HC Deb 27 April 1860 vol 158 cc253-7
CAPTAIN ANNESLEY

said, that before the noble Lord the Foreign Secretary rose to reply, he wished to bring a matter under his notice, for which he was sure he would receive the indulgence of the House. He meant the disgraceful condition of the' graves of those British soldiers who had fallen at Sebastopol. On this subject a letter from an Englishman had appeared in The Times of that day, which he would take the liberty to read to the House. The letter said:— Being on a short visit to this place, and feeling very desirous to see the last resting-places of our fallen countrymen, I called on Lieutenant-Colonel Gowen (American contractor with the Russian Government for raising the sunken ships in the harbour) for some information—he being the only person who knew their relative positions—who very kindly offered to accompany me. Our first visit was to Cathcart's Hill, where we found the beautiful largo black marble cover on the tomb of Sir Robert Lydstone Newman, Captain of Grenadier Guards, had been removed by some sacrilegious hands, doubtless seeking for jewellery or other articles of value. We endeavoured to replace the cover in its proper position, but were unable to move it. Colonel Gowen proposed having it replaced in a few days. We also found the hinges on the gates partly hacked off, evidently for the paltry value of the copper. I also learned from Colonel Gowen that there had been previously a number of shot and shell placed over and around several of the graves by relatives and friends who had visited the spot; these, together with the large shot surmounting the corners of the wall enclosing the cemetery, and on each side of the gate, are now all gone. We next visited the Artillery graveyard, and discovered that they had also disturbed the tablet from the tomb of Captain W. K. Allix, Aide-de-Camp to General Sir De Lacy Evans. The walls around this cemetery were sadly broken down. We then proceeded to the graveyard of the Naval Brigade, where a ghastly sight presented itself. We found the slabs that covered the grave of Commander Lacon Usser Hammett, of Her Majesty's ship Albion, had been turned over and the remains of that lamented officer entirely exhumed, the bones as well as some remaining portions of the uniform being scattered around the grave, which evidently had been opened only a few days before. It was truly a heart-sickening spectacle to behold the last mortal remains of this brave officer he bleaching in the sun. Colonel Gowen assured me that on the following Sunday he would have the remains carefully restored to their former peaceful state. We then visited several other graveyards, and found them more or less in a very dilapidated state—the walls broken down in many places, and in some instances so much so that even the cattle have been found grazing within the enclosures. Notwithstanding, however, the mutilated and neglected state of many of the graves of those brave men who fell in the Crimea, still the sincerest thanks of every true Englishman are due to Colonel Gowen for the truly Christian and sympathizing interest he has so disinterestedly taken in having, entirely at his own expense and trouble, already repaired and restored many of the English graves and cemeteries, as well as several of the French and Sardinian, and preserved them from violation and decay. It is sincerely to be hoped that our Government will take such speedy and necessary measures for putting our graveyards in a proper state of repair as to preserve from oblivion the last resting places of so many brave men who fell during the Crimean campaign. His object was to elicit the opinion of the Government on this subject, and to inquire whether there were any objections to make a diplomatic representation to the Russian Government. If there were, perhaps the Government would think it right to issue instructions to the nearest consular agent, who was, he believed, our Consul at Odessa, to make periodical visits to the cemeteries at Sebastopol, in order to protect the remains of our gallant countrymen from desecration.

