Lords Sitting of 7 July 1853

Preamble
MINUTES. PUBLIC BILLS.—2a Convicted Prisoners Removal and Confinement.
Reported.—Colonial Bishops Act Extension; Patronage Exchange.
3a Soap Duties; Public Works Loan.

RUSSIA AND THE PORTE—QUESTION.
LORD BROUGHAM: I wish to put a question to my noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Of the importance of the question I am about to take the liberty of asking, I have no doubt; of the importance of the subject to which that question relates, no person can have a doubt I beg to premise my question by stating, as my noble Friend knows, that I have had no communication whatever, directly or indirectly, with him upon this subject—I have had no communication, direct or indirect, upon the subject, with my noble Friend at the head of Her Majesty's Government. As to putting the question, as well as to the subject of the question, I have bad no communication with any of my noble Friends amongst Her Majesty's Ministers. I put the question entirely apart from them, but I put it under a deep conviction of the importance of the question in the present crisis of affairs; My Lords, a notice stands upon our books in the name of my noble Friend the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Clanricarde), which, if made to-morrow, as the notice implies; must needs bring on a discussion of all (for there can he no limit fixed to such a discussion) that relates to the present posture of affairs in the east of Europe. I know that that Motion is in safe hands, whether I regard the motives of my noble Friend in bringing it forward, or the sound discretion under the control of which he is sure to act; but my question is this—whether my noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs thinks that in the present posture of affairs, no inconvenience—I might even Say mischief—may possibly arise—I may almost say may probably arise—from such a discussion at this period? If—which Heaven forbid!—all negotiation is at an end, and a rupture is inevitable, then no inconvenience can take place from the discussion. If—which Hea-

1349
ven grant!—negotiations are in such a state, and the posture of affairs is such, as almost to have attained the point of success, and the difficulty and embarrassment are at an end, then neither mischief nor inconvenience can arise: but if neither of those questions can be answered in the affirmative, then I put it to my noble Friend the noble Marquess, and I appeal to his discretion, whether it would not be well to abstain from making this Motion, for the present at least.
The EARL of CLARENDON: My Lords, it is perfectly correct, as my noble and learned Friend has just stated, that he did not communicate with me, nor, to the best of my knowledge, with any of my noble Friends near me, about the question which he has now put. The first notice I had of the intention of the noble and learned Lord was, when he just now beckoned to me, from which I thought he was about to put some question relative to our foreign relations. My Lords, in answer to my noble and learned Friend's question upon the very grave Subject that now agitates the public mind, with regard to which my noble Friend (the Marquess of Clanricard) has given notice of a Motion for tomorrow, I certainly Cannot say that there would he neither mischief nor inconvenience in a full discussion of that subject at present. Unfortunately, I cannot say that negotiations have arrived at that point, or that this matter is so near a settlement, as to render a discussion upon it comparatively unimportant. But I do say that negotiations are going on; that we most earnestly hope that there may be a peaceful solution of the question and that I am sure your Lordships would be the last persons in the kingdom to do anything to interfere with that settlement. I entirely agree with my noble and learned Friend that this question cannot be in safer bands than in those of my noble Friend the noble Marquess near me. I am, indeed, indebted to my noble Friend already for having once or twice put off this Motion of which he has given notice, and that lie, as well as my noble Friend opposite, has been content With Such answers as I was enabled to give Upon this Subject; and I felt that after the great delay that has taken place in bringing this question to a solution—considering, too, the very grave interests that are connected With it, and the very natural anxiety which exists, not only in your Lordships' House, but throughout the Country, to possess all the information which Her Majesty's Government could
1350
safely give—I felt, my Lords, that I ought not again to ask my noble Friend to withdraw his Motion; but I reserved to myself, in reply to him, to say nothing more than my sense of public duty allowed—more than which neither he nor your Lordships would require. I therefore did not make any application to my noble Friend to postpone his Motion, holding myself ready to meet him to-morrow. As, however, I am upon my legs, I will take this opportunity of asking my noble Friend whether he will object at least to postpone the Motion until Monday next? It is not with reference to the difficulties of the subject itself that I ask him to do this. I do not mean that from the danger of discussion, or the amount of what I should have to say upon the subject, I should ask my noble Friend to postpone his Motion until Monday next. I do not believe that the nature of things or the state of things will vary between to-morrow and Monday next. My reason for asking is, that I think it would be convenient to have this discussion in both Houses at the same time; and my noble Friend Lord John Russell is so extremely unwell that it would be impossible for him to be in the House of Commons to-morrow. My noble Friend, however, hopes to be present on Monday, and to that day, therefore, I would ask the noble Marquess to postpone his Motion. I think I can rely on the judgment and discretion of my noble Friend upon that occasion; and I am sure he will not bring forward then anything prejudicial to the pub-lie service, or, least of all, that he will not bring forward anything likely to impede the progress of the negotiations now going forward.
The EARL of ELLENBOROUGH: My Lords, it is to be expected that Her Majesty's Government must be desirous of taking the earliest opportunity, consistent with its views of the public interests, to make a statement to the House of all the transactions that have taken place, and, if necessary, to ask for the opinion of Parliament on their conduct—if necessary, to ask for the suport of Parliament in the acts they are inclined to adopt; and if that be a fair conclusion to arrive at with respect to their proceedings, I really think the noble Marquess would only exercise a sound discretion, and have in view the public convenience, if he deferred, not only until Monday, but generally, without fixing at present any day, the Motion of which he has given notice for to-morrow. I am myself so strongly impressed with a sense of

