Lords Sitting of 5 April 1852

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Copyright Amend-merits; Colonial Bishops.
2a Mutiny; Marine Mutiny.
Reported.—Indemnity.

WAR WITH AVA.
The EARL of ELLENBOROUGH: My Lords, I fear that I may now speak without any incorrectness of expression of the war with Ava. As yet there has been, I apprehend, no declaration of war on our part, and it is not customary for Princes in the East to issue any such declarations, and therefore it cannot be expected that such a monarch as the King of Ava will make any change in that point of etiquette. We are, however, at war with Ava. The Government of India appears to have clung to the last to a hope that war would not take place; and yet it certainly made requisitions on the King of Ava which it must have foreseen would ultimately terminate in war, without having undertaken any of those preparations which such a war would of necessity require. In that country, and also in this, it appears that we cling to the hope that we may have as much or as little of war as we please. That, however, is not the case. War is a game that must be played by two parties, and we cannot deal with the King of Ava in this war as if he were altogether a dummy in the play, in order to conduct the game just as we please. If he should decide on assailing our provinces of Tennasserim, or of Arracan, or of Chittagong, or of Assam, he will subject our Government in India to very great embarrassment indeed; for he will have the advantage of acting on what is called an interior line of operations. Allow me, my Lords, to state to you, as shortly as I can, the circumstances connected with our last war in Ava, for it is necessary to see the magnitude of the crisis as it now stands. There was employed, my Lords, in the last war with Ava, a force of not less than 40,000 men—a force as large as that which the French sent to Algiers, and as that which Bonaparte took with him for the conquest of Egypt. There were 30,000 native troops, and nearly 7,000 European bayonets employed to form that force. Of the European troops two regiments, the 13th and the 38th, left Calcutta in April, 1824, 1,800 strong, and in January, 1826, they had not 500 men left fit for service in the field;
648
and I believe that the mortality in the other European regiments was not inferior. I doubt much whether at the end of that war 10,000 men out of the whole 40,000 were fit for duty in the field; the whole army in Arracan was utterly wasted away, and was totally unable to afford any co-operation to the other forces. On the 11th of May the army landed at Rangoon, and it was not able to move from that place till the 11th of the February following. It was detained there for nine months, having been surrounded by a large Burmese army, and not being able to move forward. During that time the European troops lived entirely on salt provisions. No fresh previsions, nor vegetables, were to be had in the country; and when bullocks were sent them, every bullock sent from India cost in freight 10 l.; in fact, during the whole of the war almost the whole of the provisions were necessarily sent from India. Notwithstanding the great amount of the force sent to Ava, I believe that the general, in advancing on the capital of that country, had never more than 5,500 men under arms at his command; and I know that on the 24th of February, 1826, at the conclusion of the war, he had with him only 4,000 men: to that small force had our grand army dwindled away. My Lords, we have undoubtedly now some advantages which we did not then possess; but the climate of the country continues the same, as also the same impracticability of moving in it for nine months of the year. We have also undoubtedly now great advantages in the rapidity of steam navigation; but we must not over-estimate them. We can convey troops and munitions of war to that country more rapidly than we could then, and thus our army will be better circumstanced than before; but I doubt whether we can convey them at less expense. Time is most valuable in military operations; but I doubt whether in point of cheapness the moving of troops by steam, is less expensive than before by means of sailing vessels. Moreover, our large steam vessels draw too much water to move much further up the river than Rangoon. The smaller steam vessels, however, which the East India Company possess, can be used above that point, and these by towing boats will much facilitate the operations of the army. But, at the same time, it must be remembered that the moment the army leaves the banks of the river—and nobody knows this better than the noble Duke (the Duke of Wellington) at the table—it can-

649
not move without animals, and animals under such circumstances must be a great expense to an army; for, though these small steamers may convey men, they cannot convey animals. There is also another advantage which we shall have now, but which we had not formerly. The climate of Arracan, then so fatal to the troops under General Morrison, is supposed to be now much improved, in consequence of the land having been cleared. But there is always this to be recollected—that there is a great difference in the health of troops well covered, as they now are, and in that of troops exposed as our troops would he in the open field for military operations. I feel confident, however, that the health of the troops would not be liable to such loss as it was in the late war. But there are other circumstances very disadvantageous to us at present, as compared with the former occasion. Rangoon was then attacked by surprise; there was not the smallest expectation that our forces would be directed on that quarter, and 17,000 Burmese troops were then in Arracan. Rangoon was attacked by 10,000 men, and was captured without loss. We then proceeded to fortify our position, and to occupy the great Pagoda, which at once protected and was the key to it. What is the case now? By our operations, untoward as they are, we have indicated the point of our attack. We have had a collision with the Burmese on that point, and, without finding any fault with the officers in command, we have twice most unfortunately retired, after a collision, from the conflict. Now the mere circumstance of our retiring under such circumstances must give encouragement to the Burmese. The town of Rangoon, which we occupied before, is now destroyed, and another town, four miles up the river, is built beyond the reach of our steamers; and the whole of that position, and especially the Pagoda to which I have before alluded, with terraces of brick, each rising 15 feet above the other, situated on a height 200 feet above the level of the river, and commanding all the ground in the neighbourhood—that position is now fortified and stockaded in every direction, and defended by 100 guns. It is impossible, therefore, not to expect that great loss will be incurred in taking it; and it is to be attacked, not by 10,000 men, as formerly, but by a force not much above 5,000. Moreover, the circumstances are particu-
650
larly unfortunate under which we are called on to carry our army into that country. The Punjab is not yet so settled as to make it safe for us to withdraw any considerable force from it; and, without drawing troops from the Punjab, we have not three regiments on the side of Bengal available to be sent there with safety. I regret, my Lords, to find—what no doubt, under the circumstances, was unavoidable—that one European regiment has been sent from Fort William—that there is only one regiment to supply its place, and that this has been sent from Dinapore, which is left without European troops at the very moment when we may be about to engage in another war: so that in the front of the Nepaulese we are withdrawing the only regiment which we have to defend Calcutta. There is also another circumstance to be considered, which I take to be one of a very serious nature. In the last war all the operations in Ava were carried on by the Madras army; and I attribute the sending of so large a portion of that army to Ava, mainly to the great personal influence and the great personal ability of Sir Thomas Monro. Without his influence, I think that the Government would not have been able to withdraw from that Presidency 23,000 men, or 28,000 men, including Europeans. I remember, with regret, certain passages in the recent history of the Madras army which make me doubt whether we can safely calculate on being able to despatch a large force from that Presidency on service beyond the sea. Your Lordships may not, perhaps, be aware that the Bengal soldier is accustomed to leave his wife and family in his native village when called into active service; but the soldiers of the Madras army take their wives and children with them into the camp; so that, when they go beyond the sea, all their families form a village, which is left without means of support. When I arrived, some years ago, at Madras, I found two regiments there, I will not say in a state of mutiny, but so disinclined to proceed to China as they had been ordered to do, that it became a matter of deep anxiety and apprehension to the Government; and the cause of this disinclination—so far as I can recollect the immediate cause of it—was the terrible state of misery and distress in which the wives and children of the men of the regiments which had already sailed for China were left. I am not aware, my Lords, of any alteration

