The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1864-03-09

a.
pa1ch In manner which III put an eqa q
smcn m0nstrous demands fox tho hntufa-
khear, bear But, n an not pistnkea,
the laAe dispstcA from Washln9ton w. wit.
Ten ehout August, md NJ received hNeto-
wgd The hitter end Of August snd eaxiy IN
september the noble Eaff took tAa s(Suak
step o. 1eiz!ng The soeall1d Cuuft1orais
nme - tee Aetsey apcp that ves3saeptelon
General Informed Parliament that tke V0o1-
ernment wonlA not be warranted in inter-
feFtng: Hear, hearl Wen, then, nv Lords.
II you have not satisfied the Feiefai. neither
have yon satisfied the Confedsrata States.-
iHeArJ Yon have not safisfled the Poles.
aud yoa have offended Russin. In concln.
sion, the speaker rccaritulAted the existing
ment and NEST Of the European fovegH. snri
denounced the policy that had produced such
emoarfassments ~ source of national dan.
ger. ~ an -.
Lord Russell defended the course he had
taken on the ground that Intervention eec-
orally failed Of its Objsct. and aegravated tho
evils Il sought to prevent He did not admit
lord Derbys principle, that England was
bound to aceept Whatever France rropoacd
had stated from the begiuninC that Eeklapd
had NO intention Of regulating the Internal
affairs OF that country. We a.ted to obtain
redress OF our own grievances, NOT 10 set up
any particular form Of Government. As to
the ErcLch proposal In reference to the
States OF the American ConfedoFacy, Lord
Russell said: ~ think that, though on some
questions which arise the Emperor of the
French may pursue a different policy from
that which we follow, he gives full weight to
the consideration that the policy which may
suit the French nation may not be the
policy which the British nation prefers.
believe that the Emperor ID too inst to
attribute such difference of opinion to
anything but regard for the policy which
We think right and which We think
the interest of this country calls upon M to
pursue. Hear, hear Then, the noble
Earl tays that We differ from FRANCE about
America. Now, no such PROPOSAL was ever
made to Us. There was o proposal that we
should offer our good Offices in order to re-
concile the North and South; but 1t was
tolerably obvious that If the proposal was
made by two Powers, say England and
France, II would irritate the Northern States,
would fail of effect, and that there was much
better chance of q reconciliation between
the North and South In our abstaining from
Earl approved that decision. I certainly am
convinced that the whole country concurred
in the policy which we then pursued.
In the House of Commons Lord Palmer
ston, in reply to asimilar attack by D'Israeli,
said:
Ishould much have preferred to have heard
the opinion of other members beside the
right honorable gentleman, who is always
listened to with the Difference which his
abilities and position entitle him to; but as
hof % rar41 - thot~ 81 Jr
Of the House have given him On unlimited
proxy, shall take leave to deal with the
speech which he has delivered The great
complaint Of the right honorable gentleman
seems to be not as to what the speech con-
tains, bat as to what he thinks 1t ought to
have contained, and think that shall have
no difficulty in explaining to the House the
topics to which the right honorable gen
tleman alluded were not introduced into her
Msjesty's speech. In the first place, he com
planned that no mention has been made Of the
civil war In America. Why, We have over
and over again lamented, and still continue
to lament, the continuance Of that war, and
we have declared more than once that her
Majesty's Government profess to act. and
intend to continue to act, upon principle
Unless the House had thought that her Ma.
jesty's Government was going to depart
from that course, Of which there is no indi-
~~s4v.---s-A>~--ysA~ ~ ~--aA A>.aA- llaAu ssaattAs
OF surplnesage TO nave -iiied the speech
with repetition of the statements made on
former occasions, and which are still bind
iLg upon her Majestys Government. fffear
hear
THE ALEXANDRA CAsr.
The Alexandra case has been dismissed -
The London Times devotes large share ci
its columns to the discussion of the subject.
As it stands now q dead lock has occurred
by the dismissal of the appeal by the Court
Of Error, from the Court OF Exchequer,
which tried the case in the first instance, on
the ground Of the want of Jurisdiction. But
a loophole, it is said, has been discovered by
crown lawyers, by which the case will be
taken to the House Of Lords, and when once
before that august body it will no doubt be
thoroughly ventilated, and We shall learn
from the debates thereon the real sentiment
of the British Government. 1t IL said thxt
the rule in cases. Of appeal to the House o1
Lords is, to subject the matter to the law
Lords, while all the rest OF the membsra
acuuieace In their decision.