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

CORRUPT PRACTICES AT ELECTIONS
PREVENTION ACT.

Mr. H. BERKELEY a,ked the First Lord of the
Treasury when he intended to move for a sel?ct cominit-
tee to inquire into tha operation of the " C.irrupt Prac-
tices at Elections Prevention Act." (Laughter.)
. .

Lord PALNIERSTON said that he would take the
opportunity of doing Bo on an early day.

ARMY ESTIMATES.

Sir C. WOOD gave notice that on Monday next the
army estimates would be entered into.

JOINT-STOcK BANKS.

In reply to a question,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
he did not intend to move a second committee for Joint-
Stock Banks, but woull state the course he intended to
adopt on an early day.

THE SECRET TREATY. -MR. DISRAELI'S
EX VI, A.N ATION.

Mr. DISRAELI— I have to request the indulgent per-
mission of the horse, although I take precedence of no—

Mr. T. DUNCOUBE—I beg the ri;ht hon. member's
pardon. lam extremely sorry to interrupt the right hon.
gentleman, but from what fell from him yesterday, and
the intimation he gave that he was going to bring forward
a, subject of great importance, I infer that he is not about
to enter into mere personal explanations respecting his re-
cent statement, and the contradiction of the noble lord at
the head of the Government. Now, sir, in asking the in-
dulgence of the house to go beyond the usage of the house
—although I am far from thinking there should not be
every indulgence granted—l wish to come to this under-
standing. lam of course ignorant whether the right hon.
gentleman is about to state that be was 'imposed on in
Paris, or thal: the contradiction of the noble lord was in-
accurate, but if he is going beyond this, if he is going into
the general question, I hope there will be an understanding,
so that other honourable members may be at liberty to make
remarks en what may fall either from the right hon.
gentleman or the noble lord, without their being stopped
by the forms, their being no question before the house.

Sir. J. PAKINGTON—I rise on the point of form. I
think the house will feel that my right hon. friend was about
to Wu) the course which is always i.ermitted in matters of
personal interest, and seeing that my right hon. friend is_
desirous of doing so, and the noble lord is ready to reply, I
would suggest that the usual course for the house would
be to hear the explanations, and then decids whether the
discussion should bo prolon3e&
Mr. DISRAELI-When the accuracy of a statement
made by a member of this house has been impugned with-
out any qualification, it has always been the courteous
custom of this house to permit the member to make such
statement as he may think necessary to vindiwito his accu-
racy—perhaps his honour. It i. in that spirit that I am
shot"' to proeee.l to-night, sn I if any gentleman calls me
to order I shall enders! an I that the perniis,ion is not ac-
corded. If it be accorded L trust that the permission will
be fairly andl:berahyconstrued, ant the house may be as-
sured that I shall not mike auy observation I do not think
necessary to clear up the point in dicpute. And I cannot
help feeling that I am interpreting the general opinion of
the house when, in recallins the circumstances that led to
this appeal, I express my belief that an attempt on my
part to answer the contradiction of the noble lord is nei-
ther impertinent nor unnecessary. I will therefore assume
f no gentleman rises to call me to order, that the house
will grant me that indulgence, which on many other occa-
d.
stone they have granted to hon. members on both sides of
the house. I remember some years ago, I think it may be

