On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    No. 490. Apg. 13, 1859J THE lEADEB. ' 92...

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Imperial Parliament. Saturday, August 6....

    Horsman said that a neutral poUcy had bee & carefully maintained since the first commencement of the Italian complication . From the speeches and conduct of the present ministry he inferred thai ; they entertained the wish , if not the intention , of diverging from that policy , and becoming participators , in controversies with which all foreign questions were now entangled . That the responsible muster should not , during the recess , commit ^^ "f *^ *? a course so contrary to the judgment ot Parliament and the opinion of the public , it now behoved the House to take all necessary precaution , xorttus pupose he recommended them to adopt Lord Llcho s resolutionEngland by taking part in the conference

    . could do no good to Italy , but would merely relieve France from perplexities by taking them upon herself—Mr S . Hekbebt denied that Lord Palmerston had said anything about going into conference to settle the details of the Treaty of Villafranca The Government had never been asked to ¦ j oin iii settling those details , nor had they , as alleged , snatched at the notion of joining the conference . Although we had not been belligerents , that was no argument against entering the conference ; and would it be right for England , if asked on terms which afforded a chance of success , to refuse to take part in a conference by which a more permanent arrangement might be made for the

    security of Italy ? He did not say they were going to the conference , but if difficulties were removed and objections at an end > a refusal to do so Avould be a dereliction of duty on the part of the Government . — Mr . Wihteside controverted the objection to the resolution that it unduly crippled the action of the executive . In adopting it he maintained , on the other hand , that the House would but follow established precedents , to some of which he referred , and enforce a policy of non-intervention and neutrality which had hitherto been so wisely observed through the whole course of the perturbations in Italy . The Congress of Paris tried to settle the Italian question and failed . AVhat hope was there of better

    success from a renewal of the attempt at a congress held elsewhere ? He proceeded to remark upon the peril and mischief which would ensue if the conduct of discussions at any such congress were entrusted to the present ministers as representing the interests and upholding the honour of England . — Ltord J . Russell commented upon the negative and illusory character of the resolution . The House was asked to address the Crown for the purpose of preventing something being done which there was no intention of doing , and which in all probability no one would ever wish- or propose to do . But the discussion had chiefly turned upon the general question of Italian affairs . On this point he

    noticed that the supporters of the resolution had almost unanimously assigned the responsibility for the war to the King of Sardinia , an allegation which he considered altogether unfounded , expressing his approval of the domestic administration and of the foreign policy of that state , Respecting the congress , the noble lord stated his belief that there was a very serious obstacle to any participation by England in its discussions , and much probability that it would be found most advisable to stand altogether aloof . On the other hand , there were circumstances , some of which he explained , that might render English diplomatic intervention expedient ; and lie could not assent to a peremptory Government

    self-denying ordinance compelling the to abstain from taking part in the councils to which all other European powers hud sent their representatives . The matter , he submitted , was one which ought to be left to flic responsibility of the executive . The noble lord then remarked upon tho state of Italy , contending that by their recent conduct th o Italians had proved themselves worthy of liberty He proceeded to explain and defend tho part taken , by himself and his colleagues in the communications interchanged with Franco and Austria during the war , for the purpose of bringing about the final pacification . —Mr . DittiiA 101 , 1 observed that the Chancellor of tho Exchequer had evaded tho practical question under consideration . Ho had frankly placed his . Italian policy boforo tho House : and it" thoso largo and decided views wore shared by his colleagueo , and

    indicated the predominant opinion of the Cubinot , then tho policy under which the Government proposed to entor the conference was to put an and to tho settlement of furty-flve years ago , and he pointed out tho consequences of this policy . With reference to the communication from tho French Ambassador , Lord J . Russell's explanation , ho said , had boon ample , except upon tho most material point , whether ho had genonilly approved of tho proposal , and whether that approbation was communicated to , tho Emperor of tho French . Ho objected to tho motion that it called upon tho House to give an opinion upon tho question on what was practically tho last night of tho session , and lie trusted that Lord Elcho would not press it to a division , —Lord Palmkkston commented u # on tho remarks made by Mr . Diaraoli in the last Parliament upon the conduct of tho Austrian

