The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-09 00:00:00

SCOTCH EPISCOPAL COMMUNION.

Mr. A. STEUART called the attention of the house to
utilities by which a clergyman of the Scotch Episcopal
communion may by a private bill obtain admission into the
Church of England, even though he may have countenanced
what have been condemned by his own Church as danger-
ous error; and asked the First Lord of the Treasury whe-
ther he considered a remedy should be devised, either by a
public enactment or regulations regarding private bills of so
unusual nature.

Lord VALMERSTON said that he agreed with the hon.
member that a formal bill was not the mode of dealing
with a subject like the present, but he thought when the
bill was brought forward would be the proper time to dis-
cuss the matter.

ECCLESIASTICAL AND CHURCH ESTATES
COMMISSIONS.

Mr. Alderman COPELAND moved for a return of all
monies paid by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, or tie
Church Estates Commissioners, during the years 1855,1856,
1857, and 1858, out of funds administered by them to soli-
citors, surveyors, and other officers, specifying the names
and particulars of each transaction (in continuation of Par-
liamentary paper, No. 292, of session 1855).—Agreed to.

DESPATCH TO THE PRUSSIAN GOVERNMENT.
. Mr. S. FITZGERALD, pursuant to notice, rose to ask
the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he would
lay upon the table of the house a copy of a despatch stated
to have been addressed to the Prussian Government, or her
Majesty's Minister at Berlin, conveying the views of her
Majesty's Government as to the course which that Power
ought to pursue with reference to the war now raging in the
north of Italy. The hon. gentleman said,—Before I ex-
plain the grounds upon which, in my opinion, this docu-
ment may fairly, and with advantage to the public service,
be laid upon the table, I hope the house will permit me to
make a short explanation which is, I think, rendered-neces-
sary by the somewhat abrupt contradiction whiails;is given
the other day by the right hon. Secretary for India (Sir C.
Wood) to a statement which I then made. (Hear.) I then
asked whether there would be any objection to lay upon the
table a communication made on behalf of' her Majesty's
Government; giving advice to the Courts of Germany as to
the course they should pursue with reference to the war
now raging in Italy. I referred to this communication as
one which I might fairly impute to the Government upon
the authority of the right hon. Secretary of State for India;
but that right hon. gentleman with, I think, more vivacity
than courtesy, at once exclaimed " I never said anything
of the kind.' Now, of course, lam bound to accept the
disclaimer of the right hon. gentleman ; but I deem it due
to myself that I should state the grounds upon which, as I
think fairly and justly, I was led to attribute that statement
to the right hon. gentleman. On referring to the report of
the right hon. gentleman's speech to his constituents at
Halifax, I find these words attributed to him :

" We have seen recent accounts that in a largo portion of
Germany a strong spirit prevails by which they seem dis-
posed almost to engage in hostilities. I hope and trust that
their own good sense, aided by the advice which we have
given them since we came to power, will induee them to
abstain from hostilities."