LORD JOHN RUSSELL

Sir, I quite agree with the hon. Member for Horsham (Mr. S. FitzGerald) that this question of Savoy, and the neutralized parts of Savoy, is too important a matter to be discussed in the incidental manner in which it has been brought forward this evening. I shall therefore not refer to the statements I have made at various times to the House, only saying that they were founded at the time upon the declarations which were made by foreign Governments, or upon the despatches which I have received from Her Majesty's Ministers abroad. With regard to the immediate question, and which the hon. Gentleman opposite and the House regard with considerable interest, as to what is to be done now in regard to that part of the subject which remains open for consideration, namely, the neutralized parts of Savoy, I wish to give to the House such information as I can, but it is very far from being complete. It is proposed that there should be a Conference of the Powers of Europe who signed the treaty of Vienna on a particular subject, and that subject is, as it is stated by the French Government, to reconcile the 92nd Article of the treaty of Vienna, to which all the Powers of Europe who signed that treaty are parties, with the second Article of the treaty of Turin, which has lately been concluded between the Emperor of the French and the King of Sardinia. I do not believe that the French Government wish either to go any further in the way of stating what other questions are to be considered or to place any further restrictions on the questions to be discussed at that Conference. I do not certainly apprehend that the French Government mean to impose such a restriction as the hon. Gentleman seems to suppose. At the same time, from communications I have received, and from the declarations which the Emperor of the French has made from time to time, I conceive that to any measures that may be properly called the dismemberment of Savoy, we should find in the Conference that the French Government would be decidedly opposed; but it is obvious that there may be other measures which would not amount to dismemberment, but which would yet give a military frontier to Switzerland, which might be proposed by Switzerland. However, when Switzerland has made such proposal will be the time for Her Majesty's Government and the, other Powers to consider it. With respect to the parties to the Conference, they are, as I have stated, the eight Powers who were parties to the treaty of Vienna, and I believe there is no doubt that all these Powers will agree that Switzerland should be likewise represented at that Conference. With regard to Sardinia, there is some discussion still going on, and likewise as to the question in what manner Switzerland and Savoy are to appear at the Conference. The Conference in London in 1831–2 is cited as affording a precedent. According to that precedent, the parties not comprehended among those who signed the treaty of Vienna may appear at the Conference, either always, or only on certain occasions. That is a matter which, as I have stated, is under discussion. The time of the meeting of the Conference has been likewise a matter of discussion, but the French Government state on that subject that they consider a Conference cannot be properly assembled until the treaty of Turin is complete. That treaty of Turin is not complete until the Assembly of Turin shall have given their assent to the treaty. The King of Sardinia has no doubt given his assent to the treaty, but it is a part of the constitution of Sardinia that no cession of territory shall be valid until the treaty giving it is confirmed by the Votes of the Parliament of Sardinia. The French Government say that, supposing the Vote of the Parliament of Piedmont should not be in favour of the cession, and should be against the ratification of the treaty, there would then be nothing for the Powers of Europe to deliberate upon, and therefore they cannot be called together until that vote has been come to. It is understood that the Parliament of Piedmont is to consider the question about the first week in May, or the first ten days in May, and it is proposed that the Conference should meet after that time. Then there comes the question to which the hon. Member for Horsham called my attention the other evening, and to which we attach, as he does, considerable importance—namely, what shall be the state of possession of the neutralized portions of Savoy after the treaty has been confirmed, supposing it to be confirmed at Turin, and before the Conference has met? We have stated more than once at Paris, and Earl Cowley has stated it even since his return to Paris, that, in our opinion, it is most desirable that no civil or military occupation by France should take place until the Conference has considered this question of the neutralized parts of Savoy, and under what restrictions those neutralized portions shall be hereafter held, and in what manner they shall be disposed of. The French Government, however, I must say, on the other side, state that they see great difficulty in assenting to such a proposition, because it would seem to assume that the Treaty of Turin did not perfectly do what it purported to do—namely, transfer the whole sovereignty of Savoy from the King of Sardinia, its late or present Sovereign, to the Emperor of the French. They therefore raise this difficulty, without laying any stress, however, upon the practical objections to any other course. With regard to any practical result, they say that Her Majesty's Government may be assured that there will be no precipitation in taking possession of that territory, but that there must be some authority, and that the territory cannot be left without some authority during the Conference. That discussion between the two Governments is not yet concluded. It still appears to me, I must confess, that it would be more satisfactory that some arrangement should be come to by which the whole of that territory should not be in the possession of the French authorities during the time of the Conference, because, as from the complication of documents there arises every day questions of wounded pride or injured honour, it is desirable that the French authorities should not be required to withdraw from any portion of the territory of which they are in actual possession. This is a matter like other matters which depends very much on the opinion of the different Powers in Europe. I believe that the Government of Prussia takes the same view as we do on this subject. With regard to the other Powers, we have had communications on this particular point, and I can only say that it is not at present decided. I will not go further into this subject at present. I have only wished to give such information as I am able, and I do not think the question is one for discussion at the present moment.

With regard to the cemeteries of Sebastopol, I am sorry to say that I am afraid the statement of the hon. Gentleman is in conformity with the truth, since it agrees in every respect with the statements we have received. We have given such directions as we think may prevent any further continuance of such shocking outrages upon the feelings of this country and the relatives of the great and gallant men who are buried there; and I have desired Her Majesty's Minister at St. Petersburg to remonstrate in very strong terms with the Russian Government on the subject.