§ EARL STANHOPE, in moving for a 148 copy or extract of the Despatch from the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, to regulate the diplomatic relations with the Court of Rome since the cessation of the legation at Florence, said that at a time when Central Italy was in a state of extreme agitation, and when alarm—and perhaps something more than alarm—existed there their Lordships could not expect to be called upon to give any opinion upon the political aspect of the matter to which he called their attention, and he did not wish to invite them to do so. His object was to call attention to the great inconvenience and disadvantages which had attended our recent system of diplomatic intercourse with Rome. Those inconveniences would be acknowledged by Her Majesty's Government and by any one conversant with the subject. Whether this was the exact time at which some better system should be adopted Her Majesty's Government would be the best judge; all that he intended to do was to move for the Return of which he had given notice, and to which he believed there would be no objection on the part of the Government; and any Peer would have the opportunity of expressing his views upon the subject. In the first place he felt it right to say that he had not the smallest complaint to make against the gentleman who now carried on our diplomatic business at Rome. The appointment of Mr. Odo Russell was, he believed, a very good one, which that gentleman had fully justified by the ability he had shown in the performance of his duties. In former times it was held that any diplomatic intercourse with Rome was to be avoided, that penal consequences would attach to any attempt to establish it, and that any Minister entering upon such intercourse would be liable to the penalties of a premunire. At the Peace of Paris the Ministers of the day had not the smallest desire of exposing themselves to the penalties of a premunire, but at the same time they perceived the necessity for the due protection of British subjects, of establishing some kind of diplomatic intercourse with the ruler of a state which comprises the seaports of Civita Vecchia and Ancona, and they resolved to do that indirectly which they dared not do directly. It was determined to send to Rome an Attaché of the Legation at Florence, with the rank only of an Attaché, to carry on our diplomatic business in that city. Great inconvenience was 149 found to result from that arrangement, and about twelve years since the Government and Parliament decided upon applying a remedy. In 1848 the Act the 11 & 12 Vict., cap. 108, was passed, enabling Her Majesty to establish and maintain diplomatic relations with the Sovereign of the Roman States. In the Bill originally there were only two clauses; but a third clause was introduced in that House upon the Motion of the Earl of Eglintoun, to the effect that it shall not be lawful for Her Majesty to receive
Any person who shall be in holy orders of the Church of Rome, or a Jesuit, or member of any other religious order of the Church of Rome.He thought that restriction was a reasonable one, and he did not seek to disturb it; because it did seem to him that in the present religious condition of Ireland it would be most undesirable to receive any person bearing the rank of Nuncio, or Legate, as Ambassador from Rome. He was not, therefore, in any way seeking to disturb that provision; he only wished to show how consistently with it we might establish a more direct diplomatic intercourse with the Court of Rome. At that time the Ministers of the Court of Rome took offence at this clause. They probably overlooked the precedents established in the cases of the Courts of Berlin and St. Petersburg, and declared that since an attempt was made to shackle their free discretion in the choice of their agents they would receive no Minister on the part of England. Up to this moment, therefore, the Act had remained a dead letter. He could not but think, however, that a favourable moment had now arrived for reviewing this question. Hitherto we had carried on diplomatic intercourse with Rome by means of an Attaché to the Legation at Florence. As their Lordships were aware, however, in consequence of recent and well-known events, that Legation had just ceased to exist, so that in any case there must be some modification of our mode of conducting our relations with the Roman Court. The analogous course would be to send to Rome an Attaché connected with the Legation at Turin or Naples. But there were plain objections to either of those courses. An Attaché sent from Turin to Rome would be at a very considerable distance from his proper post; and it must be remembered that between the Court of Turin and the Court of Rome at present no very cordial relations exist- 150 ed. If, on the other hand, our agent in Rome were attached to the Legation at Naples, he would be placed in this very inconvenient position, that he would either have to communicate direct with the Secretary in England without receiving communications from the head-quarters of his mission; or that he would have to receive or send his communications through a city which was further removed from England by a twenty-six hours' journey than the distance which