Sitting of 19 November 1867

Preamble
The House met at half after One of the clock.
A Message from The LORDS COMMISSIONERS, by Colonel Clifford, Yeoman Usher of the Black Rod—
"MR. SPEAKER,
"The Lords authorized by virtue of Her Majesty's Commission, desire the immediate attendance of this Honourable House in the House of Peers."
Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, with the House, went up to the House of Peers:—
And being returned;

NEW WRITS DURING THE RECESS.
Mr. SPEAKER Mr. SPEAKER acquainted the House that, during the Recess, he had issued Warrants for New Writs, for Galway County, v. Lord Dunkellin, deceased; for Bradford, v. Henry Wickham Wickham, esquire, deceased; for Rutland, v. Hon. Gilbert Henry Heathcote, called up to the House of Peers; for Leicester County (Southern Division), v. Charles William Packe, esquire, deceased; for Manchester, v. Edward James, esquire, deceased.
Ordered, That a Committee of Privileges be appointed.
OUTLAWRIES BILL.
Bill "for the more effectual preventing Clandestine Outlawries," read the first time; to be read a second time.
NEW MEMBER SWORN.
Viscount Burke, for Galway County.
THE LORDS COMMISSIONERS' SPEECH.
MR. SPEAKER reported, That the House had been at the House of Peers at the desire of the Lords Commissioners appointed under the Great Seal for opening and holding this present Parliament; and that the Lord High Chancellor, being one of the said Commissioners, made a Speech to both Houses of Parliament, of which Mr. Speaker said he had, for greater accuracy, obtained a copy; which he read to the House.

ADDRESS TO HER MAJESTY ON THE LORDS COMMISSIONERS' SPEECH.
MR. HART DYKE: Sir, in rising to move that an Address be presented to Her Majesty in answer to Her most gracious Speech, I trust I shall not ask in vain for the kind forbearance and consideration which are ever accorded to one who addresses the House for the first time. If I touch but lightly upon the various topics mentioned in the Speech from the Throne, I would ask the House to believe that it is not because I underrate their importance, but simply because I feel some diffidence in addressing myself to subjects in reference to which the vast majority of hon. Members have had longer experience, and upon which they would therefore be better qualified to speak.
Her Majesty has graciously signified Her regret that the necessity has arisen for assembling Parliament at this somewhat unusual season; and the primary cause of Parliament having been thus assembled is—as might be expected—referred to in the first paragraph of Her Majesty's Speech. I need scarcely remind the House that Her Majesty's Government having deemed it expedient to send a force into Abyssinia for the purpose of liberating our countrymen who are in captivity there, the necessity must necessarily arise for our voting supplies in order to defray the cost of that expedition. The circumstances connected with the sad events that have occurred in Abyssinia, at least so far as the earlier part of them are concerned, are already
52
pretty well known to this House and to a large majority of the English people who have taken an interest in the subject. It is well known that when Lord Palmerston was Prime Minister a mission was sent to Abyssinia. It would, perhaps, be wasting the time of the House to go through the whole of the events that have occurred from that time down to the present moment—it will be sufficient to recall the fact that this difficult Abyssinian question has been several times brought before both Houses of the Legislature. As early as February, 1866, a noble Lord in the other House (Lord Chelmsford), put a Question to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on this subject; and no later than last Session a debate occurred on this subject when the question was brought prominently forward by the hon. Member for Poole (Mr. Henry Seymour). I trust that at the outset of a war which may cost the country a large sum of money, it will be felt that it will not only be advantageous to the Government, but satisfactory to the House and those out of doors who take an interest in the subject, that the fullest investigation should take place, both as to the causes which have led to the prospect of this unhappy war, and also as to the means which the Government have adopted with the view of bringing it to a successful issue. In studying the Papers furnished to the House last Session, it will appear that various measures were adopted with a view of persuading, as it were, the somewhat eccentric King Theodore to deliver up the captives. On the 29th January, 1866, through the intervention of Mr. Rassam, who was commissioned by this country to endeavour to procure the release of the prisoners, we find that they were actually liberated. And this reminds me of a point which has been urged—namely, that the difficulties' which have arisen in Abyssinia have been occasioned by offence given at different times to King Theodore. The prisoners, as I have said, were actually liberated, and a reconciliation took place between them and the King on the 29th January, 1866; but shortly after which it appears that, without any ostensible reason or provocation, King Theodore, after bidding them adieu, saw fit to send after them and take them once more into captivity, and they were sent to Magdala and put in chains on the 6th July, 1866. The next event which I have to notice is the autograph letter sent by Her Ma-

53
jesty to King Theodore, stating in the kindest manner the anxiety felt by herself and the people of this country for the liberation of the captives, and at the same time expressing no ill-will towards King Theodore so long as the prisoners were liberated. At the same time, presents were sent to King Theodore by Mr. Flad, a missionary, and subsequently Colonel Merewether was sent out, in compliance with the King's wish, with certain artizans, who were placed at his Majesty's disposal. I now come to the letter written by the noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, to which I will call particular attention. Surprise has been expressed that, inasmuch as the difficulties surrounding this Abyssinian question were well known last Session, prompt measures were not taken while Parliament was yet sitting. That would have been the case; but I should state that the letter to which I have referred was addressed to King Theodore, informing him that unless the British authorities at Massowah were made acquainted within three months of the time the letter was despatched to the King with the fact that the captives were released, the King would be held responsible for the consequences, and the answer to that letter only arrived three days before Parliament was dismissed from its labours at the close of last Session, and therefore it would have been clearly impossible for the Government to have taken any action in the matter so far as Parliament was concerned. Her Majesty and the Government have been animated solely by an honest desire to secure the release of the captives in Abyssinia, and not by any wish for territorial aggrandizement or by any ulterior motives. If any hon. Member will search history through, he will find that there are few instances in which indignities inflicted on a country have been borne with greater moderation and patience, or where more humane and moderate means have been resorted to for the purpose of effecting an object such as we have now in view. I need not tell the House that in the expedition already upon its way the Government look for no increase of territory, nor to obtain any special advantage on the coast of Abyssinia. I feel—and I am sure many in the country will agree with me—that there is something which we have always held dearer than ambition, and that is our national honour. Acquainted as the House is with the geo-
54
graphical position of Abyssinia, it would be useless for me to attempt to disguise the fact that an expedition to such a country is fraught with many difficulties, and must be costly as regards money, and it may also be as regards life. If we can suppose an instance in which we have received indignities equal to those we have received in the present case, the country being easier of access and with fewer difficulties of transport and climate than Abyssinia, I think there are few persons who would hesitate as to what course we ought to pursue; and I trust that the country will not be deterred from upholding its dignity and liberating the captives by the special difficulties which Abyssinia presents. If during the debate that will arise on this subject it can be shown—as I believe it will—that every legitimate means which diplomacy has at its command have been adopted for the purpose of effecting the liberation of the captives, I believe the conclusion at which the Government have arrived to send out an expedition will be acquiesced in and endorsed by the majority of the people of this country. As a young and a humble Member of this House I trust the day will be far distant when Parliament will hesitate to vindicate and protect the representatives of this country when they are subjected to indignities and ill-treatment in a foreign land.
Sir, the events which have recently occurred in Italy, and the complications to which they are likely to lead, have given rise to much anxiety in many minds; and that anxiety must be mingled with regret when we consider the present state of that country, requiring as it does, above all things, peace and order for its permanent consolidation, that violent persons should have proceeded to harass and disturb it, and have thus tended, by their own precipitancy, to defer to an indefinite period the result they have been desirous of bringing about. Our ally, the Emperor of the French, has been placed in a position of no ordinary difficulty with regard to this question; but I trust the confident hope expressed by Her Majesty in Her gracious Speech, founded on the enlightened wisdom and moderation of that monarch, may be speedily fulfilled. When we remember how many anxious questions connected with foreign affairs are at present before the political world, it must have been a matter of general gratification to all who heard, in the recent

55
reception, of our new representative in Paris, the cordial sentiments expressed by the Emperor, affording, as they do, a clear indication of a continuance of that policy of peace and goodwill towards England which he has not only invariably expressed, but which he has conscientiously endeavoured to carry out as long as he has sat upon the throne.
Sir, the miserable attempts of certain misguided men among our countrymen and others are referred to in Her Majesty's Speech. It is with, feelings of pain and regret that all who love the cause of order in this country, and all who wish to see a brighter future dawn upon the sister country, have observed what has lately taken place in Ireland on the part of violent and unprincipled men, our countrymen and others, who have so far disturbed the existing order of things that trade has been, paralysed, agricultural operations have been almost suspended, and many manifest advantages to the progress of prosperity which might have been opened up in that country have been for the present sacrificed. I cannot help offering my meed of praise to the authorities in Ireland and elsewhere for the firm and temperate manner in which they have met the emergency. There have also been certain cases of outrage which have occurred in the streets of London—miserable attempts by a few men armed with revolvers to upset the law. I trust that by a wise administration of the law, and by the good feeling and forbearance that are being shown, we shall soon hear that there is an end to this unhappy state of things.
No doubt the Government will supplement the recent Act for the representation of the people of England by other measures affecting the representation of the people of Scotland and Ireland. In introducing those measures Her Majesty's Government will be able to bring to bear on the subject the consideration they must have given to it during the recess. The anxious consideration given to the question of the franchise last Session will prevent that subject giving us as much trouble in dealing with the new Bills as would otherwise have been the case. With regard to the latter part of the Bills—the distribution clauses—there will doubtless be some difficulty; but I trust that the same policy of forbearance and goodwill as was adopted last Session will characterize our future debates on the Reform
56
question, and will facilitate its settlement. Many hard things have been said in reference to the measure of last Session. When we consider the amount of legislation yet to be got through with regard to Parliamentary Reform, I think we had better pass over anything like recrimination respecting the past, and set to work honestly to make complete the partial settlement we have arrived at. Representing a constituency (West Kent) which has certainly as important and varied interests as any, I may say that a feeling of thankfulness and satisfaction pervades all classes that a question about which so much has been promised and so little performed, and which has become a stumbling block to every kind of legislation, has been so far settled. The Commissioners appointed to consider the boundaries of the new boroughs have, I am informed, bestowed much time and attention to their duties; and when their Report is laid on the table, considering the amount of pains they have taken to collect information and the impartiality they have displayed, I have no doubt this important feature of the Reform Act will speedily become the law of the land. Her Majesty's Speech promises the introduction of measures for the suppression of bribery. This is unfortunately a thing which has become so engrafted on our political system that it will be difficult to deal with it. Like a long-seated disease, which has spread through every nerve and every sinew, bribery will be difficult of eradication; but I understand that legislation on this subject will proceed on the basis of the Bill mentioned in this House last year, and that it is proposed that instead of Election Committees sitting in London, competent Judges will be sent to the constituencies involved to make the inquiries on the spot. I believe that such a course will facilitate the administration of the law, for there is no doubt that the heavy expenses of inquiries in London prevents prosecutions for bribery. One great difficulty to be dealt with is that of definition, as it is more difficult in cases of bribery than it is in criminal matters to define the exact point at which it might be said the Rubicon is crossed, and a man, instead of conscientiously canvassing for a vote, is endeavouring to use corrupt influence.
The next question referred to in Her Majesty's Speech was that of Education, and it is one there is great difficulty in dealing with; but I believe, when we consider the

57
enormous mass of evidence taken by Committees and Commissions which the House now has before it on this subject, we may express a hope that the question will soon receive a satisfactory solution. Nor do I think there is any question more urgent at the present moment. It only requires you to look at the calendar at any assizes, and to notice the large proportion of prisoners who are returned as unable to read and write, or who at best are able to read and write imperfectly, to perceive how shortsighted a policy it has been not to deal with the subject long ago. AS a mere matter of pounds, shillings, and pence—as a mere matter of saving the county rate—it must be a prudent thing to give the lower population at starting on their walk in life some chance of learning those things which are likely to make them better and happier members of the community.
Last year a Motion was brought forward having reference to the better management of the Mercantile Marine; and I am glad to see that Her Majesty's Government intend to legislate on a subject which is so nearly connected with the very bone and sinew of our commerce.
It is a matter of congratulation that we no longer receive those gloomy returns relating to the cattle plague which used to come to us once a fortnight; and I am glad to hear that a Bill is shortly to be introduced on this subject. I believe that sad experience of this disease has established the fact that its ravages are chiefly to be traced to the ports where cattle are disembarked from the Continent, and that one great centre for spreading the contagion has been the Metropolitan Cattle Market. It is satisfactory, therefore, to learn that a proposition is about to be made for the institution of a separate market for cattle imported from abroad, which are to be slaughtered within a confined area and in separate slaughter-houses. Under present legislation it is provided that cattle landing at any of the out-ports shall be slaughtered within a confined area in each port. Under the Metropolitan Traffic Act, a provision will come in force in 1874, prohibiting slaughter-houses from being erected within a certain distance of dwelling-houses; and while we consider how large the number of cattle slaughtered in London, and how calculated the trade in hides and other things of the kind is to spread disease, I have no doubt this enactment will prove a great and salutary boon.
I have now—very inefficiently I fear—
58
gone through the chief topics mentioned in Her Majesty's Speech. The House must be aware that we are met on the present occasion to consider matters more especially connected with foreign affairs; but there are many questions affecting the amelioration of the law of this country, with which, though they are not touched upon in Her Majesty's Speech, the Government will at least attempt to grapple with before the Session closes. This has been called "a moribund Parliament;" but I am sanguine that though it may be drawing to its close, it will retain its vigour to the end, and will transmit to its successors an honoured name. Thanking the House for the attention it has paid to me, I will conclude by expressing my earnest hope and confidence that we may so legislate in this last Session of Parliament as to preserve those institutions which are, I believe, dear to all classes of the community, to uphold the interests of this country abroad, and insure that prosperity at home with which, under the blessing of Providence, we have been so largely endowed. The hon. Gentleman concluded by moving—
"That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, to convey the Thanks of this House for Her Majesty's Most Gracious Speech:
"Humbly to thank Her Majesty for the gracious expression of Her Majesty's regret that She has found it necessary to call for our attendance at an unusual, and, as Her Majesty is pleased to say, probably an inconvenient season:
"To express the regret with which we learn that the Sovereign of Abyssinia, in violation of all International Law, continues to hold in captivity several of Her Majesty's Subjects, some of whom have been specially accredited to him by Her Majesty, and that the persistent disregard by that Sovereign of friendly representations has left Her Majesty no alternative but that of making a peremptory demand for the liberation of Her Subjects, and of supporting it by an adequate Force:
"Humbly to thank Her Majesty for informing us that She has directed an Expedition to be sent for that purpose alone, and that She confidently relies upon the support and co-operation of Her Parliament in Her Majesty's endeavours at once to relieve our Countrymen from an unjust imprisonment, and to vindicate the honour of Her Crown:
"To thank Her Majesty for directing Papers on this subject to be forthwith laid before us:

59
"Humbly to express the gratification with which we learn that Her Majesty's relations with Foreign Powers are friendly, and that Her Majesty sees no reason to apprehend the disturbance of the general Peace of Europe:
"Humbly to thank Her Majesty for informing us that, in consequence of the invasion of the Papal States by a band of Italian Volunteers without authority from their own Sovereign, His Majesty the Emperor of the French felt himself called upon to despatch an Expedition for the protection of the Sovereign Pontiff and his dominions:
"To express our concurrence with Her Majesty in the hope that, as the object of the Emperor has been accomplished, and as the defeat and dispersion of the Volunteer Force has relieved the Papal Territory from the danger of external invasion, his Imperial Majesty will find himself enabled, by an early withdrawal of his Troops, to remove any possible ground of misunderstanding between His Majesty's Government and that of the King of Italy:
"To assure Her Majesty of the deep regret with which we learn that the Treasonable Conspiracy commonly known as Fenianism, baffled and repressed in Ireland, has assumed in England the form of organized violence and assassination:
"To convey to Her Majesty our participation in the opinion which She expresses that such outrages as have been committed require to be rigorously put down, and to express our confidence that Her Majesty may rightly rely, for their effectual suppression, upon the firm Administration of the Law, and the loyalty of the great mass of Her Subjects:
"To thank Her Majesty for having directed the Estimates for the ensuing year to be laid before us in due course, and for informing us that they will be framed with a view to economy, and to the necessary requirements of the Public Service:
"Humbly to thank Her Majesty for informing us that, as a necessary sequel to the Legislation of the last Session, Bills will be laid before us for amending the Representation of the People in Scotland and Ireland:
"Humbly to thank Her Majesty for informing us that She has reason to believe that the Commissioners appointed to inquire into and report upon the Boundaries of existing Boroughs, as well as of the proposed Divisions of Counties and newly enfranchised Boroughs, have made considerable progress in their inquiries, and that no time will be lost, after the receipt of their Report, in laying before us their recommendations:
60
"Humbly to thank Her Majesty for informing us that a Bill will be presented to us for the more effectual suppression of Bribery and Corruption at Elections, and that the Public Schools Bill, which has been already more than once submitted to Parliament, will again be laid before us.
"To express our hearty concurrence in the opinion expressed by Her Majesty, that the Education of the people is a question that requires the most serious attention of Parliament, and humbly to assure Her Majesty that She may rely upon our approaching the subject with a full appreciation of its vital importance and acknowledged difficulty:
"Humbly to thank Her Majesty for informing us that measures will be submitted to us, during the present Session, for amending and consolidating various Acts relating to the Mercantile Marine; and to concur with Her Majesty in opinion that the exemption which the Country has now for some time enjoyed from the Cattle Plague affords a favourable opportunity for considering such permanent Enactments as may relieve the Home Trade from vexatious restrictions, and facilitate the introduction, under due regulation, of Foreign Cattle for Home Consumption:
"Humbly to thank Her Majesty for informing us that Measures for the amendment of the Law, which have been deferred under the pressure of more urgent business, will be submitted to us; and that other questions, apparently calling for Legislative action, have been referred to Commissioners, whose Reports will be laid before us as soon as they may be received:
Humbly to assure Her Majesty, that in common with Her Majesty, we earnestly pray that all our deliberations may be so guided as to conduce to the general contentment and happiness of Her People."
COLONEL HOGG: Sir, in rising to second the Address which has been so ably moved by my hon. Friend, I feel painfully conscious of my own inability to undertake the task; but I know full well that I can rely on the indulgence of the House of Commons, which is always granted to young Members on similar occasions. My hon. Friend has so fully and ably gone into the early causes of the Abyssinian war, that it is unnecessary for me to dilate upon it; but there is one thing he said that I think ought to be enforced on the Government and the country, and that is that it was impossible for the Government before the close of the last Session to give an ample or full explanation of heir policy; because in the despatch

61
written by the noble Lord at the head of the Foreign Office to King Theodore, three months were given him for the release of the captives. Those three months did not expire until the 17th August, and as Parliament was prorogued on the 21st August, it was impossible—no answer having been received—to give further information to the House. A final summons was sent by the noble Lord at the head of Foreign Affairs on the 9th September, demanding the release of the captives, and we may still hope that the Abyssinian expedition may not become an Abyssinian war. The Government have had two courses before them. One was conciliation, the other was force. I think all will allow that conciliation has been stretched to its utmost limits, and that after three long years of conciliation and prolonged negotiation, during which time our captive countrymen have been kept languishing in chains and suffering every indignity at the caprice of a barbarian monarch, Her Majesty's Government were fully justified in sending out an armed force with an imperative demand for the immediate release of the captives. Should the Emperor of Abyssinia be so ill-advised as to brave the power of England, and so render obligatory an appeal to arms, I think no one will say that force has been appealed to before every form of conciliation and persuasion had been exhausted. I believe that no Government ever sent forth an expedition with greater reluctance, or under a greater sense of responsibility. This is not the time to vindicate the policy of Her Majesty's Government; but I believe that none was ever sent forth better provided. I may be permitted to allude to one or two of the objections I have heard urged against this expedition. Expense is the first of these, and to those who made it I will say—Are lives of captive countrymen and women of less value than gold? Can a saving of expense recompense England's honour outraged by the detention in chains of Her Majesty's Consul and an Envoy accredited by Majesty itself? The second objection is that the lives of those we seek to save might be placed in greater peril by the means taken to release them. Be this as it may, the captives can hardly be worse than they are now, dying, as it were, by inches in their chains, and in hourly, in momentary danger of their lives. Their own earnest desire was to hear of some effort being made to force King Theodore
62
to release them. I hold in my hand some extracts from a letter which have been received from Abyssinia, and only that it is not customary to read extracts on an occasion like the present, I could show that the prisoners themselves implore us to send out a force to release them, and that if not speedily sent they fear it will be too late. The letter to which I refer contains also an account of the indignities to which the prisoners have been subjected; it tells how their swords had been taken from them, and how they had been thrown down before the Abyssinian Monarch. I will say no more on the policy of the expedition; but I hope the House will bear with me while I enter a little into military details. No Government can insure success in any expedition, but they can do all in their power to deserve it; and I can confidently state that no expedition ever started to uphold Old England's honour better prepared by a provident and far-seeing Government. The preparations for an army to invade a country so little known as Abyssinia are necessarily of a complicated and an expensive character; but it will be found that while efficiency has been mainly sought as the truest economy, extravagance and waste have been carefully guarded against. I feel sure the House will approve the selection made of Sir Robert Napier as Commander-in-Chief, whose past services eminently qualify him for that important command. I may be allowed to mention some of the services of this distinguished officer, whose deeds add lustre to the soldier's name he bears. Sir Robert Napier began his career in 1845. He was in the Sutlej campaign; he was at Goojerat; he was at both sieges of Lucknow; he has held important posts in various expeditions; and was second in command in the expedition to China. Her Majesty's Government having found a good soldier qualified to command, appointed him; and then they did the next best thing—they trusted him—and accordingly they had invested him with full power, political as well as military—thus avoiding delays incident to a division of authority and responsibility. The force under Sir Robert's command consists of 12,000 fighting men, efficiently armed, and fully equipped for any duty they may be called upon to undertake. The Papers laid before the House will show how carefully and anxiously Government has made provision for all possible contingencies, by providing an

63
efficient transport and an ample commissariat, combined with arrangements for the health of the troops. To carry out this latter object, three steamers have been despatched as hospital ships, with full medical attendance and every necessary appliance for the sick. It may possibly be urged by some that the expedition is on an unnecessary large scale; to this I reply that these ample preparations afford the best hope of bringing King Theodore to reason without an actual collision, and if hostilities should unfortunately be necessary, they will tend to shorten their duration. A smaller and less perfectly equipped force might be detained in Abyssinia waiting for reinforcements, and its protracted detention would tend to give rise to complications which it would be most desirable to avoid. I have not adverted to India as the basis of operations, believing it will be admitted the Government have acted wisely in selecting it as the one best adapted for the purpose. As to the Indian army being employed by the Government, these troops have well upheld the honour of our flag in Persia and in China and Japan, as well as in many well-fought fields in Hindostan, and I have no doubt will do as well in Abyssinia; and the selection of soldiers whose habits and whose constitutions were best adapted for service in Africa will meet the approval of the House and country.
The question of our foreign relations is one of the most paramount importance at the present time, and, after the many menacing clouds which have recently hung over the political horizon, and the wars and rumours of wars which have reached our ears, and the various alarms which have for some months pervaded the public mind, the assurance contained in Her Majesty's Speech, that our relations with all foreign Powers are of the most friendly description, and that She sees no reason to apprehend any disturbance of the public peace, will be received not only by the House, but by the country, with feelings of the liveliest satisfaction. If even the rumour of a misunderstanding between European Monarchs, flashed through the telegraph, made the pulse of credit and of commerce vibrate to its centre, how much greater would have been the disturbance of England's commercial interests had war really broken out in Europe. We must all deplore, with Her Majesty, that the peace of Italy has been disturbed; and now we must hope that the bands of volunteers
64
having returned to their homes and peaceful avocations, the Emperor Napoleon will be able to remove his troops not only from Rome but from Italy, and that all cause of discord being thus removed, peace may be restored to Italy.
The House might well deplore with Her Majesty that the treasonable conspiracy called Fenianism, baffled in Ireland by the vigour of the Executive, the good sense of the mass of the people, and the fair administration of justice by Irish juries, should have assumed the form in England of assassination and organized violence. All classes of Her Majesty's subjects will loyally rally round the Throne and the institutions of their country, and, while reprobating those wicked attempts to disturb the public peace, will uphold those whose sad duty it may be to vindicate public justice.
In the last Session important changes in the representation of England were introduced by Government, and after careful consideration by Parliament became the law of the land. Whatever differences of opinion there may have been on this long-vexed question, all are agreed that the measure passed was beneficial, and that these changes have removed considerable discontent from some classes of the people. The country has on many occasions expressed their approval of last Session's work, and this approval will encourage Parliament to approach the question of the Irish and Scotch Reform Bills with the same forbearing spirit and the same candid temper as characterized the proceedings of last Session. I am sure that the judicious concessions granted to our working classes in England will be freely extended to those in Scotland and in Ireland, and when our task shall have been concluded we shall look back with pride and heartfelt satisfaction at having passed measures which I hope will conduce to the public good by uniting all classes of our fellow-subjects in the government of the country. It appears from the Speech that our attention will be called to Bills for the prevention of bribery and corruption. I trust that whatever measure may be passed will tend to remove the plague spot of corruption which is a serious blot on our electoral system, as well as on the character of the House of Commons. The consolidation and revision of the various Acts connected with our Mercantile Marine will be a great boon to our shipowners, masters, and seamen. At present great

65
confusion exists, owing to the fact that there are seven or eight Acts upon the subject, containing some 700 sections, which have to be consulted, and it is difficult for those not learned in the law to find what is applicable to any particular question. I hope the promised reform will make these Acts more intelligible. It is gratifying to learn that the railways, which in the height of panic last year were all eagerly demanding the aid of Government legislation, are now doing the work of reform themselves; and there is good reason to hope that, with greater economy, a better system of accounts, and a determination among all classes of shareholders to forego present dividends unless fairly earned, our great railway system may before long regain in the public estimation that high state of credit from which it ought never, with average good management, to have fallen. Now that the fearful and mysterious disease, the cattle plague, has left this land, we may be enabled to legislate on the subject in a manner which will remove restrictions on home trade; and, while relieving our farmers from all just apprehension as to a fresh importation from abroad of this dread disease, may at the same time encourage that trade which is the only means of insuring a cheap supply of meat for the public. I fear I have too long trespassed on the time of the House, to whom my best thanks are due for the kind attention they have been pleased to grant me, and I have only to express my hope that the Address I have the honour of seconding may meet with unanimous approval.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That," &c.—[See Page 58.]
MR. GLADSTONE: There is nothing, Mr. Speaker, in either of the addresses which have been delivered by the Mover and Seconder of the Address which would at all tempt me to depart, or excuse me in departing, from the general and prudent rule that excludes controverted matters, as far as possible, from the annual debate on the Address. I have every disposition to conform to that rule, and I am bound to say that I think there are special reasons for adhering to it strictly on the present occasion in domestic circumstances, to which I need not more pointedly refer, immediately affecting the Leader of this House, and with respect to which I will merely take the opportunity of assuring him that he carries with him universal
66
sympathy. I admit that it had been my intention—and I only mention it because I think this was the proper occasion for such a proceeding—to ask of the right hon. Gentleman, and of his Colleagues, some explanation with regard to a declaration which was made during the Recess; but, under the circumstances to which I have adverted, I cannot think of introducing at this moment any topic of the kind. Sir, the Speech of Her Majesty contains little, if anything, of which we have reason to complain. As to the great subject—that of the expedition to Abyssinia—I cordially join with the hon. Gentleman who said that we may still cling to the hope that the Abyssinian expedition may not prove to be the Abyssinian war. It is a natural thing with regard to any war, still more with regard to a war so peculiar in its character, and one as to which it is so difficult to see any definite issue, to cherish as long as we can the faintest hope. I think it is quite evident that we could not make progress to-night, and we should probably only prejudice the future discussion of the question, were the Government to endeavour to obtain at this moment the sanction of the House, direct or indirect, for any proceedings connected with the Abyssinian expedition. Our business to-night is to acknowledge in the most respectful manner the receipt, as it were, of Her Majesty's gracious communication touching the Abyssinian war, and then to await an occasion—no doubt an early one—on which some responsible Minister of the Crown will detail to us what the proceedings of the Government have been, and by what considerations they have been guided. Up to the present time, I apprehend, all action in regard to this question has been the action of the Executive. For the House, it is a res integra. In speaking of the Executive, I do not speak exclusively of those who now possess power, nor of the shares in which the responsibility may be divided between the present and the past Government; I merely mean that the House is not committed by anything to anything. It will be its duty, therefore, to exercise a free judgment upon all that has been done. No doubt that free judgment ought to be a considerate judgment; for I fully admit that a more difficult question has rarely been submitted to a Government than the course which was incumbent upon them to take with respect to this matter. We shall expect of them, however, a full and

67
frank explanation, and not an explanation merely of the merits of the case as between themselves and the Emperor of Abyssinia. That I take to be the simplest part of the question; for, as has been well said by the hon. Gentleman who moved the Address, and whom, on this his first occasion of addressing us, I sincerely congratulate upon his most intelligent and judicious speech, no doubt can be raised to the existence in the amplest form of what is called a casus belli between us and the Sovereign of Abyssinia. The questions upon which it will be interesting to us to be informed, and upon which the House will have to pass its judgment, are of an order quite distinct from that primary consideration. The great difficulty in the case is to show that the object which we seek is an attainable object—to show that it is practicable to carry on a war with, an enemy of whom we may be tempted to entertain the apprehension that he will not fight, but run—and to show by any reasonable calculation how such a war is to be brought to an issue. Upon these questions Her Majesty's Government have means of judging which we have not. I by no means wish at this moment to express any want of confidence in the prudence or fairness or pacific character of their intentions; but I think it right to point to these matters as subjects upon which the country will fairly expect to receive full information. I hope also—it is a point which I have no doubt will not have escaped the attention of Her Majesty's Government—they will be able to show in what relation their proceedings stand to an enactment which passed through the Legislature in the year 1858, in the shape of a clause in the East India Government Act. According to that clause—I do not profess at this moment to quote the exact words—but according to that clause it was made incumbent upon the Executive to seek beforehand the consent of Parliament for military operations conducted by the Indian force beyond the Indian frontier, except they grew out of an invasion of the country, or out of sudden and unforeseen exigencies. [Sir STAFFORD NORTHCOTE intimated dissent.] I judge from the gesture of the Secretary of State for India that he questions the correctness of my reference to the clause; I would say, therefore, the approval of Parliament, not for the military operations—which is, of course, not possible—but for the purpose for which the operations are carried on. [Sir STAFFORD NORTHCOTE
68
again intimated dissent.] If I am wrong I can be easily corrected.
SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE: I beg the right hon. Gentleman's pardon for interrupting him; but as the point is one of importance, and as some misapprehension prevails respecting it, I had better correct him at once. The clause as originally introduced—and it was introduced by the right hon. Gentleman himself—was to the effect which he has stated, that it should not be lawful to use the Indian forces for such purposes without the previous consent of Parliament; but in going through the House it was altered, and as it now stands it provides that it shall not be lawful to apply the revenues of India to the carrying on any military operations beyond the frontier without the previous consent of Parliament.
MR. GLADSTONE: My impression of the clause was different; but the right hon. Gentleman's explanation will make it the more easy to show—which the Government are no doubt ready to do—the conformity of their proceedings with the exact provisions of that Act of Parliament. There are two points on which I confess I entertained very great anxiety. One of them was as to the view of the Government with regard to the limit to be placed upon the purposes of this expedition. We are now going into Abyssinia, and the question which the country, I think, will regard with, perhaps, the greatest interest of all is the question, When shall we come out of Abyssinia? Now, as to that question, I am bound to say that nothing can be more intelligible and nothing more satisfactory than the declaration contained in Her Majesty's gracious Speech, that the expedition She has directed to be sent to that country is to be sent for one purpose alone. I do not in the slightest degree understand those words as precluding Her Majesty's Government, in the exercise of their discretion, from availing themselves of the temporary opening which these unhappy circumstances may afford for purposes useful to science, to peace, and to civilization; but I do understand these words as carrying a complete disavowal on their part of all intention and of all desire to make this expedition subservient or instrumental in any degree either to purposes of territorial aggrandizement—which they would hardly dream of—or to the contraction, in whatever form, of new political responsibilities. I think that, difficult, doubtful, and dark, as necessarily