(Hear, hear,) The right hon. baronet further said :
" I believe that in the endeavour to keep Germany out of
the war we shall be consulting the best interests of the
country."
Even if this were all, I should be entitled to attribute to the
right hon. gentleman the announcement that advice had
been given by her Majesty's Government as to the course
which should be pursued by the German Powers with re-
gard to the war in Italy. I find, however, that the right
hon. gentleman's speech has apparently led not only me,
but others, into error, for that speech was thus commented
upon in the leading article of the limes
ahnesbury :
Minister
" We learn from Sir C. Wood that our Foreign
has not been idle, and Prussia is subjected to the
se eilsame ad..y
monitions, expostulations, and warning which _
failed of their effect when addressed by Lord M
to France, Austria, and Sardinia."
had attracted
for the speech of, the right hon.
gentleman ~
Lord lualmesuury, and he
As far as I was concerned the case does not even rest here ;
the notice of my noble friend, Lor
expressed his fear lest
refe-
rence to it in another place, where e
should be found to prejudice
thought it his duty to make some he
with
this officious giving of adviceeeero_
and might therefore
our position of neutrality—( h
anonsibility upon the Government of
ha hon.bhiee
impose unnecessary re-•
tNthheewrceeoaspelltle said that, alt
blognohuoturg
this in answer to the observations of
country. I find that, e
ear•tg•u3fetsh eo fri tghhe
my noble f,ntehned,Dounke
eooff
had not been able to read
had no doubt of the accuracy of that
he
baronet's speech,
report, and pa alluded to by
the right honourable gentleman would not bear the con-
struction to which Lord Malmesbury_ seemed to apprehend
it was open. Now, when I found an identical report in
all the morning newspapers attributing to the right
that the hon.
gentleman a statement present Government had
given advice to the Po
be pursued regard to the war in Italy-
thehwwithers of Germany with reference to
to
that that language was understood in the
samee sense s
public writers, and that a noble duke—the
when
I rou
foundeby
colleague of the right hon, gentleman—expressly stated
that the language held by the right hon. gentleman referred
to a despatch of which that noble duke was cognizant, I
think I was perfectly entitled to attribute these sentiments
to the right hon. gentleman—(hear, hear)—and while I
entirely accept his disclaimer, I cannot but think he must
have been somewhat precipitate in stating so decidedly that
he not only had not said what I attributed to him, but that
he never said anything of the kind. Now with reference
to the question I wish to put to the noble lord the Secre-
tary for Foreign Affairs, I beg to assure him that my ex-
perience of the department over which he presides is far
too recent to permit me to press him to produce any papers
which he may think it desirable for the public interest to
withhold ; but I must say, at the same time, that I think
the paper to which I reter does not come within that cate-
gory. I do not ask for a portion of any correspondence, or
for anything having reference to pending negotiations, but
we have had a circular from the Government of Russia _
ex-
pressing their views with regard to the present position of
Germany--,we have had a circular addressed to the various

French Ministers byM. Walewski--and Ithink this country
and Parliament should be in possession of-the most authen-
tic records of the opinions of our own Government upon-the
same subject. I thick it is not only desirable that we should
be in possession of the views of her Majesty's Government
upon this subject, but that it is also very necessary t,bat this
house should know the language in which these viewshave
been expressed. It may be that that language is judicious ;
it may be that it is conciliatory ; it may be that it is all
this house could desire ; but, on the other hand, it may be
such as is calculated to irritate and to wound the sus-
ceptibilities of those to whom it is addressed. How-
ever guarded statesmen may be in writing their despatches,
it is not always that a public man is successful in attaining
the object he has in view. A very remarkable instance of
this occurs to my mind, because, on a former occasion, when
the noble lord (Lord J. Russell) held the seals of the
Foreign-office, he addressed a very important despatch to
the Court of Russia. The laudable object of that despatch
no one doubted ; but, laudable as was its object, it only
paved the wav for the outbreak of hostilities, and 'en—
couraged the kiiiperos of Russia in the pursuit of those
designs and the adoption of those measures which afterwards
rendered a war between this country and Russia inevitable.
It is therefore desirable that we. should know not only
what the policy of the Government is, but what are the
exact terms and phrases in which they have conveyed
that policy to foreign Governments. If, under present cir-
cumstances, and especially after the news which has just
been received, the noble lord thinks it better that =the
despatch should not now be produced, I will say nothing
further. But I shall now conclude with asking whether
there is any objection to lay on the table the desPatch
alluded to by the right hon. member for Halifax on the 'oc-
sion to which I have referred ? (Hear, hear.)
Sir C. WOOD (who was indistinctly heard) was under-
stood to say,—Sir, I may be permitted, before the noble
lord rises, to offer a few words in explanation of what I did
say at Balifax, and of why I made :the answer that I did
yesterday to which the hon. gentleman has adverted. I
understood the hon. member yesterday to ask for the pro-
duction of a despatch which I had stated had been addressed
to the different Courts of Germany, urging on them an adhe-
rence to a course of firm neutrality in the present war ; and
in reference to that assertion, speaking perhaps with a little
warmth, I remarked that I had said nothing of that kind.
What occurred at Halifax was this :—Many persons there
were very much interested in the trade of the Continent,
and, apprehending that their business would be entirely
stopped by the -war, they expressed great,stlarin at a report
which they had heard that Prussia wss on the point
of taking an active part in the streggle. On the
other band a large number of people wergelso apprehensive
lest the preparationsgoing on in this country should render
the maintenance of,our neutrality muchmore difficult. In
the first place, I told them that the present Government
were not more likely than the last to abandon the policy of
neutrality, and I assured them that the naval and military
preparations which had been for, some tine tin progress were
not intended, as I believed, by the late Government, and
certainly not intended by the present Government, in any
way as a departure from that policy. But I added that
events might happen elsewhere, for example in Germany,
by which, if the war extended, this country might possibly
become involved; and that out of consideration for our own
interests, and even. for our own obligations, we might be
called upon to interfere. I further said, I hoped and trusted
that this would not be the case—that the statement that
Prussia was on the point of taking
_en active part in the
war was unfounded—that that was a course which I thought
a regard for her own interests should induce Prussia not
to pursue, and that we had also given our advice to that
effect. Not that we had advised Germany, that she ought
to remain neutral. That would, perhaps, have been going
further than we had a right to, do ; but that, looking to the
interest which this country felt in the question, she was
justified in urging Prussia not to take an,immediate and
active part in the war now raging in Italy.,
Mr. SEYMOUR FITZGERALD—I certainly never
used in relation to this despath the words which the right
hon. gentleman. has described. I spoke of it merely as a
communication on the part of her Majesty's GoVernment
giving advice to Prussia as to the course to be purs,ued with
reference to the war.