1351
the expediency of that postponement, that it had been my intention to communicate to the noble Marquess my wish that he would generally postpone that Motion. I should have done so, because I cannot think it would be desirable that any statement should proceed from the noble Marquess, however temperate that statement might be, when it would be perfectly impossible for Her Majesty's Government to make any other than a partial and lame statement respecting the transactions in question. Such a statement would not, tinder any circumstances, he satisfactory to your Lordships; and if they were to go beyond that statement, and disclose matters, for the convenience of debate, which ought at present to be kept concealed, public mischief, and not public advantage, would be caused from the discussion being forced upon us. That opinion which is stated in the last paragraph of the Motion which the noble Marquess intends to propose—"that Her Majesty may confidently rely upon the zeal and affection of this House for their cordial concurrence and support in maintaining the faith of treaties to which this country is a party, and in preserving those territorial and political arrangements upon which depend the general peace of Europe, the security of commerce, and the national independence of our ancient allies"—it may be very proper for us at some future period to declare, it may be very right for us to say, that, at some future period; there is, however, judgment in not merely saying the right thing, but in saying the right thing at the right time; and that time certainly appears not yet to have arrived. I will suggest to the noble Marquess that he should take into consideration whether in reality it will be for the public advantage that either on to-morrow or on Monday this discussion should be forced upon the House—the question being one of the most difficult and important character, on which it is perfectly impossible for Her Majesty's Ministers, consistent with their duty, to make a full disclosure of the transactions that have taken place.
The EARL of DERBY: Before the noble Marquess proceeds to give an answer to the appeal that has been made to him, I trust I may be permitted, on a question of this importance, to say a few words. The noble Marquess opposite, in giving the notice which stands on the paper in his name, though he may, of course, have mentioned the matter to his private and
1352
personal friends, did so, I think I may say, I without consulting with any political party, and without reference to any political support he might receive from one side or the other. As has been stated by the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign. Affairs, I, as well as he, came down to the House without receiving any intimation that the question was to be brought forward by the noble and learned Lord near me, and I was unaware of his intention, until he stated, to my surprise, that he was about to bring this question under your Lordships' consideration. I was aware that it was the intention of my noble Friend who has just sat down, to make some suggestion in reference to the Motion; and I now desire to express my entire concurrence in the views expressed by my noble Friend and the noble Earl opposite. I beg to express my hope, also, that the noble Marquess will be content, notwithstanding the natural anxiety which he and the country must feel for the solution-God grant it may be the pacific solution!—of the question to withdraw his Motion, and that he will be satisfied to leave the responsibility of the question where it must rest—on the Government—and that he will not embarrass them and the affairs of the country by calling upon them to make declarations that may be inconsistent with the advantage of the public service, or, on the other hand, bring on a partial discussion, in which it would be impossible, on their part, to enter fully into the question. I rise, not so much to express my concurrence in the view of my noble Friend who last addressed your Lordships, as to express a hope that if this course which we suggest shall be taken in this House, it will be also deemed expedient that a similar course should be taken in the other House of Parliament. I think my noble Friend the Secretary of State of Foreign Affairs has rested his request for a postponement till Monday on the ground that a similar postponement has taken place in the House of Commons; and I am sure your Lordships, and the Members of the other House of Parliament, are equally aware of this—that it would not be proper to have one House of Parliament altogether silent in the discussion of foreign affairs, while in the other House there should be a partial statement, made by an individual Member, which will be either answered imperfectly, or not answered at all. The course that will be pursued by the hon. Gentleman who has given that notice of Motion in the