69
are many of the circumstances of politics, one thing there is beyond all doubt and question, and it is that the people of this country are at this moment fully charged, and, perhaps, overcharged, with responsibilities of Empire from which they cannot in honour escape, but to which it would be folly and guilt gratuitously to add. I hope also that another important subject, strictly germane to this Abyssinian question, and an essential part of it, will be dealt with in a manner creditable to the House. The rumour is that a large sum will be asked for; there is also a rumour that a limited portion of that sum may be charged on the revenues of India. The matter is one upon which it is quite unnecessary for me to give an opinion this evening; but I cannot help expressing my hone that if we are to be asked—as we must be asked—to incur a heavy expenditure, the Government in their plans and provisions for meeting this expenditure will confide in the courage and prudence of Parliament and the country, and will not propose to make that charge an addition to the debt of the country by saddling it upon future years. I do not ask them for any declaration whatever; but I wish to assure them, on my part, that in case they act upon the principle, the wisdom of which I think has been acknowledged of late years, that we should endeavour as far as possible to meet the whole wants and expenditure of the day out of the means and resources that the day provides, these proposals will receive from us, I think, a fair consideration in no hostile spirit. Of course, I cannot compromise freedom of judgment on my own part or on the part of others as to the particular means of carrying out the object; but with regard to the principle, I have thought it right to say thus much. I pass over the general expression in Her Majesty's Speech with regard to our relations with foreign Powers, and I come to a matter of concern to England. Considering the immense importance of the Italian question to European civilization as a whole, and considering that the Italian Kingdom has now become an essential part of our present European civilization, I think Her Majesty's Government could not avoid advising Her Majesty to take some notice of recent painful circumstances—painful circumstances I cannot but call them. I confess that with the defective and partial information that I possess, which I hope may be enlarged by
70
future disclosures, I am not able to regard with entire satisfaction any portion of what has taken place; but I do not think there is any just cause to complain of the manner in which Her Majesty has been advised to refer to this subject, nor do I think that the noble Lord (Lord Stanley) or the Government could have acted more prudently than in recommending the Crown to intimate in the friendly manner in which it has been couched the desire which Her Majesty has uttered. I make, therefore, no complaint whatever of the reference in the Speech or the Address to the Italian question. With respect to "the treasonable conspiracy commonly known as Fenianism," at a moment like the present, when the Executive Government has to discharge, on its own responsibility, an important function, I think I shall best perform my duty by refraining from any general expression of opinion as to the precise character of that deplorable movement and the way in which it ought to be met. I observe we are told that that conspiracy "has assumed in England the form of organized violence and assassination," and I cannot doubt that in advising the Crown to use those terms Her Majesty's Government are in possession of knowledge by which they think them to be strictly and absolutely justified. But as respects the more general purpose of the sentence, I am sure the Queen is well sustained in the expectation She entertains that in the firm and discreet administration of the law She will at all times be supported by the great mass of her subjects, and especially by her subjects as they are represented in this House. I am glad, Sir, to perceive that Bills are to be laid before us for amending the representation of the people in Scotland and in Ireland; and I cordially join in the expressions of the Mover and the Seconder, that we should address ourselves to the consideration of these Bills with a feeling of the public duty incumbent upon us, and likewise with a conviction that our own honour and credit are in a peculiar manner involved in bringing to a shape of completeness and to an issue satisfactory all those portions of the question of Parliamentary Reform which still remain undisposed of. But as the name of Ireland occurs in connection with this subject of Parliamentary Reform, I shall venture upon two remarks. I do not presume to impute blame to the Government for refraining from submitting to Parliament—especially at the particular

71
moment when Parliament this year is called together—a declaration of its intentions upon a question so beset with difficulties as the question of land tenure in Ireland; but, considering the magnitude of the Irish question at all times, and its immense and growing magnitude at this time, and how largely this question is affected by matters relating to the tenure of land in Ireland, I am very sorry that Her Majesty's Government have not felt themselves able to assure us that they mean to renew their efforts for the Parliamentary settlement of this long-vexed question. I believe that a Parliamentary settlement of this question is required; and although there were provisions in the Bill of last Session to which it was impossible, I think, for this House to assent, yet, on the other hand, it involved some principles of great value to which I trust Her Majesty's Government will be prepared to adhere. The other word I have to say refers to a matter upon which I am rather desirous of obtaining some information—namely, the Established Church of Ireland. I find that the Commission of Inquiry which has been issued by Her Majesty has not yet been laid upon the table of this House. If it had been, I should have taken pains to acquaint myself with its terms, so as, if possible, to avoid any necessity for a Motion upon the subject. But I have heard it reported that the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the Established Church are not to be Commissioners for the simple collection and presentation of facts—a work doubtless of great utility—but that their instructions will give them authority to propose plans for dealing with the Established Church of Ireland. I mention that rumour in the hope that it is an untrue rumour. I own it appears to me that it would be an error to refer to a Commission the preparation of plans for dealing with a national question of that order; and in the circumstances with which that question is surrounded, I do not think this House could consent to consider as exempted from its own jurisdiction the question of the Church in Ireland during the period that such a Commission might very fairly claim to spend in the deep deliberations that preparation of these plans would involve. A Commission for the examination and collection of facts, I have no doubt, will be useful; but, if their instructions go beyond the examination and collection of facts, I wish
72
to state respectfully for my own part that I do think this House, if it should see fit to take measures with respect to the Established Church in Ireland, would be bound to refrain from doing so, because the very unusual course has been taken of referring to a Commission a question of such vast national and political importance. I therefore trust that the rumour I have heard is untrue, and that the Commission is one appointed only for the purpose of bringing into public view the facts of the case in a clearer light than we see them now, and that the mode of dealing with the Established Church will be reserved entirely for the discretion of Parliament. Sir, the other portions of the Speech are necessarily somewhat vague. I do not think there is any reason why we should find fault with them upon that ground. It is never wise in the Queen's Speech to be too definite and detailed in the character of the pledges given, because impediments to legislation may arise from the most legitimate causes, and yet much disappointment may be caused by the failure of promises too freely made. Naturally, a Parliament that meets in November cannot expect the same amount of light as to the intentions of the Government as a Parliament that meets in February. I have therefore only to say that, assuming, as I do assume, the Address to be framed in such a manner as to leave entirely uncommitted the judgment of the House on the important question which is the immediate cause of our being summoned here, I am glad that I can concur in the Motion of the hon. Gentleman opposite for a loyal Address in accordance with the Speech from the Throne.
THE CHANCELIOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: I beg to thank the House for the sympathy it has shown me. I am much touched by the manner in which the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) has alluded to my domestic affliction, and by the way in which the House has received his allusion to that subject. The right hon. Gentleman has made a speech, of which I think every one must recognise the fairness and wisdom. I agree with him in thinking that the Address was moved by my hon. Friend (Mr. Hart Dyke) in a manner which engaged the attention and interest of the House, and certainly it was seconded by my hon. and gallant Friend (Colonel Hogg) in a speech which every one will acknowledge to be one of ability. The right hon. Gentleman is perfectly correct

73
in his assumption that on the part of the Government we do not for a moment suppose that the House will be at all pledged by agreeing to this Motion to our Abyssinian policy. The House will consider the whole subject when it is brought before them—as it will be brought before them in a legitimate manner in a very short time—as if the matter were then introduced to their notice for the first time. It will not for a moment be understood by the Government that, because there may have been in this and the other House of Parliament one or two discussions on Abyssinian affairs, or because hon. Gentlemen may have expressed opinions on the subject, the House is thereby at all pledged or precluded from deciding on the question after full and free discussion. The Government will at the proper time be prepared to vindicate their policy and the course which they recommend Parliament to adopt. Indeed, it is most expedient in a question of this kind—especially where we have to deal with a remote country, and where our calculations must be based on circumstances involving great difficulty of detail—it is most expedient that no decision should be come to by Parliament until there has been such a discussion. We are quite prepared for it; and we have every confidence that in all we have done we shall obtain the concurrence of this House. The right hon. Gentleman has treated the matter so fairly in his observations this evening, that I think we may assume that we shall go into it without treating it as at all a party question. With regard to the other recommendation which the right hon. Gentleman has made as to the manner in which we should carry on the war, if war should be inevitable, I hardly think it would be convenient to enter into that question now. The time is near when it will be my duty, or that of some other Minister, to place the whole matter before the House; and, considering that some of the papers relating to Abyssinia have only been laid on the table this evening, I think it would be premature to enter on a discussion of it now. I assume that Gentlemen on both sides will be anxious to make themselves masters of the information placed before them, and placed before them with probably as little reserve as has ever been used in respect of any public documents, previous to entering on a discussion of the Abyssinian question. Sir, I will not touch on other questions connected with foreign
74
affairs to which the right hon. Gentleman has alluded. It must be satisfactory to the House to hear from the Throne the assurance that friendly relations exist between Her Majesty and the other Powers to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred. We all must deplore what has occurred in Italy; but I think this is not a convenient occasion to enter—if, indeed, it should be necessary to do so—on the cause of that unhappy disturbance. I believe that the spirit in which Her Majesty has addressed us on that subject will be approved and re-echoed by the House. I hope the House will, in their Answer to Her Majesty's gracious Speech, concur in the wish that within a short time the presence of foreign troops in Italy will cease. With respect to the very important questions connected with Ireland to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred, it must not be assumed that when the House meets in February it is not the intention of Her Majesty's Government to deal with many subjects not particularly referred to in the Speech from the Throne. With regard to the Irish land question, I do not think that any of the Governments with which I have been connected can be accused of having passed it over. Although our efforts to bring that question to a solution may not have been fortunate, I think no one will deny that great pains have been taken by us to effect that object, and the right hon. Gentleman has been just in remembering that last year, though the time of the Government and the House was greatly occupied with other weighty matters, no contemptible effort was made on our part to deal with the Irish land difficulty. The House, therefore, must not infer that, because the subject is not mentioned in the Speech from the Throne, Her Majesty's Government have given up the solution of the question in despair. On the contrary, if they have an opportunity, I think I may say a Bill on the subject will be brought in during the present Parliament. With respect to the question of the Irish Church, I think that in his allusions to the Commission the right hon. Gentleman gave too wide an interpretation to some of the expressions in the document appointing the Commission. However, as I believe a copy of that document will be placed on the table tomorrow, it is unnecessary to say more on the point at present. The right hon. Gentleman has given prudent counsel to Ministers and to the House as to the vague

75
terms on which, on the whole, it is necessary to frame a Speech from the Throne; and therefore I will not defend a paragraph which has not been attacked. I may however, say thus much—that the passage referring to Education is not a rhetorical flourish. Her Majesty's Government have given their most earnest attention to the subject; but at the time when Parliament has now been called together, we should not feel justified in referring more specifically to our efforts and intentions in that direction. I again beg to thank the House for their great kindness.
MR. HORSMAN: I rise to ask an explanation of the Government respecting a rather important matter which was lightly touched upon by my right hon. Friend the Member for South Lancashire, but upon which I look to the noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs to give us fuller information. The paragraph of the Royal Speech referring to Italy is the longest one in it; but, at the same time, it conveys the least amount of information. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Lancashire has assisted in the composition of so many Queen's Speeches, that he shows great indulgence for vagueness in the present one; but this paragraph is so constructed that it tells us nothing that we did not know before. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that the events in Italy are of a very painful character, and I hope the House is not prepared to deal out one measure of justice to those who raised the insurrection and another to those who put it down. I must say that I cannot approve the conduct of either party in this affair. I regret the movement of Garibaldi; but I protest, also, against the movement made on the part of France. When we are told that the action taken by France has secured the Papal territory against foreign aggression, I must say that I think the most objectionable, unjustifiable, and injurious invasion of the Papal territory is that which has been made by France. The Speech from the Throne seems to treat the Italian question as if it were exclusively a question between France and Italy, and one to be viewed solely in reference to the Convention between those two Powers. If that were so, we should express surprise that the subject was introduced in the Royal Speech at all, because it would be one in which England had no interest. But we have received to-day the report of another Royal Speech delivered to another Legisla-
76
tive Assembly yesterday, and in it we find a larger and more statesmanlike view of this matter. The Emperor of the French tells his Chambers—
"The relations of Italy to the Holy See interest the whole of Europe, and we have proposed to the Powers to settle these relations at a Conference, and thus to prevent new complications."
Now, to that statement I wish to draw the attention of the noble Lord (Lord Stanley). England is among the Powers which have been invited to this Conference. May I expect the noble Lord to give us some information as to the character of the invitation, and as to the character of the answer to it? I rejoice to hear that the Emperor has invited England and the other Powers to go into this Conference. I rejoice at it for two reasons—first, I rejoice at it because it shows that the Emperor is not satisfied with the present position of things in Italy, and therefore desires a change; secondly, I rejoice at it because I am satisfied from its terms the Emperor wishes that change to be in the direction of completing the union of Italy. If those be his views in proposing a Conference, there ought to be no difficulty as to what answer England should return to the invitation. It is not necessary that the noble Lord should, in the first instance, give an answer either in the negative or the affirmative; nor is it necessary, as some imagine, that a basis of negotiation should be agreed upon beforehand; but I think it is the duty of an English Minister to take care that the Conference is not a mere idle ceremony, and that in his answer he should communicate to the Emperor of the French that as the representative of England it will be his business to draw the attention of the Powers to three important points, and to ask for a decision respecting them. These points are—first, as to the nationality of Italy; secondly, as to its liability to French intervention; and thirdly, as to the manner in which the revolutionary spirit is fomented by the recent proceedings in Italy. It is impossible for any one who looks at the state of Italy not to see that its unsettled condition is a standing menace to the peace of Europe. Indeed, it is not a month since every Bourse in Europe was agitated by the belief that we were on the very verge of a religious war—Italy and Prussia on the one side allied on behalf of nationalities, against France united with Spain and Austria upholding the principles of the Holy Alliance. We have escaped that war

77
—no one knows how narrowly or for how short a time—but it is evident that the danger may recur at any moment, and it is not for the interests of England nor of Europe that such a state of unsettlement shall continue. Look at the state of things in Italy. There are two Sovereigns, the Pope and the King of Italy, regarding each other with intense hostility, and each in an aggressive attitude. The Pope will not recognise the King of Italy, he ignores his acts and fulminates periodical censures against his Government, and so far as the Pope's efforts can bring about that result, the King of Italy sits on an uneasy throne, with subjects of doubtful allegiance. On the other hand, the King of Italy abjures the temporal Power of the Pope. He insists, in the name of Italy, that a dependent Power is no Power; that a protected Power is not a Power; and that a Power which has no national recognition and no willing obedience, and which commits its safety and dignity to the keeping of foreign mercenaries is not a Power, but a fiction and an intrusion, against which he will wage ceaseless war till the unity and independence of Italy are crowned by the possession of Rome. In saying this, I express no opinion as to the rival claims of the contending Powers; I am only describing the situation. If it were merely an Italian question the Italians would settle it for themselves easily enough; but the Catholic Powers have regarded it as a religious question, and France, as one of them, has charged herself with the protection of the Pope. For fifteen years the French Emperor kept an army at Rome; but he found it a thankless office, odious, discrediting, embarrassing, expensive, and at last unsafe. He accordingly withdrew under cover of the September Convention; but that Convention, as we all see now, was, from the first, a worthless instrument, an unjust compact forced by the stronger Power on the weaker; it was soon perceived that it could not stand. Events have been too strong for it. The Garibaldian invasion brought the French Army a second time to Rome; but the defeat and dispersion of the Garibaldian Volunteers, alluded to in the Speech from the Throne, instead of leaving the Emperor of the French master of the situation, has made him more its slave than ever. For he is in this false position—bound by the Convention and by his obligations to the Catholic Powers to protect the Pope, but was bound by his antecedents, his sym-
78
pathies, and his interests to maintain friendship with Italy. But the two things are incompatible. He cannot protect the Pope without humiliating Italy; he cannot assist Italy without sacrificing the Pope. In France his position is equally embarrassing. In France, too, there are two powerful parties—the clerical party and the popular party—and both of them look up to the Emperor as their head. The Church party hail him as the eldest son of the Church; the popular party hail him as the eldest son of the Revolution. He is dependent upon both, and dare not offend either; so that he becomes entangled in a middle course of temporizing expedients. Then the position of the King of Italy is still more painful. He cannot control the wishes of his people, and it would be madness to brave the armies of France. He also has to make a choice—either to dare all and be honoured as the King of Italy, or to surrender all and be denounced as the vassal of France. He made his choice, and the result has been far more damaging to the Emperor of the French than to him. The victory of Magenta has added no laurels to the army of France; but the popular party in France is much offended—and bitter exasperation is felt in Italy—and these feelings are fraught with public danger. The Italian Monarchy is discredited and weakened, and to the same extent the republican element is strengthened in Italy; and we have signs that there are inflammable materials in France in dangerous propinquity to the revolutionary spirit in Italy. The cry of the French ouvriers, unheard for many years, has lately been ominously revived with intervention. "Down with intervention," "Long life to Garibaldi,"—that cry conveys a warning which no French ruler can dare to disregard. And it warns Europe also that there is a smouldering volcano in Italy which no one deserving of the name of statesman can fail to perceive, and which perceived, it would be folly and criminality to disregard. Under these circumstances, the Emperor of the French invites England and the other Powers to a Conference for the settlement of the Roman difficulty; but a common opinion in England is that we ought at once to answer by a point-blank refusal. But I have asked why, and have been told that it is solely the Emperor's business—that he has got himself into the difficulty, and that he must get out of it as he can. I

