The Sun.
London, England, 1857-02-11 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUAIIV 11, 1857.

This was a sufficient precedent for the measure now pro-
posed.
The motion for the app intment of a sel, ct committee
was then agreed to.
SECONDARY PUNISHMENTS.

Viscount DUNGANNON, who had given notice of a
question on this subject, said that after what had passed
in the other house on the preceding night, when Sir
G. Grey obtained leave to bring in a bill relating to
secondary punishments, he would abstain from putting
his question, and would reserve any remarks he had to
make until the bill was before their lordships.
After a few words from the Earl of HARROWBY, the
House adjourned at half-past eight o'clock.

eight, there was a discussion in this house upon the pro-
ceedings which had taken place at Frankfort, it was a case
of considerableimportance, and was adjourned from day to
day. I took some part in the debate, with the view of
vindicating the conduct of Austria, and I remember I
had occasion frequently to appeal to the treaty of Vienna.
I had occasion to refer to a guarantee contained, as
I alleged, in the treaty of Vienna, and having
been given by England to Prussia with respect
to her Saxon provinces. The noble lord, at pre-
sent the first Minister of the Crown, was then Secretary
of State for Foreign Affairs, and had been Secretary for
Foreign Affairs for no less a space than 17 sears- On that
occasion, when I referred to the guarantee of Great Britain
to Pru=ssia in respect to her Saxon provinces, the noble lord
unequivocally contradicted me in the face of the house, and
said there was no such guarantee in the treaty of Vienna.
On that occasion I had the opportunity of reiterating my
statement, and mentioning the clause of the treaty in which
the guarantee was contained. The noble lord was still in-
credulous, and requested one of his aides de-camp to go to
the library—it was in the old house—and bring him the
treaty of Vienna. He found there the guarantee by Great
Britain to Prussia of her Saxon provinces in that treaty,
and the noble lord, the then Secretary of State—who had
been Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs during seven-
teen years, and whose reputation as a statesman mainly
depended on his knowledge of foreign affairs—then became
acquainted, for the first time apparently, with that most
important undertaking of the BritishO rown. Now, sir, on
the first night of the session I hal occasion, in the course
of debate, to refer to another fact. I mentioned that there
was in existence a guarantee by France to Austria of her
Italian provinces : I mentioned also that that guarantee
was expressed in a treaty ; and I mentioned further that
that treaty was a secret one. The noble lord contradicted
me on that occasion, as he had done on the previous one
with respect to the guarantee given to Prussia • but I was
in a very different position the other night to that in which
I found myself when I received the contradiction of eight
years ago. The treaty I then referred to was not printed
—it was not published—it could not be sent for to the lib-
rary of the House of Commons—to vindicate my assertion,
or to refute the allegations of the noble lord; and I did
not, under those circumstances, consider it respectful to
the house to rise after the noble lord and make a busi-
ness reiteration of the statement I had made. I felt
that such a reiteration, under the circumstances, would
neither be satisfactory to the house nor to myself. I hal
a moral conviction when I made the statement in debate
that I was right, and that moral conviction of my cor-
rectness sustained me under the almost unprecedented
contradiction which I received from the lips of the Chief
Minister of the Crown. (Hear.) Sir, I received the in-
formation, which I presumed to communicate to the house
that night for its guidance, from a quarter which I felt
convinced could' not be mistaken—a quarter which I was
confident could not be mistaken. And here I may per-
haps be permitted to say, though on such a question, I
think it quite unnecessary that a member of this house
should be called upon for his authority ; but, in conse-
quence of the peculiar nature of the observation of the
noble lord, the house will perhaps allow me to say that I
received the information from no French or foreign quar-
ter, and that if I had not made the visit to Paris, to which
the noble lord with much good taste alluded—" Oh, oh,"
from the Ministerial benches, and " Hear, hear," from the
Opposition)—that information would have been equally
in my possession. (Hear.) Now I think lam not mis-
taking the feeling of the house when I say they will agree
with me—assuming that the information that I gave was
correct, or assuming, which is the same thing as far as my
conduct is concerned, that I had, on the faith of the au-
thority on which I received it, a conviction in my own
mind that it was correct—l think the house will agree
with me that it was impossible under the circumstances
that I could be silent on the point. It was totally oat of
the question that if the affairs of Italy were brought
under discussion in this house, as they had been brought
under discussion at the termination of the last session
—it was impossible that if such a debate, for example,
had been originated by the noble lord the member for
the City of London—and it was a subject which every
one expected would have originated with him—l felt
that it was impossible that I could listen to a motion
on the subject of the affairs of Italy, brought forward
by a statesman of the reputation of the member for the
City—a motion founded on the proceecings of the Confer-
ence of Paris, and upon the direct and implied engage-
ments of the British Government--it was impossible if
such a motion were brought forward by the noble lord, or
any other hon. member, founded on such authority, and an-
swered as it was answered last year by the noble lord at
the head of the Government, whose answer was then felt
to be satisfactory—l am sure the house will agree with me
that, being in possession tof such important information,
and believing it to be authentic, Icould not, as an honest
man, listen to a debate carried on with a suppression of
facts which would have totally altered all the arguments
and conclusions of the discussion. I felt, then, irons the
first moment when I became, or believed I had become,
possessed of this information, that if the affairs of Italy
were again brought under the consideration of the house
it would, on my part, become an exemplary duty to make
the statement I made to the house on the first night of the
session. That statement was well considered. (Hear.)
