The Sun.
London, England, 1857-02-04 00:00:00

ki[Pmat 40. STAMPED SD•

' the affairs of Italy, and you singled out the kingdom of the
two Sici des as the object of your magnanimous interference.
What ha .t Piedmont to do with Naples ? You told us
that the system of misgovernment in Naples was calcu-
lated to produce dangers which might disturb the peace of
Europe, so recently restored ; bat will the noble earl say
v on the part of her Majesty's Government, that he had the
slightest apprehension that the course of conduct pursued
by the Kiug of Naples towards his subjects had the slightest
chance of distuibiue' the peace of Europe? Neither will
the noble lord say, for he knows it better than I do, that
there was the slightest fear of a conflict between Fam) and
Austria in Italy. The plea you put forward has nu substance
iu it ; your interference partly arose from a sense of the
necessity of adhering to declarations previously made, and
partly from your inherent love of meddling. (Laughter.)
And what are the demende. you made? If you were on
friendly terms with the Sovereign, you might represent to
him in a friendly manner that he was not pursuing a curse
which was calculated to be for his own beeefit or the bene-
fit of his people. It was taking great liberty to do that
even with a most intimate friend, but you cannot say that
your intimacy with the King of Naples was such as to jus-
tify your interfering as you did in his affairs. I ani not
a supporter of the tyrannical measures of the King of Na-
ples. I am not defending the state of things in Naples or
iu the Papal States, but I think matters have been made
infinitely worse iu Naples, Rome, and Spain by your in-
terference. What had you to do with Naples, the Papal
Government, or Spain ? You are bound toprotect your own
subjects in those states; but as between a sovereign and
his own subjects, to break off all friendly relations be-
cause that sovereign does not take your advice is a
monstrous proceeding, according to every principle
of international law; and no one who understands those
principles will get up and defend. it. (Hear, hear.) On
what pound, then, have you withdrawn your minister
from Naples? lam not to be told that in speaking this I
am attacking the policy of France. I have a profound ad-
miration for the Emperor of the 'Nelkch, not only on ac-
count of hiiiianeet talents and ability-illlt forThie scrupulous
adherence anti fidelity in his engagements with this country.
1 do not think I am going too far when I say that the Em-
peror of the French is about the only cordial friend you have
in Europe ; but the Emperor of the French may fall into
errors, and I think he has done so in this case. Whet have
you done? You have made certain demands on the King of
Naples. He answers in a manner that you consider offensive.
But you must recollect the language held towards the King
of Naples by that portion of the press which is supposed to
receive some of its inspirations from the noble viscount.
Was there any term of vituperation which was not applied
to him ? (Hear.) We were told that the presence of a few
slips kindle a revolution in the country, and make
him a fugitive over the face of the eapth. Such was the state
of your friendly relations ; and yet after such language you
say you regret the King of .'Naples was so ill advised
as not to listen to your friendly representations. (Hear,
and laughter.) You withdrew your ambassador, and so
did the Government .of France, but these ambassadors of
two of the greatest nations of Europe walked down stairs,
and went away without the slightest excitement or com-
motion on the part of any human being. No precautions
were taken, the King went openly in the streets, but ex-
cept a miserable attempt at insurrection in Sicily, said to
be produced (but that t do not believe) at the instigation
of others, which was soon put down, and a wretched at-
tempt at assassination which ended in the execution of the
criminal, this was the whole result of your interference,
except that England and France received, and well de-
served, the affrout they suet with. (Hear.) 1 now come
to other topics, and I cannot but regret that we are en-
gaged in two heavy wars in the east—a war with Persia
and a wsr with China. I admit the importance of the iu-
dependence of Herat, in reference to our 'adieu empire,
and lam not going to defend the tortuous and devious
policy perdue(' at various times with resitri to Herat
by Persia. In 1832, we received a solemn assurance—an
assurance not confirmed by the fact—that no attempt
would be made on Herat. It was necee,ary, in conse-
quence of the falsehood of the representations of Persia,
to suspend diplomatic relations with the Persian minister
in his country; but owing to the co-operation of Russia,
then in amity with us, Persia abandoned her attempt upon
Herat. In 1853 ma agreement was come to between Col.
Shed and the Slut], which was not very clearly expressed,
but the effect of that agreement was, I believe, that Per-
sia was to make no attempt to occupy or invade Herat,
and we undertook, on our part, if any attempt was made
on Herat by others, to use our moral influence to prevent
such an attempt from taking place. In 1816 our new ally
and former enemy, Dost Mahomed, advanced towards
Herat, and the governor of that place, fearing the designs
of that prince, applied to Persia for assistance. The
Persiaus advanced, and the ruler of Herne, now fear-
ing the Persians, applied to the Affghans to defend
him against Persia and his own people. Thereupon
a conflict took place, in which the Affghans were signally
defeated by the Persians, who, in violation of the engage-
ments they entered into with us, made tlieniSelves masters
of Herat. It is not, however, quite clear that under such
circumstances the occupation of Herat was a violation of
the engagement she male with us. But observe what had
been the state of Persia in the intermediate time. Persia,
a comparatively weak and powerless empire, found herself
between the pressure of two mighty states—Russia and
England. During the late war, I believe Persia offered
to take a part against Russia if England anti France en-