1353
other House, must rest with himself alone; but as the noble Earl has made an appeal to the noble Marquess, and as I cannot make a similar appeal to the hon. Gentleman in the other House, I have merely to say, that whenever the question is discussed it should be discussed fully, and whenever it is discussed in one House, a simultaneous discussion, under circumstances exactly similar, should take place in the other House of Parliament.
EARL GREY: If I rightly understood the reply of the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to the question put to him by the noble and learn I ed Lord (Lord Brougham), he distinctly stated, that it was out of his power to deny that a discussion upon this subject at this moment would not be unattended with mischief and inconvenience. Now, I think after that declaration from the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, the propriety of postponing the discussion must be obvious to every one. And I cannot think that any scruple which my noble Friend (the Earl of Clarendon) may have in asking that this Motion may be postponed because he has before made a similar request—I cannot think, I say, that any scruple of that kind ought for a moment to stand in the way of my noble Friend endeavouring to prevent this discussion coming on until such a time as, in his judgment, knowing when it may safely take place, it may be brought on. That it should ultimately take place—that a subject of such deep importance should be discussed, and fully discussed, in both Houses, is, I think, obviously necessary; but, on the other hand, even those who have no other means of information on the subject than can be obtained from the public papers, can hardly doubt that, at the present moment, a discussion upon this subject in both Houses of Parliament can hardly fail to be attended with some risk of increasing existing irritation, and diminishing the chances, which I trust are still great, of preventing any unfortunate breach in the peace of the world.
The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDE: May I beg that my noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs will repeat the expressions he has used respecting the inconvenience of proceeding with my Motion? I did not understand his observations in the same sense as my noble Friend near me.
The EARL of CLARENDON: In answer to my noble Friend, I hare to state that I
1354
repeated, or intended to repeat, the words of my noble and learned Friend opposite. I said I could not deny that there might be mischief and inconvenience in bringing on a full discussion of this subject at the present time; but that I did not think it right to ask my noble Friend to put off his Motion again, because I would reserve to myself the right to say nothing in reply which I thought would be detrimental to the public service.
The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDE: My Lords, I deeply feel the responsibility that is thrown upon me—a responsibility that is the greater, because, as the noble Earl opposite has rightly said, I certainly consulted no Member of this House, much less any party in this House, with respect to this question, or the Motion I might make, or as to any part that might be taken by leading Members of this House thereupon. After what has been said by my noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, I cannot of course think of proceeding with my Motion. When I am told on authority that I incur a risk, even the slightest, of increasing the difficulty of this critical moment, or that I incur any risk, no matter how slight, of causing inconvenience and mischief at such a moment—I cannot for an instant hesitate to stop in the course which I thought it would be advisable to adopt. At the same time I may be permitted, without at all discussing the question, to say that there seems to have been, amongst some noble Lords who have spoken, a misapprehension of the Motion which I thought it was my duty to place on the notice paper. Into the whole of the question as regards this House, I certainly did not intend nor wish to enter, because an important part of that question, when it comes to be fully discussed, must be the conduct of Her Majesty's Government. I certainly did not think that I could in any way arraign or touch them by insinuation or supposition, much less could I attempt to laud them, until all the papers connected with the subject were laid before your Lordships. But what appeared to me was this—that in the present state of affairs (there being certain circumstances public and patent to the whole world) an expression of opinion by the British Parliament at this moment could not fail to have a very great effect on the course of events. With your Lordships' permission, I am willing to withdraw the notice on your Lordships' table; but you must understand clearly and distinctly