I will not attempt to excuse it by pretending that it was
uttered in the heat and hurry of debate. The statement,
I repeat, was a well considered, a long considered etette-
meht, and if it be an erroneous one I am prepared to take
all the responsibility of it upon myself. (Hear, hear.)
Now, sir, there is one point upon which I must ask the in-
dulgence of the house in order to prevent any misconcep-
tion. I wish to guard myself against misconception as to
the views with which I lock upon such an alleged connec-
tion between France and Austria as a matter of policy. I
wish no one to suppose that in the observations I made on
the night of the address it was my intention to offer any
opinion on that question adverse to the coarse that had
been pursued with regard to Austria. I alleged the cir-
cumstance I did in vindication—not in reprobation—of
Austria ; but I mentioned it to illustrate the conduct of
her Majesty's Government as to the general management of
our foreign relations. I cannot suppose that there is any
gentleman present who can remember with accuracy what
I may have expressed in this house with regard to the
position which, in my opinion, Austria ought to hold
in the great system of Europe; but I may be permitted to I
say, in order to avoid any misconception on the subject,
that the words I uttered in the house, before the proroga-
tion, on the noble lord's (J. Remelt's) motion, was the ex-
pression of an opinion that I have long steadfastly and con-
stantly entertained—that it is necessary for the highest
European interests to maintain the power and authority of
Austria. That was the opinion I expressed on the eve of
the prorogation, and often and often I bad expressed that
opinion before, and even in the debate which I felt it necea-
cessary to recall to the recollection of the house when I com-
menced these observations to-night—the debate on Cracow
--I was vindicating the position of Austria. If then it be,
in my opinion, one of the highest objects of European
policy that the power and authority of Austria should be
maintained, I will venture to say it is of equal importance
to those who are subject to that power; and therefore it
was that I said last year that as regards Italy and the
Italians it is for their sake of importance that the autho-
rity of Austria should be powerful and strong, for it is
when that authority is questioned, when it is harassed by
secret societies or the machinations of foreign governments
that the policy of Austria becomes tyrannical and retro-
grade. (Hear.) It was not, then, with a view to impugn
the treaty I alleged to exist that my observations were
directed. I wiil say also—for .ea these points there should
be no misconception—that I believe the policy which
directed that treaty on the part of France was a policy
conceived in that wise, that temperate, and that con-
servative spirit, which has gained for the government
of the Emperor of France the respect and confidence of
all Europe. (Hear, hear ) France, confident in herglory,
in her inexhaustible resources, her power, and the univer-
sal reepectehe has obtained. (dries ot "Question, question,"
from the Ministerial tide, replied to by loud cheers from the
Opposition.) I assure hon. gentleman that lam speaking
to the question. (Hear.) If the house does not wish me
to speak I will sit down. (Go on.) I am prepared to
make a statement to the house which, I believe, it is for
the public interest I should make. I began by saying that
I must appeal to the habitual indulgence of the house, and
I will not meke the statement I have to make unless I am
permitted to put it before the house fully and perfectly.
It demands it and deserves it, and I assure the house that
its indulgence will not be misplaced, for I am coming to
details sn hich every man will feel ought to command atten-
tion. Now, I have merely made these observations to
guard myself against being supposed, in the remarks I
offered on the first night of the session, to have impugned
that policy which would maintain the authority of Aus-
tria, or to have supposed that France was animated in this
proceeding— if it took place—by any other motive than its
respect aed regard for the general interests of Europe.
What I did complain of that night, what I complain of
now—and this is most germane to the question before us—
is, that if it bo a fact that this treaty exists, and that the
steteenent I made was correct, the conduct of her Majesty'e
Ministers at the same time was conveying to this house,
and to the country, and to Europe an impression that they
were pursuing a policy quite contrary to it, and that their
course of general policy was entirely adverse to that which
this alleged treaty was intended to accomplish. I think it
concerns the honour of the house that upon this subject
there should be a clear understanding. If it be true that,
while this alleged treaty was in existence, we were nego-
tiating treaties with Sardinia, occasioned by representations
of a contrary character, it is import ant that it should be
known to the house. Surely it is a circumstance which
demands attention, and which is involved in the statement I
made and the contradiction I received from the noble lord.
