§ MR. STIRLING—in rising to call the attention of the House to a portion of the Correspondence relating to the affairs of Rome, and to ask for the production of the despatch, or a portion of the despatch from Mr. Odo Russell reporting the words of the Pope during their conversation on the 26th of July 1862, which led to Earl Russell's despatch of the 25th of October 1862, and the suggestion that the Pope should retire to Malta—said, he wished in particular to draw the attention of the House to Earl Russell's despatch dated the 25th October, which he believed many Members of the House would agree was one of the ablest State Papers on the subject of contemporary politics which had proceeded from the Foreign Office. But after the first feeling of admiration was over, there arose another feeling of wonder why that despatch had ever been written; and this feeling was rather strengthened when it was seen that the despatch which followed contained 1417 a reason why the first should not have been published at all. This despatch was written six days later than despatch No. 1, and was addressed to Lord Cowley, for the purpose of being read to the French Minister for Foreign Affairs in order to elicit from him a frank interchange of opinion on the dangers and inconveniences of the prolonged occupation of Rome. Now, he (Mr. Stirling) thought it might fairly be questioned whether it was altogether frank to invite a discussion of this nature with the French Minister, and yet to conceal the fact that the writer of the despatch, the English Foreign Secretary, had proposed to the Pope that he should withdraw himself from his French protectors, and should elope with the English Admiral to Malta. But proceeding through the succeeding despatches, it was not until we came to No. 7 in the published Correspondence that we found any explanation of the mystery. Then we discovered that the French Government, in the yellow-covered collection of despatches which it presented to the public annually, had inserted what Earl Russell regarded as a very inaccurate statement of what took place between Mr. Russell and the Pope so long ago as the 26th of July. Lord Russell characterized that statement as a compilation of the hearsay of Rome; and on the 29th of January, he addressed a despatch to Earl Cowley for the purpose of setting the matter right, and referred to the original despatch of Mr. Odo Russell, which was not compiled from hearsay, but was written on the very day when the interview took place, and while the facts, therefore, were fresh in the recollection of the writer. One might suppose that a paper of this kind, coming from the British Foreign Minister, would have met with a courteous response, and that some apology would have been made for the rash romance put forth in the French "yellow-book." But this was far from being the case. Lord Cowley was directed to read this despatch to the French Foreign Minister, but no intimation was afforded as to the answer made by M. Drouyn de Lhuys, or the manner in which he received the despatch. But it was remarkable that since the publication of the "yellow-book" and of these Parliamentary papers the French press had never ceased to attack the policy and impugn the statement of Earl Russell in regard to the affairs of Rome, unless at such times as it was engaged in attacking and impugning his policy with regard to Poland. Now, 1418 the comments of newspapers where the press was free, however valuable in themselves, would not be fit subjects for discussion in this House; but we knew that as regarded the articles in the French press, their intrinsic merits were by no means a fair criterion of their importance. Since the establishment of military despotism in France, the French press had been merely a machine with a hundred mouths through which the Sovereign addressed the world. The present Minister of the Interior in France entered office with a flourish of trumpets about extended freedom of thought, but he had since been principally occupied in repressing and punishing any movement in that direction. That Minister sat in his office with a kind of telegraph by his side, by means of which he was enabled to drop an extinguisher on any newspaper in France. He was in fact the sub-editor of the French press, responsible to no one but the Emperor, who was himself in reality the editor-in-chief. The French press, so conducted, had been especially eloquent, sarcastic, and bitter on the subject of what it called "the incident Odo Russell." It denied that Lord Russell's statement was correct, it asserted that the romance of the "yellow-book" was substantially true, and it had hinted at the existence of an official document, emanating from Cardinal Antonelli, denying the accuracy of the one and confirming the statement made in the other. The question naturally arose, wore these imputations made from some pious motive, but upon confessedly insufficient grounds, or were they made under a misapprehension of the facts, and in the conviction that the statements they put forward were true? It appeared to him (Mr. Stirling), in the original despatch of Mr. Odo Russell there must be ample means of setting the matter completely at rest. He did not ask his hon. Friend the Under Secretary of State (Mr. Layard) to produce the whole of this despatch, because at the interview between the Pope and Mr. Russell on the 26th of July much might have passed which it would be improper to make public. The position of the Pope, between his French protectors on the one hand and his duties to the Church and his people on the other, must be painful indeed to a man universally allowed to be of so excellent a character. Possibly the Pope dropped to Mr. Russell some hints concerning these varied perplexities. On these points the Under Secretary of State 1419 might withhold information; but would he not give the House the precise words reported by Mr. Odo Russell which led to the suggestion that the Pope should go to Malta? The subject-matter of Mr. Russell's despatch to his chief, though perhaps important, was evidently not urgent, for the Foreign Minister took twelve or thirteen weeks to answer it, and must therefore have written with great deliberation, and under the impression that there was no great urgency as regarded time in the proposal that was made. Under these circumstances, he would ask his hon. Friend, whether there was any objection to lay upon the table a Copy of the Despatch of Mr. Odo Russell, or of a part of it, reporting those words of the Pope during their conversation on the 26th of July, 1862, which led to Earl Russell's Despatch of the 25th of October, and the suggestion that the Pope should retire to Malta?