The Sun.
London, England, 1861-02-11 00:00:00

2HE DEBATE IN THE PRUSSIAN

CHAMBERS.

By a majority of 159 to 146 the Prussian Cham-
ber has adopted the motion of M. de Vincke, that
" It is not in the interest of Prussia or Germany to
place obstacles in the way of the consolidation of
the Unity of Italy."
This vote of the Prussian Chamber has already
appeared in our columns. We now subjoin the
speech of the Prussian Minister of Foreign Affairs,
Baron von Schleinitz, and that of M. de Vincke.
Baron von Schleinitz gave the following explana-
tions :

" As many speakers have expressed their opinion
upon the Italian question, I think it right to ex-
plain the view taken of this important question by
the Government. The Government has not the
slightest motive of against Italy, against a
people who once dominated the world, who have
produced great things in art and science, and writ-
ten their names in glorious characters in the his-
tory of civilisation. Nor do we object that a people
with such a past and so well characterised a nation-
ality should attempt to obtain a political conforma-
tion assuring that nationality, and making good,
its signification. But, without depreciating in any
manner whatsoever the importance of the national
idea, we do not think we can attribute to it the
absolute value which has been claimed for it in
Italy—a value before which everything else is to
give way, the law of nations as well as the right of
treaties, all interests, the highest as well as the
lowest. Here, with the exception perhaps of those
members who do not consider themselves as at
home in this country, no one will attribute so abso-
lute a signification to the principle of nationalities.
If any one was to attempt to reconstruct the balance
of power in Europe on a purely national basis, he
would give the signal of an endless and sangui-
nary struggle. There is another principle, that of
non-intervention, which we cannot admit as bind-
ing and applicable under all circumstances."
Baron von Schleinitz then explained that the
only position Prussia could assume was one of
reserve.

M. de Vincke then rose and spoke as follows :•

Certainly there cannot be any objections made to

the policy of non-intervention as explained by the
Minister of Foreign Affairs. It is the duty of every
Government to spare the blood and property of the
citizens. But, such being the case, no diplomatic
intervention should have been made which is in
staring contradiction to the views now adopted.

M. de Vincke then expressed his disapprobation
of the Coblentz Note, which was totally uncalled
for, and passed severe censure on the Government
for allowing the Prussian Government ship the
Loreley to carry despatches between Messina and
Gaeta in defiance of the admitted law of non-inter-
vention.

" There is a third fact (continued M. de Vincke)
which I must dwell upon, and which is contrary
to the policy of non-intervention' now admitted;
Prussia, in concert with other Powers, requested
the Emperor Napoleon to keep his fleet at Gaeta.
What could have induced Prussia to take such a
step? Humanity has been put forward as a plea.
The best humanity would have been to put an end
to a sanguinary struggle the only result of which
can be to maintain for a few weeks more a Crown
to a King who will never have his kingdom again.
Prussia has not, then, been faithful to the principle
of non-intervention ; she has shown herself
unfavourable to Italy. Italy will never be a con-
quering Power, but she will contribute greatly to
the preservation of the balance of Power in Eu-
rope. The Emperor Napoleon has said, that the
greatest virtue of a people was to have confidence
in itself,' and that France might tranquilly await
the future, confident in her own strength and loy-
alty. This is equally applicable to Germany. Let
us rejoice to rival France in the arts of peace. If
she chooses to attack us she will find us sword in
hand."

After saying that the French nation were easily
excited, that the French Emperor once said to the