What I complained of, and what I complain of still, is this,
that the Italian policy was made a stalking-horse by the
Government, if the facts I alleged and the statements I
made were correct; and I wanted to show to that liberal
party in Europe who covered their lack of zeal in domestic
affairs by their confidence in the noble lord—l wanted the
liberal party in Poland and Hungary clearly to understand
that that Italy which they thought was about to be rege-
nerated by the noble lord was the object of a very different
policy, an 1 the subject of a very different treaty, with his
knowledge and concurrence. (Hear.) I wish to place be-
fore the house, without exaggeration, what are exactly the
charges involved against me in the contradiction I received
from the noble lord. That contradiction involved two points
—two distinct allegations. The first allegation of the noble
lord was that my statement that there was a treaty, and a
secret treaty, in existence by which France guaranteed to
Austria the security of her Italian dominions, was altogether
a fiction —that there was no such treaty in existence—that
there was not the slightest foundation for it—that it was, t
use the noble lord's words, a romance. (Hear, hear, from
the Ministerial benches.) That was the first allegation in-
volved in the contradiction of the noble lord. The second
allegation was in the shape of a derisive hypothesis, for he
said, "If there be such a treaty" (the noble lord having
immediately before declared to the house that there was
not), "all I can say is that I have not seen it—l have not
heard of it—the Government have not heard of it ; and in-
stead of advising such a treaty, if we had been consulted we
should have said to France, Make no arrangement of the
kind.'" Those are the two allegations involved in the con-
tradiction of the noble lord. Nov, as everything depends
on accuracy, I will read from the report of the noble lord's
speech those observations of the noble lord in which those
two allegations are stated :—" We come now to Italy,
and, in reference to that question, the right hon. gentle-
man has had access to archives, and has found out treaties
of which we never heard. He announces that there is a
secret treaty concluded between the French and Austrian
f
Governments, with the sanction of the Governmentss oions.
England, gueranteeiug to Austria her Italian
othat we are
totally ignorant of it; and, so far f
I am bound to say that this is the first timeevere heard
e
n such a
treaty; but all I will undertake to say is
adVised
es
of it. The right hon. gentleman may have
such a treaty, if we had been consulted
roNmve
should
have given our advice in an oppositehaving certainly
direction.
accu-
rately described the allegations involvedcheers.)
1 will now address
is an entire romance." I ask the house ifinl
thheavneoblnoet
lord's
contradiction? (Opposition
that there is no such treaty--that isi a pure„Ate invention,
the
or must have created that either I have been hoaxer),
myself to the first allegation, that tthe whole isaromaneaen—d

fact in the heat and fire of debate. (Hear, hear) My state-
ment is—and I wish the house to do me the honour of attend-
ing to what lam about to say (here the right hon gentle-
man assumed a peculiarly slow and solemn tone)—my state-
ment is ibis : that engagements were negotiated between
France and Austria with the main object of guaranteeing on
the part of France the security of the Italian dominions of
Austria—that these negotiations were brought to a success-
ful conclusion—that they were expressed in writing—that the
form the written instrument assumed was that of a treaty,
and of a secret treaty, and that that treaty was executed on
the 22d of December, 1854. (Cheers, and counter cheers.)
In answer to the first allegation of the noble lord, that there
was no treaty whatever in existence—that the whole of my
statement on that point was a mere romance—l am here now
to re-state what I expressed the other night, and to give the
very d de of the instrument, the form of the instrument, and
the object of the instrument. (Hear, hear.) Now, sir, I
come to the second allegation contained in the contradiction
I received from the noble lord—an allegation whichthe house
perfectly remembers was uttered in a spirit of derision ; but
I will give the advantage to the noble lord of taking it as
having been said with becoming gravity. That allegation was :
" If there be such a treaty I have not seen it, her Majesty's
Government have not seen it ; and if they had been applied
to they would have recommended that such an arrangement
should not be made." Sir, I have in possession evidence—
irresistible evidence to my mind—which proves to me that
throughout the negotiation of this treaty, which I declare
exists—this treaty of 22d December, 1854, by which the secu-
rity of the Italian dominions of Austria is guaranteed by
France—that throughout the whole of the negotiations for
obtaining this secret treaty, her Majesty's Government was
privy to them from the first—(loud cheers from the Opposition
members)—that the substance of it received their approbation
and concurrence—l will add, their cordial concurrence; and
that they were formally advised previous to the execution of
the treaty. Now, the house will at least agree that, so far, I
have not avoided the issue—that so far I have placed the very
pith and marrow of the noble lord's contradiction before the
house, and that the two allegations that contradiction con-
tains I have met. But, Sir, I have some further statement to
make on this subject. I have to state to the house now that
not only was the treaty executed on Dec. 22, 1854, with the
cognisance of her Majesty's Government, but that it was
largely and extensively acted upon—that, in consequence of
this secret treaty, Austria withdrew a large portion of her
troops from Italy ; that, in conseqUence of Aastria's with-
drawal of a large portion of her troops from Italy, the Italian
Governments throughout that peninsula became alarmed, and
that Austria obtained from the French Government permis-
sion confidentially to communicate to the Italian Governments
in order to "tranquillise them" (I believe the very words used
on the occasion), "to tranquillise them"—Austria obtained
permission from the French Government confidentially to corn-
ronnicate the fart. I would upon that point make even a fur-
ther statement, and that is, that the fact that Austria obtained
that permission and communicated the existence of the secret
treaty to the Italian Governments was known to her Majesty's
Government. (Hear.) Sir, the noble lord has said that I
have " had access to archives and found out treaties of
which we never heard." I will refer now to archives of
which the noble lord has heard. I will refer to the ar-
chives of that office over which he so long presided—and I
tell the noble lord that if he will give me the correspondence
iug
evidence— what
thatl dom notgh t believe
possibly au
without reserve from the archives in Downing-street, of the
1854, and January, 1855,
transactions that took plice during the months of December,
bold passages,t sayl thinkthatl Iwcoou could dwi
i)illfe hrheeeciwuni :est
?.