651
in the regulations of the service which can relieve the families of the Madras soldier from the distress which they suffer when their husbands and fathers proceed beyond the sea. Notwithstanding all this, I will assume, for I doubt it not, that we have entire success in the war. What will be the consequence of that success? I think that the King will fight to the last, and the result will be the entire dissolution of the Burmese empire; and then it will be for our Government in India to consider what it will do under such circumstances. I know, my Lords, that the Governor General will be placed in circumstances under which a great pressure will be brought to bear on him as to the policy which he ought to adopt. First, there are certain enterprising British merchants, who, having exhausted all the forests on one bank of the river and its tributaries, are very desirous of possessing the teak forests on the other side, for the purpose of carrying on and extending their trade by Rangoon; and these persons are in concert and connexion with the press at Calcutta, the movements of which I have always viewed with anxiety and distrust. They say that in consequence of our occupying the whole Burmese empire an overland intercourse with China may be established, and that great advantage would accrue to our trade from its extension along that Burmese frontier. Thus the desire to push forward trade, and to make the whole affair a money speculation, is the feeling which actuates the press of Calcutta. I hope that the Governor General of India will treat that press with the disregard which it deserves. But, my Lords, there is also another serious pressure which my right hon. Friend ought to disregard, and which it will be more difficult I am afraid for him to resist; that is, the pressure of a large part of the civil and of the whole military service. They have before their eyes the occupation of Affghanistan, which produced a complete revolution in the army of Bengal. That will always be the case where a great territory is to be occupied even for a time, and still more where a now territory is to be annexed to and brought under our dominion. Young officers are then placed in command of districts—others are placed in political employments, where they actually direct the operations of troops under the command of their superiors. Great rewards and distinctions are obtained—and, no doubt, great talents exhibited; and the
652
consequence is that every man, with a natural ambition, looks forward to the distinction and promotion he may attain; and it is most natural, with these feelings, that the idea of a new war, likely to terminate in new conquests, is dear to that army—an army full of enterprise, and of those feelings which naturally excite military men to great actions. There is, however, nothing I should view with greater apprehension than the annexation to our empire of a large portion—ay, or even of any portion—of the Burmese territory. It is essentially a false position. My Lords, you must have seen before now that, with the greatest ability on the part of our generals, with the greatest courage on the part of our soldiers, and with the most perfect equipment on the part of our army, it is very difficult to retain, even for a short period, an eminently false position. A false position is as dangerous to an empire as it is to an army, and always ultimately vindicates its power over those who sin against the first principles of true policy. I feel, my Lords, perfectly satisfied that the annexation of Ava, drawing in that direction a large portion of the vital resources of the British empire in India, will weaken us in points where the exertion of all our force is required, and will materially impair both its civil and military strength. It is because I entertain these apprehensions of the consequences of the military occupation of Ava, and of the possibly fatal effects of even the most complete success, that I request you, my Lords, to call on Her Majesty's Ministers to produce such papers on this subject as can be produced without detriment to the public service, for the purpose of making us acquainted with the causes of this war. I have not heard that any trustworthy officer on the part of the Government has been sent to Rangoon to ascertain the facts out of which it has arisen. They rest entirely, I believe, on the authority of persons who went with their complaints to Colonel Bogle, at Moulmein. What value is to be attributed to their statements we know not; but this we do know—for it is stated, with a degree of confidence almost inclining us to treat it as correct—that the total amount of the indemnity which we require from the Government of Ava is only 900 l.; and yet to obtain that sum all these public dangers which I have recounted are to be incurred. Now, my Lords, when I look at the character of the trade

653
carried on at Rangoon, I cannot help looking with suspicion at the statements made by any of the persons concerned in it. One of the most considerable traders at Rangoon is a person of the name of Crisp. That man, as soon as he knew of the probability of war, freighted a schooner with arms, and sold it to the Governor at Rangoon. When the Governor refused payment for them, he had the effrontery to go to Commodore Lambert and complain of the injury inflicted upon him. I suppose we shall hereafter see the amount of the compensation claimed by that person (Crisp) in the bill to be paid by the Burmese Government. The Governor of Rangoon offered in consequence 100 l. for this man's head; and I confess that I should not have been deeply grieved if he had got it. This is a description of one of the persons for whom this great war is to be undertaken; I confess I look upon the matter with great anxiety. If our reputation and honour be at stake, no matter however small the injury, war must be submitted to, and we must endure it; but if there is not an overwhelming necessity for our interference at present, for the reasons I have stated, I think we ought not to interfere. There is also another peculiar objection to it at the present time. The services of the Madras army, we heard several months ago, were likely to be engaged in a different affair with the Nizam. We heard that the Indian Government, as a creditor of the Nizam, had required him to pay a certain sum of money, and that if be did not pay it by a certain day, his territory was to be occupied and his troops put down. The Governor General must consequently have looked forward to a collision with the Nizam as a probable occurrence; and I think, therefore, that he would not have made such a demand without having a certainty that he had the Madras army in hand; for the town of Hyderabad is in the hands of the Arabs, and so are half the forts in the Nizam's dominions. They will defend them with bravery, and no prudent man would engage in operations in that country without having the whole of the Madras army in hand for that purpose; and, unless we postpone the demand for that payment, the Madras army will be called upon to carry into effect two distinct and distant operations at the same time. I hope, my Lords, that my noble Friend opposite will not think it inconsistent with his duty to lay the papers to which I have referred on the table, in order that we may
654
know on what grounds the Government of India is proceeding in this matter.
Motion—
"That there be laid before this House, Copies or Extracts of Communications which may have passed with reference to Hostilities in Ava."
The EARL of DERBY: My Lords, with regard to the military grounds on which my noble Friend has based his observations, I have only to say that he speaks with a knowledge which gives him great advantage on any point which he thinks necessary to discuss. But whatever may be the difficulties which attend the operations now going on in Ava—and I am afraid I must agree with my noble Friend in his description of them as a war—whatever the difficulties and obstacles with which we may have to contend, I am quite sure that my noble Friend would be the last man to desire to shrink from a war, if war were necessary, for the due protection of our fellow-subjects. On the other hand, whatever may be the feeling of the public press in Calcutta, or of those "enterprising British merchants" whom my noble Friend has described, endeavouring to promote trade, or of the Army anxious to win fresh laurels in the field—however they may press upon my noble Friend the Governor General of India any extension or accession of territory—I am quite sure, whatever motives they may have to acquire territory, that there is no man more averse to such acquisition of territory than the Governor General; and I agree with my noble Friend that great inconvenience and disaster would be likely to result from a large accession of territory in the district alluded to. I hope when the papers are produced for which my noble Friend moves, and which, to a certain extent, there will be no difficulty in producing, that he will be satisfied that there has been no desire to incur all the responsibility and hazard of war, but that, on the contrary, the Indian Government has been anxious to avoid recourse to hostilities; and that, upon the other hand, the measures of my noble Friend the Governor General have been so prompt and ready as to lead to the reasonable conclusion that there will be no protracted hostilities with the Burmese empire; and that these hostilities will end in the entire success of our troops; though not, as my noble Friend seems to think, with the dissolution of the empire of our adversary. My noble Friend has thrown great doubts on how far we should be jus-

