TREATY OF VILLAFRANCA.—AFFAIRS OF ITALY.—QUESTION. (Hansard, 22 July 1859)

§ MR. DARBY GRIFFITH

said, he rose to put the question of which he had given notice relative to the Treaty of Villafranca. In his opinion the time had arrived when our diplomacy should cease to bear the characteristics of secrecy. Diplomacy in the present day was conducted so well that it did not need to be protected from public observation, and he thought it would be greatly for the advantage of the country if the public were allowed the opportunity of knowing what was going on. There were many occasions upon which public opinion could have interfered with salutary effect, and without desiring to make any personal attack, he might specify the case that occurred ten years ago. Ten years ago an offer was made by Count Hummelauer, on 280 the part of Austria, to the noble Lord opposite, to cede the province of Lombardy to Sardinia, but that offer the noble Lord had declined to accept. In the interval Italy had suffered countless miseries, and at this moment, so far as her future prospects were concerned, she was in no better position than when the offer was made, although her plains had been deluged in blood. Now he was firmly convinced that if the system of secrecy had not been adopted, and that offer had been made known at the time, public opinion would have been so decidedly expressed that the offer of Austria would have been acceded to, and that Italy would thus have been spared the frightful carnage we had so recently witnessed there. Another instance might be found in the evil which had resulted from the secrecy observed with regard to late events. Great injustice had been done to the Earl of Malmesbury on the subject, and which was only corrected when the blue-book which contained the correspondence relatinig to Italian affairs was published. That the noble Earl had been subjected to great misrepresentation there was no doubt, and he must say that he felt much surprise at the boldness of the noble Lord (Viscount Palmerston), when, with an utter want of consideration for the danger which the Government had escaped in consequence of the withdrawal of Lord Elcho's Motion, he ventured to say that the early communications of the Earl of Malmesbury with Austria showed an undue leaning in favour of the preponderance of that power in Italy—the fact being that the noble Earl had condemned the proceedings of Austria from the first. The hon. and learned Member for Sheffield and others sometimes said that the power of this country really resided in the House of Commons, that no important transaction could take place to which this House were not parties; but how were these transactions generally concluded? Not by that House, but in the Cabinet, in a room in some public office, by a half-dozen gentlemen, who were not more able to form a correct opinion upon the question at issue than the Members of that House. He contended then, that it was a complete anomaly that this House, which had to find the sinews of war by scarifying the population with heavy taxes, should have no voice whatever in the settlement of those matters, and that Ministers who, when carrying on negotiations, were entirely under the authority of this House, 281 should, when peace was concluded, be removed from all influence on the part of the House. The late war in Italy had begun with hopes of independence that had excited the whole population of that country; but as he understood the treaty which bad just been agreed upon between France and Austria, one of the stipulations was that the late rulers of Tuscany, Parma, and Modena should return to those countries. Now, if they did so with the goodwill of the people no one would be more delighted than he (Mr. Griffith) should be; but if it were meant that foreign Powers were to interfere for the purpose of reinstating these Princes in their former possessions, surely that was not the way to promote Italian independence? He did not presume that even the noble Lord the Foreign Secretary had all the information upon the subject that was satisfactory to himself. On the contrary, he dared say the noble Lord was very much in the same position in that respect as the rest of the world; but he should like the noble Lord, as far as he was able, to answer the question of which he (Mr. Griffith) had given notice, namely, whether he has reason to believe that there is a provision or understanding in the late Treaty of Villafranca that the late Dynasties of Tuscany, Modena, and Parma are to be restored to those possessions, if necessary by military force, and if so, whether her Majesty's Government are prepared to take part in any Congress or other diplomatic negotiation having that object?