separated us from Rome, either of which courses would be productive of inconvenience. Under these circumstances, though the Government might be able to adduce valid reasons to the contrary, he could not but think that on general grounds it was desirable to establish direct diplomatic intercourse with Rome. Another reason why present circumstances afforded a favourable opportunity for reviewing the subject was, that no difficulty need now be raised about the question of expense. The Legation at Florence had just ceased to exist, and the sum which it had cost would be exactly sufficient to meet the expenses of a Mission at Rome. It would also perhaps be found a fortunate circumstance that the present Ministers of the Pope wore not the men who had dissuaded the Pope from availing himself of the Act of 1848. We were not asking the Court of Rome to do us an act of favour; from whichever side it was made the overture was one which both parties might accept without loss of dignity. He believed he could appeal to very authoritative testimony for the purpose of showing the inconveniences and the disadvantages which had followed from the mode in which our relations with the Court of Rome had hitherto been conducted. He might appeal upon that point to a gentleman who had for many years been at the head of our Legation at Florence, and who had filled with great distinction other diplomatic posts—he meant Sir Hamilton Seymour; and he might further appeal to the noble Marquess near him (the Marquess of Normanby), who had also held the office of our Minister at Florence, and whose courtesy and hospitality in that post would not easily be forgotten by any person who had ever been brought within their influence. But what were the special disadvantages of our present position? In the first place, it deprived our representative at Rome of his due weight and dignity. It was impossible that a young man, who held no higher office than that of an Attaché, and who 151 perhaps lived, as Attachés usually did, up some three or four flights of stairs, could compete upon equal terms with the accredited Ministers of France and Austria and of other Powers. And if any noble Lord denied the proposition his argument might perhaps carry him further than he desired, for, if an Attaché with a slender salary was all that was required at Rome, it would he difficult to say why a more expensive diplomatic establishment was maintained at Paris or Vienna. Notwithstanding, therefore, the personal merits of the gentleman who now filled the post, there was a want of weight and dignity in our communications with the Court of Rome. The whole system, as it now existed, was neither more nor less than a system of make-believe. In law we pretended not to send a Minister to Rome; but in fact, we did send one. Now, in public as well as in private life, a system of make-believes was never so effectual as an open and a manly policy. This further disadvantage attended our present diplomatic relations with Rome. It was perfectly optional with the Pope or his Foreign Minister whether he would or would not receive our Attaché. An Ambassador had a right to demand an audience with the Sovereign of the country to which he was accredited. A Minister Plenipotentiary might ask for an interview with the Foreign Minister, but neither of those privileges pertained to an Attaché belonging to a different Mission. There had been times when the gentlemen so employed at Rome had experienced great difficulty in obtaining any interview either with the Pope or the Foreign Minister. He believed that Mr. Russell had perfect facilities in this way; but this was owing solely to the alarms of the times in Italy, and to the anxious feelings of the Ministers of the Holy See, and it was just the evil of the system that this privilege fluctuated according to times and circumstances. Admitting the ability both of Mr. Russell and his predecessor in office, and that they had discharged their duties in a most unexceptionable manner, still he said the Government had no right to expect, as a general rule, that they could attract the highest ability to such a post if it continued to be placed in the lowest diplomatic rank, and the smallest diplomatic stipend It was manifest that questions might at any time arise between the two courts, such as the enlistments in Ireland for the service of the Pope which 152 required to be dealt with by a very firm and prudent man; and it was important that we should have in Rome not an able man by accident, but an able man as a natural consequence of our diplomatic system. Look at what occurred with the Courts of Berlin and St. Petersburg. The Courts of Berlin and St. Petersburg were neither in communion with Rome, but each maintained a Minister there. An intimation proceeded some time back from St. Petersburg, and likewise from Berlin, to the effect that it would not be agreeable to receive an ecclesiastic as Envoy in those cities; but, as the Court of Rome desired to employ none but ecclesiastical agents, the result was that no Minister from Rome ever permanently resided at St. Petersburg or Berlin. The course adopted in the case of those two countries might also be adopted in the case of this country; and if it were not agreeable for