655
tified in acting on the representations of the merchants of Rangoon without previous inquiry. I am not at present in a condition to enter into the merits of those claims; but their justice has been admitted by the King of Ava himself; for, on representations being made to him with regard to those claims by a a former Governor of Rangoon, he not only acquiesced in them, but marked his displeasure at the conduct of the late Governor by removing him from his government, and substituting another in his place. Whatever may be the policy of the King of Ava now, that, surely, is a primâ facie justification that the claims for indemnity to the amount of 9,000 rupees were not put forth without just cause. On the 6th of January last, Commodore Lambert, in execution of instructions he had received, proceeded up the river to confer with the new Governor of Rangoon. The first communications with him were not of an unfriendly character. He received on board his vessel a deputation of persons—persons certainly not of very high rank, but he acted wisely in waiving the etiquette on which he might have stood—and received from those persons a communication not by any means unfriendly. He then sent Commander Fishbourne to have an audience of the new Governor—it was necessary for him as Commodore to remain on board the frigate—and that officer was instructed firmly to demand compliance with the terms we had before demanded. In performing this duty, Commander Fishbourne, and the officer who accompanied him, from whatever cause, were subjected to a series of indignities and insults which it was impossible for him as a British officer, acting under the orders of his Sovereign and in the public service, to permit. Whether these indignities arose from a mistaken idea of dignity on the part of the Governor of Rangoon, I will not undertake to say; for Commander Fishbourne (he being the second officer in command) having refused to communicate with any one but the Governor himself, they were kept waiting outside the village, and told that the Governor was asleep, and could not be disturbed. They were then subjected to a series of insults and indignities that could not be taken in any other sense than as premeditated, and which the meanest person could not have viewed otherwise than as insults. Every communication was addressed to Commander Fishbourne, as from a superior to an inferior, couched in
656
language implying superiority on the part of the Burmese; and no nation is more touchy and sensitive about dignity and forms than the Burmese. On receiving information of the insults offered to Commander Fishbourne, Commodore Lambert said it was impossible that he could continue communications with such a Government, and actually withdrew; but unfortunately, as I think, by way of retaliation for the insults offered to his officer, taking on himself, without previous instructions, to seize a vessel of the King of Ava, which he carried with him. In passing down the river with this vessel, his ship was fired on from a stockade; and I think the noble Earl will admit that, hostilities having been thus commenced by the Burmese, it was the duty of Commodore Lambert not to submit to such an insult, but to return the fire, which he did so effectually as to silence the stockade in a few minutes. In passing, I must say that my noble Friend adverted to the fact of two expeditions having been sent to the factory, in both of which hostilities occurred, as if he thought that this expedition was sent for hostile purposes, and that then upon the commencement of hostilities our ships had retired; but so far from this expedition having been entered on with hostile objects, in a subsequent letter the Governor of Rangoon himself pressed this point on our Government, that Commodore Lambert had no instructions to act hostilely, that he had come as a messenger of peace, and not of war, and that he had withdrawn without attempting to execute his mission. The withdrawal of that officer could not, then, have given that encouragement to the Burmese which had been represented. Commodore Lambert reported his proceedings to the Governor General of India; and, of course, the Governor General could not but be sensible that this unfortunate transaction must lead to critical events, if not to war. Not a moment was lost in taking those precautions which I am sure my noble Friend will think ought to have been taken, namely, to protect Moulmein and Arracan, and making other preparations to support our forces if hostilities should become necessary. But, although these preparations went on, yet, the fact is, that, immediately subsequent to the withdrawal of Commodore Lambert, there came a letter from the Governor of Rangoon, complaining of the course that had been pursued by that officer, and expressing his willingness to comply with the

657
original requisition. On receiving this answer, the Governor General, not suspending the preparations he was making for military proceedings, but having collected two Queen's regiments, five Native regiments, and a considerable force of European artillery, sent round to Bombay for the steam force—and this will show the efficiency of the Indian navy—that force was despatched in five days after the requisition. The Governor General, not suspending his preparations, and anxious to prevent the renewal of hostilities, but not to supersede Commodore Lambert, charged Commodore Lambert to proceed with a letter to the Governor of Rangoon, in which he stated that, on a compliance with the original demand, and an expression of regret on the part of the Burmese Government for what had taken place, the ship would be immediately restored, the blockade that had been instituted would be raised, and terms of friendship again entered into between the Governor General and the Governor of Rangoon. I think my noble Friend will admit that the Governor General of India could hardly have taken a more conciliatory course, or one more likely to avoid war. Commodore Lambert found, on arriving, that the ships were too far down the river to enable the message to be sent by the boats, and consequently the Fox was towed up by steamers, for the purpose of taking the letter; and, to prove the pacific character of the mission, the guns of the Fox were not loaded, and the tompions were actually upon the guns. They were fired on by the Burmese stockade. In three minutes the fire was returned, the stockade was silenced, and Commodore Lambert proceeded up the river and delivered the message. The answer evaded all compliance with our terms; it evaded giving satisfaction for the original claims, or for the further demands afterwards advanced by the Indian Government; and it proposed that the negotiations should be transferred from Rangoon to Martaban. On the receipt of the despatches containing this intelligence, the Governor General in Council, with the unanimous consent of the Council, thought that no time should be lost in trifling, but that it was necessary at once to strike a blow which it was hoped would supersede the necessity of any hostilities with the Burmese empire. At the same time, the Governor General was determined to proceed with his preparations, and to despatch his forces, so
658
that they might be ready to be sent by the latter end of last month. The Governor General did not even then relax his endeavours to come to terms; for simultaneously with sending that expedition he sent a further communication to the King of Ava—not to the Governor of Rangoon—stating that if the King of Ava would express his regret for what had occurred, and if the original conditions were complied with, and the expenses incurred in our preparations defrayed, hostilities should be stayed, and peace be restored. The Governor General is as well aware as my noble Friend can be of the great inconvenience of any protracted hostilities at that period of the year when the rainy season is commencing; and I believe that my noble Friend the Governor General has no further intention that to despatch such an expedition to strike a blow against Rangoon and Martaban as will be sufficient to produce terror in the minds of the Burmese. By a single blow struck without delay, and showing the efficiency of our preparations, peace may be yet restored on terms honourable to the British Government, and not involving any continued occupation, possession, or annexation of any portion of the Burmese empire. If those steps which are now being taken are not successful before the rainy season commences, in inducing the Burmese authorities to tender their submission and enter into terms of peace, it will be for the Governor General to consider what duties and responsibilities will devolve upon him in the more serious and arduous struggle which will be forced upon him. I have to hope that no such consideration will be forced upon him, but that terms will be agreed upon under terror of the force that has been so promptly despatched. I am sure the Governor General will not neglect any steps which his duty calls on him to take, and which are necessary for the security of the empire, and for the maintenance of the dignity and honour of the British name. My noble Friend will believe that there is no man more anxious than he is to avoid war, and to avoid what I should consider as a great misfortune—the compulsory annexation of the Burmese empire. I make no objection to produce such papers as can be produced without injury to the public service. If my noble Friend will move for extracts from papers with regard to the hostilities in Ava, I shall have no hesitation in producing such as will be sufficient to satisfy both him and your

659
Lordships, that, without any undue shrinking from the responsibilities which have devolved upon my noble Friend, the Governor General has taken every step in his power for the purpose of avoiding hostilities, consistent with our dignity and honour, in the maintenance of which are involved the safety and security of our Indian empire.
The EARL of ELLENBOROUGHsaid, he would make the required alteration in his Motion. He concurred in the observations that had been made by the noble Lord. He had not said that war should not take place if it were necessary to support the honour and dignity of the country. If it were so, might God prosper our success! He would therefore move for extracts from any papers explanatory of the grounds of the war with Ava.
Motion agreed to.

FOREIGN REFUGEES.
LORD BEAUMONT, in rising "to call the attention of the House to the Correspondence laid on the table respecting Foreign Refugees, and to move for Correspondence respecting the detention of the Rev. Mr. Wingate," said, that he should not have troubled the House upon the present occasion had it not been that the papers that had been laid on their Lordships' table were calculated to lead to an impression that Her Majesty's present Government intended to make a change in the policy which this country had invariably, heretofore, pursued with regard to those persons, who, in consequence of troubles in their own country, were obliged to seek a refuge here. He trusted that this impression was a false one, and that the Government of this country did not intend to abandon the principles so ably laid down in the despatch of his noble Friend (Earl Granville) near him, of the 13th of January last, and so invariably acted on by this country. He trusted that Her Majesty's Government did not intend to act the spy, to play the eaves-dropper, to dog the heels of every person of political character who arrived here from a foreign country, to render the asylum this country had heretofore afforded a mockery, and to make a residence here at least as painful and as restrictive upon the liberties of foreign refugees as that of their own country would have been. Yet this, and more than this, had been demanded by Foreign Powers; and though they had little hope of having those demands complied with by the late
660
Government, some steps in that direction had been expected by them, at least in a modified sense, from the present Government, as it appeared to him from the correspondence that had passed. However original might be the ideas of Her Majesty's Government with regard to the elective franchise, and various other matters of domestic policy, he trusted they were not going to abandon that line of conduct or those principles which had invariably signalised this country as different from all other countries in Europe, and made it the country of those who had lost their own. He would attempt to prove that the liberty we afforded to these refugees, while it was an honour to this country, was also beneficial to the Governments from which those refugees fled, and was conducive to the general tranquillity of Europe. Suppose that this country and America did not afford an asylum to political characters in adversity, but delivered them up to their own Governments, or made their sojourn here so oppressive that they preferred to remain at home, those Governments would then be obliged, when the tide of emigration now setting in on our shores was turned back to them, to fill their prisons, and to increase both their armies and their police establishments. What would be the effect of such steps with regard to those Governments? They would bring increased discredit on them—they would raise strong feelings against them, and spread discontent in the land—they would increase the passions they were intended to repress, and the very thrones of those countries would be in imminent danger from the odium such conduct would excite. Under our present policy, what was the position of the refugees in this country? They who, in their own country were listened to with great respect, in our multitudinous society were immediately lost, and became an injury to no one. When a refugee landed on our shores, he was entitled to the protection of our laws, but he was also bound to obey our laws. When he arrived on our shores he had the same liberty as one of our own subjects: he was allowed to advance, as loudly as he liked, his opinions on the conduct of those Governments from whose persecutions he bad fled—he was allowed openly to lecture on the defects of the Government under which he had previously lived—to discuss all political maters in the public press—the pages of the newspapers were open to him to disseminate his opinions; he bad, in fact, every

