The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDE, in pursuance of notice given by him on a previous occasion, rose to ask whether Her Majesty's Government had any objection to lay upon the table copies of the Communications between the British and French Governments respecting the establishment of the French Empire. The noble Marquess said, that had he been aware, when he gave notice of his intention to put the question, that a notice of a question on the same subject had been given in the House of Commons, he should have postponed his notice, in the hope that the explanations which might be made in the other House would have been satisfactory. Having given that notice, however, he felt it incumbent on him to ask, without further delay, some explanation of the views of Her Majesty's Government regarding the extraordinary speech to which he then alluded—the speech lately made by his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Control at Halifax. 79 The real question was, not whether an individual Minister might have committed an indiscretion, or uttered hastily words or phrases without due reflection; but whether the Government of this country and the Government of France continued to hold the same cordial amity and friendship which had recently existed between them, and which friendship and cordiality he believed, in the present circumstances of the world, were the surest guarantee of the continued peace of Europe. He did not wish to attribute more importance to the speech of any individual Minister than was necessary; but it was utterly impossible to say that a speech in public of a Cabinet Minister was at any time without importance; and, unfortunately, the speech to which he had alluded had been circulated throughout the whole of the kingdom, and had also been circulated, he regretted to say, abroad, and it was within his own knowledge that great attention had been attracted to the speech in Paris. He had already said that he did not wish to attach any particular or too much importance to this speech; but at the same time considerable publicity having been given to the expressions it contained, he thought it was most desirable that the House should have an explanation from the Government of the terms upon which Her Majesty's Government stood with the Government of France. However unwilling they might be to attach undue importance to the words of an individual, he could not, for one, subscribe to the doctrine which he had heard and seen advanced, that a Cabinet Minister, a confidential servant of the Crown, was not hound to exercise more discretion in his language to the public, than a person upon whom no such responsibility was placed. Indeed, upon many important occasions the views of the Government upon coming events had been given to the people of this country in the shape of addresses to electors; and it was impossible for any man to deny that in former and even in later years, words dropped from the lips of Cabinet Ministers had exercised a most important effect upon public interests. No one could be conversant with the history of the last European war, its continuance, or partial cessation, without perceiving that its partial cessation and its renewal were much affected and influenced by expressions which had fallen from public men. Many of those ill-timed expressions produced the greatest effect upon the continuance and character 80 of the war, while they vastly increased the difficulties which surrounded the establishment of peace. More than that, their Lordships could not but remember that only last year, upon both sides of the House, great importance was attached by leading men to articles which appeared in the newspapers, and to particular phrases which those articles contained with reference to the authorities and Government of France. He considered, however, that articles which appeared in the newspapers were entirely different from expressions uttered with the responsibility of persons holding high positions in the Government of the country. It was impossible for the Government of this country ever to be held responsible for what might arise in that free discussion of the public press, which, thank God! they had ever been enabled to preserve. That was the stand which their Lordships took upon that occasion: but here that excuse did not apply. He had no wish to repeat the particular words of the speech to which he had alluded, nor to inquire into the justice of the strictures which might or might not have been made. He wished, however, to know whether those strictures in any way conveyed the views and sentiments of Her Majesty's Government? If the Government were anxious to maintain the dignity, the honour, and the credit of the Crown and of the country, they must not only take care that their own honour and dignity were kept unsullied, but they must also be sincere in the professions which they held out to the world, and they should take care not to wound the dignity, character, or feelings of those towards whom they professed feelings of friendship and amity. He believed that, so far as the personal feelings of the Members of the Government were concerned, there was a desire to maintain feelings of amity towards the ruler and people of France. It was with the confident hope of receiving an explanation of the opinions of the Government that he had then ventured to bring the subject under the notice of their Lordships. With respect to the particular papers for the production of which he asked, he apprehended there could be no difficulty in laying them upon the table. He was of course entirely in the hands of the Government with reference to the matter. But, as the noble Earl who lately held the seals of the Foreign Office (the Earl of Malmesbury) had informed the House, early last Decern- 81 ber, that communications had been received from France with reference to the establishment of the French Empire, and that Her Majesty had speedily, and without difficulty, recognised the Empire, he presumed those communications had been reduced to writing, either in the shape of notes between the two Governments, or recorded in despatches to or from the British Ambassador at Paris. If there were any reason why any part of those despatches, or the whole of them, should not be produced, of course the noble Earl at the head of the Government (the Earl of Aberdeen) would decline to produce them. If, however, as he apprehended, those communications would be found to exhibit merely expressions upon both sides of cordial goodwill and good understanding, there could be no harm in their being produced. He trusted that in any case their Lordships would receive an assurance from the Government that nothing had occurred to lead to a cessation of that cordial and sincere alliance which the noble Earl (the Earl of Malmesbury) informed the House then existed.