the Court of Rome to employ any but ecclesiastical agents, then, as this country was by law prevented from receiving them, the natural course of proceeding seemed to be that this country, though it might not receive an ecclesiastical Minister from Rome in London, might entrust its diplomatic business in Rome to a regularly accredited Minister. Their Lordships would recollect that one of the Ministers of Prussia who had resided at Rome was that distinguished man the Chevalier Bunsen, and their Lordships all knew the great advantages of which his residence at Rome had been productive in the cause of literature and art. The mention of art reminded him that there was another point which he wished to impress on their Lordships' attention, and that was that the presence of an English mission at Rome would tend greatly to promote the interests of art in this country. Their Lordships were all aware of the very large number of students in painting, sculpture, and architecture, who resided at Rome. It was within his own recollection that the English students there were more numerous than the students from any other country, except France. It must be home in mind that a period of one or two years passed in Rome was almost indispensable for the full development of artistic genius. A remarkable testimony on this point had been furnished by Sir Joshua Reynolds, who in one of his lectures stated that though many of his friends had assured him even before his journey to Rome that he had obtained a full 153 knowledge of his profession, yet that—as Newton declared he felt before the endless ocean of science—he felt but as "a little child" in art when he stood in the presence of master-pieces of the great painters of Italy. He believed no person would deny the advantage to artists of a period of study at Rome; and an English mission there would supply a central point of union for English students. Their Lordships would, perhaps, be surprised when he stated that England was almost the only nation in the world that did nothing for its students at Rome. The Royal Academy did, indeed, send on the average one student in the year; but the English Government did nothing at all in this respect, and contrasted unfavourably with other Governments in this matter. Mr. John Gibson, that eminent English sculptor resident at Rome, whose genius in art did so much honour to his native country, and one of whose noblest works, a colossal statue of the Queen, adorned the apartment immediately adjoining to that House, had the goodness some time since, at his request, to draw up a paper upon this subject, in which he stated—Here is a list of the nations whose Governments send pensioned students to Rome to study painting, sculpture, and architecture. France has an academy, Austria, Prussia, Saxony, Tuscany, Naples has an academy; Russia, Spain, Mexico, Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, France has at Rome five architects, five painters, five sculptors, two landscape painters, two engravers, two medal or die engravers. Each student is sent here for five years. As to Russia, each student is sent here for six years, with a pension of £160 a year each; for his journey £40, and for his return £40. The French academy and the Naples academy have professors to overlook the students. All other students are watched by their Ministers. In the year 1844 I visited England, after an absence of twenty-seven years. The late Sir Robert Peel sent for me. I waited upon him, and he said that the Government had some idea of sending students to Rome, and he wished me to give him what information I could upon such a subject from my long experience of the practice of foreign nations. With reference to his question as to the propriety of sending English students to Rome, I said that I was entirely ignorant of the state of sculpture in England, but since my arrival I had been examining the public monuments, and that I could see the defects of style which prevailed in them, likewise the absence of the grand principles of severe simplicity with that perfect execution imbibed at Rome. The English Government spend large sums to erect public monuments, but contribute nothing towards the training of their students. I had seen some who had natural powers, but wanted the advantages given to young sculptors of the Continent—that is, a Roman education for six years, I have visited England a few times since, and the above are still my sentiments. If the English Government were to follow the ex- 154 ample of other nations, they would in the course of time have public monuments that would be an honour to the nation.He would not weaken the force of that testimony, by adding one word of his own by way of comment; but he might mention that the Prince Consort, whose enlightened zeal in the cause of art was so well known, addressed a public letter to the late Earl of Ellesmere on the subject of the intended Art Exhibition at Manchester. In that letter, which bore date, July 3, 1856, were these words:—No country invests a larger amount of capital in works of art of all kinds than England, and in none almost is so little done for art education.It might be objected, as it had been objected on similar subjects in another place, that, after all, questions