661
advantage and liberty which our own subjects enjoyed. Yet it was to take away this liberty that foreign countries had applied to this country. What was the effect of this liberty? Why, that these persons arrived here with every opportunity to make known their feelings; but they found that their voices, with all these advantages, were lost in political discussions that were going on here, and that, however able they were to interest their hearers in their own country, they found that in this country there were more important subjects under discussion, which sometimes even obliterated the memory of their own political grievances. The effect of their agitation was absolutely neutralised. Here men found their level more easily than in any other country, and nothing could be better for any Government in which there had been a revolution, in which one party had become predominant, than that the party which was for the moment overcome should be allowed to come to this country and become, as it were, lost in our society. Yet it was asked that we should watch over these persons, that we should establish a system of espionage to ascertain what opinions they were advocating, and what associations they formed. Such a practice was contrary to our habits, and was totally unnecessary. We have here something much more efficacious than any police: we have a press which searches out all that is passing of importance in every quarter of the country and amongst all classes of men; and if we only attend to what is announced in the press, we might be pretty well aware of what all classes of men were doing. Every memorandum contained in those papers before their Lordships, which was supposed to be information with regard to what was going on here, merely contained what had appeared twenty times over in the public journals: not a single event was in the memorandum which could be new to any person who read the newspapers. Many of these statements were copies of advertisements that had been paid for and inserted in more than one journal. By means of the press you had sometimes even announcements of where some noble Lords had dined. When the press even peered down into these matters, it was evident that no person who read the papers could long remain in ignorance of what was going on. Foreign Governments, therefore, showed their ignorance of the habits and customs of this country, in asking that we should establish a police system
662
of espionage or surveillance, and try to prevent that free expression of opinion which, as he had already shown, was so advantageous to them. He believed that our line of policy was correctly laid down in the despatch of his noble Friend (Earl Granville), and if the present Government adhered to the principles contained in that despatch, he believed they would be acting for the best interests of this country, and in accordance with those principles which this country ought to maintain. He would refer to one passage in that despatch, which pointed out the line of policy that he wished to see adhered to by the present Government, and then show the reasons why he believed—although he hoped his impression was not correct—that it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government not strictly to adhere to that policy. Before doing so, he wished, in order to narrow the subject, to state that his observations applied only to some of those Powers from whom had been received the despatches contained in these papers. In the first place, he altogether excepted Prussia from the remarks he was about to make. He wished to see the closest communication between that country and England, and he regretted to see that Prussia had joined in the note of the other Powers; but the speed with which that Power had withdrawn from joint action with the other Courts, and the conduct of that Government, satisfied him that there was not the slightest ground for any complaint in regard to the Government of Prussia. He also thought France might be excepted from the remarks he was about to make. Not only had France refused to be coupled with Austria and Russia, but an explanation had taken place on the subject between the most distinguished person who represented France at this Court and the Foreign Office, in which the nature of the memorandum and the purport of the note which accompanied it were professed to be such as to remove any suspicion of a wish on the part of that Power to interfere or dictate on the subject. He might also say that the last despatch from France left an impression on his mind that now there was very little to complain of in. the present position of France in regard to the question. Excepting those two Powers altogether from the remarks he was about to make, he would now read to their Lordships the exact words of the despatch of his noble Friend (Earl Granville), which he thought, laid down accurately the line

663
of conduct this country ought to adopt. His noble Friend said—
"By the existing law of Great Britain all foreigners have the unrestricted right of entrance and residence in this country; and while they remain in it are, equally with British subjects, under the protection of the law; nor can they be punished except for an offence against the law, and under the sentence of the ordinary tribunals of justice, after a public trial, and on a conviction founded on evidence given in open court. No foreigners, as such, can be sent out of this country by the Executive Government, except persons removed by virtue of treaties with other States; confirmed by Act of Parliament, for the mutual surrender of criminal offenders. British subjects, however, or the subjects of any other State residing in this country, and therefore owing obedience to its laws, may, on conviction of being concerned in levying war against the Government of any State at amity with Great Britain, be punished by fine and imprisonment. Offenders in this respect are equally open to prosecution by individuals or by the Government."
These extracts contained the real state of the case, and pointed out the line to be taken. Of course, if any parties here were taking any active measures of hostility, and were guilty of any overt act against the Government of a foreign country, our Government was bound to interfere in the matter. But this was not what was demanded. In one of the despatches from Russia, it was stated that it was not a question of levying war that was complained of. The complaint was that parties conspired here. Of course parties conspired here. Not one but many conspiracies now existed throughout Europe, and had long existed, and their ramification extended to this country. Ever since 1830 there had existed in France a conspiracy against the existing order of things, and there were persons in this country connected with it. The French Legitimists here talked over their grievances, and the means by which they could restore an order of affairs better for them. The same sort of conspiracy existed with the object of overthrowing others of the existing Governments on the Continent. It existed in Italy in particular. Wherever there were Italians there existed a conspiracy to overthrow the Austrian power in Italy. Wherever there were Hungarians there existed a conspiracy against the new system of government which the Emperor of Austria had established. But he was confident that the least dangerous portion of these conspiracies was the portion of it which was conducted in this country; because here all their proceedings were known, whereas in foreign countries the
664
proceedings were secret, and the Governments might be taken by surprise. He remembered of his own knowledge, that, in 1831, in Central Italy there was a conspiracy on a large scale brought to maturity throughout the Roman States, which was unknown to the Papal Government, and which, it was well known, was for a time successful. Such a conspiracy could not have taken place in this country without its proceedings being made public through the press. He should have hoped that this despatch would have been the conclusion of the correspondence on the subject of foreign refugees, and that the matter would have gone no further. An answer had been given, and any further attempt to induce the English Government to alter our laws and habits, was an interference with our internal affairs. Russia closed the correspondence by a note of great moderation. But he was surprised at the despatch frond the Austrian Government, dated from Vienna, on the 4th February, which must have created some regret on the part of those friendly to the Austrian Government. This despatch actually stated that the Austrian Government was about to take severe measures against innocent English travellers who chanced to be travelling within its dominions. He could give no other interpretation to the despatch when he coupled the words of it with the measures that had taken place. Let no one imagine that he disputed the right of Austria to establish a severe system with regard to the internal police of her own territories, provided it were fairly and generously carried out. She had a perfect right to establish any general law with regard to travellers that she might think calculated to produce tranquillity in that country. Such general rules had not, however, been made; but on the contrary, individual cases had been singled out. Certain stray Englishmen had been persecuted. Austria vented her spite against this country, annoying private persons. It appeared, however, that very shortly after a sudden change came over the dream of the Austrian Ministry; for he found Soon after two despatches of a very different character to those to which he had referred with so much pain, but at the same time equally extraordinary. The first was the despatch from Prince Schwarzenberg, dated from Vienna; March 15, 1852, expressing the great satisfaction with which the Austrian Government had

