AFFAIRS OF CHINA.—QUESTION. (Hansard, 12 April 1861)

§ LORD JOHN RUSSELL

I will first answer the question which has been put to me relating to the affairs of the Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein. The hon. Gentleman (Mr. Baillie) said very truly that this question is one of great interest to Europe; and it is certainly impossible to regard it without some apprehension. My hon. Friend behind me (Sir Harry Verney) has 516 stated what I believe is quite true with regard to the understanding arrived at in 1851. There was an armed intervention by Austria and Prussia; but an understanding was arrived at, though unfortunately, as in many other cases, the understanding turned out to be a misunderstanding, because from that time to this, with respect to the nature of the engagement, the terms of it, and the measures that were to be the consequence of it, there never has been an agreement between Germany and Denmark. In the first place, it has been maintained always on the German side that this understanding was a regular convention between the parties. The Danish argument always has been that it was a mere interchange of notes, not constituting an engagement, but informing Austria and Prussia and the Germanic Confederation, on the part of the King of Denmark, what he of his own free will resolved to do. With respect to the terms of the arrangement, and to take the last question of my hon. Friend (Sir Harry Verney) first, the rights to be guaranteed by a common constitution for the general affairs of the monarchy, unhappily that general constitution never was conceded. It was proposed on the part of Denmark that there should be a common constitution and a common Assembly, and that Holstein should send members to represent it there in proportion to its population. That was in itself a very fair principle; but the people of Holstein, supported by Germany, declared that such a body would not offer a sufficient security for their rights in connection with a larger population; and, therefore, they refused to assent to such a union. Other plans for effecting a reconciliation were suggested, into the details of which I need not enter; but before 1851 my noble Friend now at the head of the Government made a proposal with regard to Schleswig—namely, that it should be divided into two parts, one occupied by the German population, the other occupied by the Danish population. But the Danish Government and people were quite as much against such a separation as Germany was against a fusion between Holstein and Denmark; and, consequently, that proposition also fell to the ground. It has always been maintained on the part of the King of Denmark that he has endeavoured to carry into effect faithfully and honourably what he had promised to Austria and Prussia in 1851. It was alleged on the part of Germany that his efforts were not sincere, and 517 that they have failed because the just rights of Holstein were not conceded, and because Schleswig in particular had not that recognition of nationality to which she was entitled. Towards the end of last year the Danish Government applied to Her Majesty's Government, making a proposition with regard to Holstein which was to be laid before the Government of Prussia; and also saying, with respect to Schleswig, that although the King of Denmark could not negotiate with Germany on that subject, as he conceived that he had no engagements towards Germany in relation to it, he would yet be quite willing to state to the British Government the measures he proposed, and consult with them upon those measures. We did not find in the propositions of Denmark that there was enough to induce the Germanic Confederation to agree to them. At the same time we thought it would be quite fair that the Germanic Confederation should propose a counter project of her own, and thus some attempt be made towards a settlement. But the Prussian Government absolutely rejected those propositions, and that endeavour to effect a reconciliation therefore fell to the ground. The Germanic Confederation, in pursuance of their former decrees and requirements, called upon Denmark to grant to Holstein two things: first, that that part of the budget for the common expenses of the monarchy which was to be defrayed by Holstein should be submitted to the States of that Duchy; and next, that laws which were to affect Holstein should not have validity unless they had the consent of the States of Holstein. Both of these proposals are very intelligible, and, I believe, quite within the competence of the Germanic Confederation to make. But I must say there has been on both sides a great obscurity of phrase in the propositions put forward, which has has tended, with other causes, to protract this dispute and render it apparently so difficult to accommodate. The Danish Government construed the demand of the Germanic Confederation in this way—that they required that no new law should be valid unless it had the assent of the States of Holstein; and when that interpretation was placed before the Prussian Government they denied altogether that such was their intent. In that state of the question the French Government asked Her Majesty's Government to inform them of the course we had taken. I said we had no objection to give the French 518 Government the whole of the correspondence that had passed on the subject; and on receiving it M. Thouvenel, the