HC Deb 08 July 1869 vol 197 cc1425-9
MR. GLADSTONE

said, that by the indulgence of the House, he wished to be allowed to make an appeal to his right hon. Friend the Member for Tamworth (Sir Henry Bulwer), in whose name a Notice stood on the Paper for to-morrow evening, to the effect that he meant to call attention to the recent negotiations between the Government of this country and that of the United States, and to move an Address for Papers. He must, in the first place, render his acknowledgments on the part of the Government to his right hon. Friend for the considerate manner in which he had hitherto regulated himself upon this subject, he having more than once postponed the Motion in consequence of representations made to him on the part of the Government, founded on what they believed to be the public interest, and a period of the Session had now arrived when his right hon. Friend was in a position to ask either that they should offer no further impediment to his Motion—even in the shape of an appeal to postpone it—or give sufficient reasons why they thought it would not be advisable to bring it forward. He hoped his right hon. Friend would receive favourably the overture he was about to make, and would come to the conclusion that he could best serve the interests involved in this great question by refraining from asking the House to discuss the question at this period. The grounds upon which he made this appeal were these—The House was well aware that it was the general rule of Parliament not to discuss matters of foreign negotiation while they were in progress. Some months ago the important matter in question reached a new stage by the rejection of the treaty originally framed between the two Governments, and at first sight this had the aspect of the cessation of the subject. The Government of the United States brought on that cessation; but Her Majesty's Ministers had no reason to believe that the United States Government regarded the question as having been definitely dropped, because it was known to Her Majesty's Ministers that the Government of the United States thought it highly desirable that some interval should elapse, in reference to the state of opinion and feeling in that country, before any negotiations on the subject should be resumed. He was inclined to think that it was their duty to concur in that sentiment of the Government of the United States, and to favour the prevalence of the view upon which they had acted. He might also observe that that was not only the view of the Executive in that country, but it was the fact that this important and delicate subject had not been made the theme of discussion in either of the branches of the Legislature of the United States. He was well aware that a speech of great length was delivered, expressing the views of the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations, and that speech, delivered in confidence, was afterwards published by license of the Senate, but no general debate had been held in the two Houses of the American Legislature on the question. Under these circumstances he felt —and he thought the House would sympathize with him in the feeling—that it was the duty of Her Majesty's Ministers, as it was their anxious desire, to endeavour that nothing might occur to impede the resumption of the negotiations between the two Governments with favourable prospects at the proper time. It therefore became his duty to renew the application he had on former occasions made to the right hon. Gentleman, and to request that he would refrain from now asking the House to enter on the general discussion of this case, which was still substantially pending between the two Governments.

SIR HENRY BULWER

Sir, I am sure the House will feel that I am most desirous, on personal and public grounds, to comply with any request made by my right hon. Friend, who is the head of the Government and responsible for its acts. But, Sir, I think I may say without presumption that I am, perhaps, not altogether unqualified to form an opinion for myself. I have wished to form an opinion conscientiously, and I have been somewhat strengthened in the opinion I have formed by looking j back to those which I have previously expressed, and finding that they have been found correct Now, Sir, I say this, because upwards of two years ago I had a conversation, which I think I may repeat, as it relates to a public matter, with my right hon. Friend the Member for Buckinghamshire (Mr. Disraeli), who is not now in his place, on these very affairs of America; and everything I said at that time has proved true. When my noble Friend (the Earl of Clarendon) accepted the appointment of Minister of Foreign Affairs, I took the liberty of requesting an interview with him, and from my experience in the affairs of the United. States, and of the Constitution of the United States, I impressed upon him my opinion that the negotiations which we were then carrying on with Mr. Johnson in this country would not be brought to a successful close. Now, Sir, I say, with the same confidence with which I expressed that opinion to my noble Friend at that time, that I am convinced that if we leave the question as it now stands between us and the United States of America, we shall have cause to repent our silence and inaction. I am for leaving well alone, but I am not for leaving ill alone.

LORD JOHN MANNERS

I rise to Order. The right hon. Gentleman appears to be discussing the subject, though there is no question before the House.

MR. SPEAKER

I think the House will allow to the right hon. Gentleman a reasonable latitude; but I think also that I must lay emphasis on the word "reasonable."

SIR HENRY BULWER

As I desire, if necessary, to put myself in conformity with the forms of the House, I might say that I would conclude with a Motion; but, after having this Notice frequently before the House, and having stated that I would bring it under discussion, I think, in justice to myself and my feelings, and in justice to my duty to my country, I should be allowed to state why, if I do give way to the wish of the Prime Minister, it will be with extreme reluctance.

MR. SPEAKER

I may remind the right hon. Gentleman that it would be contrary to the rules of the House that he should enter now upon the discussion of a question on which he proposes a discussion on a future day. He is limited to an answer to the question which has been put to him, with a reasonable latitude for explanation.

SIR HENRY BULWER

I perfectly understand that, and I have not the least intention of speaking on the general matter. All I wish to address myself to is the suggestion of my right hon. Friend. Am I in Order? ["Hear, hear! "] Well, then, I give as my reason for thinking that this matter ought to be discussed, that without discussion it is in a very unsatisfactory condition. I do not attach much importance to the speech of Mr. Sumner, to which my right hon. Friend has alluded, or to the rejection of the Treaty by the United States; but what I do attach great importance to is, that, as the question now stands before the public, one country thinks it has suffered a great wrong for which no redress has been offered, whilst the other considers that a most exaggerated demand has not been abandoned, but merely suspended, to be brought forward at any time, when it would be as dishonourable as now for us to grant it, and more dangerous for us to refuse it. When I refer, moreover, to past negotiations in which our Government has exhibited almost every variation from the extreme of resistance to the extreme of concession, I cannot but feel that it is time for this House to steady the policy which we should henceforth pursue, and leave no doubt with the American people as to the feelings of the people of Great Britain. At the same time, I admit that it is for the House itself to judge of this matter, and I should be exceedingly sorry to bring before it any subject which it was not well disposed to receive, and which, exercising the same judgment as myself, it thought it was inexpedient at this time to discuss. Of course, I cannot expect any very great party support, because all parties were mixed up in these matters, and perhaps some of the acts which they committed I should not be indisposed to condemn. But I shall bow to the general sense of the Gentlemen around me; and if it is the general desire that I should not now bring this question forward, certainly I shall not do so. But then I must add, that if I am so unfortunate as to prove a true prophet—as I have done on one or two occasions before—I must throw the responsibility on my right hon. Friend, and feel free to add to the observations I have to make on the past conduct of preceding Administrations those which I may feel myself called on to make on the conduct in this instance of the present one.