1355
that I do so only on the supposition, and with the anticipation, that the Motion of which notice has been given in the other House of Parliament will likewise be postponed. I certainly have thought, and notwithstanding what has been said my opinion remains unchanged, that at this critical moment an expression of opinion by the two Houses of Parliament, and of the feeling which I am sure must animate them, and, from what I see by the organs of publie opinion, I can confidently say does animate every man in this country, in Parliament and out of Parliament—an expression of the firmness which, I trust (and which I do not wish to insinuate the slightest doubt of), is to be found in Her Majesty's Councils—I say the expression of such a feeling and such an opinion at this moment, it did seem to me, would not be without particular weight, not in increasing hostility, but in averting that which appears to me, if vigorous steps are not taken to prevent it, may lead to a general and tremendous war, such as, thank God! has not been witnessed since 1814. These were the views with which I thought it right to ask your Lordships to consider the circumstances of the case as it now stands, not with reference to details with which we are unacquainted, but with reference to all those great facts that have been published to the world by authority, and on which no doubt can be entertained by any assembly, or by any individual. In the discussion of those facts. I believe, no material difference would be found to exist; but, lest I should incur even the possible risk of causing difficulty, I do not hesitate as to taking the course which it is my duty to take, and, with your Lordships' permission, I will withdraw my notice of Motion.
EARL FITZWILLIAM: Before this question entirely passes away, I am desirous—not to provoke any further discussion, hut in order to place before the public the fullest information that can be obtained—to ask the Members of Her Majesty's Government, and more especially the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether the document—an unauthorised copy of which I hold in my hand—is believed by them to be authentic, or if it has been or is in the possession of Her Majesty's Government? It is dated from Peterhoff on the 14th, otherwise the 26th of June, 1853. It says—
"It is known to our faithful subjects that the defence of our faith has always been the sacred duty of our ancestors. From the day it pleased
1356
the Almighty to place us on the throne of our fathers the maintenance of the holy obligations with which it is inseparably connected has been the object of our- constant care and attention; these, acting on the groundwork of the famous treaty of Kainardji, which subsequent solemn treaties with the Ottoman Porte have fully confirmed, have ever been directed towards upholding the rights of our Church."
Having stated the circumstances which appeared contrary to the faith of treaties to the great Powers with which Russia was in relation, the document concluded with these remarkable words:—
"But if, through stubbornness and blindness, it desires the contrary, then, calling God to our aid, we shall leave Him to decide between us, and, with a full assurance in the arm of the Almighty, we shall"—
these were words very remarkable—
"go forth to fight for the Orthodox faith."
That is, your Lordships will agree with me, a most remarkable document, and I am desirous—and I believe your Lordships will be desirous with me—of knowing whether Her Majesty's Government hag reason, from anything that has been communicated to them, to think that document really proceeded from the quarter whence it seems to be dated?
The EARL of CLARENPON: In answer to my noble Friend, I have only to say, we have received that document from Her Majesty's Minister at St. Petersburg; that it was furnished without comment, simply as having been published on the day on which it was sent to us by post. We have no further information on the subject. I believe that in the translation which appeared there were some faults, not of much importance, but one of them struck me as the noble Earl read the concluding sentence now, in which he read—"We shall go forth to tight for the orthodox faith." The words should be, "We shall go forth to fight in defence of the orthodox Church." There is not much difference, but the latter words are nearest the sense. In other points the translation was tolerably correct.
The EARL of MALMESBURYsaid, he was under the impression that his noble Friend (the Earl Fitzwilliam) was about to remark to their Lordships on the main question, otherwise he would have wished to have addressed a few words to the House in reference to it; but as now it had been agreed to post pone its further consideration, he should not attempt to return to it. He must say, however, that their Lordships ought to be assured by

1357
Her Majesty's Government that, as far as in them lay, they will endeavour to effect a similar postponement of the discussion on Monday next in the other House; for it could be no compliment to their Lordships to be suspected of not having sufficient discretion to carry on such a debate, while it was declared that it was quite open to the House of Commons fully to enter upon it. He therefore must say, that he thought they ought to have the confident assurance of Her Majesty's Government that, as far as they had power to do so, they would use their exertions to bring about a similar postponement in the other House of Parliament to that which the noble Marquess opposite had this evening consented.
The EARL of ABERDEEN: It is quite impossible for the Government to give instructions with respect to the order of business in the House of Commons. All we can do is, to exercise any influence we possess to do our utmost to prevent the discussion.
The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDE: And also to assure us that if the efforts of Government fail, your Lordships shall not be debarred from the same right of discussion as the other House. The Government may not be able to prevent the Motion coming on; and, if so, I am, I confess, one of those who think the inconvenience might be less by a discussion in this House also.