tea::
to
sorty—m ae
elucidateiyn
fonbrsttoahmi no
er-
punrovdoe,rtaekveeryto
asserted. The house will, I hope, at least now admit that I
have not avoided coming tittle of a:telt wliiihabvee
to a direct issue with the noble
lord. (Cheer;) The noble lord the other night, when this
question was under discussion, thought fit to treat this grave
subject,
as is his custom, in a spirit and in tone of
alevity.
I cannot say that I admired at the Ville the tone the noble
ear,
lord adopted—(hear, h 1 , and laughter)—because if there
were any foundation for what I stated it required at the least,
I think, the attention of the Minithe other
hand, ; but if, on
it were an • inconsiderate statement still more a state-
ment invented for the occasion—it is not in a tone of ri-
bald ridicule that it ought to have been answered—(oh, oh,
and laughter from the Ministerial benches, and cheers from
the Oppositi#4—nut rather in a tone of warm and over-
whelming indignation. (Hear.) But how stands the ease
with regard to myself if, on so grave a matter, I made an in-
considerate statement My character as a politician would
be damaged or destroyed ; but if I had invented a statement
of the kind, it was not my character as a politician that
would have been at stake, but m character as a member of
society itself. (Cheers.) Sir, I have sat in this house now
20 years, and during that time I have laboured assiduously
to obtain the good opinion and respect of the house. These
are to me dearer than all worldly possessions. lam
conscious that I have occasionally addressed the house ineffi-
ciently—sometime; perhaps, with indiscretion—but this I
know, that I have always treated them with candour.
Whether the noble lord in his answer to me the other night
treated us in the same spirit, I care not to inquire. (Hear.)
Viscoant PALMERSTON—The right hon. gentleman in
introducing the observations he has just made, and in claim-
ing, as a right, the attention of the house, said that the ques-
tion at issue involved his character for judgment, and it
might be his character for honour. Now, sir, I beg leave to
call to the recollection of the house that nothing I then said
or insinuated could in any way whatever justify the right hon.
gentleman in conceiving that any question concerning honour
was involved. I did not accuse the right hon. gentleman of in-
venting the statement which he made on that occasion—but
what I did accuse him of was an excess of credulity —(a laugh)
—having been induced to believe an assertion made without
foundation or in accordance with facts. (Hear, hear.) There-
fore I can only say that I should very much regret if the
right hon. gentleman should herbalsr in his mind any notion
that there was anything in what I said that at all brought in
question that honour which I am quite sure no man possesses
in a,higher degree than himself. (Hear, hear.) The right hon.
gentleman finds fault with use for not being angry—(laughter)
—he complains that I treat him with too much good humour
—(more laughter)—that what he is pleased to call, in lan-
guage which, as he talks of good taste, I shall not too closely
examine —(hear, hear, and a laugh)—" ribald ridicule." Un-
fortunately, it generally happens that these who make them-
selves ridiculous arc the last people in the world to observe it,
and it is therefore only natural that they should abuse others
for what is really occasioned by their own conduct. (Laughter.)
Now the right hon. gentleman has stated very accurately one
part of the contradiction which he says I gave to his statement,
but he has omitted some very important portions of it. Now I
beg to recall the attention of the house to what the charge was
—for he held it out distinctly as a charge which the right hon.
gentleman was bringing against her Majesty's Government, and
of which the allegations were by him considered the evidence.
The right hon. gentleman did not make it a charge against her
Majesty's Government that they were anxious to maintain
the power and position of Austria, for, says the right bon,
gentleman in the last debate we had at the close of the last
session, among the principles of foreign policy proclaimed by
the party of which he is the leader in this house, was that the
great leading alliances of England should be the alliance with
Russia, the alliance with Austria, and the alliance with the
United States. I had occasion to point out to the right hon.
gentleman then that he had omitted by accident to mention
that power, viz., France, with which we were . bound in the
most intimate alliance, and for the most important objects.