§ The EARL of ABERDEENI trust, my Lords, that it is not necessary for me to give an assurance of the earnest desire entertained by Her Majesty's Government to cultivate the most intimate relations of friendship and alliance with the French Government, or to state our opinion that so long as the policy of France is a policy of peace and friendship, neither we, nor any other State, have any sort of right to interfere in the internal concerns of that country, with their form of government, or with the dynasty which the French people may please to choose. I am happy, in answer to the question of the noble Marquess, to assure your Lordships that the best possible understanding continues unbroken between the Governments of the two countries, nor is there anything which could appear in the least degree likely to endanger or diminish the cordiality of that good understanding; and I will venture to say that no person is more eager to maintain this good understanding in its full integrity than my right hon. Friend to whose speech the noble Marquess has just alluded (Sir Charles Wood). The noble Marquess has neglected or omitted to describe the circumstances under which that speech was delivered. It was a speech made by the right hon. Gentleman to his constituents, and with a freedom of expression which, perhaps, might have been employed inad- 82 vertently, and in which he used terms which he would not have employed had he been addressing the House of Commons. I am sure the noble Marquess will recollect the circumstances under which these expressions were used. The right hon. Baronet was addressing his constituents, and arguing against the wish which would seem to have existed among some of them in favour of universal suffrage and vote by ballot. In doing so he pointed out—and had it not been for the freedom of expression, which I dare say he regrets as much as I must regret it—an argument, which, whether good or bad, was still a perfectly legitimate one—that the existence of universal suffrage and vote by ballot had not prevented a state of things, and a state of law, in France, especially as affecting the freedom of the press, which we should very much deprecate seeing established in this country. That is the substance of the statement of the right hon. Baronet. In that I see not much to complain of, nor, indeed, anything to which any man can possibly object. With respect to the spirit in which the right hon. Baronet spoke, I am assured by him that he "can state with the utmost sincerity that nothing could be further from his intentions than to use any words which could be considered as offensive to the Emperor, and regrets that any expression should have fallen from him upon that occasion upon which such an interpretation could have been placed." Now, although I admit that the expressions are not so respectful as might have been used towards the Sovereign of a friendly State, yet still the substance of the argument was such as I have stated, and which he was perfectly justified in using. The right hon. Baronet having expressed his regret that any interpretation should have been placed upon expressions used inadvertently by him, upon such an occasion as that of addressing his constituents, I think the noble Marquess will agree with me in the propriety of taking no further notice of the matter. The more important part of the address of the noble Marquess was that in which he expressed an opinion that the effect of the speech to which he had alluded had been to throw some doubt upon the continuance of those amicable relations with France, which he wishes to sec continued. I hope I have upon that subject satisfied the noble Marquess, and completely set his mind at rest; and he may rest assured that nothing has occurred to interrupt in the least degree the friendly 83 relations of the two countries. With reference to the production of the correspondence on the recognition of the French Government, I think, although there might be some portions of that correspondence produced without objection, that it would be inconvenient to lay so much before the House as would be necessary to lead to a correct understanding of the subject. I think, therefore, that it will be more expedient for the noble Marquess not to press further for the production of the papers in question.
§ House adjourned till To-morrow.