French Minister for Foreign Affairs, declared that the course pursued on the part of France was completely in harmony with that of Her Majesty's Government. In accordance, therefore, with the views thus entertained by the two Governments, and finding that Russia and Sweden also partook of the same opinions, we addressed to the Danish Government the advice that they should submit to the States of Holstein plainly and clearly the quota of the budget of the monarchy which appeartnined to and should be defrayed by that Duchy. The Foreign Minister of Denmark replied that his Government had already agreed to propositions of a just and reasonable kind which they were about to send to Holstein, and which would be an answer to the advice that had been given them. It afterwards appeared, when those propositions reached Holstein, that they were of a very general and complicated nature, relating, first, to a permanent constitution for the monarchy, and, secondly, to a provision called a pro-visorium, which embraced, among other things, a budget for Holstein's share of the common expenses of the monarchy. Our Minister at Copenhagen, Mr. Paget, who has acted with great ability in these transactions, asked the Danish Minister to place the last part of the proposition in a separate form, by which means he thought it would have a better chance of success with the States of Holstein. There was, however, a misunderstanding between the Danish Government and the Royal Commissary who was sent to Holstein. It was said that he had not done his duty properly in respect to laying the whole proposition before the States; and, having resigned his office, another Commissary was appointed. According to the accounts we have received in the shape of a despatch from the Danish Government to their Minister in London, and communicated to us, the proposition of the Danish Government is to the effect that the quota of the expenses of the monarchy belonging to Holstein are to be laid before the States of Duchy, and that they will have an opportunity of discussing and deciding whether each item ought to be granted, reduced, or rejected. Now, that proposition of itself seems to fulfil the demand of the Germanic Confederation. There is also, however, a fourth proposition, to the effect that in an unforeseen case, or if the decision of the 519 States should be at variance with the existing laws of the kingdom, then their decisions shall be submitted to the Royal sanction. This phrase appears to us somewhat obscure, and the matter as placed before the States of Holstein was, perhaps, not so clear and explicit as was desirable. Still, I think, if it stood as it was communicated to us, that there was on the part of the King of Denmark and his advisers a bonâ fide intention to ask the opinion of the States of Holstein in regard to the budget. We received yesterday or to-day information from our Consul at Hamburg that the question had been considered by the States of Holstein; that they did not believe the budget had been fairly submitted to them, and that they therefore refused to entertain it. They based their refusal on this among other reasons—that the King had not given a previous sanction to the resolutions of the Diet in regard to the items. It was replied very fairly by the Danish Minister in London, that you cannot expect the King's sanction to be given without first seeing that there is no condition attached to the votes which would be derogatory to the Royal prerogative. But, both in London and at Copenhagen, we have been assured that if the items are thought to be excessive, and reductions in them are desired by the States of Holstein, there would be no difficulty in considering those reductions favourably. I own it appears to me very unfortunate that such has been the asperity of feeling on both sides, that a sort of hesitancy and difficulty should have been shown by the Danish Government in proposing the budget fairly and simply to the Diet of Holstein; while, on the other hand, there has been a kind of predetermination on the part of the States of the Duchy not to come to an agreement, but rather to excite differences that might prevent a reconciliation. Then there is another point, that no law affecting Holstein should have any force in Holstein unless the Estates shall have consented to it. As to that question no mention has been made of it by Holstein, and I am informed by the Danish Minister that there will be no objection to come to an agreement as to all such laws. Therefore, as to the question itself, the friends of both parties might propose terms such as both Governments have already considered—the one demanding, and the other agreeing to—which would prevent any ground for further differences between Germany and Den- 520 mark. As far as we are acquainted with the opinions of the Governments of France and Russia, and of Sweden, all those Powers seem to take much the same view of these matters as Her Majesty's Government does; and if they should give any further advice it will he in the same sense, and ought, therefore, to have greater weight with both parties than the single opinion of one Power acting alone. We shall endeavour by our communications to bring about such an agreement. That is the present state of the question; and I am about to lay the Correspondence upon the table of the House, but it will not include all the despatches, because negotiations