But that being his opinion, that the alliance with Austria was
sound policy, he could not aver in the abstract that it was a
breach of duty on the part of her Majesty's Government to be
a party to measures tending to secure the integrity of the
Austrian dominions. (Hear.) And to-night he has fairly
stated that he considers
the maintenance of Austria, not only
north of the Alps, but south of the Alps also, in undiminished
power, as essential to the interests of Europe. (Hear.) What
then was the right hon. gentleman's charge ? It was this,
He said, although you, the British Government, are profess-
ing great interest for the Italians, you profess to sympathise
with their feelings of aversion to a foreign yoke, you say you
wish to encourage Italian nationalities ; yet while you do
this openly,
on the one hand, on tho other hand you are se-
cretly instigating and encouraging the French Government in
giving a
• guarantee, which, so far as the possessions of Austria
go, is wholly at variance with the sympathy yo
the objects you say you wish to promote. In answer to that
charge, I stated that which I nth repeat—that, to the best
knowledge and belief, ere is no treaty between
of ley
France and Austria guaranteeing the Italian possessions of
Austria. (Cheers.) Nor has the right hon. gentleman
brought forward any proof that there is. (Hear, hear.) Ho
has not made any explanation, or stated any grounds on
which he made the assertion. Therefore the statement rests
now, as it did on the previous evening, upon the hearsay
evidence of somebody or other whose name the right hon.
gentleman has not mentioned. (Hear, hear.) The right loran
gentleman has talked about good taste. Of course every man
is the best judge of the degree of latitude which should be
given to him, and in regard to the checks he may impose
upon himself. But it appears to me that if a person is told
engagement contracted between . two other par-
of a " secret enga
he would not take upon himself the
• • ordinary cases
ties, in
he
t
liberty of making such secret engagement public without
consent of some one at least of the parties concerned. ( eat,
hear.) This matter reminds me of a peculiarity I remember
in our late honoured friend Mr. Hume, who used constantly
to ask us to lay before the hoaso the details of the application
o
T
of the secret service money. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) 1
me I must say that secrecy and publication are not very easily
reconcilable. (Hear, and a laugh.) But tho right h
to divulge
these lgen-
tleman says a sense of public duty compelled him
in
his
these secret transactions, not that the case which,
the
view, would constitute that necessity, viz., the debate on
arisen—but in anticipation of what might
affairs of Italy, had to tell the
come at some future time, he thought it necessary
to
have
house of these secret transactions, which he allegesd
OwerS.
taken place between two great and indepenntiornapn,s
dis.
That is a matter entirely for the right hon.
was this : That
ernion. What I stated the other evening
w treaty as the
we did not believe in the existence of any such
heard of it,
right hon. gentleman spoke of; that we
neverhad seen it, and
and that unless the right hon. gentleman
we had not had
un-
less he had had access to archives to which
ele that the
b r f
access—unless that was the case, it was my
right hon. gentleman had been imposed on by erroneous in-
formation in some quarter or other. I have now to say that
the only foundation for the statement of the right hon. gen-
f the war with
tleman
is this—that in the early part o
'
Russia, when some hoe° was entertained that Austria would
into
her forces to those of the allies, she entered
have joined known to the two
communication with France, which was
a
powers
• the object of Austria being to ascertain whether, if,
she joined her forces with those of the allies in the war in the
east--(hear)—France would undertake that no disadvantage
Italian
province.
should be taken of' the opportunity to disturb her
fthe
statement (Hear.) That is the only foundation or
statement of the right hon. gentleman. It is perfectly true,
as the right hon. gentleman has mentioned, that in Decem-
ber,Bs4—and as there are some gentlemen in the house, who
1 are not now in the Government, who were members of the
Govornment a t that time, they can correct me, if my statements
are erroneous as to what Passed when they were in office—
that as it was at that tine hoped that Austria would join de-
fensively and offensively with France and England in the
war against Russia, and that the armies would in that case
come into collision with those of Russia, she wished to
know, supposing that Bessie, should—which as a belligerent
power she might do, and acting en the rights of a belligerent
power
sh e bad a right to
do—attempt to instigate any insur-
rection in Italy, with the view of distracting the attention of
Austria, what course the French Government would take.