665
received the news of the formation of the Earl of Derby's Cabinet; and, proceeding to analyse the speech of the noble Earl on his installation into office, built upon it a conviction that a change was about to take place in the policy of England; and that, being discontented with the despatch of the noble Earl, late the Foreign Secretary (Earl Granville), the Austrian Cabinet hoped they would soon see the line of policy there marked out abandoned by Her Majesty's present Government. He was aware that the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Derby) laboured under the great disadvantage of not being always properly and clearly understood in the statements which he made in their Lordships' House; and he must bear witness also to the fact, that when the noble Earl undertook to explain his former speech, unfortunately his explanation very often made the speech still less intelligible than before; and this perhaps might have been the case with regard to what fell from the noble Earl on a former occasion in regard to political refugees. Certainly, the noble Earl's speech appeared to him (Lord Beaumont), when he heard of it, to contain all that was desirable on the subject; he could not at the moment differ from him as to a single point. The remarks in question appeared to him to satisfy the demands of justice and of hospitality; they appeared to set forth what had been before stated by the noble Earl (Earl Granville), that nothing but the law should be his guide, and that he would not strain the law at the request of any foreign Government. [The Earl of DERBY: Hear! hear!] If that were the intention of the Government, he could only say that he applauded it; if that were their policy, he could but approve of it. It seemed, however, that the Government of Austria put an entirely different interpretation on this exposition of the policy of Her Majesty's Administration, and they imagined that the noble Earl intended to abandon the policy of his predecessors, and pursue an entirely different one. On the whole, this despatch left an impression either that the Austrian Cabinet entirely misinterpreted the speech of the noble Earl, or that something had been held out to them by Her Majesty's Government which was not reconcileable with these papers. The reply of the noble Earl the Foreign Secretary, in answer to that of the Austrian Minister, was no less remarkable. It stated—
"Her Majesty's Government have received with
666
the liveliest pleasure the despatch to you from Prince Schwarzenberg of the 5th inst., which you have been authorised to communicate to me upon the part of the Cabinet of Vienna."
This, it would be remembered, was the despatch which announced the "genuine satisfaction" of the Imperial Cabinet at the change of Government in England. It went on:—
"In proportion to the value which Her Majesty's Government place upon a maintenance of a cordial friendship with Austria, the oldest ally of England, cemented, not only by the tie of mutual interest, but by the recollection of past efforts in a common cause, was the regret with which Her Majesty's present Government, on succeeding to office, found that the result of the events of the last few years had been to substitute for those friendly relations a tone of mutual suspicion, if not of actual alienation, and to give to their diplomatic correspondence a character quite at variance with the dispositions which ought to subsist between them. The despatch which you have recently placed in my hands affords the greater satisfaction to Her Majesty's Government, because, without reference to the past, it lays the foundation of a renewed good understanding between the two countries."
Now, he did think that a reference to the past ought to have been insisted on, especially as there still remained at the Foreign Office that extremely offensive despatch of the 4th February to which he had referred, and which ought either to have been withdrawn, or, at any rate, explained, whatever might be the Government in power. At that time every foreign Government had either withdrawn or modified at least its first demand on the question. The Prussian Government had withdrawn their note altogether; France had made the most satisfactory explanations; and Russia had considerably modified the language which she had first held. Austria alone, when the noble Earl came into power, remained without having taken steps to remove that which was insulting and derogatory to this country, while it was totally unworthy of the Government of Austria. It was clear that the perusal of these papers left an impression either that some deviation from the former line of policy had been promised to Austria, or that the noble Earl's speech and despatches had been totally misunderstood by the Austrian Cabinet. There was another part of the subject to which he was now about to refer, and that was, the treatment which Austria had exhibited towards certain English subjects who happened to be in the Austrian dominions. If there had been no threat uttered on this subject, it would have been sufficient to have left these matters, with-

667
out farther investigation of them, to Her Majesty's Government, fully convinced they would have demanded and obtained full satisfaction; but since the famous despatch of Prince Schwarzenberg, he thought they were bound to ask what steps had been taken by the Government, and what had passed between them and the Austrian Government on the subject; because it was now evident that those acts had become a part of the general policy of Austria, and it was upon that account that he asked an explanation of the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Malmesbury) with regard to what had passed between him and the Austrian Government in respect of the various cases of hardship inflicted on individuals in Austria. One of these cases he could not help alluding to in particular, because, if it had been correctly stated to him, it was really of a monstrous character. It was that of Mr. Wingate, a clergyman of the Scotch Church, a harmless, inoffensive gentleman, established at Pesth, since the year 1841, with the sanction of the Viceroy and the Government, as a clergyman to the English residents there, and as a missionary to the Jews. He had become resident there with the sanction of the Viceroy of Hungary, and at no period of his residence there had anything in the shape of an accusation been brought against him—a fact that was fully admitted by the Government authorities; he had a pastport from the Foreign Office, and a permission de sejour from the local authorities. During the Hungarian war, the Hungarians had tried to press him for a soldier, but he had positively refused to serve, and was ultimately allowed to retain his character of a civilian. On the 3rd of January, all forms of law were abolished in Hungary, and on the 5th of the same month, this gentleman, with another gentleman, were ordered, without any reason being assigned, to quit Pesth. According to the account which he (Lord Beaumont) had received, it was then in the depth of winter—the Danube was frozen over, the ground was covered with snow; some of the members of his family were under medical treatment, some of them were bedridden, and, though a medical certificate that their lives would be endangered by exposure to the cold was sent to the authorities, it had no weight whatever with him. Mr. Wingate was summoned to appear before the head of the police, and was ordered to depart immediately. The unfortunate persons then begged to be allowed to appeal to Vienna;
668
and this permission was granted by the authorities at Pesth, who, he was bound to say, had behaved with a great deal of feeling, and did all they could to mitigate the sufferings of those whom they were ordered to expel. The appeal, when made, was, however, unsuccessful, and the answer returned from Vienna was an order for their immediate removal—the sooner the better. They then asked to be allowed to go by Vienna, but this also was refused. A member of their congregation then went to Vienna, but he too was unsuccessful, and a more imperative order was then issued, giving only two or three days to prepare for their departure. Almost the whole of this time was occupied in getting passports; there were, as he was informed, no less than six bureaus to pass through, and, last of all, they had to obtain the sanction of the military commandant. Great difficulties, too, were raised about a nurse going with them who happened to be a Hungarian woman, and all her brothers and cousins had to be produced to depose to her intention of leaving the country. In fact, the whole of this part of the transaction was well worth any of their Lordships' attention, as showing the great evil and inconvenience of the passport system. After going through these ceremonies, and after experiencing other difficulties, they were turned out of Pesth, and obliged to travel some hundreds of miles in the depth of winter, suffering seriously in health, and some of them still felt the ill effects of that journey. A similar cruelty was inflicted on Mr. Edwards in a part of Gallicia. He, also, without any cause of complaint being stated against him, was ordered to leave the Austrian dominions, along with his wife, who was then in such a state of suffering that she was taken ill on the road. He was willing to make great allowances for Austria. He did not doubt but that great severity was necessary to maintain peace and tranquillity in her dominions; and he was convinced that if her army were diminished, or the regulations of her police reduced, the existence of the present Government would be in considerable danger, especially in Hungary, where strong measures were absolutely necessary. Severity and strictness were essential to the maintenance of a Government which was loathed in Hungary, hated in Italy, disliked in Bohemia, detested in Croatia, and not much loved even in Vienna; but the treatment which had been

