§ The Earl of Aberdeenhad yesterday stated that he was desirous of taking the first opportunity, after seeing the treaty which had been laid upon the table on Thursday last, of offering some observations to their Lordships upon the subject, but the absence of the noble Lord yesterday prevented him from doing so. It was not, however, his intention then, nor was it his intention now, to enter into the details of the treaty. Other opportunities more convenient than the present would occur for the purpose; and he had already, upon one or two occasions, availed himself of their Lordships' indulgence to offer observations upon the subject. He would only say now, that every day served to strengthen his conviction of the disastrous consequences of this treaty, that he was more and more convinced its natural termination must be war, and that the more it was considered the more clearly its impolicy and injustice appeared. But there was one circumstance of a very remarkable nature connected with this treaty. It was thrown upon the table of the House without a single word of comment or explanation, although the noble Earl must perfectly well know that in the whole history of the diplomacy of this country there was no instance of a treaty only ratified by some of the high contracting parties being laid on the table of that House. The treaty presented a case wholly without precedent. On the first day of the Session, his Majesty said in his gracious Speech that a treaty had been concluded by the five Powers for the settlement of the affairs of the Netherlands, and that as soon as it was ratified he would give directions that it should be laid upon the Table. The ratifications were to arrive on the 15th of January. This date was afterwards extended to the 31st of the same month. This day having passed, the noble Earl, by command of his Majesty, laid the treaty upon the Table, not condescending even so much as to say, that it had not been ratified by all the Powers. It was not usual to print the ratifications with treaties, so that they had upon the Table the treaty signed by the Plenipotentiaries of all the five Powers; and, in the absence of the ratification of three of them, they were left to believe, unless they obtained information from some other source, that it had been ratified by all the five. The act professed to be what it was not, the act of five Powers, instead of the act of only 12 two of those Powers. He thought that in the circumstances of the case the House might reasonably have expected explanations from the noble Earl. The circumstances of this treaty opened some very difficult and complicated considerations. It was a matter of doubt whether the treaty was in any degree valid, or, the treaty professing to be a reciprocal and general obligation among five Powers, and being executed only by two of them, how far this circumstance affected the validity of the compact. Into this he did not now inquire, although he professed he was not aware whether the five Powers undertook a joint guarantee, or whether each was singly or separately bound. Perhaps this did not admit of a very easy solution, and therefore he should not ask the question. Neither should he ask whether the noble Earl expected the ratification of the three Powers, or when he expected it. When this ratification arrived, if it should ever arrive, the treaty would not be less unjust, nor less impolitic, than at present, but it would then be what it professed to be, the treaty of five Powers, and not the treaty only of England and France. If, on the other hand, it should not arrive, but be finally withheld, then he must conclude that the Ministers of the three Powers had exceeded their instructions. In the present aspect of the affair, it was at least obvious that some explanation was required.
§ Earl Greyexpressed his regret if his absence yesterday had been productive of inconvenience to any of their Lordships. But it was unavoidable, as he had been engaged with his Majesty in Council until eight o'clock. The noble Earl said, that, in the peculiar circumstances of this treaty, some explanation was required from him. It was not usual, he believed, to accompany the presentation of such treaties with any explanation; nor did the peculiar circumstances of the present case appear to him to create any necessity for explanation, since it was perfectly notorious to everybody who ever read a newspaper that the treaty was not ratified by the five Powers. If an express declaration from him of that fact was required, he now said, that this treaty had been ratified by France, Great Britain, and Belgium. Now, one word as to the practice that such treaties were not presented to Parliament until they had been ratified by all the parties. The habits of his life had not been such 13 as to rend or hi in familiar with such subjects. He readily admitted that he had no information or experience which, upon a subject like the present, could entitle him to enter into competition with the noble Lord. But yet, eminent as were the attainments of the noble Earl in this department of knowledge, he did not always prove to be infallible. As an instance, he might mention that, the other night, the noble Earl pronounced the signature of a treaty only in the French language to be a thing wholly unprecedented, but he had scarcely got home before a list was laid before him of a considerable number of treaties which had been signed precisely in the same way. Nor was the noble Earl quite correct in the present instance, for Spain was included among the powers mentioned as parties in the Treaty of Vienna; and that treaty was laid before Parliament, although Spain had not executed it, and did not, in fact, execute it for two years afterwards. They had been much blamed on account of the publicity which had been given to the recent negotiations, and had been told that every step in the proceedings had regularly appeared in the foreign papers. He had felt all the inconvenience of this, and he hoped the ancient and more wholesome practice would soon be revived, and that negotiations would not henceforth be promulgated until they were mature. However, these publications having already taken place, the treaty having also been ratified by France and England, and as much discussion had already arisen upon the subject, in which repeated discussions the noble Earl had been a principal party, he had thought it advisable to lay the treaty before the House. It was a complete transaction as between France and England, and as a transaction between these powers only had it been produced. With respect to the probability of the ratification by the other Powers, the noble Earl did not require any answer. He had, however, no objection to say that he entertained the most sanguine expectations that all the Powers would ratify the treaty at a very early period. The noble Earl was more confident than ever that this treaty would lead to the most disastrous consequences. He could only say, that he was as confident as the noble Lord could be in his opinion, and as ready to defend the grounds of his confidence, that by means of this treaty they had established the peace of Europe, on what, he trusted, 14 would prove a secure and lasting foundation.
§ The Earl of Aberdeensaid, that the present case differed from that of Spain, to which the noble Earl referred as a precedent, inasmuch as that the signatures of the Plenipotentiaries of all the Powers were here affixed to the treaty. The case to which the noble Lord referred bore no resemblance to the present, because there appeared in that case no signature of the Spanish minister. There was no question of recognition in that instance, as the Spanish minister had never signed the treaty. The present transaction, which was incomplete, appeared on the face of it to be complete. The case of the Treaty of Vienna bore no resemblance to it, because there the want of the signature of the minister of Spain was a transaction clear and intelligible on the face of the document. He found no fault with the presentation of the treaty; he only said, the circumstances required explanation. With respect to the future consequences of it, the proper time to judge would be hereafter but at present he would deliver it as his opinion, that England and France had agreed to a treaty which carried war in its front