WILSON'S (HAMPSTEAD) ESTATE BILL.
LORD COLCHESTERmoved the Second Reading of this Bill. It was really nothing more than a private Bill, but it had been made to assume the character of a public Bill in consequence of the importance attached to it by the interest which a portion of the public took in the property to which the Bill applied—namely, the manor of Hampstead, including Hampstead-heath. It had been said that this was a Bill to empower Sir Thomas Wilson to enclose Hampstead-heath, and to grant it out on building leases. A strong feeling in opposition to the Bill had been consequently raised. He could, however, assure their Lordships that the Bill was not intended to have any such effect. It was not for enclosing Hampstead-heath, or any other land whatsoever. Its only object was to give to Sir Thomas Wilson power to grant leases for a longer term than he possessed the power to do under his father's will. There was no person who would be more opposed to the enclosing of Hamp-
1358
stead-heath than himself; but there was no provision whatever in this Bill that would give the slightest facility for such a step. When the Bill was before their Lordships on a previous occasion, the opinion of the Judges was taken upon it, and was given in its favour. The noble Lord then pointed out the nature of the several provisions of the Bill, and concluded by moving that it be read a second time.
The EARL of SHAFTESBURYsaid, that he should say "Not content" to the second reading of this Bill; but he begged at once to observe, that those who opposed the second reading of the Bill were not anxious to interfere with the rights of Sir Thomas Wilson in disposing of his property in whatever way he might think proper, under and in accordance with his father's will by which he had obtained it. He had the full benefit of the property devised to him by his father's will, and no one wished to disturb him in it; but it was quite another thing when he came to Parliament, and asked for powers which the will of his father did not confer upon him. Their Lordships, before complying with such a request, were bound to inquire whether the powers asked for would, if granted, be beneficial or injurious to the public. His belief was, that the granting of such powers would be most detrimental to the public interests. This Bill had been before their Lordships four several times already, and had been as often rejected; and he hoped that on this the fifth time, the rejection would be final to this persevering and tiresome application. It was a Bill to enable Sir Thomas Wilson to grant building leases of his land at Hampstead. He understood the noble Lord to say that no such power was demanded; but it was clear from the contents of the Bill that a power was demanded to grant building leases for ninety-nine years—a power that would very much intrench upon open spaces and impede the free circulation of the air which they at present enjoyed. He understood at the time the will was made, the property was not available for building purposes; but, since then, a road had been made called the Finchley-road. Now, the inhabitants of Hampstead and the neighbourhood would have no objection to Sir Thomas Wilson building on either side of that road, which presented a very great frontage; but Sir Thomas demanded a power to build elsewhere. If the powers now sought to be obtained had been unintentionally omitted from the will of the late