    sifted . He did complain , however , of an expression which had been used the day before by Mr . Bright , in his absence , for the first time in his life in connexion with his name , —the word " fraud . " Mr . Overend entered into very full details of the transaction in question , supported by correspondence , whence he inferred that the original object of the arrangement between him and Mr . Childers was that there should be a dignified withdrawal of . the petition , and lie insisted that his seat had never been in issue . When the matter was agreed to be referred ( the referee , it transpired subsequently , being Lord March ) , he had protested against the question of the seat being entered into , but it appearing that between the

    there had been a misunderstanding agents of the several parties as to the terms of the agreement , Mr . Childers ' s agents withdrew from the reference , although he ( Mr . Overend ) ultimately consented to all matters being left to the referee . — Mr . Bright disclaimed the position of an accuser in this matter . The case , he said , had appeared to him as of such a nature that he could not refuse to present the petition . —Mr . Disrakli observed that , in his opinion Mr . Overend had placed himself quite right in the matter , and had been actuated by a sense of honour , and he had no reason to doubt that Mr . Childers had been influenced by motives equally correct . The petition referred to circumstances , he ht before the

    remarked , Which ought not to be broug cognisance of the House , and he asked what was the remedy sought by Mr , Childers ? Sir G . Gret said , if the mere question raised by the petition was whether there had been a compromise between Mr . Overend arid Mr . Childers , and the former had not fulfilled the stipulations , he agreed that , the question would be withdrawn from the cognisance of the House ; but that was not the whole question , for the petition alleged a matter as to the sum to be paid by Mr . Childers as a consideration for giving up the petition , which would be a corrupt compromise , and fully deserved the consideration of a committee . — The motion was agreed to , and the committee nominated .

    EUROPEAN TROOPS IN INDIA . On the order for considering the European Troops ( India ) Bill , as amended . —Sir CT AVood explained the particular reasons for introducing this bill . He stated the limitations which had been imposed upon the East India , Company as to the number of their European troops , which had been increased by Act of Parliament in 1853 to 24 , 000 , but that number had been at one time exceeded under a doubt which this bill would remove , legalising what had been done , and giving a margin for an increased force to the extent of 30 , 000 . The opinions of the members of the Royal Commission differed as to the expediency of alocalarmy in India ; but he thought the-weig ht force

    and the Sardinian Governments respectively , when he characterised that of the latter as ambiguous , and eulogised the spirit of dignified conciliation manifested by Austria . He denied that any approbation had been expressed of the paper received by the French Ambassador , and , with respect to the conference , the Government , he said , were not proposing to go into a conference at all , but if they did , it would not be to upset the arrangements of 1815 . He was of opinion that Austria would be stronger if she had no Italian possessions ; but it was one thing to hold this op inion , arid another to enter into measures to change arrangements founded upon treaties that were the basis of a great Europeau settlement . He then reviewed the discussion that had just taken place , replying to various questions and criticisms , and contending finally that the case

    made out by the supporters of the resolution did . not justify any interference by the House with the discretion of the Government . —Lord Elcho , in reply , defended his motion , which , however , he did not press . lie was satisfied with the result of the debate , and felt inclined to bow to the advice of the right hon . gentleman opposite not to persist in his motion . This was the 9 th of August , and it would put the country to great inconvenience if so close upon the 12 tli there was to be a change of Government . ( Laughter . ) It was not his wish in pressing the motion to exhibit any hostility towards the Governmenfc He accepted , therefore , the amendment of Mr . A . W . King lake , whose speech as well as his motion he was willing to accept , The " previous question " was voted without a division , and the House , passed to the other orders of the day . The Consolidated Fund ( Appropriation ) Bill was passed through committee . Other bills were advanced a stage , and the House adjourned at a few minutes to three o ' clock . Tuesday , August 9 . MILITIA LAWS AMENDMENT . In the House of Lords the Earl of RiroN moved the second reading of this bill . —Lord Stratford DE Redcliffe regretted the suspension of the ballot for the militia at a time when a large force Avas so much needed for the defence of the country . In the present condition of Europe , which he reviewed at some length , it was not only necessary , but an absolute duty to have a sufficient force to maintain our position and independence as a nation . At present our position , wa-s not one of strength , and as long : as wo remained in that position he earnestly hoped that we should not enter into the congress , as we should