The French Government assured Austria that they would not
encourage any risings or disturbances in Italy ; and, more-
over' that if the Austrian armies joined with those of France
and England in the war, and disturbances broke out in Italy,
the French forces in Italy (which were but small in number)
would act with those of Austria as far their limited sphere
extended, for the protection, not of the Austrian possessions,
but of the general state of the territorial possessions of the
powers of Europe, This arrangement was undoubtedly
known to the English Government—(cheersfrom the OPP :
sition)—and a very proper arrangement it was, for it would
have been inconsistsut with the proposed alliance if any other
course had been taken, and that arrangement was certainly
put into the shape of a convention which the right hon. gen-
tleman says was signed in December, 1854. I can only say
that information reached us• yesterday, by which we are
assured that it never was si—
geed. (Hear.) But that conven-
tion is as different from the treaty which the right hon. gen-
tleman says was entered into as two things can be. Between
that convention and such a guarantee as the right hon. gen-
tleman has spoken of, there is, as the right hou • gentleman,
as well as I, must have read in a French periodical, an abyss,
and an imPaslable gulf. What I donied the other evening,

aid what I do still deny, is, that there is any treaty in exis-
tence by which France guaranteed the possession of her Italian
provinces to Austria. (" Hear, hear," and cheers.) I am
inclined to believe that the information we have received is
correct, and that the convention was not signed. It was a
temporary conventiou—(hear, hear)—and was only to have
continued in force while the war continued. (Hear.) But it
never was signed, and why ?—(hear, hear)—because it was
founded on the assumption that Austria would join Eng-
land and France in active operations against Russia.
(Hear, hear.) Austria never did join England and
France in active operations against Russia ; it was her
policy to remain neutral—(hear, hear)—and lam inclined
to believe that the information we have received is more cor-
rect than that of the right hon. gentleman, and that the con-
vention, which was limited in its terms, limited in its opera-
tion, and limited in its effect, was never signed. (Hear, hear.)
No doubt but that the intentions which were declared in the
convention would have been carried out if the circumstances
to which it applied had arisen; but it is a perversion of
terms to say that it contained a guarantee by France to Aus-
tria of the possession of her Italian provinces. (Hear, hear.)
The right bon. gentleman has repeated the assertion he made
the other evening. I can only repeat my denial. I beg the
right hon. gentleman's pardon for not having been angry the
other night—(laughter)—and I am sorry that I cannot even
muster up any indignation now—(" hear, hear," and laugh-
ter)—and if he will allow me to treat this subject in a manner
which is not likely to give offence to any man, I must throw
myself on his indulgence for not speaking with more indigna-
tion. My object is to vindicate the Government from a charge
of bad faith and deceitfulness towards the people of Italy, in
having instigated that which he calls a treaty. And here
again I must say that we were charged with having instigated
a treaty the other night; but LIJW the right hon. gentleman
says we only agreed to it. I trust I have now vindicated the
Government from the charge brought against them; and hav-
ing said so much, I will not further trespass on the house.
(" Hear, hear," and cheers.)
The subject then dropped.
THE INCOME TAX,

the Major o
fR
PEa Er
lDi a
mr
eo
us et
to
( 1 8 move
t .a,
roe. s o2l0u)t i oon 'o
n,
a iTolsi a
at
pwrhoevriesaos,
which, by its technical construction, would inflict in a time
of peace a second year of fall war income tax upon the loyal
but heavily burdened subjects of her Majesty, this house is
of opinion that the provisions of the said act should cease
and determine from the 6th day of April next." The hon.
gentleman was proceeding to state the circumstances under
which he brought forward the motion, his doing so being, as
ho said, the result of a pledge which he had given to certain
persons whom he mentioned, when
The SPEAKER inquired whether the hon. gentleman in-
tended to conclude with his motion, as otherwise he was out
of order in continuing his observations ?
Major REED said, thenhe would conclude with his motion,
though he should not press it to a division. After some fur-
ther brief remarks, in the course of which he quoted an ex-
tract from a speech of Mr. W. Cowper, during his recent elec-
tion at Hertford, to the effect that that right hon. gentleman
never supposed the war income tax would be continued this
year—he concluded by saying that it was but fair to give the
Chancellor of the Exchequer the grace he required Juntil after
he had made his financial statement, and therefore he should
withdraw his motion.

Tho motion was accordingly withdrawn.
INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS.
Sir S. NORTHCOTE obtained leave to bring in a bill to
make better provision for the care and education of vagrant,
destitute, and disorderly children, and for the extension of
industrial schools.

SALE OF BEER.
On the motion of Mr. HARDY, tho house resolved itself into
a committee of the whole house to consider the acts relating
to the sale of beer; Mr. FITZROY in the chair.
Mr. HARDY then moved for leave to bring in a bill to
amend the laws relating to the general sale of beer by retail,
and to regulate certain places of public resort, refreshment,
and entertainment. The hon. and learned member observed
that the question of the sale of beer had been dealt with by
Parliament on several occasions, and that every attempt had
only served to bring the law into disgrace, and make it cala-
mitous, instead of beneficial, to the people. The first act on
the subject was passed in the Ist year of the reign of William
IV., and it gave to every person the opportunity of obtaining
a license from the Excise on the payment of two guineas. By
the sth William IV. an attempt was made to remedy the in-
conveniences which had ariseuunder the former act by fixing the
annual value of the houses to be licensed at 101., and requiring
certificates of character. That act failed in its effect; and by the
3d and 4th Viet., the rating was raised to 151. in towns con-
taining 10,000 inhabitants, and a proportionate amount was
fixed upon for houses in similar places. Tho provisions of that
act did not accomplish the object for which it was passed.