1359
Sir Thomas Wilson, there might have been a strong ground for the present claim; but it really did appear that it was the decided determination of the testator that the land in question should not be built upon. Sir Thomas Wilson, therefore, asked their Lordships to give him powers which he did not possess under his father's will, and powers which it was not intended he should possess; and his opinion was that the giving of such powers would be greatly to the disservice of the community.
Amendment moved, to leave out "now" and insert "this day three months."
The EARL of WICKLOWsupported the Bill. The argument of the noble Earl was inconsistent with itself. He first said that the powers asked for ought not to be granted, because they would be in violation of the provisions of the will of the late Sir Thomas Wilson; and then he immediately added that the people of Hampstead would not object to the present Sir Thomas Wilson building on the sides of Finchley-road, which would be equally a violation of his father's will. Their Lordships were appealed to by the opponents of this Bill, not upon the justice of the case, but merely on the ground that Hampstead-heath happened to be very convenient for the public. But, in his opinion, it would be most unjust in their Lordships to consider the convenience or even the health of the people in 'that locality when debating this question, He agreed that any alterations in the 'neighbourhood of Hampstead-heath would be a great inconvenience to the public; that, no doubt, was an argument in favour of the public buying the land, hut it was no argument for refusing to the owner of that land those powers which were necessary to his full enjoyment of it.
LORD CAMPBELLstill adhered to the unfavourable opinion which had been expressed with respect to this Bill when it was before their Lordships in 1845. Each of the four previous Bills which had been introduced with respect to this property had been rejected on deliberate consideration by that House, and with the sanction of his distinguished predecessor, Lord Denman, who was not in the habit of giving his opinion without grave deliberation, and who had the most perfect respect for the rights of property. The only opinion which the Judges had given on this matter was, that no person having a vested interest in this land would be injured by this Bill; but they had given no opinion as to whether it would prejudice the copyholders of the
1360
manor of Hampstead or the public at large; or as to whether it was a proper Bill for that House to pass. Indeed, those Judges who were Members of their Lordships' House—of whom Lord Denman was one—had voted against it in 1845. The clear rule was, that the will of the donor of any property should be upheld, unless something had occurred since his death which there was reason to believe would have caused him to make a different disposition of his property had he been alive. Now not only was this not the case here, but there was strong evidence that the late Sir Thomas Wilson had, from good feeling towards the public and his friends at Hampstead, intentionally withheld from his son the power of granting building leases for 99 years on the portion of his property to which this Bill referred.
LORD REDESDALEwas bound to say that he considered this to be a very hard case. It was that of ground which, from the extension of the neighbouring suburban districts had become very valuable, and its owner came to Parliament and prayed for those powers which in an ordinary case would be granted as matter of course, without objection being made. The real question was, whether the late Sir Thomas Wilson, if he were now alive, would have granted such powers with regard to building leases as those proposed to be given under this Bill? His belief was, that the late proprietor would have done so; his will was dated in 1796, and he afterwards made codicils by which he granted building powers over a portion of his estate nearest to his family residence at Charlton. It was to be supposed that he would still more readily have granted such powers with respect to a locality at a considerable distance. The ground in question had been lately opened up by a new road, and was being built up to every day. It was quite false to say that this was a proposal for the enclosure of Hampstead-heath; it related to land which was the private property of Sir Thomas Wilson, and over which no one else had any right.
The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDEsaid, it was perfectly true that if the late proprietor were alive he would need no Act of Parliament whatever to enable him to do what was proposed in this Bill. If the gentleman who now advanced the claim should chance to die within six months, his successor could, without any authority from that or the other House of Parliament, grant building leases over every part of the es-

1361
tate. The embarrassment in this case arose wholly and solely from the casualty of this gentleman being at an advanced period of life without an heir, and the estate being entailed collaterally. He thought it necessary to say this, because for many years he had heard of this measure as one in which the lord of the manor asked powers not rightly belonging to him, for the enclosure of Hampstead-heath.
LORD COLCHESTER,in reply, stated that this Bill did not give Sir Thomas Wilson the power of building upon Hampstead-heath; or any part of Hampstead-heath; and if their Lordships would agree to the Bill, Sir Thomas Wilson was quite willing that any clauses should be struck out which might appear to give such power.
On Question, That "now," stand part of the Motion,
Their Lordships divided:—Content 19; Non-content 21: Majority 2.
Resolved in the Negative; and Bill to be read 2a on this day three months.

EAST INDIA COMPANY'S EUROPEAN TROOPS BILL.
The EARL of ELLENBOROUGHsaid, he had extracted the substance of this Bill, empowering the East India Company to augment the number of their European troops both in India and in this country, from the Ministerial measure relating to the Government of India. It was on the supposition that the House of Commons would agree to that clause of the measure that he had done so, thinking that no time should be lost in making preparation for the defence of the country, and that it would be advisable that they should pass this part of the measure at once, as by doing so they would save six weeks. He, therefore, took the earliest opportunity of submitting to their Lordships the means by which that course could be secured. If his noble Friend at the head of the Government should think it desirable to accept his offer, he would most willingly give up the charge of the Bill into his hands.
The EARL of ABERDEENwould only observe that this measure appeared to be one of an unprecedented character. There must be something very urgent in the circumstances in order to justify such an unusual proceeding, and he was not aware of any such circumstances. He thought there was no reason whatever why this provision should not come before them six
1362
weeks hence, and he could not adopt the suggestion of his noble Friend.
The EARL of ELLENBOROUGHsaid, that under these circumstances of course it would be quite idle for him to press the second reading of the Bill.
The Order of the day for the Second Reading read, and discharged.

