§ MR. T. C. ANSTEYbegged to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he had received any information respecting the measures now being taken at Dresden, by the Courts of Vienna and Berlin, to secure the admission into the German Confederation, of the non-German territories possessed by those Courts? Those non-German territories constituted themselves into three classes: first, such as Lombardy and Venice; secondly, such as Gallicia and other territories held by Austria and Prussia upon certain treaties and stipulations, not always kept; and, thirdly, territories like the republic of Cracow, held in violation of all treaties. He wished to ask the noble Viscount whether he had received any information touching the state of this negotiation, and whether her Majesty's Government, imita- 1355 ting the example of the Government of the French Republic, has in any manner notified to those Courts Her Majesty's intention to insist upon the maintenance of those stipulations of the Treaty of Vienna, by which such an encroachment upon the integrity of Germany and the liberties of Europe is guarded against; and whether the noble Viscount will lay on the table of the House the correspondence on these subjects?
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, undoubtedly information had been given to Her Majesty's Government, and negotiations had been for some time going on with respect to the intention on the part of Prussia and of Austria to propose the incorporation into the Germanic Confederation of territories not hitherto belonging to that Confederation, because of their not having formed part of the ancient German Empire. The House was aware that the Treaty of Vienna, by Article 53, stated that the Germanic Confederation was to consist of certain sovereigns and sovereign princes, and that confederated empire should include the possessions of the Emperor of Austria and the King of Prussia, which belonged to the ancient Empire. In accordance with that stipulation, the Duchy of Pozen, part of northern Prussia, Gallica, Hungary, and the Italian States of Austria, were not included in that Confederation. The following Article, 54, more distinctly specified what were to be the objects of the Confederation, by saying that the object of the Confederation was, the maintenance of the internal and external safety of Germany, and the inviolability of the States belonging to the Confederation. There were several other Articles following, ten or twelve, on the same subject; hut all these stipulations formed integral parts of the treaty signed by the Powers of Europe. It was, therefore, the opinion of Her Majesty's Government, when they heard of this intention, that such intention could not be carried into effect consistently with the law of Europe, unless with the consent of all those Powers who had been parties to the Treaty of Vienna in 1815. And in accordance with that opinion Her Majesty's Government did not, as the hon. and learned Gentleman asked, follow the example of France, but they anticipated France, and as early as the 3rd of December they made a remonstrance on that subject, both here, and at Vienna, and Berlin. Since then the French Government had in a more formal manner protested 1356 against it, and Her Majesty's Government had renewed their remonstrances at Vienna and at Berlin, and had addressed a remonstrance to each and all of the States comprised in the Germanic Confederation. Nothing yet had been decided as to that matter; but, knowing as they did, in the first place, the great value which Austria and Prussia had always attached to the Treaty of Vienna; the respect which it was to be hoped ought, in principle, to be paid to contracted engagements; and seeing, moreover, the great importance which it was, especially to these two Powers, that the Treaty of Vienna, which was the title-deed by which so many of the States of Europe held their possessions, should be respected—he could not entertain a doubt that that treaty would be observed, and that these intentions, which seemed to have been hastily adopted, and without due consideration as to the interests that would be involved, would not be carried into effect.
§ MR. T. C. ANSTEYthanked the noble Viscount for his explanation, which was quite satisfactory; but he begged to remind him that he had omitted to answer his last question, namely, whether he should object to the publication of the correspondence?
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONbegged the hon. and learned Member's pardon for the omission; but he thought the House would agree with him, that with regard to a transaction of this kind, and while the matter was still pending—in a case too, which might possibly, and he hoped would probably, end to the satisfaction of all the parties concerned—it would be highly inconvenient and dangerous to the public service to comply with the hon. and learned Member's request.