of art were not matters of national importance. He did not anticipate that such an objection would proceed from the noble Earl the President of the Council, who, on all occasions, had shown himself not only conversant with but zealous for the interests of Art, or from the noble Earl near him (the Earl of Derby), whose attachment to art was well known, and who had not many weeks since presented two pictures of considerable value to the National Portrait Gallery. But if any such objection should be raised in any quarter, he believed he could meet the objection by showing that the cultivation of art by study might give to our manufacturers—the only thing wanted to them—that taste and elegance in design in which alone they were surpassed by the manufacturers of some other nations. It might be said that his argument applied rather to the foundation of an Academy at Rome than to the establishment of a mission, and as to the former he had sometimes thought of submitting to the House a Motion which should merely go the length of calling upon the Government through their diplomatic agents to collect some preliminary information on the subject. Both a Mission and an Academy were much needed; but, if England was so much poorer than Denmark or Mexico, or so much more unwilling to assist the arts, that she could not, or would not, provide for any paid studentships at Rome, than he said a Mission would be a most valuable substitute as far as it went. It would supply a central point, and be accepted as a very considerable boon by the English artists resident in Rome—a numerous, devoted, and able body of men, men to whom in future 155 years they would have to look for their fame in sculpture, architecture, and painting. He could conceive that in former years, under a different state of things, there might have been a prejudice against such a mission founded upon religious considerations; but he submitted that the Act of 1848 had settled that question, deciding as it did that upon certain conditions we were willing to enter into diplomatic intercourse with Rome. The desirableness of such an intercourse was no longer open to question. Such, then, were the considerations which had led him to mention this subject to their Lordships. He hoped he might receive an assurance that the Government were favourable to the ultimate object. The question was one of time and opportunity, and upon that point there might fairly be some difference of opinion. He was sure, at least, that he had not brought forward this subject in any party spirit, and that he had endeavoured to urge it in such a manner as should not give any ground of offence on party or on religious grounds to any of their Lordships. Glad indeed should he be if the Government, either now or hereafter, should find themselves enabled by one and the same Act to place our diplomatic relations with Rome on a sounder and better footing, and to confer a boon—a boon which would be warmly felt and acknowledged—on the cause of British art. The noble Earl concluded by moving—That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for Copy or Extract of the Despatch from the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to regulate the Diplomatic Relations with the Court of Rome since the Cessation of Her Majesty's Legation at Florence.
LORD WODEHOUSEhoped his noble Friend would not think him indifferent to the cause of art, either here or abroad, if in replying to his observations he confined himself entirely to the diplomatic view of the subject. His noble Friend had correctly stated that the question was entirely one of time and opportunity, and he thought he could show their Lordships that the present was not a convenient time or opportunity for taking any step to produce the change which his noble Friend desired. He wished, however, at the outset to explain very shortly what was the exact condition of our relations at the present moment with the Court of Rome; for, although his noble Friend had correctly described our position in that respect, he 156 had made one or two statements to which he (Lord Wodehouse) must take exception. His noble Friend had accurately stated the circumstances which led to the passing of the Act of 1848 and the nature of that Act, including the most important clause of all, generally known as the Eglinton clause. After the Act of 1848 was passed communications were at different times exchanged with the Court of Rome on the subject of diplomatic relations between this country and the Pope; but he begged to inform his noble Friend that, so far from the Court of Rome regarding the position taken up by this country as the same as that which had been assumed by Prussia and Russia, they considered that there was an important distinction. The Court of Rome thought that the intimation which he believed had been given by the Prussian and Russian Governments that they should not wish to receive an ecclesiastic as Minister from Rome was very different from an intimation contained in an Act of Parliament, by which the prerogative of the Sovereign was limited as regarded diplomatic relations with one country in the world, and only one. They considered that it would not be consistent with the dignity of the Pope to receive a minister