669
inflicted on these unfortunate persons could do no sort of good whatever, and could answer no great political end; and, therefore, coupling it with the previous despatch, he looked upon it as an instance of a little revenge on the part of the Austrian Government for not having received the answer which it had expected. He, therefore, had thought it his duty to ask the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Malmesbury) whether he was prepared to produce any papers explanatory of the steps which he had taken to obtain redress for these individuals; and he did entreat noble Lords opposite to declare whether it was their intention to abide by what had been the usual course of policy of all Governments of this country with regard to those unfortunate individuals who sought a refuge on our shores. If they did intend to abandon these unfortunate refugees, and no longer to extend towards them the hospitality which they had ever found in England, then they would be doing that which, in his opinion, was both derogatory to this country and dangerous to the peace of Europe. If, on the contrary, they intended to persist in giving the fullest shelter and hospitality to all who sought our shores—be they monarchs fleeing from a republic, or republicans from a monarchy—if they resolved to keep the shores of England open to all, without inquiring into their political opinions, but offering them all the advantages which our enlightened laws offered to our own subjects, if the noble Lords opposite were prepared to state this, he was certain that no one there would refuse to give every means, and afford all possible allowances, for conducting this correspondence with foreign Governments on amicable and moderate terms. He begged to move, in accordance with the notice that stood in his name on the paper, for the production of correspondence respecting the detention of the Rev. Mr. Wingate.
Motion—
"That there be laid before this House, Correspondence respecting the Detention of the Reverend Mr. Wingate."
The EARL of MALMESBURY: My Lords, I shall try to profit as much as I possibly can by the lecture of the noble Lord on the lucidity of the statement made on a former occasion by my noble Friend (the Earl of Derby). But I beg to remind the noble Lord that it does not quite follow that, when a statement has been made and not understood, the implication
670
of unsatisfactoriness in such statement should rest exclusively upon Her Majesty's Ministers. My noble Friend began this subject in this House by putting a string of questions the other night; to which, however, he said, he did not think I ought to reply at the moment, and which, therefore, I did not then answer. I shall now, however, take the liberty of replying to them, and, in so doing, to invert the arrangement of the topics in my noble Friend's speech, and reply, in the first place, to the particular cases, before I proceed to make any remarks upon the general subject. The noble Lord began by asking about the arrest of a courier of Sir Stratford Canning. The history of that transaction is simply this:—Sir Stratford Canning had employed an English workman of some sort (I think an ironmonger) of the name of Scott, in doing some work for him, at the Embassy at Constantinople; and when this was finished, and nothing more remained to do, he gave the man an English passport for his return home; and either because he really wished for his services, or in order merely to expedite him on the way, Sir Stratford confided to this person an official bag containing despatches. The man was dressed not in the usual uniform of a courier, but as an artisan, and he did not travel in the carriage which couriers ordinarily use, and there was nothing to indicate him as such to the Austrian authorities. He was arrested by the Austrian police on suspicion of being identical with a man who had robbed somebody at Manchester of 1,600 l. in bank notes, and whose description had been forwarded to Vienna. The mistake in the identity was certainly most unfortunate; the man was unacquainted with German, and was detained throughout a whole night; but as soon as the matter was explained by a person who understood the English language, he was at once liberated. This happened not in our time, but in that of my noble Friend opposite (Earl Granville) in the Foreign Office. My noble Friend remonstrated most properly, as I should have done if I had been in his place with the Austrian Government; and the Austrian Government made an apology for the error into which they had been led, explained the circumstances under which it had occurred, and sent an order for the punishment of the policeman, who had not sent, when he took the workman into custody, for somebody who knew English to investigate the circumstances. My Lords,

671
I regret as much as my noble Friend, or any man living, that any such misfortune should befall an Englishman travelling through a foreign country, with the language of which he may be unacquainted; but accidents of this nature are not confined to foreign countries; neither, my Lords, is this particular occurrence imputable, in any sense, to a feeling of revenge—supposing such had ever existed in the mind of the Austrian Government—for it happened, two months before the despatch adverted to in such strong terms by my noble Friend was written; and, in the second place, it was perfectly accidental, for I can bring the authority of Mr. Grey, now an attaché of the Embassy at Vienna, to show that instructions had been given to the Austrian police for the detention of a man of the name of Adler, who had committed the robbery at Manchester. I have said, my Lords, that such a mistake is not confined to foreign countries, and will go further and say, not only that it might, but I will tell you what did, happen in this country, and to a domestic in my own establishment no later than last year. The individual to whom I allude is one who, although not personally or directly known, may nevertheless, be agreeably and indirectly known to some of your Lordships. Having sent my servants home from the Highlands of Scotland, my French cook, in the free town of Glasgow, though one of the most quiet, inoffensive creatures I ever knew in my life, was forcibly seized by two policemen, and found himself in the same position as the English workman, for he could speak no English; and the policeman and he of course could not understand one another. He was dragged through the streets of the town; he experienced the desagremens of being taken to the station-house, followed by a crowd of boys, who hissed and hooted him; he was detained two hours. The magistrate before whom he was taken very civilly let him go; stating that he was mistaken for a man who had committed a crime in Ireland; but all the satisfaction he got from the policeman was, "Sarve you right; you are such a queer-looking fellow." The result was that he lost his passage by the railway, and was put to considerable, and for him serious, inconvenience. If he had been a susceptible man, instead of a French philosophe, he would no doubt have applied to the French Minister in London to demand redress, and in all probability a long correspondence
672
between M. Drouin de I'Huys and the Foreign Office would have been the consequence, a great deal of trouble would have been caused to both countries, and we don't know how the matter might have ended. But he did not do that; he took things as they were intended; he made no more stir in the matter; and so your Lordships were saved from this correspondence. I mention this, my Lords, not to justify the proceedings in the other instance, but simply to show that such an accident as happened in that case might also happen in this country, where there is no police law, and where freedom lives as much among the people as is possible. I now come to the case of Mr. Wingate, and I must say that I think that a very aggravated case. I believe him to have been a harmless, conscientious, religious man, who went to convert the Jews in Hungary, without any other object or intention; and I think the Austrian Government, therefore, who must. have known this, too, cannot be too much blamed, after having suffered him and his colleagues to remain quietly in that country for so long a period, and who consequently led them to suppose that they should be permitted to live there as long they chose—I say, I think that Government is very much to be blamed for not having given those gentlemen and their families sufficient time to collect their goods, to settle their affairs, and to leave the country. But while I confess this with sorrow, I must at the same time say I think the statement from which my noble Friend opposite quoted his account of the details of the transaction is not one which so good and so religious a person as Mr. Wingate ought to have given. He ought to have been more exact in his details of what took place; and, lest your Lordships should be led away by the statement which has been made, and that you may know Her Majesty's Government and our Ambassador at Vienna have done all they could in reference to this case, I wish to read to you the account which has been drawn up in writing by Mr. Grey, attaché to Lord Westmorland, regarding the whole affair, and your Lordships will see that there is great variance between the statements. Your Lordships would suppose from what you have heard that the rev. gentleman had been hurried on through the Austrian dominions in the worst of weather, and that his family had not been allowed to rest on their journey. I think the noble Lord said that Mr. Wingate

673
complained he was refused permission to go to Vienna. If he were, he certainly cared very little for the permission, for he went to Vienna without it. [The noble Lord then read the document by Mr. Grey, which stated that a gentleman had called at the Embassy to state that two missionaries were in trouble, and, though the unfavourable answer of the Austrian Government to representations which had been made respecting a third missionary, Mr. Edwards, did not give good reason to suppose that interference in their case would be successful, the advice was given that Messrs. Wingate and Smith should send in a statement of their case from Pesth. No such statement had been sent in, and very soon afterwards Mr. Grey saw Mr. Wingate, who said his object was to obtain permission to travel by easy stages, without unnecessary interference on the part of the police. Mr. Grey obtained that permission for him, and saw orders to that effect sent off to the police. He took the passport, properly viséed, to Mr. Wingate's residence, and was told it was "all right." It was, therefore, perfectly clear, that though the manner in which the Austrians had acted was deserving of reprobation, it was not of the character described; the case required no exaggeration to make it one of cruelty, but, unfortunately, exaggeration had been employed in stating it. I am sorry to say I have seen accounts of large meetings in Scotland, where a clergyman named M'Leod has used very much the same language as my noble Friend, and has stated that Lord Westmorland behaved with the greatest remissness and negligence. [Lord BEAUMONT: I never said anything of the kind.] No; not my noble Friend, but the gentleman in question; and I have seen it with sorrow, because no person, and especially not a clergyman, ought to make such a statement with respect to the conduct of Lord Westmorland, who stands deservedly high in the estimation of your Lordships and of the country, for the manner in which he discharges his duties, before he had all the facts well substantiated. But, my Lords, having disposed of these points, I will now refer to the observation of my noble Friend on the general question involved in the correspondence. My noble Friend has made some general remarks on the correspondence respecting foreign refugees, which I had lately the honour to lay on your Lordships' table, on which I wish to make a few observations; and if I pre-
674
cede them with a few words in reference to myself personally, I am sure I shall meet with that indulgence your Lordships have always shown me whenever I have ventured to address you. I cannot blame my noble Friend, nor any man, for entertaining apprehension—nay, I would say even suspicion—respecting the security of our foreign policy, when he sees it placed so recently in the hands of a man so little experienced as myself. I am well aware, my Lords, that such a circumstance might excite those feelings; and I assure you that when I was called by Her Gracious Majesty to the place I now hold, I knew well it was not to any merit of my own I owed the appointment, but that it was to the partiality of my old and valued Friend now at the head of the Government, and to the confidence placed by Her Majesty in his recommendations. I knew I should be wanting—totally wanting, my Lords—in experience in the mode of carrying on the political affairs of this great country. I never had held office—I never had asked for office—I was perfectly inexperienced in the routine of public business. I had but one recollection which inspired me with some degree of encouragement, and that was that I had received the education of an English gentleman, and that one of the first principles in that education had been, as I trust it ever will be—I know that in my case it was one of the first feelings inculcated on my mind—that the dignity of the Crown and the honour of the country are, to every other consideration on earth, paramount; and, if I required another encouragement, allow me to say, though my noble Friend is present, that I found it in recollecting that he (Earl Granville), my junior in years, and almost as inexperienced as myself in official life—certainly with as little experience in that office in which I succeeded him—had, during the short time he had remained there, inspired the utmost confidence in all those who met him in the discharge of public business, and had left behind him at the Foreign Office a reputation which, when it shall be my turn to retire, I shall greatly envy. But, my Lords, if personal malice or party spirit should endeavour to invent the worst calumny against me that could be framed, it would be to put forward the supposition that, on a question affecting the safety and security of foreign refugees in this country, I do not hold, absolutely and entirely, the opinions I find expressed in the despatch of my noble

675
Friend opposite. I can well conceive the pleasure and happiness of a refugee, hunted from his native land, on approaching the shores of England, and the joy with which he first catches sight of them; but they are not greater than the pleasure and happiness every Englishman feels in knowing that his country affords the refugee a home and safety. My Lords, you know what our laws are on this subject; they have been over and over again explained in both Houses of Parliament on recent occasions, and so long as I have the happiness to be one of Her Majesty's Government, and of managing the Foreign Affairs of the country, I declare to you that from no Power in Europe, or in any other part of the globe, shall I consent to receive a demand that would change those laws. I would not answer such a demand by any epigrammatic despatch; because I think the province of diplomacy is negotiation and conciliation; but I would tell those who made such a demand, in a firm but conciliatory manner, that it could not be complied with, and I would answer them as the first Barons answered, Nolumus leges Angliœ mutari. Having said this much, my Lords, with reference to my own feelings and sentiments, and being convinced that every Member of Her Majesty's Government believes it impossible to change the laws of England upon this subject, even if a Minister could he found willing to do so, and that, so long as the foreign refugees respect and obey the law, that law will protect them against all comers, I will add, in the sense and in the principle of the policy of this country, that the same law which inexorably protects will as inexorably punish them if they bring their conspiracies into a practical shape which clearly breaks it. With respect to' the accusations on the part of the noble Lord opposite, I would ask, is there anything in the papers on your Lordships' table to give him a right to assert I will sacrifice foreign refugees in the manner he says? But the noble Lord has gone further than this, and has made a charge very grave in its nature against Her Majesty's Government; because he has more than insinuated that a secret understanding has been carried on between the Austrian Government and the Government of Her Majesty, which induced Prince Schwarzenberg to write the despatch of the 5th of March. My Lords, I positively deny such accusations or suspicions—they are totally and entirely
676
without foundation; and not only has no such communication ever taken place, but I do not believe it even entered the imagination of any of Her Majesty's Government. Why, if the noble Lord had taken the trouble to look to the dates—and I wish he had before he made his speech—he would have seen it was physically impossible for me who entered office on the 28th February, to write such a despatch as would enable Prince Schwarzenberg to write his in reply on the 5th of March, containing observations on the speech of my noble Friend. As to the despatch in question, I do not expect my noble Friend opposite (Lord Beaumont) to agree with the first paragraph. It states—
"The intelligence of the formation of the new Government under the auspices of the Earl of Derby has been received by the Imperial Cabinet with a feeling of genuine satisfaction."
Having referred to the statement made by my noble Friend, the despatch went on:—
"As far as that statement refers to foreign affairs we are happy to be able to adhere without reserve to the principles and intentions which the Earl of Derby has explained with so much candour and lucidity."
When my noble Friend made that statement, not a Peer in the House rose to make the slightest objection to it. Several of your Lordships made long speeches on our financial policy, but to the foreign policy of the Government no one made any allusion. Why did not the noble Lord rise on that occasion? Was he quite satisfied with my noble Friend's statement? If so, he is just in the same way of thinking as Prince Schwarzenberg; there was anly this difference between them, that the Prince expressed his satisfaction, but the noble Lord was so satisfied he said nothing. Well, if the Prince expressed himself satisfied, so did I. I said to him, "I'm glad you liked the speech;" the Prince gave me an opportunity of saying so. He said the intelligence of the formation of the new Government was received with "feelings of genuine satisfaction;" and I replied that Her Majesty's Government had received his despatch with "the liveliest pleasure." How I could have answered in any other way, I find it impossible to say. The noble Lord might have used more civil phrases, but I cannot see how he could have taken no notice of such expressions on the part of the Prince. Could I say it gave me no pleasure and no satisfaction that on a question of good feeling

677
between Austria and Great Britain, we had received the expression of a hope that the relations of old allies should be renewed? And while on this point I may observe, that I have seen the proposition supported in another place, that Austria is not the oldest ally of England. I express no jealousy of the historical acquirements which the gentleman who put it forward possesses, but in point of fact Austria is our oldest ally. The first treaty with Austria dates 1202, whereas our first treaty with Portugal was not made until 1386. In the despatch I wrote in reply, I went on to say—
"It is with the most unfeigned pleasure, though with no surprise, that Her Majesty's Government receive the assurance that the Court of Vienna subscribes without reserve to the principles and intentions developed by the First Minister of the Crown."
That again is very true. The noble Lord did not quote out of these despatches certain phrases or sentiments he might have approved of—he only quoted "unfeigned pleasure," and "liveliest pleasure." Is there anything so strong in those expressions, my Lords, that I am to be supposed to have bound myself to betray the honour of my country, and to hand over those unfortunate refugees to the Austrian Government? Why, the whole notion is perfectly unfounded; it exists only in the imagination of the noble Lord, and I do not believe there is a Peer in this House, with the exception of my noble Friend, who sees in these phrases more than a civil answer to a civil despatch, and the expression of the pleasure of Government that a useful and ancient ally of England was again placed on a footing of amity. My Lords, I have now told you what are my feelings in reference to that liberty which every refugee in this country enjoys, and what are the feelings of Her Majesty's Government, and I should be only doing injustice to the great statement made by my noble Friend (the Earl of Derby) on a former occasion were I to expatiate on this subject any further, or were I to say more than this—that while I have the honour to be a Minister of the Crown, and to hold the office I now fill, I will attempt to carry out the policy which has secured to these men a refuge in this country, so long as they prove themselves worthy of it, and do not by their acts violate the law which protects them.
EARL GEANVILLEwas understood to say, that the desire he felt to offer a few
678
observations on the subject under discussion had been much increased by his anxiety to acknowledge the very friendly compliment be had received from the noble Earl, who, though opposed to him in politics, had alluded to him in such kind terms. As it appeared that the correspondence relating to foreign refugees was now drawing to an end, it was hardly necessary for him to go into it; but he was happy to find that there had been expressed a very general concurrence in the principles laid down by Her Majesty's late Government in the despatch which he (Earl Granville) bad written in January last with respect to foreign refugees in this country. He was confirmed by the speeches of his noble Friend and of the noble Lord in the opinion he had expressed, that while we should concur in refusing to diminish in the slightest degree the hospitality now offered to political exiles of all climes and of all shades of political sentiment, and while we should refuse to depart from our municipal law and the practice of our courts, in respect of the definition of what constituted a political offence, and of the evidence to prove it, and to refuse to accept any foreign definitions, yet it should be the duty of the Executive Government to discourage all insurrectionary attempts against the Governments of other countries, and to prevent by all legal means all overt acts directed against countries with which we were in alliance. He very much regretted he ever had had occasion to write the despatch to Count Buol which had been referred to. The answer, though directed to him (Earl Granville), was received by his noble Friend opposite; and in reference to this subject he wished to remark there were two points on which some questions had been addressed to him out of their Lordships' House that he wished to make some observation upon. The noble Lord was then understood to say that he bad been asked why he had allowed so long a time to elapse before he had returned any reply to the note of Count Buol of the 7th of January, stating that the Holy See, through the Austrian Minister, joined in the representations of other foreign Powers respecting foreign refugees in England. He had previously received a note from Count Buol stating that the Duke of Modena concurred in the same representations; and it appeared to him of so unusual a character that he caused inquiries to be made in the proper department of the Foreign Office to know if it was customary to