79
deny, however, that it is exclusively the Emperor's difficulty—I maintain that it is a European difficulty, and one which every European Power has an interest in solving. If the noble Lord has not yet decided upon the answer which he will give to that invitation, and if it be still under the consideration of the Government, it appears to me that whatever disinclination may be shown by other Powers, he might at least, as a preliminary to the Conference, propound certain questions and give a practical and determinate character to its deliberations. Such questions, for instance, as these:—Is the nationality of Italy a religious or a secular question? Ought the sovereignty of the Pope to be a spiritual or a temporal sovereignty? Shall the head of the Catholic Church enthroned at the Vatican be under the protection of a foreign or a national army? In fact, it could all be summed up in a single question—As all the smaller States in Italy have been allowed to free themselves from the trammels of the Treaty of Vienna and unite themselves under one Italian Kingdom, ought the smallest and most anomalous of all those sovereignties to be made the only exception, and the population of the Roman States coerced into allegiance by foreign arms? If the noble Lord propounds these questions for the Conference, which, as far as we are informed, is still beating about for a basis, he will, by eliciting answers to them, have performed a great service and made a great advance towards the solution of the difficulty. He would, at least, compel both Ministers and Kings to speak out and declare which of them are ready to face and terminate this difficulty by coming to a negotiation on a sincere and solid basis. I feel that it is for England and for the noble Lord not only a responsibility and a duty, but also a great opportunity—for whatever disinclination we may have to interfere in European complications, still with regard to any question where the principles of liberty and peace can be combined, it is for an English Minister to place himself, if necessary, in the van, and to shrink from no responsibility in the discharge of a great duty. This is not a question of sentiment or religion, or territorial aggrandizement or extension. It is a question of high international policy and should be determined solely by those principles of public law and public morality which are the foundation of the rights not less of nations than of individuals, and on
80
which depend at this moment, in my opinion, the well-being of Italy, the safety of France, and the peace and tranquillity of Europe.
LORD STANLEY: I do not think this will be a convenient opportunity to enter into a speculative discussion as to the possible settlement which may be arrived at of the Roman question, or to criticize the course pursued by Governments other than our own. But I am quite ready to do that which the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Horsman) has asked me to do—that is, to state briefly, and I hope explicitly, what is the attitude assumed by Her Majesty's Government in regard to the recent occupation of Rome by a French army, and the still more recent proposal of a Conference to settle the Roman question. As to the first point, my answer will be very simple. The occupation of Rome was not a matter on which we were called by any treaty or engagement, officially or formally, to express an opinion. On that account, and because under the circumstances of the case I felt, that however one might regret the step, intervention would probably be ineffectual. Her Majesty's Government have not attempted any formal intervention; but it became my duty, on the part of the Government, to point out to the French Government that, whatever might be the difficulties with which they were pressed, whatever necessity they might conceive themselves to be under to take this step, I could not but fear that the effect on public opinion in this country of the re-occupation of Rome would be very unfavourable. In some matters of difference which have arisen between Italy and France in the course of these transactions, the good offices of Her Majesty's Government have been solicited on behalf of the Italian Government. That assistance was frankly asked, it was cheerfully given, and it has been gratefully accepted. With regard to the proposed Conference, the House is aware that invitations to attend it have been sent to, I believe, almost all the Powers of Europe by the French Government. The reply of Her Majesty's Government was sent a day or two ago, and therefore any argument delivered now, however able it may be, comes too late to modify that reply. It would not be convenient or in accordance with custom to lay upon the table of the House any papers so long as the negotiations continue; but I have no objection to state—

81
and I think it only right I should state—what is the general substance and purport of the reply which has been given. It is, in effect, this—that we do not believe any advantage will arise or any practical result follow from the Conference; unless, in the first place, there is some definite plan proposed for consideration and discussion in the Conference; and unless, in the next place, there appears from preliminary negotiations to be no reasonable doubt that that plan will meet with the assent of the parties most interested. I own, looking at the actual state of the case—looking at the wide divergencies of opinion which prevail between Protestant and Catholic Powers upon this question—I am not very sanguine as to these conditions being realized; and I am quite satisfied of this—that to go into a Conference without some previous understanding of that kind would be merely a waste of time. A Conference is an excellent machinery for giving a formal and solemn ratification for, as it were, taking note of a decision which has been already come to; but where there is a wide and fundamental divergence, not upon questions of detail, but upon questions of principle, I own I am not sanguine enough to hope that the mere fact of bringing a certain number of Ambassadors and Ministers to meet in the same room and discuss a question will be sufficient to put an end to these divergencies. If a Conference offered a chance of agreement, I for one should greatly regret to lose it. I believe every one would be glad to remove a cause of quarrel which may at some future time lead to Continental war. At the same time, I am bound to say it is not a matter in which, as it seems to me, the British Government is primarily and directly concerned, except so far as we all feel a sympathy with the people and the kingdom of Italy, and except so far as every question interests us which concerns European civilization. We are bound to do what may be fairly expected from neighbours and friends; but I do not think that in a question of this kind, not directly touching any English interest, we ought to expose ourselves to the risk of getting involved in future complications, and thereby of increasing the number of the responsibilities which we have already undertaken.
SIR GEORGE BOWYERsaid, he would not have trespassed on the House but for the Speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Stroud (Mr. Horsman),
82
who would deprive the Holy See of its temporal power because the Emperor of the French was in a difficulty. He thought the right hon. Gentleman might relieve himself of all anxiety on that point, because the French Emperor was quite capable of dealing with the question in a manner satisfactory to himself and the great nation over which he rules. Victor Emmanuel, no doubt, was in an embarrassing position; but who was to blame? If he had carried out the September Convention, to which he put his hand, this complication would not have taken place. He had an army of 50,000 concentrated round the dominions of the Holy Father, and he could easily have stopped the invasion of them by those who were called "volunteers" in the Queen's Speech, but who deserved no other name than that of filibusters or marauders. Instead of doing so, he allowed offices to be open for recruiting the invading force, permitted subscriptions to be received for them, and allowed Italian soldiers to desert his army and join Garibaldi in an attack made in violation of all the laws of nations, and which in reality amounted to piracy. Victor Emmanuel had acted in utter bad faith on the whole matter. He thought that when the filibusters got within a certain distance of Rome, the people of the Roman States and of the city of Rome would declare themselves for the Government of Florence, and then that his troops would have had a pretence for marching in to preserve the peace, but really to take possession of the dominion of a Sovereign against whom he had no casus belli. But it was a fact that the filibusters met with no sympathy in the Roman States. There was not the slightest revolutionary movement in support of the Garibaldian attack, although the effect of it was to remove the greater part of the troops of the Holy Father from the city of Rome and to compel them to go to the frontier in order to resist the invader. It would be strange, indeed, if the subjects of the Pope manifested any sympathy with the Garibaldian movement, for they had no desire to expose themselves to conscription, heavy taxation, and the consequences of national insolvency. They preferred to remain under the mild and beneficent rule of the Holy Father. These, he maintained, were facts which could not be refuted. To argue that the Holy See was to be deprived of its temporal dominion because it had been the cause of the disturbances of Italy,

83
was very much like contending that a man ought to part with property because it was a temptation to thieves and burglars; and if the reasoning were to be acted upon, there was an end of International Law and public morality. It ought to be the business of the Conference to devise measures to prevent such violations of International Law. The right hon. Member for Stroud (Mr. Horsman) had quoted the assertion that the temporal power of the Holy See was supported by "foreign mercenaries." [Mr. HORSMAN dissented.] He was glad to see the right hon. Gentleman did not go so far. What was a mercenary? A mercenary was a man who let out his sword to hire for money, and who was hired to fight by any one who would pay him. But the Pope's soldiers were not mercenaries; they did not fight for the Holy Father for money—they fought for him on a religious principle, and also on the political principle that an established and ancient Government ought not to be disturbed and overturned by filibustering invaders who had no casus belli against it. The troops of the Pope were not "foreigners," because no Roman Catholic could be considered a foreigner in Rome, which was the capital of the Catholic world. They went there, not to support a foreign Sovereign, but to uphold a cause in which they as Roman Catholics were most deeply interested. His own opinion was that the Conference would come to nothing. The fact was that it had nothing to settle. The filibusters had been routed by the troops of the Holy See, assisted on one occasion by those of France. The perfidious conduct of the Government of Victor Emmanuel in helping the filibusters had been exposed to the contempt of Europe, and it was doubtful whether for some time to come such an attempt could be renewed. The Holy Father was now in full and peaceful possession of his dominions, with the full assent of his people. It was true that his troops were not wholly his own subjects, because his territory was too small to furnish a sufficient force; but it was now clear that these troops were not required to defend the Pope from his own subjects. No troops whatever were necessary for that. So far as his own subjects were concerned, the Pope might remain in safety in Rome with a single soldier. But troops were necessary to prevent the incursions of lawless marauders, encouraged by Victor Emmanuel. If the Congress impressed
84
strongly on the mind of Victor Emmanuel the necessity, for his own sake, and for the peace of Europe, of refraining from any such attempts in future, and of consolidating his own dominions, they might do a great deal of good. He believed that the people of those Italian States the Sovereigns of which had been dethroned now deeply regretted what had been done. Naples and Sicily were especially in a deplorable condition, oppressed by taxation, by unjust laws, and by the conscription; and the inhabitants saw their country, once rich and prosperous, now reduced to a miserable state of poverty and degradation. From the information he had received, he believed that the people of those States would be glad to throw off the yoke and recall their old Sovereign.
MR. NEWDEGATEsaid, he thought the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Stroud (Mr. Horsman) had put a very opportune question, because he (Mr. Newdegate) shared with a very large body of his countrymen the strong feeling, that England had better have nothing to do with negotiations for the establishment of the temporal power of the Pope in the States around Rome. It was impossible to forget that in 1814 England intervened to re-establish the Papacy in possession of the Pontifical States. And what was the result? The ink was scarcely dry upon the documents effecting this purpose when the Pope re-organized an order, the primary function of which is to make war upon every Protestant State. That was the gratitude with which our intervention was received. He hoped that England would never again interfere in the establishment of a Power which, although territorially insignificant, was of vast European importance; because although the Pontifical States were narrow in their sphere, they served as a basis of operations for an agency that had disturbed, and would again disturb, the existing Governments in Europe which were not under the immediate influence of the Pope. What had occurred since 1814? If they look back to the despatches of Lord Clarendon and the declarations of Lord Palmerston in that House, they would find that the Jesuits, supported by Rome, had fomented, in 1847, the outbreak which took place in Switzerland; and in more recent times Russia had been obliged to break off her relations with the Holy See, because the Holy See had promoted the insurrection

85
in Poland. The Brief just issued was full of menaces against Russia. In the Encyclical, issued two years ago, when the temporal power of the Pope was spoken of, it did not mean the possession of those narrow States, which recent events had left him, but a power of interfering, under the pretext of religion, in the temporal affairs of every State in Europe. He agreed with the right hon. Member for Stroud, that the Emperor of the French had undertaken a grave responsibility in his recent intervention. And why? He protected a Power the mission of which was politically to disturb all the other Powers of Europe; he had intervened to maintain a State, which serves as a centre and a refuge for a political propagandism, which had proved itself adverse to the maintenance of peace and order in every State that does not acknowledge the supremacy claimed by the Papacy. The Emperor might have undertaken the task from will or from necessity; but it was a fact that the political agency to which he had referred, the active agency of the Papacy throughout Europe, was particularly strong in France. The Reports of M. Dupin and M. Persigni, which had been published some years ago, showed that the regular religious Orders were obtaining, through affiliated lay associations, an amount of property and a position in France, which threatened to overhear the power of the State. He trusted that Her Majesty's Government would adhere to the wise course that had been indicated by the noble Lord at the head of Foreign Affairs (Lord Stanley), and that, remembering that we owed our freedom to the Protestantism, on which, our Constitution is based, England would take no part in a Conference, the result of which, according to the expectation of France, was to confirm the Papacy in the possession of its territory, whence it might assail, not only Italy, but all the Governments of Europe which were not subservient to its policy.
SIR PATRICK O'BRIENsaid, he rose to enter a disclaimer against the observations of the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Newdegate) with reference to the conduct of the Pope in regard to Poland. He maintained, in opposition to what had fallen from the hon. Gentleman, that every Catholic in the world owed the Pope a deep debt of gratitude for the language he had used in condemnation of the Russian Government for its treatment of its Polish
86
subjects. The Poles had been despoiled of their properties, they had been hunted from their country, and were exiles throughout the world, and now that nothing was left to the remnant of the race but their religion and the right of worshipping God in the faith in which they had been brought up, the Russian Government were doing everything in their power to deprive them of that. And because the Sovereign Pontiff, who was the head of the Church to which the great mass of the Polish population belonged, presumed to lift up his voice and protest against such tyranny, the hon. Gentleman got up and denounced him. He spoke not as a Catholic merely; but he believed that every man ought to feel indignant that a great and gallant people, who had once saved Europe from the Mussulman, should be subjected to the heartless tyranny of Russia.
MR. P. A. TAYLORsaid, that the noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs had stated that England had no direct interest in the question of French intervention in Italy. He begged, however, to differ entirely from that statement. Had England no interest in European justice, and had she no reason for protesting when acts of enormous injustice were committed? Had she no faith in the principle of non-intervention which she had preached so often to other nations? If she had, was she not called upon to protest against one of the most gross and enormous violations of the principle of non-intervention that ever occurred in the history of the world? The invasion of the Papal territory by the Emperor of the French was a gross violation of that principle. It was a mere act of political brigandage to attack the little band of gallant Volunteers under Garibaldi and try the new weapon upon them. It was a sanguinary epitaph upon the glory of the French flag to have it recorded, as had been done by the General in command, that "the Chassepot rifle had done wonders." The attempt which had just been renewed had been kept up for nearly twenty years to put down by French arms the people of the Roman States. He had nothing to do with the kingdom of Italy or with Victor Emmanuel; he spoke merely with regard to the people of the Roman States, who were kept down simply by a body of mercenaries. ["No, no!"] The hon. Baronet (Sir George Bowyer) denied that they were mercenaries, because