from this country while that limitation upon the prerogative of the Sovereign existed. He was not, of course, going to discuss the policy of the Eglinton clause, which nobody proposed at present to repeal; but, the circumstances being as he had stated, our relations had been carried on with Rome in the same manner as for a considerable time prior to the passing of the Act of 1848. His noble Friend had paid a just tribute to the ability of Mr. Odo Russell, who now occupied the position of Attaché at Rome, carrying on the diplomatic business of his Government there. Undoubtedly his noble Friend had some grounds for stating that the position of an Attaché never could be the same as that of a Minister or an Ambassador; but it was equally true that Mr. Russell, like his predecessors—for the Government had obtained the services of very able men in that capacity—had conducted our business in Rome very much to the satisfaction of the Government, and had placed our relations with that Court upon a satisfactory footing. Under these circumstances the Government had to consider whether the present would be a convenient opportunity for making some representation to the Court of Rome—for that was what his noble 157 Friend desired—with the view of inducing it to receive a Minister from this country without one being sent from Rome to England. He ought to mention here that the Court of Borne had expressed its willingness to receive, whenever necessary, a special mission; but he was afraid that if we were to express our desire to send a permanent representative to Rome, we should expose ourselves to a refusal and put the Court of Rome in an inconvenient and disagreeable position. It seemed to his noble Friend at the head of the Foreign Office that the present was by no means a convenient moment for taking such a step. Their Lordships knew the distracted condition of Italy, and the peculiar position in which the Papal States at present stood. It had been very erroneously supposed, both in this country and on the Continent, that Her Majesty's Government had taken a forward part in pressing upon the Sovereign of Rome changes in his Government. Upon that matter it was important that there should be no misunderstanding. It was, of course, perfectly true that Her Majesty's Government, in common with all the Governments in this country of late years, earnestly desired that the Sovereign of Rome should make changes in the administration of his dominions, which would make that administration more consistent with justice and with the well-being of those who were placed under his rule. They desired this both in the interest of humanity and in the interest of the peace of Europe, because it was palpable that the great difficulty in Italy had been for years the condition of the Papal States; but, at the same time, while desiring this it had always been properly thought that this country, being pre-eminently a Protestant State, should not take so forward a part in urging such reforms as the Catholic States of the Continent, which had naturally greater influence at Rome. Her Majesty's Government, therefore, had confined themselves to seconding the advice which had been at various times given by those Catholic States, especially by Prance, to the Pope to make reforms in the administration of his dominions. These representations had been received in a friendly manner by the Roman Government, although, he regretted to say, they had not produced any practical effect. Now, being in this position, strongly disapproving as they did of the present administration of the Papal States, and the relations of the Pope with the 158 other Powers of Italy being in a very un-unsatisfactory condition, and his position being so uncertain, as regarded parts of his own dominions, it was manifestly undesirable that Her Majesty's Government should at so inopportune a moment take the step of pressing the Pope to receive an English Minister at his Court. It would give to this country the air of interfering more closely and powerfully in his affairs than it had hitherto done; it would very probably be met with a refusal by the Pope, and would certainly not tend to improve our relations with the Court of Rome. He was not aware that his noble Friend had touched upon any other point. The matter was entirely one of time and opportunity. If at any time the Sovereign of Rome should express a wish that a Minister should be sent there, undoubtedly Her Majesty's Government would make no objection. Powers were given by the Act of 1848 to send a Minister, and there was no reason why we should not take advantage of such an intimation on the part of the Pope. But looking to all the circumstances Her Majesty's Government did not think that the present would be a convenient opportunity for making any change in the system which now existed. Before sitting down he must say that no inconvenience arose from Mr. Odo Russell being placed under the Legation at Naples, because, although he sent copies of his Despatches to that Mission, he corresponded directly with Her Majesty's Government in the same way that he did when he was connected with the Legation at Florence. There was no objection to the production of the document for which the noble Earl had moved.