SOAP DUTIES BILL—FOREIGN AFFAIRS.
Order of the Day for the Third Reading read.
Moved—"That the Bill be now read a Third Time."
The EARL of ELLENBOROUGHwished to call their Lordships' attention to some considerations of great importance, which arose on the proposition for the third reading of this measure. When the Bill was first brought into the House of Commons three months back, it formed part of a great system of finance, founded apparently on the supposition that the happy state of peace which had lasted for nearly forty years would endure for an indefinite period longer. It was proposed, therefore, as part of a peace Budget. But since that time a very great change had taken place in the position of this country. At this moment a French fleet joined to an English fleet was at the mouth of the Dardanelles; and it was to be apprehended, undoubtedly, that the officers in command of the fleets must have certain instructions for acting, under certain circumstances, in co-operation for the defence of our ally the Sultan of Turkey, and such action, if the case should ever occur, would be war. We had likewise assembled such a fleet as was perhaps never got together since the peace—though still not so large as we might need—at Spithead. That squadron was assembled for the purpose of defending the coasts of this country; for if that action took place, and there should be war at the mouth of the Dardanelles, it must be perfectly well known to their Lordships that within three weeks of that time a very much stronger Russian fleet than any which we could show, with troops on board, might be at the mouth of the Thames. He must, therefore, say that the circumstances in which we now stood were altogether different from those under which the Bill was originally proposed. It was then part of a peace Budget, and it might now probably be regarded at this time as part of a war Budget, which would have to be proposed for the

1363
purpose of meeting the new circumstances in which we were placed. He thought it most expedient, under such circumstances, that Parliament should hold its hand for a, short time. The noble Earl at the head of the Foreign Department had very prudently said that it was not expedient, and not consistent with the public interests, that they should at the present moment enter into a general discussion of our relations with Russia, and the existing position of the Eastern question. If the noble Earl could not see daylight as to the ultimate result of the negotiations in progress, and could pot look forward with certainty to a pacific solution of the question, surely that must be a reason for their Lordships to guide their course accordingly. The same reason which deterred the noble Lord from speaking on details, should deter their Lordships from reading a third time a Bill for the repeal of a tax which gave very considerable assistance to the revenue, every shilling of which they would want, if the result of the present negotiations should be unfavourable. Therefore, he should beg leave to suggest to Her Majesty's Ministers (that it would not be expedient to read this Bill a third time until the state of affairs was such as to make it possible for the Secretary of State for the Foreign Department to enter into a full explanation of all that has taken place to affect our relations with Russia.
The EARL of ABERDEENsaid, he must be excused from dwelling upon some of the topics touched by his noble Friend. With regard to the suggestion his noble Friend had made for postponing the Bill before their Lordships, he could only state that it was his earnest hope that no such resources would be required to meet any such necessity as that to which he had adverted. But if, unfortunately, he should be mistaken in that hope, and if the greatest calamity that could befall this country should be imminent, why, even then, he did not think it was the duty of the House of Lords to interfere and prevent the relief afforded to the people by the repeal of these duties. If it should so happen that the House of Commons should determine that this country shall be placed in a state of war, why, the House of Commons would undoubtedly provide the means for carrying it out.
The EARL of DERBYmust say that he altogether differed from the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Aberdeen), in his view of the relative duties of the House of Com-
1364
mons and the House of Lords. They were not in the same position as was the House of Commons when the Bill was first laid before them; they were asked to consent to the measure as part of a general system of taxation sanctioned by the House of Commons. The noble Earl must admit that noble Lords on the Opposition side of the House, during the present Session, had given ample proof that they were not disposed to bring that House into collision with the House of Commons, or to refuse the imposition of any tax that might be demanded as requisite for the public service. But he must concur with his noble Friend near him in thinking that at a time when they were in a state of painful suspense and anxious uncertainty as to the possibility of maintaining the peace of Europe, it was their duty not to neglect the state of the finances, or to abandon lightly sources of revenue immediately available, amounting to something like 400,000 l [The Earl of ABERDEEN: 1,200,000 l.] That made the case of course much stronger. His noble Friend did not ask them to refuse their consent to the measure sent up to them by the House of Commons, but he asked them to be quite satisfied, before they passed it, that the circumstances were the same in which the Mouse of Commons was placed when they thought it expedient and practicable to take off this amount of taxation. The noble Earl must be well aware that there was a great difference between the imposition of a tax that might be required for the public service, and abstaining from taking off a tax until they knew whether the revenue would bear the loss. They had had a statement made of the financial position of the country, and even supposing peace to be altogether uninterrupted, and no larger expenditure to he incurred by our preparations, he would not say for war, but for averting war, the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not enabled to show a surplus exceeding 280.000 l., according to the last estimate. If, then, they should be compelled, not to go to war, but to make any extraordinary efforts, or to incur any extraordinary sacrifices, was it wise to surrender 1,200,000 l. of revenue. Would it pot be prudent to keep that amount in hand, in order that the House of Commons might have an opportunity of judging whether under the new circumstances they could afford to dispense with this tax, without danger of having to resort to other taxes in order to meet any emergency that might arise?