87
though paid for what they did, they acted con amore. But it could not be denied that they were not Roman troops or that they were gathered from all parts of Europe, and that they had been told by a French General that they were still under the French flag. The hon. Baronet spoke as though the Roman Government was a popular Government, and as though it was invaded only by a few bands from the outside. [Sir GEORGE BOWYER: Hear!] Garibaldi had invaded the Papal territory, but it was only to relieve Rome from that system of terror under which the prisons were filled, the best men exiled, and the people kept down by the force to which he had referred. ["No, no!"] Why, that they were kept down was proved by the plebescites, which had been taken in the places occupied by the Volunteers. The full force of infamy, however, on the part of France could not be realized by what had taken place this year. They must go back to 1849 to realize it. In November, 1848, the Pope fled—abdicated ["No, no!"]—at all events, he left his dominions without a Government. He left behind a Commission which declined to act, and after a time the Chambers met, appointed a Provisional Government, and declared themselves abolished. After some weeks a Constituent Assembly, chosen by universal suffrage, was summoned, a large majority of the adult male population having voted for it. Of that Constituent Assembly, consisting of 150 members, 144 met, and the vast majority voted for the abolition of the Papal power and the establishment of a Republican Government. There were only 11 that voted that such a proceeding was inopportune, and only 5 who advocated the retention of the temporal power. How was that resolution received through the rest of the Papal States? With the greatest enthusiasm. Between 250 and 300 municipalities proclaimed their absolute adhesion to the new Government. Week after week the Government continued, and it could not be said that that was not by the will of the Romans, because of the 14,000 men composing the Roman army only 10 per cent were strangers—Italians from other parts of Italy. For many weeks that Government continued to maintain peace and order, as was shown by the best testimony, our own Consul declaring that affairs were well managed and with the assent of the whole of the Roman States. So things Went on until the defeat of Novara; and
88
ultimately the Constituent Government was driven out by the French army in July. All this taken together formed a history of political tyranny and wrong which had few parallels in the history of Europe. Well, that was the oppression which free England was asked to sanction—the tyranny of a priestly Government to receive the sanction of Protestant England. France withdrew her troops only when the September Convention was concluded, and that Convention she herself violated when she permitted the enlisting of large bodies of mercenaries. Now that France had violated her own pledges and had again invaded the Papal States, there was another opportunity afforded for re-considering the whole question. There was, at any rate, an opportunity for England to protest against the abominable tyranny which had been so long exercised. He looked with the deepest sorrow upon the communication which the noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs had made that night. He had expected something better from the Government. He knew their position had been rendered more difficult and complicated by the miserable conduct of the Whig Government in 1849, when our sanction was given, under Lord Palmerston himself, to the invasion which then took place. To what extent we were to carry that subserviency was a matter for serious consideration. We knew that already troops were pouring into Civita Vecchia, and that arrangements were being made in Naples, possibly to secure again the disruption of Italy. If England allowed such infamous proceedings she would incur the contempt which deservedly followed the abnegation of all international duties.
MR. BUTLER-JOHNSTONEthought the Roman question occupied a very subsidiary position in Her Majesty's Speech; but, as some discussion had arisen upon it, he wished to express his opinion that it was one of much greater complexity than hon. Members had represented it to be. The conflicting interests at stake were so serious and apparently irreconcilable—on one side the future and the aspirations of the great Italian people, on the other the natural desire of the Roman Catholics of Europe that their religion should secure the freest exercise by its head being an independent Sovereign—that he did not expect that any Conference that could be assembled for its consideration could bring about a settlement. As far as this country was concerned, it seemed to him premature

89
to discuss whether any action was required on our part; for he would ask what power did we possess of giving effect to our opinions? Supposing we wished to prevent the French from occupying Rome, what power, could we exercise? Were we masters of the Mediterranean, and could we hinder the despatch, of 50,000 men from Toulon to Civita Vecchia? Would it not be well for us to consider the state of our own army? Why, we had scarcely an army that could face the mercenary troops of the Pope, as they had been rather invidiously called; for many of them were persons of fortune and position, who had gone to fight for what they held dear. We could scarcely send an expeditionary force sufficient to deal with the Papal army, and it was idle therefore to talk of preventing the French from marching on Rome. Before assuming so high a tone, it behoved us to consider the state of our army and what were the forces at our disposal. The question, however, which the House had been summoned to consider was the Abyssinian Expedition rather than the Roman question. He trusted that the assembling of Parliament at this time of year would not prove more destructive to hon. Members' health than the climate of Abyssinia to our troops, and he might add a hope that hon. Members were not being educated to the custom of winter Sessions.
MR. WHALLEYsaid, he regretted the terms in which the Italian Volunteers had been referred to in Her Majesty's Speech; but he cordially thanked the noble Lord (the Foreign Secretary) for his intimation to the French Ambassador that the Emperor's intervention at Rome would be attended with very great unpopularity in this country. For his own part, he believed that on no subject had the opinion of the English people been so decided and universal. The people of this country regarded the intervention of the French Emperor as a clue to the Imperial policy of the last twenty years. We had been spending millions after millions on account of French armaments, and it now appeared that the policy of the Emperor was "peace," indeed, but only as long as he had his own way, and that he hoped to gain his ends by the mere terror of his arms, without finding it necessary to resort to war. He now stood forth as the Sword of the Papacy; but though he placed so rigorous a construction on the September Convention, he acted very differently when the
90
integrity of Denmark was at stake. The Emperor having assumed to himself the protectorship of the Papacy, no one could tell where his policy would end. He had sent an expedition to Mexico to redress the wrongs of the Papacy there, and who could tell that he might not find that "the honour of France" might not compel him to espouse the cause of Papacy in Ireland? For himself, however, he did not believe our forces were so incapable of efficient action in case of emergency as had been represented by the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Butler-Johnstone.) He congratulated Her Majesty's Ministers on the fact, with regard to the Speech from the Throne, that in the paragraph referring to the Fenian conspiracy the words "this treasonable conspiracy, condemned alike by all creeds and by all parties," had not been put in Her Majesty's lips, as was the case in the Queen's Speech of last Session. We had not alone to deprecate violence and assassination in connection with Fenianism; but there was an undefined sense of alarm gradually spreading over the country as to what was the nature of Fenianism—what was its extent, and what was its object. At present we had had no explanation on those points, and without asking Her Majesty's Government whether they thought the conspiracy had been originated, sustained, and encouraged by Roman Catholic interests and by the Roman Catholic people, he would ask them whether they were prepared to say that it was not the necessary result of the teaching of that body? The hon. Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Newdegate) and other hon. Members had frequently brought before the House the question regarding the disloyalty, treasonable principles, and disaffection, which was the chronic teaching of certain Roman Catholic schools. That teaching, he had reason to know, was carried on by some of the heads of that Church in the confessional, although he confessed he had no positive evidence of the fact. He maintained that Fenianism was the natural result of Roman Catholic teaching. As The Times truly said the other day, "It is quite clear that Fenianism is patted on the back and encouraged by the hierarchy of Rome." He implored the Government now at the beginning of the Session to take the necessary measures. The remedy was simple. It was to make known throughout the land the true nature of the doctrines which the Roman Catholic

91
Church taught under the name of religion. "The Wrongs of Ireland," like the "Wrongs of Poland," were in reality a phrase under cover of which means were sought and found to assert continually the supremacy of the Roman Catholic hierarchy.
MR. CORRANCEsaid, he wished only to make a remark upon one paragraph of the Royal Speech—namely, that referring to the cattle plague in this country. It had been his good or evil fortune to press upon the Government the policy of enforcing certain measures in relation to various ports. One of those measures was the separation of the cattle markets, which he was glad to hear was to be established by a Bill to be submitted to Parliament. It was a matter of great satisfaction to all—both of those without, as well as those within that House—to hear that the cattle plague had ceased, and that the restrictions which had existed were to be taken off the home trade. It was, however, in his opinion, necessary that some provision should still be continued in regard to foreign cattle, because exactly in proportion to the liability, and means for the dissemination of the disease which the removal of internal restrictions would produce, so ought the greatest caution to be observed in order to guard against the danger of the admission of infected animals into the country. He doubted not that the Government would take warning from the past, and would introduce the necessary provisions for this purpose into their Bill, which he was much pleased to hear it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government to introduce.
Motion agreed to.
Committee appointed, to draw up an Address to be presented to Her Majesty upon the said Resolution:—Mr. HART DYKE, Colonel HOGG, Mr. CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, Mr. Secretary GATHORNE HARDY, Lord STANLEY, Sir JOHN PAKINGTON, Sir STAFFORD NORTHCOTE, Mr. CORRY, Lord JOHN MANNERS, Earl of MAYO, Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Mr. STEPHEN CAVE, Mr. HUNT, and Colonel TAYLOR, or any Five of them:—To withdraw immediately:—Queen's Speech referred.
House adjourned at a quarter before Eight o'clock.

Preamble
THE PARLIAMENT, which had been Prorogued successively from the 21st day of August to the 6th day of November, and thence to the 19th day of November, met this day for Despatch of Business.
The Session of PARLIAMENT was opened by Commission.
The HOUSE OF PEERS being met,
THE LORD CHANCELLOR THE LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House,
"That Her Majesty, not thinking fit to be personally present here this day, had been pleased to cause a Commission to be issued under the Great Seal, in order to the opening and holding of this Parliament."
Then Five of the Lords Commissioners, namely—The LORD CHANCELLOR, The LORD PRESIDEHT OF THE COUNCIL (The Duke of Marlborough), The LORD PRIVY SEAL (The Earl of Malmesbury), The Duke of Buckingham (The SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES) and The Earl of Cadogan, being in their Robes, and seated on a Form placed between the Throne and the Woolsack, commanded the Yeoman Usher of the Black Rod to let the Commons know "The Lords Commissioners desire their immediate Attendance in this House, to hear the Commission read."
Who being come, with their Speaker;
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid—
"My Lords, and Gentlemen of the House of Commons,
"HER MAJESTY not thinking fit to be present here this day in Her Royal Person, hath been pleased, in order to the

3
opening and holding of this Parliament, to cause Letters Patent to be issued under Her Great Seal, constituting us and several other Lords therein named Her Commissioners, to do all things, in Her Majesty's name, on Her part necessary to be performed in this Parliament: This will more fully appear by the Letters Patent themselves, which must now be read."
Then the said Letters Patent were read by the Clerk. And then
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid—
My Lords, and Gentlemen,
"IN again applying to you for your Advice and Assistance, I regret that I have found it necessary to call for your Attendance at an unusual, and probably to many of you an inconvenient Season.
"THE Sovereign of Abyssinia, in violation of all international Law, continues to hold in captivity several of My Subjects, some of whom have been especially accredited to him by Myself, and his persistent Disregard of friendly Representations has left Me no Alternative but that of making a peremptory Demand for the Liberation of My Subjects, and supporting it by an adequate Force.
"I HAVE accordingly directed an Expedition to be sent for that Purpose alone, and I confidently rely upon the Support and Co-operation of My Parliament in My Endeavour at once to relieve their Countrymen from an unjust Imprisonment, and to vindicate the Honour of My Crown.
"I HAVE directed that Papers on the Subject shall be forthwith laid before you.
"I RECEIVE from all Foreign Powers Assurances of their friendly Feelings, and I see no Reason to apprehend the Disturbance of the general Peace of Europe.
"A BAND of Italian Volunteers, without Authority from their own Sovereign, having invaded the Papal Territory, and threatened Rome itself, The Emperor of the French felt Himself called upon to despatch an Expedition for the Protection of the Sovereign Pontiff and his Dominions; that Object having been accomplished, and the Defeat and Dispersion of the Volunteer Force having relieved the Papal Territory from the Danger of external Invasion, I trust that His Imperial Majesty will find Himself enabled by an early withdrawal of His Troops, to remove any possible Ground of Misunderstanding between His Majesty's Government and that of The King of Italy.
"THE treasonable Conspiracy commonly known as Fenianism, baffled and repressed in Ireland, has assumed in England the Form of organized Violence and Assassination. These Outrages require to be rigorously put down; and I rely for their effectual Suppression upon the firm Administration of the Law, and the Loyalty of the great Mass of My Subjects.
Gentlemen of the House of Commons,
"THE Estimates for the ensuing Year are in course of Preparation, and will in due Time be laid before you. They will be framed with a view to Economy and to the necessary Requirements of the Public Service.
My Lords, and Gentlemen,
"As a necessary Sequel to the Legislation of the last Session, Bills will be laid before you for amending the Representation of the People in Scotland and Ireland.
"I HAVE Reason to believe that the Commissioners appointed to inquire into and report upon the Boundaries of existing Boroughs, as well as of the proposed Divisions of Counties and newly-enfranchised Boroughs, have made considerable Progress in their Inquiries, and no Time will be lost after the Receipt of their Report in laying before you their Recommendations for your Consideration and Decision.
"A BILL will also be presented to you for the more effectual Prevention of Bribery and Corruption at Elections.
"THE Public Schools Bill, which has already been more than once submitted to Parliament, will again be laid before you.
"THE general Question of the Education of the People requires your most serious Attention, and I have no Doubt you will approach the Subject with a full Appreciation both of its vital Importance and of its acknowledged Difficulty.
"MEASURES will be submitted to you during the present Session for amending and consolidating the various Acts relating to the Mercantile Marine.
"THE Exemption which the Country has now for some Time enjoyed from the Cattle Plague affords a favourable Opportunity for considering such permanent Enactments as may relieve the Home Trade from vexatious Restrictions, and facilitate the Introduction, under due Regulation, of Foreign Cattle for Home Consumption.
"MEASURES for the Amendment of the Law, which have been deferred
6
under the Pressure of more urgent Business, will be submitted for your Consideration.
"OTHER Questions apparently calling for legislative Action have been referred to Commissioners, whose Reports, as they shall be received, shall, without Delay, be laid before Parliament;
"IT is My earnest Prayer that all your Deliberations may be so guided as to conduce to the general Contentment and Happiness of My People."
Then the COMMONS withdrew.
ROLL OF THE LORDS—Garter King of Arms attending, delivered, at the Table (in the usual Manner) a List of the Lords Temporal in the Third Session of the Nineteenth Parliament of the United Kingdom: The same was Ordered to lie on the Table.
REPRESENTATIVE PEERS FOR IRELAND—Writs and Returns electing the Earl Annesley a Representative Peer for Ireland in the Room of the late Earl of Mayo, with the Certificate of the Clerk of the Crown in Ireland annexed thereto: Delivered (on Oath), and Certificate read.
The Lord Colchester—Sat first in Parliament after the Death of his Father.