§ THE EARL OF MALMESBURYthought their Lordships were much obliged to the noble Earl (Earl Stanhope) for bringing this subject before the House. He entirely agreed with the noble Earl upon the diplomatic part of the subject on which he had addressed them, and he did not distinctly see the force of saying that this was not the right time and opportunity for sending a Minister to Rome, because he thought the more serious the affairs of Italy and the Papal States the more this country required the whole weight which it could give to its diplomacy in that country. He should, however, be the very first man to declare that, whomsoever Her Majesty's Government should think proper to send, it would be impossible for him to act with greater zeal, judgment, and discretion 159 than Mr. Odo Russell had done since he had held this appointment. He (the Earl of Malmesbury) would say, from his own opportunities of judging, that Mr. Russell had been most successful in his intercourse not only with the Ministers of the Pope, but with the Pope himself, and this under the great disadvantage of not holding a high rank. This disadvantage was chiefly felt in contending with the Ministers of other nations. Nothing was more disadvantageous or more impolitic than for a gentleman in this position to be compelled to sit down in conference with Ministers who had much greater authority for urging their claims and advocating their cause than he had. A point of detail had been referred to with which he was not before acquainted, namely, that Mr. Odo Russell had been attached to the Court of Naples. This, of course, was a question for the noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, but for his own part he was inclined to ask why this gentleman had not been attached to the Embassy at Turin? because it appeared to him that Mr. Russell's correspondence would be much more conveniently, rapidly, and safely sent from that part of Italy than from Naples, considering the great distance of the latter from London. This, however, was a point for the judgment of the noble Lord, and he only ventured to state his opinion. The noble Lord the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs had said that in the event of our sending a Minister to Rome, the Pope might not consent to his reeeption at this moment. But he (the Earl of Malmesbury) could not understand the inconvenience of the position, because, before we sent a Minister to Rome, we should be able to ascertain whether he would be received or not. And with regard to the compliment not being returned, instances had occurred in which that had not taken place; for until very lately Switzerland had sent no Minister to this country—very much, as he thought, to her own detriment,—for, if she had, very much of what had happened might have been prevented. The noble Lord (Lord Wodehouse) also said that the sending of a Minister to Rome at the present moment might be understood as indicating an intention on our part to interfere more actively with the internal affairs of Italy. He was glad to hear that the noble Lord was influenced by a desire to avoid such an appearance, and hoped that the whole policy of the Government with regard to the Italian States would be charac- 160 terized by similar caution. He could not too earnestly impress both upon the noble and learned Lord (Lord Brougham) who had called attention to the tragical events now occurring at Palermo, and other Members of their Lordships' House, how careful they ought to be as to the public expression of judgments upon Italian subjects and Italian sovereigns. When Her Majesty's Government blamed, and very naturally blamed, the slaughter and loss of life arising from the bombardment of Palermo by the Neapolitan ships, were they not precluded from any severity of comparison by history itself, and that very recent history? Those who now condemned the Neapolitan Government for bombarding Palermo should recollect that only in 1849, the King of Sardinia, Victor Emmanuel himself, bombarded Genoa, then invaded in the same manner and by the party of the self-same man, Garibaldi. God forbid that he (the Earl of Malmesbury) should justify either act. He only wished to impress upon their Lordships that when, either by our diplomacy or by rash condemnations made in that House, we interfered in the affairs of Italy, we exposed ourselves to very severe observations, and to difficulties of still greater importance than those observations.
THE MARQUESS OF NORMANBYsaid, he had himself had practical experience for three years and a half of the inconvenient character of the present diplomatic arrangements in respect of the Court of Rome, and he was bound to say that he had received every possible assistance from the very eminent man who then filled the position of Attaché at Rome, and afterwards, on the appointment by Lord Clarendon, to the Secretary of Legation to the Tuscan Mission still continuing to reside unofficially at Rome. Lord Lyons was at that time in daily correspondence with him, consulting him on every point connected with the affairs of the Roman States and other matters. Lord Lyons had often expressed to him not only the inconvenience he felt in his personal communications with the Court of Rome and its Ministers, but had referred to the extremely disagreeable position in which an English agent without any recognized character was placed in treating not only with the Court of Rome, but with other diplomatic agents. Considering the great interests that were involved in our communications with Rome and the Italian States, he thought it was very desirable that our relations with the 161 Court of Rome should be placed on a more satisfactory footing. He approved the object of the clause in the Act of 1848 which had been referred to, but he thought it was unfortunate that the attainment of that object had not been sought by means of an intimation from the Executive Government that it would not be agreeable to them that an ecclesiastic should be appointed Ambassador at this Court, instead of it being made the subject of a legislative enactment. He fully recognized the advantage which would be experienced by British artists from the presence of an English Embassy in Rome, but at the same time he felt that there was some reason for the doubt which had been expressed by the noble Lord the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, as to whether this was precisely the moment at which any change should be made in our relations with the Papacy—whether indeed all that had passed within the last year will not just now indispose the Court of Borne to make what would be a concession on their part if they were expected to receive a British Minister whilst the clause in the Act of Parliament regulating Diplomatic Intercourse to which they had objected remained unrepealed. In all that had been said in praise of the personal qualifications of Mr. Odo Russell he entirely concurred.
§ Motion agreed to.