    not do credit to ourselves , nor exercise a beneficial influence for the interests of others . —Lord Kingsdown pointed out the difficulties which existed in finding men for the army , navy , and militia , and insisted not only on the necessity of retaining the ballot for the militia , but advocated a system of compulsory service , or conscription . —Lord Ripon assured the House that the attention of the Government had been most earnestly devoted to the subject ojf procuring sufficient forces for the defence of the country , and deprecated the adoption of such measures as those proposed by Lord Kingsdown , especially in time of peace . Their lordships adjourned at six o ' clock . called

    of authority was in favour of a local , of which he pointed out some of the advantages . The late Government had come to a decision that a local army should be niaintained , and the present Government had arrived at the same conclusion . Referring to the discontent of the European troops in India , he observed that he did not think they had any substantial grievance ; but there were palliatives of their conduct , and he did not think it fair to treat them as wrongheaded or mutinous . Most of the malcontents were men who had recently arrived in India , arid he considered it was a mistake to send out raw rocruits there . —General Peel said the bill proposed . increase the local army of India contrary to the

    In the House of Commons , Mr . Bright attention to certain matters in relation to the withdrawal of a petition against the return for Pontcfract . The subject was deferred . On the consideration of the East India Loan Bill , as amended , a conversation arose regarding the expediency of gran'ting an Imperial guarantee . Other bills were forwarded a . stage . In the evening , Mr . Maoicninxox obtained leave to bring in a bill to establish equitable councils of conciliation to adjust differences between masters and operatives . The House was counted out at a quarter to seven . Wednesday , August 10 . The House of Lords mot at four o ' clock , and passed a long scries of bills through thojr respective stages of progress . ' Tho European Troops ( India ) Bill , and some other moasures , wore brought up from tho Commons , and road a first tiine . Their lordships adjourned at half-past five . In the Houhh of Commons , Sir M . Soymour and Mr . Dunn took tho oaths and their seats as members respectively for Dovonport and Dartmouth . TUB rO . NTJik'KAOT ELECTION ; Mr . Biucjht moved for a select committee to inquire la to the circumstances connected with tho withdrawal of a petition from Mr . Hugh Chlldcrs , tho unsuccessful candidate at tho lato election for Pontefraot , challenging the return of Mr . Ovorond at that election . —Mr . Ovjukunw said ho did not complain of Mr . Childore for presenting tho petition , or of tho motion for a committee to inquire into allegations aWjoting his honour } on tho contrary , his desire was that tho whole matter should be thoroughly

    opinion of the report of the commission , and a bill of such importance should not have been hurried through Parliament as this had been . This increase of the Indian army was , no doubt , a question of patrouage , and with such views was no doubt recommended by the Council for India j but he would much rathev increase their salaries if necessary , than thus add to their patronage . Ho regarded the conduct of the European troops in a more serious light than Sir C . Wood , and ho asked whether tho Government had received any communication from Lord C lyde and General Mansfield respecting tho mutiny , lie was of opinion that the enlisting men in this country for India would weakon the resources of the recruiting ' and

    market for tho regular army . m Ijtin , ana saw no reason , ho said , why Germans or other foreigners might not bo enlisted for India . Ho , however , objected to any incrcuso of tho local force , and believed that Sir C . Wood hml adopted a purely Indian view of tho case , which was nothing more or loss than a question of patronage . — fcjir Oicoiwit Evans ropudlatod tho idea of employing forelguors , and contomlud that tho disaffected troops in India had good ground for complaint that the promises hold out to them by tho lMrst Minister of tho Crown had not boon carried out . Ho thought tho bill was not contrary to the recommendations ot tho commission . —After somo observations from Mr . S . Herbert , Colonel , North , Colonel Dunne , Mr . omuii

    Ayrton , oiv a . , vjuiwuuji cvyisuo j «« w v <«» v > . hon . members , the bill -was read a third time and passed . Other bills were forwarded a stage .

    No. 490. Apg. 13, 1859j The Leadeb. ' 92...

    No . 490 . Apg . 13 , 1859 J THE lEADEB . ' 929

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), Aug. 13, 1859, page 5, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_13081859/page/5/