tared into an- alliance to secure her independence
against Russia. That ilffer was declined by England i
and France, but Persia was required to maintain a strict
neutrality. She abstained from attacking Turkey, there-
fore ; bat when the preponderance of Russia in the East
seemed to be secured to Russia by the siege and taking of
Kars, thinking that she had more to fear from the hos-
tility of Russia than of England, she took no great pains
to conceal her unfriendly feeling towards this country.
Nothing was raore natural at that time than that Russia
should stimulate Persia to this course. We would do thp
same if we were in the position of Russia. But I am pea
suaded of this, that at the present time it is the sincere de-
sire of Russia not to be involved in any further war with
this country, and that for that reason she would exert the
whole of her influence in Persia to make that Government
comply with the. demands of this country, and keep on
friendly terms with as. And for the benefit of both England
and Russia, not at the present time only, but in all times,
there cannot be anything more advantageous for both coun-
tries than that, with regard to the countries that intervene,
whether Persia or any other country, between our respec-
tive territories, there should be a perfect understanding.
That is an object to be aimed at by every statesman, and the
more we are exposed to the encroachments of Russia, the
more should it be our object to maintain between the two
as large a space of territory, bound neither to the one nor
the other, bat which, preventing the Possibility of contact,
may prevent the chance of collision. I believe Russia to
be deeply impressed with that truth; and though she may
have stimulated Persia to harass and insult you when she
was your enemy, I believe her efforts now to be in a dif-
ferent direction ; and I believe that if Persia ever does
come into your terms, it will be much more due to the re-
presentations of Russia than to the effeet of that expedition
which, you have sent against her shores. Ido not wish in
the slightest degree to depreciate the skill, gallantry, and
valour displayed by that small expedition which has so
signally succeeded in the Persian Gulf. I think it reflects
the highest credit on the Indian Government; audit mast
be a souice of sincere satisfaction to my noble and gallant
friend behind me, and others who like him, on the ground
of age and infirmity, have been placed on the retired list, to
know that there are some of then% who are still capable of
active service and brilliant exploits. (Hoar.) I must say
I heard at first with dismay of the advance, and then with
great satisfaction of the retrograde movement of the body
of troops which had been sent to co-operate with Dost Ma-
homed on the other side of Persia.
The Earl of CLARENDON gave some explanation
across the table. He was understood to say that that force
was only sent for a local object.
The Earl of DERBY—I certainly look with anxiety to
any movement on that side. However, the papers to be
laid on the table will probably throw some light on that
and other subjects. Among other points, there is one of
importance in a constitutional point of view
deepestitliority by which this war with Persia was under-
_thethe
taken. I have seen undoubtedly a proclamation of the
Governor-General of India, in which he declares war against
Persia iu consequence of various grievances ; but I have
yet to learn that the Governor-General of India has any
constitutional power of proclaiming war upon the part of
this country. I have always understood that the 'declare,-

tion of war was a part of the prerogative of the Crown--
(hear, hoar)—that it must be proclaimed by the Crown,
with certain formalities; and if it had been so pro-
claimed in this instance, I think it would have been
the duty of the Minister of the Crown to have
called Parliament together at the earliest possible
moment, and have made known to them the circumstances
under which her Majesty had been induced to enter upon
this war. I can quite understand that when our Indian
empire was entirely governed by the East India Company
wars undertakeu against native princes, arising out of In-
dian quarrels, stood on quite a different footing, and did
not require the sanction of the Crown. But, observe, the
royal speech speaks of " British troops" having been sent
on this occasion. It treats it, not as an Indian, but as a
British war ; and unless I am greatly misinformed, the
people of this country are pledged by the acts of the Go-
wn:nent to every portion of the expenditure of this war,
beyond a certain given proportion to be charged upon the
resources of India. lam told, also, whatever may be
t ofthe
opinion of the Governor-General of Innis, or the Court
Directors, about the policy of this war, that it is a wa
en-
tered into by direction of the Government at hoe—that
it is not an Indian war, but 'a British war ; and if so, it
ought to have been proclaimed in the o
tr i
opn rr i
awn
laeyn. I, and
t
announced at the very earliest moment
kno' not what answer the noble earl hastothisiislteltebmaetnatt.
I hope that he will be enabled undeceive
present my impression is, that ae the war is unfortunate
in itself, so the manner of its proclamation is
oiniol
unconstitu-
tional, almost unjust. (Hear, hear.)
with regard to the war with Persia, it is ten times my
opinion with regard to
which that ~n
n astonishmenta gaetathine
China. (Hear, hear.) lam lost
proceedings which have characterised that war—a war by
courtesy it may , called, yet accompanied by proceedings
unknown in civilised warfare, and which I heard with
utter astonishment characterisedtf by the noble earl opposite
as being mark( d by grea
orb ears ace. (Hear, hear.) What
is the case? Ido not say that the Chinese have not vio-
lated the treaty; bat I consider it exceedingly doubtful
whether that lorcha, the Arrow, was under the protection
of the flag of this country. If not, the whole case falls
to the groand. Sir John Bowring aimits that the time
for which it was licensed to carry that flag hal expired;
but ho says the Chinese did not know that it had
expired. But what then ? He says again that, by virtue of
the colonial registry, she was entitled to the ben fi of that
flag till her return from her voyage. Now, I very greatly
doubt the legal validity of the colonial register on which
Sir John Bowring relies. (Hear.) lam sure that there is
infinite danger in permitting to authorities at a very great
distance an unlimited power of granting British protection,
and thereby enabling the parties enjoying it to claim the in-
tervention of the British power in their support. My belief
is that that colonial registry is of very doubtful validity,
inasmuch as it is in,onsistent with, and repugnant to, the
law of England; and no principle is more clearly laid down
with regard to colonial governments than this—that their
acts must not be repugnant to the
(Hear, hear.) This colonial registry gives the privilege.o
general law of England.
British vessels to those whose owners are not British
subjects, not naturalised but who upon the payment of
a very heavy fine have been allowed to take on board
hands in Hong Kong, and have thereby become pro_
tested, autlentitled to the privileges of the British flag.