1365
He was inclined to think that the wisest course would be that suggested by his noble Friend, of postponing the third reading of the Bill for a fortnight or three weeks—a course which would produce no effect whatever upon the revenue, although it might pro-duce some little uncertainty, but which un-certainty arose, in fact, not from the proposition of his noble Friend,, but from circumstances of a very important character, namely, the preservation of peace, or otherwise. Was it a prudent or a wise course in the prospect of that uncertainty to take a step that would absolutely deprive the Exchequer of more than 1,000,000 l. of revenue, when they had the alternative of waiting a fortnight or three weeks to see whether the tax could. he taken off with safety to the public. It appeared to him that a short delay was the course dictated by prudence and sound sense, and that the other course was unsuited to the present circumstances of the country, and was incurring a risk which he could not but think would add seriously to the responsibility now weighing upon Her Majesty's Government.
The EARL of ELLENEOROUGHmoved that the Bill be postponed for a week.
Amendment moved, to leave put "now," and insert "on Friday the 15th of this instant July."
EARL GRANVILLEcould not help thinking that it would he infinitely the wisest course to leave the responsibility of this case with the Government. If the Government assumed that responsibility—weighing, on the one side, the great alarm and inconvenience which the adoption of the proposition of the noble Earl would occasion to the mercantile community, and feeling, on the other side, perfect confidence that if the honour and interest of the country required us to enter into a war, there would be no difficulty whatever on the part of this rich and spirited country in finding the necessary means—he really hoped that his noble Friend would not press his Motion to a division, or that, if unfortunately he should do so, their Lordships would not concur with him.
The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDEsaid, he apprehended that although the noble Earl might not press his Motion to a division—supposing that the Government took upon themselves the responsibility of resisting what he considered a very wise suggestion, and supported by most sensible, clear, and rational arguments, he still must say that he was happy the Motion
1366
had been proposed, if it were only that it had elicited from the noble Earl at the head of the Government, and from the noble Earl the President of the Council, an expression of confidence that, at the shortest notice, the resources of the country would be found in such a state as to enable us to meet any emergency which might arise. Nevertheless, he thought it would be wise if for a short time they held their hand, as the noble Earl advised; and lie did not see that any interest could be injured by that course. For although it might be true that a pertain degree of alarm might be created by it, it would pot the less create a confidence in the determination of the Government to uphold the honour and interests of the country at any cost, and that confidence would place the commerce of the country on so sure ft basis that it would bear no proportion to the disadvantage which might result to the country from the repeal of the tax. If, however, the Government, feeling that they had ample resources at their command to meet any dangers or difficulties that might possibly arise, and, therefore, assumed the responsibility of refusing the assistance offered to them by the preposition of the noble Earl, he did not suppose that it would be desired to force it upon them, though he thought it would he wiser if they accepted it.
LORD BEAUMONTconsidered that the whole question rested on the responsibility of Government. If their Lordships had the assurance of Government that they were prepared to take the whole responsibility of meeting any emergency that might, occur, he thought that they ought to trust them to that extent; hut it was only on that understanding that he should accede to the proposal for passing this measure.
The EARL of ELLENBOROUGHsaid, he should certainly not withdraw his Motion. On the contrary, he wished that it should appear on the Journals as an indication of his opinion of the absolute necessity, under present circumstances, of keeping all the resources they could in their hand for the public protection. At the same time, he knew it would be quite idle for him to divide the House. He certainly did not feel that he could place the same degree of reliance on the Government, as that which seemed to be placed on them. by some noble Lords who had spoken. If the responsibility of Government could fit out a fleet, he should be perfectly satisfied; but knowing, as he did, that it could do no

1367
such thing, it could not in the slightest degree be a matter of consolation to him to throw upon the Government the onus of meeting that difficulty.
On Question. That "now" stand part of the Motion,
Resolved in the Affirmative.
Bill read 3a accordingly, and passed.
House adjourned till To-morrow.