SELECT VESTRIES.
Bill, pro formâ, read 1a.
THE LORDS COMMISSIONERS SPEECHhaving been reported by The LORD CHANCELLOR;—

ADDRESS TO HER MAJESTY ON THE LORDS COMMISSIONERS' SPEECH.
EARL BROWNLOW: My Lords, in rising to move an Address to Her Majesty, in answer to Her Majesty's most gracious Speech, I must not omit to claim the kind indulgence of your Lordships for one of its youngest and most inexperienced Members; and I trust that the errors that I may commit, or any short-comings on my part, may be kindly attributed to want of experience and of knowledge of the ways of your Lordships' House.
My Lords, Her Majesty has been gra-

7
ciously pleased, in the Speech from the Throne, to bring before the attention of the House several most important matters. The first in order—and I think that I am right in saying the first in importance—is the Abyssinian Expedition. It comes home to the heart of every Englishman to feel that a number of our fellow-countrymen are languishing far from their country and their homes in the prisons of a half-civilized barbarian. I do not desire to follow minutely the ramifications of the Abyssinian question; but, at the same time, I feel that it is necessary for me to go back as far as the mission of Mr. Rassam. After the seizure of Consul Cameron and other prisoners, Mr. Rassam was sent to Abyssinia with a letter from Her Majesty, requesting the release of the captives. At first Mr. Rassam, was exceedingly well received, and the captives were at one time actually delivered over to him. The King, however, expressed a wish, before the captives started on their homeward journey, that he should be reconciled to them; and for this purpose he sent for them to the Royal camp, when an apparent reconciliation between them and the King took place. The captives then returned to Magdala to await the approach of the season fittest for them to commence their homeward journey. At length, when the long wished-for time arrived, the captives started on their homeward journey to Massowah, and Mr. Rassam passed over with his suite to take leave of the King. On his arrival, he was asked by the King what had become of the prisoners? and he replied that they had started on their homeward journey. Upon this the King once more expressed his wish to be reconciled to the prisoners, and directed them to be again brought before him. They were for this purpose re-captured, put in chains, and brought before the King, when the form of reconciliation was gone through the second time. Shortly after, however, the King informed Mr. Rassam that he intended to detain them prisoners until the workmen and artizans he had asked for to instruct his people should arrive from England. Mr. Rassam was compelled to write a despatch to this effect; and the King sent one of the prisoners (Mr. Flad) to be the bearer of the letter to England. Such was the state of affairs when the present Government came into office. Mr. Flad returned to England with this letter, and a number of workmen and artizans were
8
engaged to proceed to Abyssinia, under the charge of Colonel Merewether, who proceeded with them. Colonel Merewether, on arriving at Massowah with the artizans, refused very properly to allow them to go up the country, and be thus placed in the hands of the King, before the prisoners were released—and therefore he established them at a place near Massowah until he could obtain further information. Colonel Merewether sent a message to the King informing him that the presents from Her Majesty and the artizans had arrived, but that they would not be forwarded until the prisoners were released. The King, in reply, wrote to Colonel Merewether requesting that the presents and the artizans might be immediately forwarded to him, but he did not in any way refer to the release of the captives. Colonel Merewether, therefore, wrote to the King again, informing him that the presents and the workmen could not be permitted to proceed up the country until after the liberation of the prisoners. No notice having been, taken of this communication, the noble Lord at the head of Foreign Affairs wrote a letter to King Theodore, expressing the great disappointment of Her Majesty that the prisoners had not been liberated, and informing him that if their release did not take place within three months he would forfeit Her Majesty's friendship. At a later date, the noble Lord at the head of Foreign Affairs again wrote to the King of Abyssinia, informing him that we had resolved, if necessary, to resort to force in order to procure the release of the captives. Your Lordships will perceive, from the statement I have made, that there has been no desire on the part of Her Majesty's Government to bring on a war with unnecessary rapidity; that before they resolved to use force they had exhausted every peaceable means in order to procure the release of the prisoners. Letters were written and presents were sent without avail, and it was only when every peaceable means had failed that it became necessary for Her Majesty's Government to vindicate the honour of the country by demanding by force that which King Theodore had refused to concede to peaceable means—the release of the prisoners. It was considered necessary, by competent judges, that Indian troops should be employed upon this campaign; but as Parliament was not then sitting, it was impossible to obtain the sanction necessary for the employment of Indian troops upon

9
foreign service. Under these circumstances, Her Majesty's Government took upon themselves the responsibility of adopting active measures, trusting that at the earliest opportunity Parliament would give their approbation to those active measures which they deemed it absolutely necessary for them to pursue.
My Lords, the friendly relations of this country with foreign Powers is necessarily a source of national gratification. The wise and careful policy of the noble Lord at the head of Foreign Affairs has placed this country in such a position that at no time in its history has the friendship and goodwill of England been more earnestly desired than it is at the present moment. Not only are we at peace with the great Powers of Europe, but they are happily at peace with one another. Some of those great Powers having passed through a short though sanguinary war, are now resting upon their arms, and I heartily trust that this calm will be a lasting one. Some interruption has, no doubt, been caused to the peace of Europe by an attempt on the part of a band organized in Italy, who have, acting totally without the authority of their Sovereign, entered the Papal States; but His Imperial Majesty the Emperor of the French, by a prompt expedition and by allowing the French troops to act in concert with the Papal army, has been enabled, after fighting only one battle, to restore tranquillity to that part of Europe.
My Lords, the treasonable conspiracy, which is commonly known as Fenianism, born in a far-off country and nurtured in Ireland, has unhappily of late spread to some few districts in England where its appearance has been characterized by wicked and blood thirsty outrages; but it is gratifying to find that in no single instance have the English people exhibited the slightest sympathy with Fenianism. It is therefore to be hoped, my Lords, that no extraordinary measures will have to be resorted to to put down attempts of so very vague and isolated a character.
My Lords, after the great measure of Reform passed during the late Session of Parliament for this country, it no doubt becomes necessary to bring in Bills to amend the representation of the people in other parts of the United Kingdom. This is the necessary sequel of the great measure passed last Session. The attention of the House is earnestly called by Her Majesty to a measure for the education of
10
the people. The question of education is no doubt one of great importance. In Ireland there is now a Commission at work inquiring into the subject, and has proceeded to some extent in its labours. In the interim, however, the subject is so vast that I cannot help thinking there is an enormous amount of statistical information which will have to be obtained before we can deal satisfactorily with the question.
My Lords, it is a matter of great congratulation to this country that the cattle plague which had so long prevailed has at length subsided. The cattle trade of this country has, of necessity, been greatly trammelled and hampered by the unavoidable checks which have been imposed. Now, however, the disease has died out, and with its disappearance there is every hope that these impediments may be removed. The removal of such impediments will be of the greatest possible service and advantage to the country.
Such, my Lords, are the important matters to which Her Majesty has called the attention of this House in the gracious Speech from the Throne. My Lords, I heartily beg to thank you for the kindly attention you have afforded me; and I beg your Lordships' leave to move the following humble Address, thanking Her Majesty for the gracious Speech which She has addressed to us from the Throne:—
MOST GRACIOUS SOVEREIGN,
"WE, Your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal Subjects, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in Parliament assembled, beg leave to offer our humble Thanks to Your Majesty for Your Majesty's gracious Speech.
"WE humbly thank your Majesty for the gracious Expression of your Regret that You have found it necessary to call for our Attendance at an unusual, and, as Your Majesty is pleased to say, probably at an inconvenient time.
"WE regret to learn that the Sovereign of Abyssinia, in violation of all international Law, continues to hold in captivity several of Your Majesty's Subjects, some of whom have been especially accredited to him by Your Majesty, and that the persistent Disregard by that Sovereign of friendly Representations has left Your Majesty no Alternative but that of making a peremptory Demand for the Liberation of Your Subjects, and of supporting it by an adequate Force. We thank Your Majesty for informing us that an Expedition has been sent accordingly for that Purpose alone, and Your Majesty may confidently rely on the

11
Support and Co-operation of Parliament in Your Endeavours at once to relieve our Countrymen from an unjust Imprisonment, and to vindicate the Honour of Your Crown.
"WE thank Your Majesty for informing us that Papers on this Subject will be forthwith laid before us.
"WE rejoice to learn that Your Majesty's Relations with Foreign Powers are friendly and satisfactory, and that your Majesty sees no Reason to apprehend any Disturbance of the general Peace of Europe.
"WE thank Your Majesty for informing us that the Invasion of the Papal States by a Baud of Italian Volunteers, without Authority from their own Sovereign, has led to the Dispatch of an Expedition by His Majesty the Emperor of the French for the Protection of the Sovereign Pontiff and his Dominions. We join with Your Majesty in trusting that as the Object of the Emperor has been accomplished, and as the Defeat and Dispersion of the Volunteer Force has relieved the Papal Territory from the Dangers of external Invasion, His Imperial Majesty will find Himself enabled, by an early withdrawal of his Troops, to remove any possible Ground of Misunderstanding between His Majesty's Government and that of The King of Italy.
"WE learn with the deepest Regret that the treasonable Conspiracy, commonly known as Fenianism, baffled and repressed in Ireland, has assumed in England the Form of organized Violence and Assassination. We concur with Your Majesty that such Outrages as have been committed require to be rigorously put down; and we are confident that Your Majesty may rely for their effectual Suppression upon the firm Administration of the Law and the Loyalty of the great Mass of Your Subjects.
"WE humbly thank Your Majesty for informing us that as a necessary Sequel to the Legislation of the last Session, Bills will be laid before us for amending the Representation of the People in Scotland and in Ireland.
"WE rejoice to learn that Your Majesty has Reason to believe that the Commissioners appointed to inquire into and report upon the Boundaries of existing Boroughs, as well as of the proposed Divisions of Counties and newly-enfranchised Boroughs, have made considerable Progress in their Inquiries, and that no Time will be lost after the Receipt of their Report in laying before us their Recommendations.
"WE thank Your Majesty for informing us that a Bill will be presented to us for the more effectual Suppression of Bribery and Corruption at
12
Elections, and that the Public Schools Bill, which has been already more than once submitted to Parliament, will again be laid before us.
"WITH Your Majesty we are of opinion that the general Question of the Education of the People requires the most serious Attention of Parliament; and Your Majesty may rely upon our approaching the Subject with a full Appreciation of its vital Importance and acknowledged Difficulty.
"WE thank Your Majesty for informing us that Measures will be submitted to us during the present Session for amending and consolidating various Acts relating to the Mercantile Marine; and with Your Majesty we hope that the Exemption which the Country has now for some Time enjoyed from the Cattle Plague will afford a favourable Opportunity for considering such permanent Enactments as may relieve the Home Trade from vexatious Restrictions, and facilitate the Introduction, under due Regulations, of Foreign Cattle for Home Consumption.
"WE thank Your Majesty for informing us that Measures for the Amendment of the Law, which have been deferred under the Pressure of more urgent Business, will be submitted to us; and that other Questions apparently calling for legislative Action have been referred to Commissioners, whose Reports will be laid before us as soon as they may be received.
"WITH Your Majesty we earnestly pray that all our Deliberations may be guided so as to conduce to the general Contentment and Happiness of the People."
LORD HYLTONrose to second the Address, and said: My Lords, the subjects which are recommended to our notice in the gracious Speech from the Throne have been so well touched upon by the noble Earl, that I feel I have no claim whatever to your Lordships' attention; but I would ask your sympathy on the ground that I undertake this duty at the close of long political services. Now, my Lords, we are called together, as the noble Earl has said, under peculiar circumstances, and at a very unusual period of the year. No doubt it would be the duty of any Government—and it would be, no doubt, in accordance with the wish of Her Majesty herself—to ask the advice of Her Parliament before undertaking, as Her Majesty has unfortunately been compelled to do, any extensive hostile operations in a distant part of the world; but in this case, my Lords, it also appears that the summoning of Parliament is a constitutional necessity.

13
It seems that by the Act of 1858, for regulating the Government of India, the sanction of Parliament must be obtained before Her Majesty's Indian army can be employed in military operations out of India; and therefore it was necessary, in a constitutional point of view, to call Parliament together to obtain that authority. The events connected with the detention of our fellow-subjects in Abyssinia have been known for years past, and have provoked very general feeling of sympathy and indignation. Much dissatisfaction has been felt at the delay that has already occurred, and at the length of time such a reproach to our honour has been sustained. Some of our fellow-subjects in that country, including an accredited agent, have been detained for years past in prison. In 1865—and even in 1864—the noble Earl who was then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs admitted that there was a possible necessity for undertaking some strenuous measures for their liberation, and stated that he was fully prepared to take such steps as might be found necessary for the purpose. But the noble Earl objected at that time to sending a mission to Abyssinia, because he thought it derogatory to the honour of this country to send such a mission while our accredited agents were held in captivity, and he naturally determined to exhaust every effort before resorting to any military demonstration which might partake of a hostile character. Well, my Lords, this state of things continued up to the time when the present Government came into office, and then inquiries were instituted and agents were sent out from this country. Every effort, however, has failed, and it has become evident that there is no other hope of obtaining a release of the prisoners but by a military and a hostile demonstration. No doubt, my Lords, the military and other resources of this country will be severely taxed in carrying on a war in so remote a region as Abyssinia, and in a country of which so little is known, or of which, at all events, so much has to be learnt. We can hardly expect to thoroughly overcome every difficulty connected with the country and the climate, and to be as well forearmed against the difficulties as we should be if we were properly forewarned of their existence. But I have great confidence in the exertions which the Government are taking to secure success in this direction. Of one thing I feel quite certain—that
14
our Anglo-Indian forces will maintain their ancient renown, and show that they are fully equal to any duties which they may be called upon to perform. However much, therefore, we may regret that our troops should be called upon to act under such circumstances, it would be still more a matter of regret if anything were neglected on the part of this great country which could secure the success of the expedition. I feel sure that it is the general disposition of Parliament and of the country to afford to Her Majesty every possible assistance and aid.
My Lords, to a commercial country like ours it is always a matter of the greatest importance that we should be on terms of accord with the other nations of Europe; and at no time, I believe, has a more cordial or friendly feeling between us and the great Powers of Europe and other countries of the world existed than exists at the present moment. I was much struck the other day with the words of hope which were conveyed in the speech made by the Emperor of the French on receiving the distinguished diplomatist accredited to his Court by Her Majesty; for I thought that they implied that France and England will act cordially together for the maintenance of universal peace, and for the repressing (should it be necessary) of overweening ambitions, and that they will strive to promote these ends both by their counsel and example. The state of alarm which had arisen from the late unfortunate situation of affairs in Italy, to which Her Majesty refers in her Speech, has, I am happy to say, passed away almost as suddenly as it had arisen; and there is no doubt that some solution will be found by which the future peace of Italy can be secured and preserved.
My Lords, with regard to that sad, useless, and hopeless conspiracy which has broken out in some parts of Ireland, and which has now caused so much uneasiness in this country, I do hope that the firmness of the Government and the loyalty of Her Majesty's subjects will enable them to suppress and uproot it altogether. It is a movement which appears to me not only to frustrate all the hopes and wishes of those who promoted it, and to render the grievances of Ireland less easy of approach, but it concerns us all, inasmuch as it must lead in this country to far more strict police regulations, even to the arming of the police, in order to enable the Government to perform their first duty—to protect Her

15
Majesty's loyal subjects. My Lords, the passing of a Reform Bill for England has, of course, rendered it necessary that similar measures should be considered with reference to Ireland and Scotland, and I hope that the representation of those countries will be dealt with in the same liberal measure as that which was applied to England a few months since. I can only hope that those measures will be speedily brought before Parliament, and that they may tend to the satisfaction of every part of Her Majesty's dominions. The Commission which has to decide on the boundaries of the counties, boroughs, and cities of England, Her Majesty informs us, will soon be ready with their Report; and, no doubt, when that Report has been delivered, legislation will immediately take place on the subject. I know that that Report is looked forward to with considerable interest; I trust it will receive impartial consideration from your Lordships, and that it will be received with satisfaction by those whom it affects. It has, my Lords, been a standing reproach and scandal to this country that hitherto we have been unable to deal effectually with bribery at elections; and therefore I am sure any measure that will get rid of that evil will be most favourably regarded by the community. I trust, therefore, that such a measure will be speedily brought before the other House. Again, my Lords, the education of the country is one of the most important subjects to which the attention of Parliament can be directed. A measure connected with public schools has twice already been before Parliament. The question of the general education of the country is becoming every day more and more important. I am sorry, however, to say that the information on the subject is still incomplete, and it is not likely to be dealt with this Session as a general measure. But in Scotland the subject is much further advanced. A scheme of general education is there much more matured, and I trust that a Bill on the subject will be brought forward and passed during the present Session. There can be no doubt that a measure for consolidating the various Acts relating to the Mercantile Marine, even if it does no more than consolidate those Acts, will be a very great benefit to the shipping interest and to the commercial community. I am therefore glad to find that a measure of this description is about to be introduced. With reference to the cattle plague, I rejoice to learn that some
16
general measure is to be brought forward. I have no knowledge of the nature or principle of the measure which the Government are about to propose on that subject; but as the result of my individual experience, I may state that the country has suffered extremely from foreign diseased cattle being introduced and driven from the different ports to be slaughtered. Not only so, but in the early period of cattle plague they were driven to neighbouring fairs, and thus spread the disease through whole provinces of the country. This is an evil which I hope will be properly guarded against in future, by arrangements being made for slaughtering cattle at the ports of their arrival. At any rate, I think we have a right to ask of the Government some measures calculated to make us more secure than we have hitherto been. With regard to the remaining portions of Her Majesty's Speech, it is not necessary that I should detain your Lordships. I have now only to thank your Lordships for the patience with which you have listened to one who feels he has little claim on your indulgence. I will conclude with one observation: I am sure you will all unite in the prayer that Her Majesty may long be preserved to rule over a contented and happy people. I beg to second the Address which has been moved by my noble Friend. [See Page 10.]
EARL RUSSELL: My Lords, the Address to the Throne having been moved and seconded with great judgment and propriety by the two noble Lords who have addressed your Lordships, I rise to make a few comments on the topics contained in the Royal Speech. In the first place, I think that Her Majesty's confidential servants, having arrived at the opinion that it was necessary to use force in Abyssinia—in short, to make war on the kingdom of Abyssinia—there can be no doubt as to the propriety of their advising Her Majesty to call Parliament together, even if it must be at an inconvenient season of the year. If I have any doubt on the subject it would be whether Parliament should not have been called together rather earlier than at the present time. But, in the next place, as to the important matter which has been the occasion of bringing Parliament together, in regard to the warlike expedition to Abyssinia, I should say there are two questions requiring consideration. The first question is, whether we are justified by the conduct of the Sovereign of Abys-

