§ MR. DARBY GRIFFITH,in moving for copies of the despatches of Mr. Dunlop from Pesth, when acting lately as diplomatic agent of the Government in that locality, said he was anxious to ascertain the policy of the Government with regard to Hungary and Austria. There were several indications of what it was when they were qualifying for the benches which they now adorned when they proclaimed a policy of alliance with France and distrust of Austria, and he was desirous of knowing whether they remained of the same opinion now as then. He thought the Secretary for Foreign Affairs had shown a leaning towards Austria in despatches which he had written. However, on a subsequent occasion, in answering him (Mr. Griffith) the noble Lord said the Government would be perfectly impartial, and that he hoped Hungary would attain whatever liberties were compatible with her adhesion to the Austrian Empire. During the time over which these despatches and questions extended, a gentleman had been sent from our Embassy at Vienna to Pesth, and he was allowed to remain there until the last answer to which he had alluded was given by the noble Lord. Now, the House really had no information of a trustworthy nature as to the proceedings of the Government in the matter, and such information, he believed, could only be obtained from the despatches written from Pesth. He wished to know whether the Government leaned 1792 to liberty as against authority, or to authority as against liberty. This information the despatches would help them to obtain. There was no reason in the world why these despatches should not be published—unless, indeed, Government should think that Mr. Dunlop expressed more liberal views towards the Hungarians than they were prepared to adopt. For himself, he must say he thought the Hungarians deserved their best wishes.
Motion made, and Question proposed—
That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, that She will be graciously pleased to give directions that there be laid before this House, Copy of the Despatches of Mr. Dunlop from Pesth, when acting lately as Diplomatic Agent of the Government in that locality.
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONSir, I cannot consent to the Motion of the hon. Gentleman. Mr. Dunlop was attached to the Embassy at Vienna, and was stationed a certain time at Pesth in order to give the Government confidential reports as to the state of parties, as to the turn of events, as to the character and views of individuals, and a variety of matters very interesting and useful for the Government to know, but which were of that character that it would be quite wrong to make them public, inasmuch as that would entirely prevent any other person employed on such a mission from giving information that would be really useful. It is obvious that a person in a position like that of Mr. Dunlop writes without reserve a confidential despatch to his employers; he enters into many details respecting men and things which it is very useful for the Government to know, but which no man would write if he expected his despatches to be made public, and the parties with regard to whom he expressed opinions would know what those opinions were. Therefore, I am sorry I cannot agree to the production of these papers. With regard to the general observations made by the hon. Gentleman, I have to state that we are quite sensible, as he is, of the great importance of the events now passing between Austria and Hungary. We attach due importance to the maintenance of the Austrian Empire as a great Power in the centre of Europe, holding, I may say, a sort of balance between opposite and conflicting interests; and we should consider it a great misfortune to Europe if that empire were to be dissolved by any internal convulsion which could possibly be prevented. It has not, on the other hand, been deemed by the Govern- 1793 ment right or fitting, or their duty, to take any part in the dissensions now unhappily prevailing between the Austrian Government and the people of Hungary. These are matters in which really we see it would do no good to interfere. We do not feel called on even to express any opinion as to which party is in the right and which in the wrong. We confine ourselves to the expression of a fervent hope that these differences will be settled amicably, and in such a manner as shall leave Austria a great, powerful, and prosperous State in the centre of Europe. When the hon. Gentleman says he wishes to know whether we take part with liberty against authority or with authority against liberty, my answer is that we leave liberty and authority to settle their own disputes in Hungary, and that we do not presume to judge which party is in the right and which in the wrong. Whatever opinion we may entertain on the matter, we do not feel it the duty of the Government to express that opinion; nor do we think there would be any utility in expressing it or endeavouring to give it force. I, therefore, have only to say that we hold with regard to the unfortunate dissensions in Hungary the same course we hold in regard to the dissensions on the other side of the Atlantic—namely, a position of entire neutrality, and I should hope that the hon. Member will not press for the production of despatches which could not be given without detriment to the public service.
MR. WHITEregretted that the noble Lord had not thought proper to produce the despatches. The noble Lord said they had no right to interfere in the disputes between the Emperor of Austria and the people of Hungary. He (Mr. White) should be very glad if that strict principle of non-intervention had been rigidly adhered to in the foreign policy of this country, but he did not understand that flexible sort of policy which could now advance as a reason for not interfering the principle of non-intervention, when it was intended to support a great power at the expense of a struggling people, and yet did not hesitate at other times to interfere when the assertion of popular rights was supposed to suit the convenience of British interests in other parts of the world. If ever there was a cause in which it was proper to interfere it was that of Hungary, because we had treaty rights with Hungary. There was frequent reference to the Treaty of Vienna of 1815, 1794 Degenerate statesmen of Whig principles too often intruded upon their notice that treaty, which had been denounced by Sir James Mackintosh and other distinguished Whig writers in years past. But it was hardly the time to talk of treaties when a people of 15,000,000, making use of the right which was distinctly laid down in their Magna Charta, of taking up arms against their Sovereign, presented the most magnificent of spectacles—that of a people united as one man — all classes combined in upholding what they believed to be their dearest rights and privileges, and resisting usurpation on the part of Austria, The idea of keeping up Austria as a first-rate Power arose from jealousy of France; but if the keeping down of a great people were thought necessary for that object, nothing could be a greater mistake or delusion. The Emperor of the French had succeeded in recognizing that the time had come when the principle of nationalities would dominate, and hence he had been enabled to maintain a constant influence, to the detriment, it might be, of the peace of Europe, but which influence the present Government were aiding and abetting by showing unmistakeably their sympathy for the Austrian cause. He need not allude to the seizure of the arms at Galatz, or to the general tenor of our policy, which had been decidedly hostile to the Hungarian nation, and a most disagreeable contrast to that sympathy which we were wont to lavish upon some other nations. He could not sit down without doing homage to the great Hungarian leader, M. Deak, who, by his strict deference to a constitutional course, had earned for himself and his people the affection and respect of every person who had taken the trouble to investigate the subject.
§ MR. DARBY GRIFFITHsaid, he hoped they might confidently rely upon the observance of the principle of strict neutrality which had been laid down by the noble Lord at the head of the Government, and on that ground would not press for the production of the papers referred to in his Motion.
§ Motion, by leave, withdrawn.