In 1534 a committee was appointed to consider the evils
arising from drunkenness, and that committee made certain
strong recommendations which were not carried out. Then
came Lord Harrowby's committee, in the year 1849-50, and
before that committee evidence was given showing that
beer-shops had not tended to the comfort and advantage of
the working population, but on the contrary that their com-
forts and morals had been seriously, not improved, but im-
paired by the existence of such establishments A committee
of the House of Commons, which sat in 1853-54, reported that
the beer-shop system had proved to be a failure. Nothing
had been done on the report beyond raising of a controversy
with respect to Sunday drinking—a subject with which he
did not intend to deal in the bill which he was about to ask
leave to introduce. (Hoar, hear.) At the present time there
were in England 40,0011 beer-shops and 89,000 public-houses,
In Manchester 1 house in 35 was devoted to the sale of beer
and spirituous liquors, and in Leeds the proportion was 1
in 45. In these towns, therefore, every facility was given for
drunkenness, and secluded districts were so far removed from
the surveillance of the police that crime of every kind was
concocted in beer-shops almost without the risk of detection.
(Hear, hear.) There were no statistics with respect to the
increase of drunkenness which could be relied upon, but
every man who paid attention to the habits of the peasantry
must be aware that in consequence of their frequenting beer-
houses their wives and children were frequently driven to
the workhouse, and he believed there was scarcely an instance
of destitution which had not arisen from indulgence in drun-
kenness. Although there had been a great diminution
in crime generally, an immense increase had taken place
in crimes of violence nurtured by drunkenness. From 1846
to 1852 the number of such crimes was 1,951, whilst
from 1851 to 1855 the number had increased to 2,377
—about 21 per cent. He believed that a great num•
ber of the beer-shops were well conducted, particu-
larly in the metropolis ; but it has been proved before com-
mittees that the beer-shops throughout the country had been
harbours for thieves and places for the reception and disposal
of stolen goods, and for the arrangement of robberies, bur-
glaries, and other serious offences. It was a remarkable fact,
that although beer-shops had been in existence for the last
26 years, no attempt had been made to place them on the
same footing as licensed public-houses. Many complaints had
been made respecting the partiality shown by magistrates ;
but, he believed that, generally speaking, those complaints
had come from parties whose applications had been rejected,
and that the publicans generally were well contented with the
present system. Although some magistrates might have acted
improperly, he believed that the gentlemen of England had
done their duty in this respect, and he trusted that for the
future they would perform it more strictly and efficiently.
There was a considerable difference between the proportion of
convictions in the cases of public-houses and beer-shops,
showing that the magisterial license had operated much more
beneficially than the Excise license. Now, what was the fit-
ting remedy for the existing state of things ? The first remedy
which had been suggested was that every person in the coun-
try, on paying a large sum for a license, should receive it, and
that magistrates should be absolutely compelled to grant such
a license. Another remedy whichhad been proposed was that
licenses should be granted at a high price, but that only a
certain number should be granted within a given area, or ac-
cording to the amount of population. The third proposition
was that which passed under the name of the Maine Law. (A
laugh.) With respect to the firstplan, it appeared. to him that
the license would be so high that the trade could not be made
remunerative. The second plan, he believed, could not be
carried into effect, because populations were so differently
located with regard to area, that it would be impossible to
lay down a definite line. It certainly was not his intention
to propose the adoption of the Maine law. He was not pre-
pared to give up the use of either wine or beer, and therefore
could not consent to become any party to an organised
hypocrisy, which would attempt to force such a measure on
the poorer classes. (Hear, hear.) The Maine law could not
be carried out until hon. members arrived at such a state of
purity and abstinence from liquors as would enable them to
deal with the question properly ; and when that should be
the case, there would be no need of any compulsory law on
the subject. A great reformation iu this respect had taken
place among the higher classes. Formerly there was scarcely
a German prince who did not go drunk to bed every night—
(laughter)—and too many of the higher classes followed their
example. He believed that tie alteration which had taken
place in the habits of the upper classes would spread to the
lower, and that the time would arrive when the latter would
enjoy themselves moderately, and drunkenness would bo
abolished. He now camejto the provisions of the bill which
he intended to submit to the house. He proposed to respect
vested interests, and that when licenses had been given they
should remain on the same footing until these 41,000 beer-
houses should change hands, or their licenses should be with.
