could be brought to a successful
issue. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HENNESSY said his object had been to obtain
information. He would not presume to give the Govern-
ment advice, but did he venture to do so, the last advice he
should think of giving them was to interfere in the manner
they had done in continental affairs.
The motion was then agreed to.
CHAIN CABLES AND ANCHORS IN THE MER.