ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

CHAPTER VI.

FOREIGN AFFAIRS. THE WAR IN ITALY-Statement made by Earl Granville on the re-assembling of Parliament-Remarks of the Duke of Rutland, Earl of Malmesbury, and the Duke of Newcastle-Lord Palmerston intimates in the House of Commons the views of the Government on the Italian Question-The news of the Armistice between France and Austria arrives in England, and is communicated to both Houses, then sitting, by the Ministers -Further discussions in the House of Lords on the events passing in Italy- Opinions expressed by the Earl of Malmesbury, Marquis of Normanby, Earl Granville, Earl of Derby, Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, and other Peers. In the House of Commons, Lord Elcho postpones a motion on the affairs of Italy, of which he had given notice Remarks made on the occasion by Mr. Seymour Fitzgerald and Lord John Russell-On the 28th of July, pursuant to notice, Lord John Russell enters into a lengthened explanation of the policy of the Government in regard to Italian affairs-His speech -Answer of Mr. Disraeli-Speeches of Mr. Bowyer, Lord Palmerston, Mr. Whiteside, Mr. Drummond, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Maguire, and Lord Claude Hamilton-Further debates in both Houses on the same subject-The Marquis of Normanby raises the question of Italian policy by a motion for papers -Answer of Lord Wodehouse-Lord Elcho renews in the House of Commons his postponed motion for an Address to the Crown respecting the proposed Conference of European PowersMr. Kinglake moves the Previous Question-Speeches of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Seymour Fitzgerald, Lord Harry Vane, Mr. Gilpin, Mr. Milnes, Mr. Horsman, Mr. Sidney Herbert, Mr. Whiteside, Lord John Russell, Mr. Disraeli, and Lord Palmerston-Lord Elcho replies, and declines to press his motion, which is not put-The Estimates having been voted, and various necessary Bills passed, the Session is brought to a close on the 13th of August- Parliament is prorogued by Commission-The Speech from the Throne delivered by the Lord Chancellor-Concluding Remarks.

THE events which took place

Italy, of which an account is given in another part of this Volume, gave rise to occasional

remarks and discussions in the

their re-assembling after the General Election. Both the foreign policy of Lord Derby's Go

vernment and the principles adopted by their successors in office, came in for their share of animadversion and comment. It will be necessary briefly to notice some of these debates, in which the course pursued by the British Government in regard to France and Italy underwent the criticism of Parliament. In the first Ministerial explanations given to the House of Lords by Earl Granville, as the leader of the House, that noble lord made some remarks upon the duty of the Government in respect of the war, then pending, and our foreign relations in general, which gave occasion to a short debate. In touching on the subject of the National Defences, Lord Granville said that the Ministers were fully alive to the duty of efficiently maintaining them. There was no ground, he said, for alarm of invasion, but invasion should be an impossibility. The war would engage the first and most serious attention of the Government. It was our duty to maintain a strict and bond fide neutrality, to keep our country at peace, and to give Europe peace as soon as possible, by bringing our influence to bear at the first favourable moment. That course, he believed, would be supported by the House.

The Duke of Rutland contended that the speeches of those Ministers who attributed the war to Austria, were not in keeping with the declaration of neutrality. Sardinia was the cause of the war. England ought to be prepared for every eventuality. The French Emperor could not restrain the passions of his army, and no one could say what might happen.

The Earl of Malmesbury made a speech, mainly intended to refute the criticisms of members of the present Government when they led the Opposition. His object was to show from the pages of the blue-book, that he had done all he could to induce France and Austria to come to an understanding. He had not, as Lord Palmerston said, patronized Austria. He had anticipated the advice of that noble lord, and had told Austria that nothing should induce the English Government to support her in Lombardy against her own subjects. He had told her that England would stand by her in maintaining her treaty rights, but not in exercising improper administrative and military influence. He had recommended a Congress. He had not passed the bounds of neutrality. But if it were true, as stated by Sir Charles Wood at Halifax, that the Government had given advice to Germany, then they had gone further than the late Government, and had taken the first step towards leaving a position of neutrality, since they had advised Germany not to judge for herself.

The Duke of Newcastle deprecated premature discussion. The words imputed to Sir Charles Wood were probably inaccurate, for the despatch did not bear the construction put upon it. The Duke assured the Duke of Rutland, that the Cabinet were unanimous in the intention to maintain a strict neutrality.

Lord Howden spoke of the war as "iniquitous." He had at heart the real independence of Italy, and protested loudly against the unholy means taken to obtain a righteous end. The end did

not sanctify the means. determination of France was taken long before the month of February, but, still, when he heard Italy claiming the Emperor Napoleon as its liberator and regenerator, he could not help saying that he had great doubts whether, at the bottom of his very capacious mind, his Majesty ever intended or expected the real liberation of Italy, however large or magnificent might be the device which he had inscribed upon his banner. Little or no change would be allowed to take place in Rome and the Papal States, and the so-called liberation of a part of Northern Italy would only serve to plunge those magnificent regions, if not into deeper darkness, at least into deeper disappointment and despair.

