§ MR. DISRAELISir, as I see the noble Lord at the head of the Government in his place, I wish to ask a question respecting the invasion of Jutland. I should like to know whether the noble Lord has any authentic information on the subject which he can communicate to the House. The particular reason for this inquiry is, that two statements have been made by the two leading Members of the Government in the two Houses of Parliament, and these statements are apparently quite contrary in their sense. We understood the noble Lord, when the matter was brought before the House, to say that he considered the invasion of Jutland on the part of the 1546 German Powers an aggravation of the outrage and injustice already committed. But when the same question was addressed to the noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs in the other House, he seemed to state that he had received formal information from the Prussian Ambassador of the intended invasion of Jutland, that the Prussian Ambassador stated that the intended invasion was in consequence of the order of the Danish Government to capture German ships, and that that order had rendered it inevitable that the war which theretofore had been local should become more general. It seemed by the accounts which had been given, that the Secretary of State accepted that interpretation of the conduct of the German Powers, and communicated it without any protest to the Danish Government. Under these circumstances, seeing that the invasion of Jutland appears still to be pursued, and remembering the original statement of the noble Lord upon the subject, made a few nights ago, I should be glad to know, Whether the noble Lord can communicate any authentic information upon the question, and also what the House may consider the real view which Her Majesty's Government take of the conduct of the invading Powers?
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONSir, the accounts we have had of the invasion of Jutland have been exceedingly contradictory, and therefore I am somewhat at a loss to give a definite answer to the question of the right hon. Gentleman. As I have already stated, we were told that the frontier of Jutland had been passed contrary to orders, and that a reprimand had been sent, but it was since represented that, nevertheless, sanction had been given to that violation. I believe that, as the matter now stands, the Germans wish to gain possession of the town and fortress of Fredericia, which commands the narrow channel between the mainland of Jutland and the Island of Funen; and, no doubt, one answer given in reference to the invasion of Jutland was that mentioned by the right hon. Gentleman — that, as the Danes had retaliated on the Germans by taking German merchantmen, that gave a character of mutual hostility which, under the invasion of Schleswig, was only a friendly act, and that retaliation altered the position of the relative parties. Another ground mentioned for the occupation of a portion of Jutland was, that it was necessary for the purpose of protecting 1547 German troops from being harassed by the Danes from the north of Jutland and from the Island of Funen. As the right hon. Gentleman wishes to know the view taken by the Government on the subject, I may state that the view we take is, that the whole matter with reference to the military operations beyond the Eider is an outrage on the independence of Denmark, and that violence is not justified by the state of things, inasmuch as the excuse given for it was, that the Germans wished for a material security for the revocation of the common constitution, and the Danish Government had intimated their intention to comply with the request to that effect before Schleswig and Holstein were entered. Therefore any extension of the occupation of Danish territory is an outrage, whatever excuse for it may be given. It was unnecessary for my noble Friend (Earl Russell) to enter into any controversy with the Prussian Government with respect to degrees of aggravation in reference to this matter. The Prussian Government know our opinion as to the main matter of fact, and it was quite unnecessary to squabble as to the particular steps taken in aggravation of their original violence.