eight, there was a dissuasion in this hone upon the pro. I
ceedinga which had taken place at Frenkfort, it was a case
of censide rahleimportance, anal was adjourned from day to
day-. I took some part in tho debates, with the view of
vindicating the con duct 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. Tho noble lord, at pre-
sent the first Minietor 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 years. On that
occasion, when I referred to the gca:antee of Great Britain
to Peu:sia iu 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 Groat
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 Isis knowledge of foreign affairs—then became
acquainted, for the first time apparently, with that most
important undertaking of the Britishe rown. Now, sir, on
the first night of the session I hail occasion, in the course
of debate, to refer to another feet. 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 be 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 ha I
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 fur 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 1 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 I am 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 ou the point. It was totally out 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 tile member for
the City of Loudon—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 of such important information,
and believing it to be authentic, Isould not, as an honest
man, listen to a debate carried on with a suppression of
facts which would have tetchy altered all the arguments
and conclusions of the discussion. I felt, then, front 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 state-
men', 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 look 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 otter any
opinion on that question adverse to the course 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
herour
foreign
esrolatioua.Governmentl auto
cannot
suppose
uppgoesenertal
hat theremanagementis of
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
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 for I's (J. Russell's) motion, WAS the ex-
pression of an opinion that I have long steadfastly and con-
s+ autly 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 had expressed that
opinion before, and even in the debate which I felt it neces-
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 than 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 will say also—for on these points there should
be no misconception—that .1 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 fur 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 respect she has obtained. (Cries of "Question, question,"
from the Ministerial side, replied to by loud cheers from the
Opposition.) I assure hon. gentlemen that I am 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 make the statement I have to make unless I our
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 a 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 ou 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 and 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 be a fact that this treaty exists, and that the
statement I made was correct, the conduct of her Maj :sty's
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 adv,ree 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, °certain ned by representations
of a contrary character, it is impott .nt that it should be
known to the house. Surely it is a circumstance which
demands attention, and which is involve d in the statement I
made and the contradiction I received frluamintohfeatniollb,libeyls tott,rihdse:
teNbrahta What
hlecoittnapi :ate
cf,yanad. a whatsm adle complain m
stalking-horsep
ma Government,de wereif
t, the
afancdtsl Iwaalnletge,eidtoand h
ntwh otos ttahtaetm e
libri tear
all
affairs party i
by
7Etuticreo°ipirreceocw;lha
,:ie concveeriendtthheeinrolbalceklonfr,f-- all iwnaciliotemdestthiec
liberal party in Poland and Hungary clearly to understand
that that Italy which they thought was about to bo rege-
nerated by the noble lord was the object of a very different
policy, and 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 allegationee The first allegation of the noble
lord was that my statement that there wawa treaty, anti
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.cords, 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 Le
sail, "If there be such a treaty" (the noble lord having
immediately before declared to the house that there was
n ot) ,'
of all
it—theca G
n sayo,
Government
set.
tI
have
ee
notno not
heardse: n
ot —f i It
;haveand noti_
heard
,ifaa n-ehn game
acalrbratenni
consulted
sLentil do fhaadvveissianigd Stu: hF
raa tree:, t y`
Arak
kind.' " Those aro the two allegaOions involved in the con-
ttadiction of the noble lord. Now, as everything deportee
tof the w-o
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 ere stated :—" We come now to Italy,
m
end, in reference to that question, the right Lon. gentle-
en has had access to archives, and has found out treaties
of which we never heard. He announce; that there is a
secret treaty concluded between the French and Aastriau
Governments, with the sanction of the Government of
England, ranteeing to Austria her Italian possessions.
I am bound to say that this is the first time I ever heard
of it. The right hon. gentleman may have seen such a
treaty; but all I will undertake to say is that we are
totally ignorant of it; atd,
so far from having advised
such a treaty, if we had been consulted
have given our advice in au opposite direction. That treaty
is an entire romance." I ask the house if I have not accu-
rately described the allegations involved in the noble lord's
contradiction 1 (Opposition cheers) I will now address
myself to the first allegation, that the whole is a romance—
that there is na such treaty—that it is a pure invention, and
that either I have been hoaxed, or must have created the