The out for us by those who preceded us, that is, a strict neutrality in the contest which is now waging. I trust that nothing can occur which should involve this country in hostilities, which, as far as human foresight can go, seem to turn upon matters which, though interesting the sympathies one way or the other of the people of this country, are yet so remote from their direct interests that it would, I think, be unpardonable in any Government to endeavour to involve this country in the contest. It will be our duty, as no doubt it would have been felt to be the duty of the late Government, to avail ourselves of any favourable opportunity which may occur in the course of these events, to tender the good offices of England, either separately or conjointly with other Powers, for the purpose of restoring to Europe the blessings of peace; but I am sure that this House will feel that steps of that kind ought not to be lightly taken, that a great country like this ought not to tender advice or interpose offices until it sees that the march of events renders it likely that those good offices or that advice will be acceptable to those to whom they are tendered, and that lightly and without sufficient consideration to commit the country to steps of that sort would be derogatory to the dignity of the nation, and useless with regard to any good which might be anticipated from the adoption of

The discussion then dropped. In the House of Commons, Lord Palmerston, on the same day, took occasion to lay down the principles by which his Government would be guided in their transactions with foreign countries. The noble lord said :"There are two great questions which pre-eminently occupy the attention of the public; one, the state of our foreign relations as connected with those important events which are now passing in the South of Europe; the other, that question of the amendment of the laws regarding the representation of the people in Parliament, which has so recently and anxiously engaged the atten

tion of Parliament and of the country. The course which we intend to pursue with regard to that first great question, is the course which has been chalked

such a course.'

The unexpected news of the conclusion of a peace between France and Italy, surprised the two Houses during their sitting

[ocr errors]

on the 12th of July.-Lord Wodehouse immediately communicated to the House of Lords a telegram he had just received from the English Ambassador at Paris, which had been sent by the Emperor of the French to the Empress, dated Valleggio, July 11th, and was in the following terms: Peace is signed between the Em peror of Austria and me. The bases of peace are-Italian Confederation under the honorary presidency of the Pope; the Emperor of Austria cedes his rights to Lombardy to me, and I transfer them to the King of Sardinia; the Emperor of Austria preserves Venetia, which is an integral part of the Italian Confederation."

Lord John Russell made a similar communication to the House of Commons, with an important addition, viz., with reference to a rumour that the Emperor would require that Savoy should be ceded to him by Sardinia; he stated that the Emperor had made no such demand, and that he did not ask for any addition whatever to his dominions.

On the 13th, Earl Granville made an appeal to Lord Malmesbury, who had given notice of a motion having reference to the affairs of Northern Italy, that he would not then bring on his motion, on account of the public inconvenience that might result from it. He also asked the Marquis of Normanby, who had intended to move for the production of a despatch, to abstain from making any remarks likely to excite debate. The despatch Lord Granville undertook to produce.

Lord Malmesbury, after the

request Lord Granville had made, consented to postpone his motion. Although he agreed to defer his explanation on the despatch of Count Cavour, he could not forbear from referring to the case of the Duchess of Parma, whose admirable conduct had won universal admiration, and expressed his opinion that it would be a bad example of public morality if she were not restored to her dominion. He protested against the statements of Count Cavour, which he was ready, as he said, to meet and to refute one by one, but at the present moment he would not discuss the subject. Deprecating the opinion which prevailed in Her Majesty's Government, that it was necessary for the House to preserve silence on foreign affairs until their immediate interest had passed away, he sincerely hoped that Parliament would not separate before an opportunity had been given to the House to express their opinion on foreign affairs, and to learn the intention of the Government in regard to the position this country would occupy in concluding peace.

Lord Normanby, in acceding to the request of Lord Granville, postponed his observations on Count Cavour's despatch, which, he said, was characterized by a suppressio veri. He highly eulogized the conduct of the Duchess of Parma, who had done everything to promote the interests of her subjects, and whose States ought to be restored, as they had been guaranteed to her by the whole of Europe.

Lord Granville thanked the noble lords for the course they had taken. He explained that

there was no wish on the part of the Government to prevent discussion on foreign affairs. Cases, however, like the present might arise, when, from insufficient information, the House was incapable of arriving at just conclusions.

The Marquis of Clanricarde protested against the reserve which was maintained by Government in respect to foreign affairs. Lord Brougham thought it a most melancholy thing that questions of so much importance as peace and war should be decided by two Emperors, uncontrolled by a Parliament, a press, or even in the slightest degree by their own Ministers.

Lord Derby thought it strange that Sardinia, which had occupied the first position, and to whom France had only stood in the relation of an ally, had been thrown entirely into the back-ground. They had heard that peace had been concluded between France and Austria: he wished to know whether peace had been agreed to between Austria and Sardinia. Lord Granville said that the Government only knew that a convention had been drawn up between the French and Austrian Emperors as a basis for peace. He was not able to give further information.

The Marquis of Normanby then moved for a copy of a despatch from Lord John Russell to Mr. James Hudson, on the subject of the alleged annexation of the Duchies of Central Italy by the Government of Piedmont. Lord Ebury protested against our past policy of officious interference in the affairs of foreign States, as tending to destroy the influence of this country in the councils of Europe. He hoped,

under the present circumstances, that Her Majesty's Government would not be too ready to put themselves forward, but would wait until their opinions and advice were asked for.

The Duke of Rutland said, that although he agreed with the last speaker on the policy of nonintervention, he did not concur with him in regard to Count Cavour, who, in his opinion, had been the principal cause of the

war.

Lord Stratford de Redcliffe thought the objection made. against British interference with foreign States, was more on account of the manner of doing it than of the thing itself, and he cited the case of the late King of Naples as in point. He also censured the conduct of Count Cavour, as having excited the revolutionary party in Tuscany.

Lord Wodehouse declared the willingness of the Government to discuss these matters fully, as soon as sufficient information had been obtained. He promised that Lord John Russell's despatch should be produced. He could not undertake to lay before the House the circulars moved for by Lord Malmesbury, but the answer to them should be communicated to their Lordships.

The Earl of Malmesbury thought the answer would not be intelligible without the circular.--The discussion then terminated.

In the House of Commons on the same evening, Lord Elcho, who had given notice of a motion respecting the affairs of Italy, which he then proposed to withdraw, entered into an explanation of the motives which had induced him to put the notice upon the

1

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »