New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-02-14


the privileges Of both against the pesple-he had the
boldness to repeat the dangerous proceeding within
tbe same sphere of action. His enc Chinese war
being censured by the Parliament he undertakes
another Chinese war in spite of Parliament. Still,
ia both Houses, only one man mustered courage
enough to make a stand against this ministerial
and, curiousy to say, tat one man be-
longing not to the popular, but tC the arstocratc
branch of TIE Legislature. The man is Lord Grey.
He proposed an amendment to the address in an
swer to the Queens speech to the purport that the
expedition ought not to have been entered upon be-
fore the sense of both Houses of Parliament
was taken.
The manner in which Lord Grey's amend
ment was met both by the spokesman of
the ministerial party and the leader of her
Majesty's opposition, is highly characteristic
of the political crisis which the representa-
tive institutions of England ae rapidly ap-
preaching. Lord Grey conceded that \ formal
sense, the Crown enjoyed the prergative of enter
lpg upon wars, but since ministers were interdlct
ed from spending one single farthing on any enter
prise without the previous sanction OF Parliament,
it was the constitutional law and practice that the
responsible representatives OF the Crown snouid
never enter upon warlike expeditions before notice
having been given TO Parliament, and the latter
been called upon to make provision for defraylng
the expenditure which might be thus incurred.
Thus, if the council of the nation thought NJ, u
might check, in the beginning, any unjust OF lmpon
tic war contemplated by min sters. His Lordshlp
auoed then some examples in order to snow now
strictly these rules were formerly adhered 10. III
1880 when some British vessels were seized cy the
Spaniards on the northwest coast OF Amer
lea. Pitt brought down to both Houses a mes
sope from the Crown calling for vote OF credit
10 meet the probable expenses. Again IN December
1896. when the daughter of Don Pedro applied 10
England for assistance against Ferdinand VII OF
Snsin. who intended an invasion of Portugal to the
benefit of Don Miguel, Canning brought down
similar message notifying to Parliament the nature
of the case and the amount of expenditure likely to
be incurred. In conclusion Lord Grey broadly in
timated that the ministry had dared to raise taxes
upon the country without the concurrence OF Par
lament since the large expenditure already incur
red must have been betrayed one way or other; and
could not have been betrayed without encrOaching
mon mouey-grants provided for entirely different de-
mands.
Now which sort of reply did Lord Grey
elicit on the part Of the cabinet! The Duke OF
Newcastle, who had been foremost In protest
inc against the lawfulness of Palmerston's second
Chinese war. answered in the first instance
that {" the very wholesome practice had arisen OF
"late years of never moving an amendment TO the
"address. unless some great party object was to be
attained" Consequently, Lord Grey being not
prompted by factiOus motives and pretending not
to aspire to put Ministers out in order 10 put him.
self H. what, for the life of the Duke OF Newcastle,
could he mean by infringing upon thai very whole
"sOme practice of late years. Was he crotchety
enough to fancy that they were to break ances ex-
cept for great party objects In the second instance,
was il not notorious that the constitutional practice,
so anxiously adhered to by Pitt and Canning, had
been over and over again departed from by Lord
Pamerston1 Had that noble ViscOunt not carried
n war of his own in Portugal in 1881, in Greece
in 1850, and, as the Duke of Newcastle
might have added, in Persia, in Afghanistal
and in many other countries Why, If
Parliament had allowed Lord Palmerston to usurp
to himself the right of war and peace and taxation
during the course of thirty years. Why, then,
should they all at once try to break from their long
seryile traditionl Constitutional law might be on
the side of Lord Grey, but prescription was un-
doubtedy on the side of Lord PalmerstOn. Why
call the noble Viscount to account at this time of
the day, since never before had ne been punished
for similar wholesome innovations In fact,
the Duke of Newcastle seemed rather indulgent in
not accusing Lord Grey of rebellion for his
attempt at breaking through Lord PamerstOn's
plescriptive privilege of doing with his Own-the
forces and the money of EDgand-as he liked:
Equally original was the manner in which the
Duke of Newcastle endeayored to prove the legality
of the Pehoexpedition. There exists an Anglo
Chinese treaty of lS43, by dint Of which
England enjoys all the rights conceded
by the Ceestias to the most favored ma
lions. Now Russia, in her recent treaty with China,
has stipulated for the right of sailing up the Peiho.
Consequently, under the treaty OF lS43 the English
had right to such passage. This, the Duke OF New
castle said he might insist upon ''withouta any great
Especial pleading" Might he, indeed On the one
side there is the ugly circumstance that the RUSSIAN
treaty was only ratified, and, consequently dates its
actual existence only rem an epoch posterior to the
Peiho catastrophe This, of course, is but slight
hasteron proteron. On the other hand, 1T is gene
rally known that state of suspends all exist
ing treaties. If the English were at war with the
Chinese at the time of the Peiho expedition,
they of course, could appeal neither to the
treaty of le43, nor to any other treaty what
ever. If they were not at war, PalmerstOn's
Cabinet has taken upon itself to commence new
war without the sanction of Parliament To es-
cane the latter power of the dilemma, poor New
castle asserts THAT since the Canton bombardment,
for The last two years. England had nerer been at
peace with China" Consequently the Ministry
had pushed on hOSilities, not recommended them,
and consequently he might, without special plead
ing, appeal to the treaties effective only during
time Of peace. And to highten the beauty of this
queer sort of dialectcs Lord FalmerstOn the chief
of the Cabinet, asserts at the saTe time, in the
House of Commons, that England all this time over,
"had aerer been at nar pih China" They were
not so ncw There were, of course, Canton bOp-
bardments, Peiho catastrOphes, and Anglo.French
expeditions, but there was no war, since war had
never been .deetar,d, and since, to this mo.
ment, the Emperor of China had allowed
transactions at Shanghai to proceed in their usual
course. The very Iact of his having broken in re-
gard to the Chinese, through all the Legitimate inter-
national forms of war, Palmerston pleads as reason
for dispensing also With the constitutional forms in
regard to the British Parliament, while his spokes-
man in The House of Lords, Earl Granville, with
"regard to China, dsdanfully declares "dc con-
"sultation Of Parliament by Government" TO be "a