fact In the heat and fire of debate. (Hear, hear) My E tate.
snout is--and I wish the house to do m© the honour of attend.
lug to what I am about to say - (hero the right hon gentle-
man assumed a
peculiarly slow and solemn tone)—my state-
ment is this : that engagements were negotiated between
France and Austria with the main object of guaranteeing c is
the pert 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 2:2d of December, 1554. (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 hero now
to re-state what I expressed the other night, and to give the
very date of the instrument, the form of the instrument, alai
the object of the insarumeut. (Hear, hear.) Now, sir, I
come to the second allegation contained in the contradiction
I received from the noble lord—an allegation which the 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 mo that
throughout the negotiation of this treaty, which I declare
exists—this treaty of 22t1 December, 1851, 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; aid
that they wore 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 Austria'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 com-
municate the fact. 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 beard. I will refer to the ar-
chives of that office over which he so long presided—and I
toll the noble lord that if he will give me the correspondence
without reserve from the archives in Downing-street, of the
transactions that took place during the months of December,
1854, and January, 1855, and if ho will assist me in obtain-
ing—what I do not believe will be necessary—any further
evidence that might possibly be requisite to elucidate some
in
thathis
I custom
admired
passages, I think I could undertake to prove, and I will be
bold to say that I would prove, every tittle of what I have
asserted. The house will, I hope, at least now admit that I
have not avoided corning to a direct issue with the noble
ee
se a
lord. (Cheers,) The noble lord the other night, when this
question was under discussion, thought fit to treat this grave
aastpttacttimeaud i
then a toe ee of
theb
no levity,l
subject,
cannotbjt, a iyse
lord adopted—(hear, hear, and laughter)—beeause if there
were any foundation for what I stated it required at the least,
I think, the attention of the Minister ; but if, on the other
hand, 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 Oppesition)—but rather in a tone of warm and over.
whelming indignation. (Hear.) But how stands the case
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 my character as a member of
society itself. (Ch
• - -"Ts-) 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. I am
conscious that I have occasionally addressed the house ineffi-
ciently—sometimes, 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.)
Viscount 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-
ventipg the statement which he made on that occasion - but
what I did accuse him of was an excess of crednlity—(alaugh)
—having been induced to belfeeie"ati assertion , made -Without
foundation er in accordance with facts. (Hear, hear.) There-
fore I can only say that I should very much regret if the
right hon, gentleman should harbour 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 p ,ssesses
in a higher degree than himself. (Hear, hear.) The right hon.
gentleman finds fault with me for not being angry—(laughter)
—ho complains that I treat him with too much good hunioul*
—(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 snake them-
selves ridiculous are 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 importapt 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. geutleman 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 liou.
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 ho 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 wore 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 Governme at 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.) -Meat
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 a • version to a foreign yoke, you say you
wish to encourage Italian nationalities ; yet while you do.
this openly, on the one hand, on the other hand you are se-
cretly instigating and encouraging the French Government in
Living a guarantee, which, so far as the possessions of Austria
go, is wholly at variance with the sympathy you express and
the objects you say you wish to promote, In answer to that
charge, I stated that which I now repeat—that, to the best
of lay knowledge and belief, there is no treaty between
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.) He
has not made any explanation, or stated any grounds on
made the assertion. Therefore the statement rests
which he
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, hoar) The right hon.
gentleman lets talked about good taste. Of coursehi every man
is the best judge of the degree of latitude wch should be
given to him, and in regard to the checks he may impos i
upon himself. But it appears to me that if a person is told
of a " secret engagement contracted between two other
in par-
ties,
liberty of making such secret engagement public without the
consent of some one at least of the parties concerned. (Hear,
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 house the details of the application
of the secret service money. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) To
me I must say that secrecy and publication are not very easily
reconcilable. (Hear, and a laugh.) But the right hon. gen-
tleman says a sense of public duty compelled him to divulge
these secret transactions, not that the case which, in his
view, would constitute that necessity, viz., the debate on the
affairs of Italy, bad arisen—bat in anticipation of what might
come at some future time, he thought it necessary to tell the
house of these secret transactions, which he alleges to have
taken place between two great and independent powers.
That is a matter entirely for the right hon. gentleman's dis-
ere ion. What I stated the other evening was this : That
we did not believe in the existence of any such treaty as the
right-hon. gentleman spoke of ; that we never heard of it,
and that unless the right hon. gentleman had seen it. and un-
less he had had access to archives to which we had not had
access—Lnless that was the case, it was my belief that the
right hon, gentleman had been imposed on by erroneous in-
formation in some quart I' or other. I have now to say that
the only foundation for the statement of the right hon. gen-
tleman is this—that in the early part of the war with
Russia, when some hope was entertained that Austria would
have joined her forces to those of the allies, she entered into
a communication with France, which was known to the two
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
should be taken of the opportunity to disturb her Italian
provinces. (Hear.) That is the only foundation for the
statement of the right hon. gentleman. It is perfectly true,
as the right hon. geirtlerman has mentioned, that iu Decem-
ber, 1854—and as there are some gentlemen is the house, who
are not now in the Government, who were members of the
Governmentat that time, they can correct me, if my statements
arc erroneous as to what passed when they were in office
that as it was at that time 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 Russia should—which as a belligerent
power sire might do, and acting on the rights of a belligerent
power sire had a right to do—attem pt 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 tire protection not of the Austrian possessions,
bt4 of the general state.of the territori d possessions of the
powers of Europe, This arraneement was undoubtedlyi
known to the English Government —(clieers from the 01,P
sitioa)—and a very proper arrangement it was, for it would
other
have been inconsistent with the proposed alliance if any
course had been taken, and that arrangement was certainly
put into the shape of a convention, which the right hon. g
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 signed, (Hear.) But that conven-
tion is as differeut from the treaty which the right lion• 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, hon. gentleman,
as well as I, must have read in a French periodical, an abyss,
and an impassable gulf. What I denied the other evening,