OUTRAGES IN MEXICO.
Mr. SCHNEIDER wished, before the' noble lord the
Foreign Secretary rose, to call attention to the present state
of Mexico, especially with reference to the outrages which
have been committed on British subjects. The hon. mem-
ber mentioned several cases of gross outrage upon the lives
and property of British residents in Mexico, and stated that
the conduct of Mr. Otway, the British Minister in that
country had been strongly 'Complained of in connexion with
those proceedings. The speech delivered from the Throne
in February last intimated that our Government had sent
a squadron to the Gulf of Mexico for the protection of
British subjects, and to obtain redress for the injuries in-
flicted upon them by the Centralist party, at the head of
which was the present President of the Republic. Mr.
Otway was on the most intimate terms with the President,
and it was believed that if he had exerted himself as he
might have done, the pardon of an innocent British subject
who had been condemned to death might easily have been
obtained. Without casting any aspersion on the character
of Mr. Otway, or charging him with want of energy or zeal,
it was, nevertheless, the tact that reports very prejudicial to
his reputation as a public servant were circulated and
generally credited in Mexico, and therefore he ought to
have an opportunity of refuting the charges brought against
him. The outrages in question, instead of diminishing
were increasing in frequency, and even after the arrival of
the British squadron they had become worse and worse.
He therefore hoped that the noble lord would inform the
house what steps had been taken to obtain proper repara-
tion for such injuries.
THE CIRCULAR OF COUNT CAVOUR.

Mr. B. COCHRANE (in the absence of Lord W. Ora-
ham) rose to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
whether the circular of Count Cavour, dated the 14th day of
June, 1859, had been officially communicated to the Eng-
lish Court ; and, if so, whether he had deemed it consistent
with his duty to make any reply thereto, or to address
any observations thereon to the Sardinian Minister in this
country. In his despatch of the 14th of June Count Cavour
referred to a previous despatch of the Ist of March, which
had been laid on the table. In the first of those despatches
allusion had been made to an independent Government for
Lombardy and Venice, while in the second the following
language was held :
" The feelings of the inhabitants have broken out ; the
municipal authoritiee., the very same that had been instituted
by Austria, have proclaimed the fall of the ancient Govern-
ment, have renewed the union of 1848, and unanimously
confirmed their annexation to Piedmont. The municipality
of Milan proclaimed it even within range of Austrian can-
non. The King, by accepting this spontaneous act of the
national will, infringes the existing treaties in no respect,
since Austria; by refusing to accept a Congress having for
its basis the maintenance of these treaties, and by invading
the dominions of his Majesty, has torn up, in so far as con-
cerns herself, the transactions of 1814 and 1815."

That despatch conveyed so much meaning, and differed so
much from the first to which he had referred, that he wished
to ask the noble lord whether he had any objections to lay
the answer to it on the table.