17
sinia In considering it as a casus belli; and second, whether it is expedient and advisable to make a large military expedition the means of recovering the captives? With regard to the first question, I think there can be no doubt whatever. I consider the conduct of the Sovereign of Abyssinia to our fellow-subjects so outrageous, so contrary not only to every principle of International Law, but to every dictate of justice in regard to other nations, that it was impossible that Her Majesty's Government should not consider it a cause of war. But, with regard to the second question, if I feel any doubts they are doubts suggested towards the end of last Session by the noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, rather than any doubts of my own. There can, I think, be no apprehension whatever in regard to our troops, not only that they will conduct themselves well, but that they will overcome any military resistance likely to be made by the troops of that Sovereign. But the difficulties stated by the noble Lord to which I have referred were difficulties in regard to the nature of the roads, to the want of water, and to the great mountain ranges the troops have to pass before they can reach the place where the captives are confined. There was likewise a difficulty in regard to the want of water during their short march into the interior. These were difficulties which the noble Lord said, very justly, would require further inquiry and consideration before the decision of Her Majesty's Government was taken. But if there was any doubt on the subject, the question arises as to the consideration it received from Her Majesty's Government. I am willing to presume that, having certainly no interest in sending such an expedition, they are likely to be correct in the conclusion to which they have come; but I suspend my judgment as to their ultimate decision until I know more of the grounds on which they have acted, and until we know that the information the noble Lord has since obtained leads to the conclusion that the expedition is likely to be successful. I have had great satisfaction in seeing it stated in Her Majesty's Speech that the expedition has been sent to Abyssinia for the specific purpose of the recovery of the captives and "for that purpose alone." I am very glad that none of those speculations which appeared from time to time in some of the public papers as to the occupation of Abyssinia
18
and our meddling with the internal affairs of that country and putting another King on the Throne who would be a better Sovereign than the present—that none of these speculations form any part of the object of the Abyssinian expedition. I am glad to see that Her Majesty's Government do not apprehend any disturbance of the peace of Europe; and therefore those rumours which prevailed some time ago that there was likely to be an international war in the spring are, happily, totally without foundation. I come next to that subject treated at some length in the Speech, and which to me is of very peculiar interest—namely, the events which have taken place in Home and the Papal Territories. The interference of the French in Rome, which led to the employment of a military force and the use of the new French weapon, is a subject of very melancholy consideration. I do not say or suppose that the Emperor of the French has violated the Convention of September; but there is an Article in the Convention which is likely to give rise to what diplomatists call "a complication"—namely, the Article which recognises the right of the Pope to enlist the subjects of foreign Powers as his troops, and to use them accordingly. Now, if these foreign subjects—be they French or Belgians—are entirely at the disposal of the Pope, and if no foreign Governments took any interest in them, the power of enlisting them could hardly be denied to the Sovereign of Rome; but when we find the French soldiers commanded by a French General, and that the French Minister of War considered that these soldiers were to be punished for military offences, and be deemed in other respects as part of the great army in France, then I think such a condition of things is likely to lead to this consequence—that if ever a dispute should arise between the inhabitants of the Roman Territory and those soldiers, and if the soldiers should be in any great danger, then, with the natural military feeling of France, a great demand would certainly be made on the Emperor by the French people to send troops to Rome to vindicate the honour of their flag and to relieve the troops that had enlisted in the Pope's service. I do not see that the fact of the troops wearing a different cockade and perhaps a different uniform from the French would prevent that feeling from arising and render it almost a necessity to despatch

19
troops to Rome. For my part, I consider all these interventions in the internal affairs of other countries as injurious to the interest of Europe and inconsistent with every principle we have professed. I remember that more than forty years ago Mr. Canning instructed the Duke of Wellington when he went to the Congress of Verona to the effect that, if any question should arise about interfering in the internal disputes in Spain, His Majesty would never be a party to enter into a Convention to interfere by force of arms. That was proper language for the English Minister to use, and I trust that the present Government will use similar language should any similar question arise. But I suppose there need be no secresy or reserve as to the project of a Conference at present with respect to the affairs of Rome. I cannot conceive how there should be any such Conference. It is a matter which must be left to the King of Italy and the Pope to settle between themselves. The King of Italy is sure to pay great respect to the Pope as a temporal Sovereign, and as a spiritual Sovereign the Pope will be secure in the affections of the whole Italian people. If that be so, I can see no use in any Conference; but if there should be one, I should be glad to know whether Her Majesty's Government proposed to take any part in it. The next topic in Her Majesty's Speech relates to "the treasonable conspiracy commonly known as Fenianism." With respect to that I agree in what is in the Speech that, "baffled and repressed in Ireland, it has assumed in England the form of organized violence and assassination." I cannot but think that—be it the fault of whom it may—very culpable negligence was shown in Manchester in not properly guarding the State prisoners when they were taken to the police-office and when they were sent back to prison. The men Deasy and Kelly were known in Ireland to be two of the principal persons engaged in Fenianism. It has always been understood that while Stephens was the man of organization, Kelly was the man of action and courage; and, such being known, it is surprising that the Government had not provided a sufficient escort of military and armed police to accompany the prisoners in Manchester, and so prevented the lamentable occurrence in which the murder of Serjeant Brett took place. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has spoken of a lawless spirit being abroad,
20
and it cannot be denied that there is some truth in that observation; and, such being the case, it behoves the Government, and especially the Secretary of State for the Home Department, to see that there is no laxity or want of vigilance in the administration of the law, and that, when great offenders are arrested for the purpose of being sent to trial, no such negligent guard should be placed over them as might permit of their escape or rescue. No doubt, as stated in the Royal Speech, Her Majesty may safely rely for the effectual suppression of those outrages on the firm administration of the law and the loyalty of the great mass of Her subjects. There is no great question in this country as to the loyalty of the greater part of Her Majesty's subjects, and even in Ireland I should say the great majority of the people are opposed to the evil-disposed who foster and promote the Fenian outrages. The next topic in Her Majesty's Speech has reference to Bills for amending the representation of the people in Scotland and Ireland. I take for granted that those Bills will be founded on the same principles as the Bill of last Session referring to England. The discussion, therefore, on the subject had better be reserved until the time when we shall know something more of the Bills. There are, however, two remarks which I desire to make, one of them applying to Bills and the late period of the Session at which many of them come up to the House of Lords; but I refer more especially to the Reform Bill of last year. I think it very inconvenient that the House of Commons should go on from the beginning of February till the middle of July discussing Bills of great importance, and that it should not be until the month of July that such measures should be brought under your Lordships' consideration. I see that at a great meeting of some 2,000 working men a member of the Cabinet made it a matter of boast that your Lordships were allowed so much freedom in the consideration of the Reform Bill of last Session. Now, it was on the 16th of July that the Bill was introduced in your Lordships' House, and by that time many of your Lordships had had enough of the London season, and had gone into the country for recreation. The Bill was considered for a fortnight, and when a noble Friend of mine, not at present in his place (Earl Grey), wished to amend it in some particular, and made for that pur-

21
pose a proposal which was not only rational in itself, but which met with the support of a great proportion of your Lordships, he was met by a somewhat obscure but intelligible threat from the noble Earl at the head of the Government to the effect that that was the 1st of August, and that if the Amendment were carried he must withdraw the Bill altogether, and consider what further steps should be taken. After that many Conservative Peers who had intended to support the Amendment were a good deal frightened by the menace, and did not know what might happen. The Bill might have been withdrawn, and those noble Peers might have had to bear the brunt of invectives spread broadcast through the whole country, and it might have been said that an excellent Bill was introduced, but that the House of Lords obstructed the passing of the measure, which, accordingly, was obliged to be withdrawn. Certainly, when a Bill changing the whole Constitution was brought into the House of Lords on the 16th of July, and when their Lordships were told on the 1st of August that they could not consider the subject further, or inquire into the value of any Amendment, I do not think that a very ample power of discussion was allowed them, or that it could be made any great matter of boast by the Member of the Cabinet (Lord John Manners), who spoke at the Crystal Palace with so much concern for your freedom of deliberation. Another observation I wish to make in reference to this matter. The noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Derby) exercises a power which many eminent men—Pitt, Castlereagh, Canning, Wellington, and Peel, among others—have wielded before. All those eminent men had to introduce important measures. Mr. Pitt introduced the Bill for effecting the union with Ireland, and the Duke of Wellington introduced the Roman Catholic Emancipation Bill, both introducing the subjects with proper solemnity and great force of expression. I allude more especially to the great speech of Mr. Pitt in introducing the Bill for the union of Ireland. "Here," he said, "is a measure of great importance, which I will show you by argument will conduce to the benefit of this country and of Ireland, will strengthen the Crown, and promote the happiness of the Irish people. It will promote their freedom, augment their riches, and be a great step in the progress and prosperity of the country." That was language such
22
as every one of those statesmen used, and it enabled them to carry their measures. Well, did the noble Earl take any such line? What did he tell us? He said, "I did not think it likely we should remain in office unless we brought in this measure. I do not like to hold office merely as a stop-gap, and therefore I proposed a measure which I thought would have a chance of being passed;" and he added that whether good or bad he would introduce this great measure. In doing so the noble Earl acted, I must say, in a manner very unlike any of those great men of whom I have spoken, in a manner, too, I think not very becoming the position which he holds in this country, and hardly respectful to the Crown, to your Lordships, or to the other House of Parliament. I would, therefore, venture to suggest to him that when he brings forward the Scotch and Irish Reform Bills, he should endeavour to find some argument to show that, in his opinion, those measures are calculated to conduce to the public benefit, and would tend to make the people of Scotland and Ireland happier and freer than they are at the present moment. It would be much better, in my opinion, that the noble Earl should be able to do that than that he should merely inform us that he was about to take two further leaps in the dark—"number two and number three." There is another fertile topic—so fertile a topic that I shall barely touch upon it now—which has been discussed a great deal in public, and which ought, I think, to be duly considered by both Houses of Parliament, and that is, what do these measures of Reform imply, and what is the course of legislation which they render it expedient to adopt? I, for one, cannot agree with the noble Earl opposite, whom I understood to say that he was quite satisfied with the course of legislation under that Bill of 1832, and that he had no wish to see a change in that respect. So far, indeed, as the general tenour of our legislation is concerned, I concur in the sentiment; but I am, at the same time, of opinion that of late years the pace of the legislation on important subjects has not kept up with the want, which must exist in a great country like this, of measures to provide against new evils and to confer new benefits. Generally speaking, therefore, I think the line we should adopt should be that we should be predisposed and even anxious to introduce every im-

23
provement that is consistent with the Constitution of the country, while prepared at the same time to examine every innovation proposed, and when we find it inconsistent with that Constitution to reject it. When Lord Grey was about to introduce a Reform Bill, he advised his Sovereign, William IV., to use this language in addressing Parliament—
"I feel convinced you will adhere to the principles of the Constitution, by which the prerogatives of the Crown, the privileges of the two Houses of Parliament, and the rights and liberties of the people are equally secured."
That was becoming language in the King of this country to use—that was becoming advice on the part of an English Prime Minister to give—and I trust that whatever your Lordships may do you will regard those words as still prevailing, and as still having weight in your deliberations. For my own part, I am convinced that everything which the people can wish, that all the freedom they can enjoy, is compatible with the forms of the English Constitution. I do not wish to see their rights, or the prerogatives of the Crown, or the privileges of the two Houses of Parliament in any way diminished, and by paying due regard to each of these considerations, you will, I believe, have established the proper limits for the improvements which you may desire to set on foot. There is another subject mentioned in the Speech from, the Throne to which I wish, before I sit down, briefly to advert—I allude to the subject of Education. That is a subject upon which I am anxious to know something of the views of the Government beyond what can be learnt from the vague expressions in the Royal Message. I have, I may add, views of my own with respect to it, which I intend to submit to your Lordships' notice on a future occasion. I propose then, following the example set by Lord Brougham in 1835, to lay some Resolutions with regard to the question of Education before your Lordships, not with the purpose of pressing you to adopt them should they not meet with your approval, but rather with the object of eliciting some discussion on a matter which is, perhaps, beyond all others of interest to the people of this country, not only in the present, but in the future, before it comes to be dealt with in the shape of a Bill. I will simply add that I do not see how any one can object to the terms of the Address which is now under our consideration, and I, for
24
one, am prepared to give it a cordial assent.
THE EARL OF HARDWICKEsaid, he desired to express the satisfaction it gave him to witness the unanimity of feeling which seemed to prevail in their Lordships' House on the subject which had mainly led to their being assembled together at that season. The noble Earl who had just sat down (Earl Russell), had expressed himself on that subject in terms which, proceeding from the Leader of the Opposition, must be looked upon as of great importance, and as evincing, on his part, the display of a wise judgment; and the noble Earl's opinion would have great weight with the country. For himself, he looked upon the expedition against the King of Abyssinia as necessary to the maintenance of the national dignity; for it must be borne in mind that we had not in his case to deal with a civilized Power like those of Europe, with whom our differences might be arranged by means of diplomacy, but with the head of a savage nation, who could be brought to do what was just and right only by an exhibition of warlike strength. In such a case the difficulties to be encountered were small as compared with the injurious consequences which would result from allowing the impression to prevail that a barbarous people might commit such transgressions against us as King Theodore had done with impunity. It was not, however, necessary to dwell upon the subject. Passing from that subject, the noble Earl (Earl Russell) had found himself compelled to fall back on a very ancient topic, with which he had for many years been so intimately connected—the state and condition of the Constitution of this country—and he complained of the insufficient time which had been allowed to their Lordships' House for their deliberations; and he moreover touched on the discussions of last year with respect to the great measure of Reform which had been passed, and which it was to be hoped had effected a settlement of that important question. He (the Earl of Hardwicke), for one, thought it ill became the noble Earl who so long sat in the councils of his Sovereign to deal with that subject in a way which might soon again lead to irritating discussions with respect to it. He himself had not been a very warm advocate of the Bill of last year, but he thought the question settled by the passing of the Act; and now that it

25
was the law of the land he was prepared to stand by it and defend it; and he hoped also to see the Bills for Scotland and Ireland brought to the same satisfactory conclusion. Were they going to raise the same feelings again as had existed against the Government during the last Session, because, having passed an English measure, the Government felt themselves bound to proceed with the other measures? The noble Earl knew perfectly well that if the Constitution of this country was to work well, it must be justly and evenly balanced, and must be carried out in Scotland and Ireland as it was in England. He should not have gone back to this question had not the remarks of the noble Earl led to it. Did the noble Earl for a moment believe that when the Government and Sovereign of this country departed (to use a nautical term) from the anchorage of a £10 suffrage, they could find ground anywhere but in household suffrage? The noble Earl could not believe any such thing. Another subject of great importance, which was mentioned in the Royal Speech, was that of education. They had heard a great deal of clap-trap talked, both in and out of Parliament, with respect to the necessity of educating the people. He himself was of opinion that the Legislature had for years been judiciously endeavouring to give the people as much education as they could swallow. It would be wise not to attempt to give more education to the working man than he had time to acquire; and if they gave him the knowledge which enabled him to read and write—if they gave him the knowledge which enabled him to read his Bible and understand his religion, it was quite sufficient, and a man of natural talent and ability would be able to help himself to acquire knowledge. But if they expected that fancy schemes, such as they heard extolled, were practicable—if they expected that the poor and working man could be educated in the same manner and to the same extent as the rich citizen—they would labour under a very great mistake. Those who advocated such a thing talked nonsense. He observed that some people were anxious to lead the working men to suppose that the Legislature was prepared to educate them by force, and use all compulsory means within their power for that purpose. The whole question was one which, along with others, they would be called upon to discuss at a future period during the present Session; and he would
26
therefore, on the present occasion, not trouble their Lordships with any further remarks.
THE EARL OF CARNARVON: My Lords, I will not detain your Lordships beyond a very few moments; but I am desirous of taking the first opportunity of saying a few words on one point of great importance which is referred to in Her Majesty's Speech—namely, that relating to the Abyssinian expedition. My Lords, I think we must all admit, as the noble Earl opposite (Earl Russell) put it, that there will be very great difficulties incident to this enterprize—difficulties connected with roads, or rather routes, with transport, with the commissariat, with the climate, and other matters incident to the march of an army through such a country. Besides that, there must also be a very great expenditure incurred; and beyond that, there must be many further and future contingencies which it is right that Parliament should take into its consideration. You have to take into account—and doubtless Her Majesty's Government has considered all these points, and will, when the proper time arrives, give us all the details—you have to take into account the possibility of a retreat into the interior on the part of King Theodore, on the advance of your army into his territory, and the extreme difficulty of inland operations in such a country; you have to take into account—that which I hope is improbable—the massacre of the captives themselves. My Lords, I do not say that these are difficulties which ought of themselves to interfere with such an expedition; but they no doubt are difficulties. Moreover, I see that in the Speech it is stated that this expedition is undertaken for the sole purpose of liberating the captives. Well, I trust that hope may be realized. But, on the one hand, circumstances which you cannot now foretell may arise which may oblige you to protract your operations. On the other hand, if circumstances do not so arise, it may be that society—if you can speak of society in such a country as that—may absolutely fall to pieces from this expedition, and such positive anarchy may ensue as that an Egyptian annexation of Abyssinia, or of a part of it, may be effected. These are all, no doubt, serious considerations, and I dare say Her Majesty's Government has taken them into view. I confess, my Lords, there is a doubt in my mind, if I may be permitted to express it—and the