and what I do still deny, is, that there is any treaty in exis-
tenet, by which France guaranteed the possession of her Italian
provinces t Austria. (" Hear, hear," and cheers.) I am
inclined to believe that the inforinatiou we have received is
correct, and that the convention was not sI.Tec,I. I WAS a
temporary convention —(len-, bear)—and was only to have
continued in force while the war coutinuel. (Clear) 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 I am 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 etfect,.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 threw
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 towcrds the people of Italy, in
having instigated that which ho calls a treaty. And here
again I must say that we were charged with having instigated
a treaty the other night; but now 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, bear," and cheers.)
The subject then dropped.
THE INCOME TAX.

Major REED roso to move a resolution, "That whereas
the act of Parliament (18 Vict., c. 20) contains a proviso,
which, by its technical construction, would inflict in a tune
of peace a second year of full 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 front 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
he 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 quotectlan ex-
tract from a speech of Mr. W. Cowper, during his recent elec-
tion at Hertford, to the effect that tkat 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 until after
he had made his fiaancial statement, and therefore ho should
withdraw his motion.
The 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.

a eOO On tmh
iet
tme
eo tei of nt
bo
ef ,wlBbr Ao.
luLe EAhßoDOuls,F,e
tißhoEo
at
mo
e thend. salethe loaf
wbee beer;
relatinghl r. FtieT ztahoevgiennetrahel
Eeheitoeu. s od
eris. stoblev eade
tiat sreellfaitni
at
go
Mr. HARDY then moved for leave to bring. in a bill to
esishalaeirof beer by retail,
and to regulate certain places of public resort, refreshment,
and entertainment. Tile 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 en the payment two guineas, o f • neas. By
the sth William IV. an attempt was made to remedy the in-
conveniences which had arisen under the former •
act by fixing the
annual value of the houses to be licensed at 101., and requiring
certificates ofeharacter. That act
failed
i
3d and 4th Viet., the rating was rised ntoitslselffeicnt;tolvn and by the
con-
taining 10,000 inhabitants, and a proportionate
amounts v \
fixed upon for houses in similar places The provisionsof that
'
act did not accomplish the object for
whi •ch it was passed.
Iu 1834 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 00i:12tr)lt .aill'adValltaio of "
the working population, but on the contrary that 'their coins
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. (Hear, hear.) At the present time there
were in England 40,006 beer-shops and 89,000 public-houses..
Iu Manehester 1 house in 35 was devoted ,to the. sale of beer
and spirituous liquors, and in Leeds the 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 of2thei4eiiantly
must be aware that in consequence of their frocauelittanleef,
houses their wives and children were frequentlyeedri*en to
the workhouse, and he believed there was scarcely an instance
of destitution which had not arisen from imiulgencelin 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 1816
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•
her 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 mode respecting the partiality shown by magistrates ;
lent, he believed that, generally spe tking, those complaints
had come from parties whose applications had been rejected,
and that the publicans generally wore 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 proportionof
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 ? Tho 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 which had 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 fir.stplan, itappeared to him.that
the license would be so highthat the trade could not bo mado
remunerative. The second plan, he believed, could not be
carried into effect, because pepulations were so differently
located with regard to area, that it would be impossible to
lay down a definite line. It certainly was not his inteution
to propose the adoption of the Maine law. Ho 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.) Tho 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 in this respect bad taken
place among the higher classes. Formerly there was scarcely
a German prince who did not go drunk to bed every night—
(langhter)—and too many of the higher classes followed their
example. He believed that the alteration which had taken
place in the habits of the upper el cases would spread to the