Lord J. RUSSEEL.—In answer to the question which
has just been put by the hon. gentleman, and which was to
have been put bo a noble lord relating to a despatch or cir-
cular of Count Cavour of the 14th of June, I have to state
that it has not been officially communicated to the British
Government. There is a despatch from Sir J. Hudson,
stating the substance of a circular written by Count Cavour
—I am not exactly sure whether the same circular or not—
which alludes to certain States being annexed to Piedmont.
The answer of her Majesty's Government to Sir J. Hudson
was that they could not acknowledge any of these annexa-
tions of other States ; that the system of occupation must be
decided finally by the wishes of the inhabitants, by the for-
tune of war, and by any general treaty of peace that might
be concluded. This answer Sir J. Hudson was desired to
communicate to Count Cavour. There is, therefore, no
acknowledgment by her Majesty's Government of any of the
annexations that may have taken place. (Hear.) I will next
reply to the question which has been put.by the hon. gen-
leman the late Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
His question is, whether I have any objecton to lay upon
the table of the house a despatch addressed to the Prussian
rtoatpursßernlienwaisthtothe
course
eovernemf
conduct
ewrhAielhajtypesrus'ssiaMeinngishtet
refe-
rence to the war in Italy. In answer, I have to state that
it would be very inconvenient to the public service if that
adnespanatscwherwhereas
blaeeidnogni
given by
hta)lirlern.
ssia, while,
ahidelser
again,
lLte which
another
was sent only last night by her Majesty's Government, con-
tinuing the correspondence. I think, therefore, the hon.
ery
fnraotmurtahlleycfaollurtenoifntoßussosmiae, errors.
The gentleman will see that it would be highly inconvenient to
give publication to part only of a correspondence. (Hear.)
But with respect to the nature of the correspondence the
The hon. gentleman speaks of a circular addressed to the
another circular signed by the French Minister of Foreign
Affairs, M. Walewski. The circular of the Court of Russia,
and I think also that of the French Minister of Foreign
Affairssp
hat wtsasanthdedpurteiepes rofctohuresGeefrmor anthaiet Con-
federation,Con-
federation to pursue in regard to foreign nations. Now, that
is a kind of discussion natural enough for the Sates of Ger-
many ; but we have not followed any such course. We have
not discussed at all the rights and duties of the German Con-
federation, and the rights and duties of the several States,
or what should determine their relations to other Powers.
But with regard to Prussia, owing to ruinours that were in
some degree countenanced by official statements, we ad
dressed a despatch to that Court. Now, in looking
at the Italian papers on the table, I see a despatch from
Lord Malmesbury to Lord Bloomfield, our Minister at
Confederationa
gentleman
fohhas
thewshvr
Berlin, in which, after stating that the 'Government
of this country intends to remain neutral, he says,
" Her Majesty's Government; therefore, deprecate any
act which might unnecessarily extend the theatre of
war, and they are prepared to take advantage of any favour-
able opportunity that may arise of being the medium of re-
storing peace." (Hear.) Now, the object of our despatch to
the Court of Berlin was to "deprecate any act that might
unnecessarily extend the theatre of war." (Hean) It ap-
pears to me that it is the bounden duty of the Government,
as far as they can properly do so, to consult with. other go-
vernments which are neutral in order to prevent the theatre
of war from extending. (Hear, hear.) I need hardly point
out to the house, certainly not to the hon. gentleman, who
is so well acquainted with foreign affairs, that while it is a
great calamity to have war in Italy, it would be a still
greater calamity if the war extended to Germany, and
through Germany to the whole of Europe. We were there-
fore led to consider what were the causes put forth that
should induce Prussia to take part in hostilities, and to dis-
cuss in the most friendly manner the interests of Prussia in
regard to the was. (Hear, hear.) In regard to the latter
part of the question put by the hon. gentlemar i it is pecu-
liarly necessary that there should be no preuiat tire publica-
tion of correspendence at this moment ; for,wi thout know-
ing how far the armistice may extend, We are informed of-
ficially by the Moniteur that it leaves roam foi negotiation.
(Hear, hear.) That is so important an anon ncement that

_i _ L - ~.4