are still going on, pending which it is not desirable to give the papers relating to them. I must say in corroboration of what the hon. Gentleman opposite has said, that I do think there is considerable danger in delaying to bring this question to an amicable settlement. There are two especial points. It must be remembered that there is a great Danish spirit as well as a very enthusiastic German spirit upon the question. The appearance of German troops in Holstein might bring about what I should consider a precipitate resolution on the part of Denmark, who might regard it as an act of hostility, and one which would justify their Government in blockading the German ports. There is another point involving much danger. The boundaries between Schleswig and Holstein are not agreed upon between the Governments of Germany on the one hand and that of Denmark on the other. As to the harbours of Kiel and Frederickshorst—two important points—there is a difference of boundary, and if German and Danish troops came into too close proximity with each other a conflict might arise which would be very deplorable. But there is still another and the most dangerous question of all, and that is as to Schleswig. My hon. Friend the Member for Buckingham (Sir Harry Verney) seems to suppose that there is no party in Germany that wishes for Schleswig to be added to Germany. But although the Governments of Prussia and of all the States of the Confederation have disclaimed any such desire, it is well known that there is a popular feeling in Germany in favour of such an annexation, and which would not be satisfied by Holstein receiving all that she demands, unless the union between Holstein and Schleswig was restored. Those who belong to the popular societies 521 in Germany make no scruple of saying that Schleswig ought to be united not merely with Holstein, but also with Germany. Now Schleswig is a Danish duchy, although there had existed before 1851 relations of a very complicated nature between that duchy and Holstein. Thus Holstein was connected with Denmark and also with Germany, and Schleswig was connected with Holstein, but not with Germany. It must be obvious that such relations must lead to all sorts of complications; and these were rendered still more difficult by the existence of a German as well as a Danish population in that duchy. It appeared to us that instead of restoring that complicated arrangement, the real justice of the case would consist in this, that the King of Denmark should do fully and fairly what he had promised to do—namely, to treat alike both nationalities, German and Danish, in Schleswig, in respect to confirmations and schools and divine services in churches, and that in such matters there should be complete equality between both nationalities. That would be not only fair towards the German population, but it seems to me that it is the obvious policy of the King of Denmark that his German subjects should be as well satisfied with his rule as his Danish subjects. All the information that has reached us concerning Schleswig induces me to believe that although there are many complaints of particular grievances—such as that, in order to be examined for confirmation, they must know the Danish language, and that the geography and astronomy are only taught in that tongue—although they complain of these things still, the German inhabitants of Schleswig generally do not wish to be united to Germany, but wish to remain subjects of the King of Denmark. Such being the case, it seems to me to be a question of detail to be settled by the King of Denmark according to the principles of equity and justice rather than a matter which is to be converted into a source of contention between Germany and Denmark. If that contention does take place no one can say to what consequences it may lead, and whether confusion upon the frontiers may not lead to war between the two nations. I have stated the case as impartially as I could. I believe there is great justice in the requirements of both parties, at the same time that there is considerable exaggeration and an absence of conciliatory spirit on both sides; but it would be a very 522 great misfortune for Europe, and would lead to other dangers if in consequence of this quarrel a conflict should arise which would tend to affect the integrity and independence of Denmark. I do not think the question is one to which this country can be indifferent. I have hitherto endeavoured to use the influence of Her Majesty's Government in favour of peace, and I trust the House will think it was the duty of the Government, as friends of Germany and Denmark so to act, and to endeavour to promote the amicable settlement of a dangerous and exciting question; and by so doing to promote the interests of peace throughout Europe.

Some persons feel an interest with the Germans and others with the Danes, but my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Aberdeen (Colonel Sykes) is, I think, the only person in the House who takes an interest in the Taepings. He asks for a number of papers; but if any are granted, I am afraid he must not expect to see them very soon, for the clerks in the Foreign Office and the printing department are now fully occupied in preparing papers which have been ordered by the House. With respect to the papers the hon. Member wishes for, I can tell him that some have reached us and others have not.