lower, and. that the time would arrive when the latter would
enjoy themselves moderately, and drunkenness would be
abolished. He now catne!to the provisions of the bill which
lie intended to submit to the house. He proposed to respect
vested inte rests, 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 lioens•ao should be with-
drawn. He also proposed that licenses for beer-shops should
be granted by the magiserates 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. Ho 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 bo notified to tho Excise. 13efore the
1853-4severalmagistrates stated that they had
committee of
Excise •
been in the habit of sending such information to t
but the chief of the Excise, Mr.
mittee that he could no. Wood, informei lie
the coin-
t meal to mind reception of 7 the anysuch notice. But what showed the anomalous state of the
had
law was this fact—The magistrates in some instances
deprived public-house keepers of their licenges for notorious
obtained
bad immediatelylicenses
offences, and those men
en. (Hear,) That
from the Excise and kept their houses
Pend therefore h
state of things ought not to be endured,_pro-
posed•iptions of houses under the 811110
to place both descriptions
jurisdiction. He also proposed to carry out the principle of
"Tippling Act," by enacting
what was generally called the_
retail to be drunk on the
that no person selling beer by
boorfor drunk on the pre-
misespre-
should be able to recover
Ithis • t•
pre-
wises unless he sued within one week. was intention
mtol make the bill applicalle to another class of persons. Iu
the report of the committee of 1853-4
la
a eed recommendationunderbte was
given that all-coffee-houses should be
the keepers f super-
vision o coffee-
of the police. In the metropolis
were forbidden to harbour bad characters, but the
houses
police had no authority
to enter such houses to ascertain
harboured not. He did
whether bad characters were ornot
w
propose to touch coffee-shops, temperance hotels, shell-fish
shops, and places of that description, which were kept open
during the day time • but he proposed to give the police a
,
supervision over all those houses which were kept open be •
nine night and four iu the morniuo. It. was to such
tween
these that bad characters resorted' after they were
places as
I lied from public-houses, and many cases they had not
ethxeß'least difficulty in obtaining illicit spirits. In fact, when the
superm • tendent of police at Wolverhampton, in 1851, went
into one of these coffee-houses and called for some gin, he hail
not the least difficulty in procuring what lie required. The
gin was handed to him in a coffee-cup, and he was told that if
the police came in, all he had to do was to put some milk to
it, and they would not discover what ho was drinking.
(Laughter.) He proposed that these coffee-shops should pay
a small licens3—that the keepers of theses houses should be
placed under the supervision of the police—that penalties
should be imposed upon them for the sale of spirits, for har-
bouring disorderly characters, and for permitting gambling.
He further proposed to impose a fine on drunken and disorderly
persons who might refuse to leave such li nises when desired to
do so, or who might be found drinking there at unlawful hours.
He believed this bill to be a step in the right direction, and
trusted that the house would give it a full and mitaire consi-
deration,

Mr. E. BALL seconded the motion, without, however,
pledging himself to the details of the measure.
Sir 0, GREY observed that ho would not then enter into

any premature discussion of the provisions of the bill, as
other opp,rtunitics. would be afforded him of stating Lie opi-
nions on the subject. There could be no doubt that drunken-
ness woe a fertile source of crime. But the whole queffiion
was, how the commission of crime could be prevented.
(Hear, h:ar.) The committee of 1853-1 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 Lis attention to that
part of the report. As great interest would be felt by tho
country in the measure now under consideration, not, only
as one of morality. jut as one afflicting the vast amount of
property now embarked in the Leer trade, he thought ample
time ought to allowed fur a full consideration of the sub-
ject. (Hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON was exceedingly glad that the hon.
and learned gentleman (AI. 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
drunk.

After a few words from Mr. Lowe, Mr. Crossley, Mr.
Ewart, and Mr. Brown,
Leave was given to bring in the bill. •
CONTRACTS FOR PUBLIC DEPARTMENTS.
On the motion of Colonel DeNNu, 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 mode of securing and paying
fixed incomes to ecclesiastical corporations, aggregate and
sole.