drawn. He also proposed that licenses for beer-shops should
be granted by the magistrates at the same sessions at which
public-house licenses were granted ; and that, in addition to
the general annual licensing meeting, the magistrates should
hold a certain number of special sessions for licensing beer-
shops. He further proposed that notice of any intended
application should be given to the superintendent
police-
officer of the district or division twenty-one days before the
session, such notice to contain a copy of the application and
certificates of character, and all such materials as might be
necessary to enable the magistrates to arrive at a correct
decision. Under the present system no beer-shop keeper
was liable to forfeit his license before a third conviction
such conviction to be notified to the Excise. Before the
committee of 1853-4 several magistrates stated that they had
been in the habit of sending such information to the Excise ;
but the chief of the Excise, Mr. Wood, informed the com-
mittee that he could r.ot recal to mind the reception of any
such notice. But what showed the anomalous state of the
law was this fact--The magistrates in some instances had
deprived public-house keepers of their licenses for notorious
offences, and these men had immediately obtained licenses
from the Excise and kept their houses open. (Hear.) That
state of things ought not to be endured, and therefore he pro-
posed to place both descriptions of houses under the same
jurisdiction. He also proposed to carry ont the principle of
what was generally called the " Tippling Act," by enacting
that no person selling beer by retail to be drunk on the pre-
mises should be able to recover for beer drunk on the pre-
mises unless he sued within one week. It was his intention
to make the bill applicable to another class of persons. In
the report of the committee of 1853-4 a recommendation was
that all coffee-houses should be placed under the super-
vision of the police. n
given co
the metropolis the koopere of coffee
houses were forbidden to harbour bad characters, but the
police had no authority to enter such houses to ascertain
whether bad characters were harboured or not. Ifs did not
propose to touch coffee-shops, temperance hotels, shell-fish
description,
shops, and places of that • p on, which were kept open
during the day time ; but he proposed to give the police a
supervision over all thosehouses which were kept opou be'
tween nine at night and four in the morning, It was to such
places as these that bad characters resorted after they were
public-houses, and iu many eases they had not
when the
expelled from
the least difficulty in obtaining illicit spirits. In fact,
superintendent of police at Wolverhampton, in 1854, `vent
bito one of these coffee-houses and cawlleifaltfor some gin, he l
was he
required.t old
not the least difficulty in procuring
gin was handed to him in a eoffe,e_cup
that Thi
land he f
the police came in, all ho had to do iws;ahsatto put some milk to
it, and they would not discover
(Laughter.) He propo
-sh
coffeeops should pay
sed that these he
Was
drink(
a small license —that the keepers of theses houses should be
the
placed under the
police—that •
supervision
posed upon them of
should be im penalties
bouring disorder]for the sale of spirits, for har-
y characters
He further proposed to i , and for permitting gambling,
persons who might ref2lpose a fine on drunken and d isorderly
do so, or who might .e to leave such luuses when desired to
He believed this bill' fouud drinking there at unlawful hours.
trusted that to be a step in the right direction at the house give , and
deration,
would it a full and mature consi-
Mr. E. BALL seconded
pledging himself to the the motion, without, however,
details of
_the measure.
P 4. observed that he 'would not thei cute into

any premature discussion of the provisions of the NH, as
one!• opportunities would be afforded him of stating,. °Pi-
nions on the subject. There could be no doubt that dritßk en-
ness was a fertile source of crime. But the whole que:stio.n
was, how the commission of crime could be prevented.
(Hear, hear.) The committee of 1853-4 took a great deal of
evidence on the licensing system and the system on which
beer-houses were founded, and the conclusion at which they
arrived was, that the distinction between public-houses and
beer-houses should be done away with. The committee,
however, did not arrive at the same conclusion with respect
to the hands in which the licensing power should be placed;
and before the second reading of the bill he thought the hon.
and learned gentleman ought to turn his attention to that
part of the report. As great interest would be felt by the
country iu the measure now under consideration, not only
as ono of morality, but as one affecting the vast amount of
property now embarked in the beer trade, he thought ample
time ought to be allowed for a full consideration of the sub-
ject. (Hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON was exceedingly glad that the hon.
and learned gentleman (Mr. Hardy) had undertaken to deal
with the subject, but he thought it was one which ought to
have been taken up by the Government. (Hear.)
Mr. WILKINSON said it was a mistake to impose restric-
tions on those who were sober, because some persons got
aunk. _ _

After a few words frem Mr. Lowe, Mr. Crossley, Ir.
Ewart, and Mr. Brown,
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
CONTRACTS FOR PUBLIC DEPARTMENTS.

On the motion of Colonel DUN E, the select committee to
inquire into the principle adopted for making contracts for
the supply of the public departments, and the effect which
the present system has upon the expenditure of public mo-
ney, was re-appointed.
ECCLESIASTICAL CORPORATIONS.
- - - -

The Marquis of BLANDFORD obtained leave to bring in
a bill further to provide for the in ode of securing and paying
fixed incomes to ecclesiastical corporations, aggregate and
sole.