679
receive an official communication from a foreign Court through a diplomatist not accredited by that Court to Her Majesty, and found that it was unprecedented. Believing that the Austrian Government was desirous of maintaining relations with us in a friendly spirit, he thought it well to avoid any fresh subject of discussion, and confined himself to telling Count Buol, when next they met, that he could not take any notice of his communication, for reasons he would understand. As to the fact that six weeks had elapsed between the time of his receiving the first despatch and his reply to it, all he (Earl Granville) could say was, that he would not have noticed it at all had he not received a subsequent communication from Count Buol with reference to the note addressed by the Holy See to the Austrian Minister at Rome. As to the moment which he had taken for sending that despatch, it had been asked why he had written it after the noble Lord then at the head of Her Majesty's Government (Lord John Russell) had announced that the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) opposite had undertaken to form a Government, and after it was known that a new Ministry had accepted office? Whether this was a mere coincidence, or whether Count Buol, for whom he (Earl Granville) had the highest personal esteem, thought—very judiciously and very naturally thought—that it would be better to get rid of that point before he began business or to treat with his (Earl Granville's) successor, it still put him (Earl Granville) in a difficult position with regard to that despatch. The despatch was sent to him, and directed to him (Earl Granville), although at that moment the noble Earl (the Earl of Malmesbury) was bonâ fide the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. He thought he should have neglected his duty if he had sent the despatch back without making any remarks upon it; but after he had made his remarks upon it, he added that it should be resubmitted to the noble Earl for his consideration, and for the exercise of his discretion thereon. Had he not done so, he should not only have acted an unfriendly part towards the noble Earl, but also have placed both himself and the noble Earl in a false position; for if the noble Earl had remonstrated, he would have been met by the precedent which he (Earl Granville) had set six weeks before in the case of the Court of Rome. When he read the despatch, he certainly felt great regret that
680
the last act of his official correspondence with the Austrian Government should be one not actually of a courteous character; yet as he certainly did consider that that communication was not an offer of a friendly Power, to obtain some practical result with respect to a country with which the English Government had no other means of communicating, but that it was an official communication, and one, as it were, that was making Austria the official mouthpiece of Central Italy; it was therefore one which could not be entertained, and he was satisfied he could not take any other part consistent with his duty than to return that despatch. He might, indeed, have returned it without writing any remarks upon it; at the same time, he owned that if he had not put upon record the reasons which he thought to be sufficient for the conduct he had adopted, he should not have discharged his duty. He had now stated all that he had to observe with respect to that despatch. With regard to the correspondence that had taken place between the Austrian Government and the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Malmesbury), he might be allowed to say this, that, although he thought it was undesirable that foreign Governments should indicate a preference of one political party in this country over another political party; and although he should greatly deplore seeing any British Foreign Secretary bind up British foreign affairs with any political party in any foreign country, yet he was not disposed to censure the Austrian Government for what it had done in this instance; for he did not think it at all unnatural that that Government, feeling the inconvenience which had arisen from the unfriendly state of the relations between Austria and England, in consequence of the previous correspondence which had taken place between the two Governments, should have received with pleasure the intelligence that the party in England which, right or wrong, had for the last four years generally adopted the complaints of Austria against the actual Government of this country, had succeeded to power. No doubt, if the noble Earl had rejected these overtures on the part of Austria in a discourteous manner, he would have deprived himself of the power of bringing the many matters in discussion to a friendly issue. During his (Earl Granville's) short tenure of office, in the different communications which he had had with almost all the

681
nations of the world, he could not but feel grateful for the singularly candid and open manner in which he had been received, and certainly not less than by others had he been so treated by the great nations of Europe, though differing from him in toto on the abstract principles of internal government. He certainly regretted that he was not able to put the relations of this country with Austria on the same footing of amity as that in which we stood with other Courts; but this had not in the slightest degree changed his opinion as to the necessity of a good understanding existing between two such countries as Great Britain and Austria, or as to the fact that the state of the relations which had recently existed between those countries was most undesirable. Without going into the question whether Austria was the oldest, or comparatively the oldest, ally of Great Britain, there could be no doubt it was most desirable that the two countries should be on friendly terms with each other. He believed indeed that there were States with which an alliance was of more paramount importance; but he thought there was no nation in Europe with which it was more desirable that England should be on the most courteous footing, particularly when it was considered that the two countries had acted together in the most perilous times. Therefore, so far from feeling jealous that the noble Earl should have accomplished, without effort, that which he (Earl Granville) had failed to do, he should be most sincerely glad to learn that, with perfect self-respect and dignity, and with due regard to the interests of this country, combined with a conciliatory demeanour, the noble Earl had been able to put an end to the annoying and vexatious questions which had in recent days existed between the two countries. With respect to the case of the engineer, he recollected and entirely coincided with what the noble Earl had stated as to the nature of that case; but he did not quite agree with the noble Earl in thinking that the explanation which had been given by Austria, in reference to that case, was entirely satisfactory. He could not see any analogy between the noble Earl's French cook and that of the engineer; yet, since Prince Schwarzenberg had expressed his regret at what had occurred, and had informed Her Majesty's Government that the Austrian officer would be punished, he was quite satisfied with that
682
assurance. With respect to the case of the Rev. Mr. Wingate and his fellow-sufferers, although he (Earl Granville) wrote the despatch embodying the case of those gentlemen, yet as he was not aware of the answer which had been received from the Austrian Government, he could not add anything to that which the noble Earl had stated.
The MARQUESS of BREADALBANEthought that their Lordships had not sufficiently adverted to the fact that the Rev. Mr. Wingate and the Rev. Mr. Smith were not only endeavouring to spread the truths of the Gospel to the Jews at Pesth, but that they were also the Christian ministers to an English congregation at Pesth. A great number of British workmen were at present employed there in the construction of a railway, and those two missionaries were employed to perform the services of Christian worship to them. The Austrian Government, therefore, by having sent those men away in so summary a manner, had deprived many British subjects of the benefit of Christian worship. This was a very important fact, and he trusted Her Majesty's Government would not suffer themselves to be trifled with in conducting the negotiation for redress from the Austrian Government.
After a few words from Lord BEAUMONT and the Earl of DERBY in explanation, the Motion was withdrawn.

PATENT LAW AMENDMENT (No. 2) BILL.
LORD COLCHESTER LORD COLCHESTER moved that the Bill should be committed pro formâ, and whatever amendments were to be proposed should be discussed at the third reading.
The EARL of MINTOwas not aware that there was anything that required discussion which could not take place in Committee.
The EARL of DERBYobserved, that there was only one question to be discussed, namely, whether it was expedient to extend the operation of the Act to Scotland. To allow the Bill to pass through Committee without proposing any amendment, and to take that subject for discussion on the third reading, would, he thought, be the most convenient course.
House in Committee.
Amendments made: Report to be received To-morrow.
House adjourned till To-morrow.