27
noble Earl at the head of the Government must be perfectly aware of the opinion I entertain on this subject, for it has been often expressed—my doubt has been, and is, whether war upon this scale, and such a campaign as we have now embarked in, was the sole alternative that presented itself to us. My Lords, I must say I doubt considerably whether the course which has been taken was altogether the only course, or the most expedient course, that could have been adopted. You sent out, in the first instance, Mr. Rassam. Well, it was my good fortune to know Mr. Rassam some years ago, to be personally well acquainted with him, and I formed a very high opinion indeed of the tact and ability which he showed in the management of wild races. But, at the same time, you sent him out rather as a commercial traveller, rather as a "bagman" almost, than as an envoy representing Her Majesty. Mr. Rassam went out without any of that pomp or circumstance which not only impresses but is absolutely essential in dealing with Oriental people, and you imposed on him, I think, an almost impracticable task. I think he discharged his duties admirably as far as they went, with one single exception, and that exception was the acceptance of money on his part from the King of Abyssinia. I regret that Mr. Rassam accepted any money from the King. I think it placed Mr. Rassam at once in a false position as the accredited envoy of Her Majesty. At the same time, the circumstances under which he went out placed him in such a situation that he was almost compelled to accept that money, not for himself, but for the purposes of his mission, and it was a fault, perhaps, excusable on his part. My Lords, I observe that in the Papers which have been laid before Parliament there is evidence of an opinion of this kind being entertained by two of the most competent officers who have great experience of the East. Sir William Coghlan distinctly states that Mr. Rassam was not invested with all that dignity and all those surroundings of pomp and circumstance which are so effective in dealing with an Oriental King; and Colonel Merewether, I perceive, holds identically the same view. But after Mr. Rassam you sent out another envoy—Mr. Flad. Now, Mr. Flad is a very excellent man; but for years he had been resident at the Court of King Theodore, who was perfectly aware of his measure; and I think from
28
his letters published in these blue books it is quite apparent that, however excellent and worthy a person Mr. Flad may be, he is not the man to be intrusted with so grave and delicate a commission as was deputed to him. The course I frankly own I could have wished adopted would have been this—that a mission should have been sent out under the charge of some Indian officer of experience, well acquainted with these countries and their inhabitants, competent to deal with the circumstances he had to meet in Abyssinia, and, at the same time, attended by an escort of, say, either a regiment or a regiment and a half of irregular cavalry. Such an escort would have been sufficient to give him all the personal protection and security that could be desired; and, on the other hand, it might have saved all the cost of this expedition and obviated all those difficulties, dangers, and uncertainties which every one must admit do exist in connection with it. Such an officer would have passed through the country at the head of a flying column, and could have presented himself before King Theodore with, it may be, presents in one hand, and an ultimatum of war on the other, and unless the prisoners were then and there given up to him—but I can hardly myself doubt what the result would have been—I can hardly doubt but that they would then and there have been released. But supposing this not to have been the case, and that the captives were refused, you might then properly have fallen back upon the alternative which you have at present adopted—you might, without any loss of honour, of dignity, or of any conceivable advantage, without even any loss of time, have taken the course that you have now taken, and obtained every good result which you are likely to obtain from it. My Lords, I have always held that opinion from the first, and I have thought it fair to state it at this early stage. On the other hand, Her Majesty's Government, no doubt after considering that view, rejected it. They have adopted a different course of proceeding, and I entirely agree that there is nothing for us now to do but to go on as vigorously as we can with the war which has been commenced. My Lords, I must say I saw with very great satisfaction that the entire command of the expedition has been concentrated in the hands of a single officer—Sir Robert Napier—an officer of the highest ability and experience. If anything can insure the success of this

29
campaign it is the concentration of the command of this expedition in the hands of one single person. There is another remark which I wish to make before sitting down. It is my firm belief that if there is any one point in connection with this expedition respecting which we should be agreed, it is that of the cost. The cost of this war, which must necessarily be very great, is one which, I think, ought to fall exclusively upon this country. The objects for which the campaign has been organized are essentially and exclusively Imperial objects, and they affect this country, primarily and particularly. In the blue book laid before Parliament there is a letter from my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for India, in which he most distinctly lays down that the objects of this expedition are Imperial objects, and that the cost ought not in fairness to be charged to the revenues of India. However unpopular it may be to assert that opinion, I sincerely hope that Her Majesty's Government will abide by the conclusion to which the Secretary of State for India has arrived, and which he has so clearly expressed in that letter. Further, I must say this, that inasmuch as this expedition is an expedition affecting the present time, and the present generation exclusively, I trust that no part of its cost will be thrown upon a future time or generation. The objects of the campaign affect us alone, and it would be a great injustice—it would be the height of impolicy, however unpopular it may be to say so—to lighten our present burdens by transferring them to some future time.
LORD HOUGHTONsaid, there was one topic adverted to in the Speech from the Throne so likely to come before their Lordships during the present Session, that he craved permission to make a few remarks upon it. He referred to the relations at present existing between the Imperial Government of France and the Kingdom of Italy. The passage relating to this subject took up a considerable portion of the Royal Speech, and it was remarkable as expressing a decided opinion, not only as to what had recently occurred, but as to the best means of arriving at a solution of the Italian difficulty. Her Majesty's Government not only intimated their regret at the occupation of Rome by the French troops, but expressed a belief that the early withdrawal of those troops would be the best solution of the Italian question. He could have wished that the
30
words referring to the early withdrawal of the French troops had been omitted from the Queen's Speech, because they assumed that which was not proved or justified—namely, that this early withdrawal would lead to the solution of the difficulty. The anomaly of the occupation of Rome by French troops was so great and so startling that it was not for him to press it upon their Lordships' attention. The question was, however, whether the solution which they all desired, of the establishment of good, satisfactory, and lasting relations between the Government of Italy and the Papal States, would be best arrived at by the early withdrawal of the French troops from Rome; and that was a question which it was, he thought, hardly within the province of their Lordships to determine. The Convention of September, entered into between the Governments of France and Italy for the disposition of the Papal States, afforded so little hope of a satisfactory solution that he had never from the commencement regarded it with any hope or satisfaction, and his prediction in respect of it had been fully realized. That Convention laid upon the King of Italy too great a burden to be borne. It required him to do that which was physically impossible—to protect a large and uncertain frontier against what were known to be the strong desire and even the earnest fanaticism of a considerable portion of his subjects. After the events that had lately occurred, their Lordships would, perhaps, agree with him there were two courses for the French Government to pursue—either to allow that Convention to be at an end, or to re-occupy the Papal States. Unless the Convention was to be considered a sham, he did not see how the French Government could have acted otherwise, or that any other result than that which had occurred could have been expected. It appeared to him that the temporary occupation of Rome by a certain portion of orderly French troops was a far better state of things, both for the Papal States and for Italy, than the existence of a large body of paid mercenaries and ecclesiastical condottieri, composed of persons of all nations, in the service of the Pope; for the latter were much more likely to excite bad feeling and keep up irritation in the Papal States than the occupation of those territories by a body of orderly and well-conducted French troops. In the remarkable Speech just delivered by the Emperor of the French to the Legislative

31
Body, His Majesty threw out the project of a Conference, in which the Powers of Europe were to meet and consult upon the question of the temporal power of the Pope. There was no reason to suppose that the invitation to the Conference would be confined, to the Catholic Powers of Europe, and he should regret if, at this moment, and before this question was fully discussed, or the conditions of the Conference foreseen, an opinion should be given by any distinguished English statesman as to the course to be taken by Her Majesty's Government with respect to the matter. He trusted that when this invitation came before the noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, he would not decide until after long consideration by himself and discussion with his Colleagues, and that they would remember that the Papal question was territorial as well as religious. It would be very unfortunate if Her Majesty's Government did not consider that there was a political as well as a religious element involved in the Italian question. If the question were left to be decided by a Conference of Catholic Powers alone, the result would probably be the permanent occupation of Rome by a joint force of those Powers, which would be a much greater grievance to the kingdom of Italy than the present occupation by French troops. If, on the contrary, it were so arranged that the Papal question were treated as a territorial one, and if the wishes of the people of Italy and of the present occupants of the Roman Territory were considered, it was just possible that the proposed Conference might lead to a successful solution of the question. There were two very important lights in which the question should be considered. One was that the strong, and almost universal desire, which once existed to make Home the capital of Italy, had considerably diminished in the minds not only of the Roman people themselves, but also of the leading men of Italy. That remarkable patriot the late Massimo d'Azeglio was not of opinion that Rome ought to be the capital of Italy, and, in his interesting letters, he gave many efficient reasons why it might not be expedient that Rome should be the capital, and why the existence of the Papal Government at Rome in a certain degree of independence might rather add to than diminish the dignity and independence of the kingdom of Italy. That opinion had been gradually becoming more prominent, and
32
was now held by the majority of Italian statesmen. The next light in which the question was to be considered was the remarkable fact of the absence of any sign of movement and sympathy with the Volunteers by the people of Rome. There appeared to be, at all events, no immediate desire on the part of the people of Rome to get rid of the Papal Government. It was not for the people of this country to deny the right of any other people to govern themselves in the mode best adapted to their wants and wishes; but it was apparent that the desire for Rome as the capital of Italy was not so strong as it formerly was. He trusted that if a proposal were made to England to join the Conference the matter would receive the gravest consideration on the part of the Government. With regard to the other topics alluded to in Her Majesty's Speech, he would not now detain their Lordships—there would be plenty of opportunity for discussing them in the course of the Session.
LORD LYVEDENsaid, that their Lordships would have an ample opportunity hereafter of dealing with the other questions referred to in the Speech from the Throne, with the exception of the expedition to Abyssinia, which was a matter of pressing and immediate importance; and therefore he thought it desirable that their Lordships should direct their special attention to that subject, and endeavour, if possible, to obtain from Her Majesty's Government some explanation with regard to the motives that had guided their policy. For his own part, he regarded this expedition as one of the most formidable misfortunes which could have befallen the country; it was an evil the full extent of which could not be foreseen; and, although it might possibly be a necessity, more would be required of the Government in explanation of its policy than was contained in the Message from the Crown before the country would accept it as such. It should be shown, in the first place, that every alternative expedient had been well considered and dismissed on substantial grounds before the expedition was resolved on, and that there were no other means of attaining the object. It was well known that several suggestions had been made with reference to the method of carrying on the expedition, not a few of which had come from that distinguished traveller Sir Samuel Baker, who proposed, among other things, that the co-operation of the

33
Viceroy of Egypt should be sought in carrying on offensive operations, while other parties recommended that we should make use of the discontented subjects of King Theodore. The noble Earl at the head of the Government shook his head; he, perhaps, thought that a very unwise proposal; but had these things been considered, and if so, why rejected? They were certainly worthy of consideration, for if adopted they would materially reduce the cost of the expedition. It might, indeed, be inexpedient to adopt any of these courses; but these were points on which he should like to hear the views of Her Majesty's Government. Regarding the question of necessity, he noticed that the second paragragh of the Royal Message opened with this passage—
"The Sovereign of Abyssinia, in violation of all international Law, continues to hold in captivity several of My Subjects, some of whom have been especially accredited to him by Myself."
No doubt it was true that in the case of the accredited representatives of Her Majesty their detention was a direct violation of International Law; but he was not sure that there was a breach of International Law in the seizure of the rest of the captives; and he hoped it would be well understood that if any enthusiast, either in religion or philosophy, chose to dive into the recesses of such countries as Abyssinia, or any part of Africa, and incur the resentment of some semi-barbarous chief or tribe, he would do so at his peril, and that it formed no part of the duty of Her Majesty's Government to espouse his cause and punish all those who dealt with him violently. Otherwise, it would be expected of the Government that it should send an expedition into the heart of Africa to inquire as to the fate of Dr. Livingstone, and avenge his death if he should have fallen by the hand of the Natives. Such intervention was, in his opinion, totally improper for this country, and he trusted the noble Earl would state explicitly that he did not wish the passage in the Queen's Message to be so interpreted. The Message stated that it was solely to secure the liberation of the captives that Abyssinia was entered. He observed the introduction of the word "alone" with pleasure; but the Government would experience the greatest difficulty in keeping their operations within this limit. For he regretted to find in all the letters and papers presented to Parliament, and in all the books which had been written upon the subject, the occupation of
34
Abyssinia was suggested. Some desired reforming the religion of the country; others proposed interference with the slave trade; it was suggested that the occupation of Abyssinia would assist our passage down the Red Sea on the way to India; and Sir Henry Rawlinson—a most able authority—spoke of the country as the most healthy in the world, and admirably adapted to serve as a sanatorium for India; but he confessed he looked upon that statement with great suspicion. Were any of those recommendations entertained by the Government? Were they to be acted on in order to maintain our prestige in India? He objected altogether to the word "prestige," which meant originally "illusions," and he did not believe that our reputation in India depended upon any such measure as the invasion of Abyssinia. India was already very strongly impressed with our power and goodwill towards it. But a very prevalent opinion throughout India was that wherever England went she picked a quarrel with the Governments and ended by annexing their territories. Some of the people of India knew that had been their case, and believed that we went to Abyssinia for the purpose of taking possession of it. He trusted that the noble Earl would state that the expedition was set on foot solely for the purpose of liberating the prisoners, and that immediately that end was gained the British Army would leave the country. As to the question of money, he agreed with the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Carnarvon) that the expense should not be thrown upon India. It was all very well for a country to make wars, the cost of which would not be borne by itself; but he had heard that Sir Stafford Northcote had declared that the Government did not intend to pursue such a course. He was glad of it, for, however palatable it might be to this country, it would be very unfair to tax India for an Imperial expedition. He also hoped they should hear something from the noble Earl as to what would be done by the army. Of course, he did not expect an account of the military manœuvres to be carried on by the troops; but he thought it reasonable to look for a statement as to what course, generally speaking, the commander of the expedition would follow. Suppose the King of Abyssinia chose to put the captives to death the moment the expedition approached him; what would be done in this not improbable case? Would the King be pursued and punished? Suppose he

35
buried himself in the interior of Africa; should he be followed? To do so would be almost impossible; but what had the Government resolved upon? All these matters must have presented themselves to the minds of Ministers; so that before the money was voted, and the despatch of the expedition had been formally endorsed, he insisted that the Government should clearly state what limit they intended putting on the operations of the expedition, and how those operations would be carried out. A noble Lord had stated that the country generally approved the expedition, and would willingly bear the cost of it; but he (Lord Lyveden) believed the country was very much annoyed at the expense being incurred, and would only be reconciled to it on being fully satisfied that the expedition was inevitable. He certainly believed that much fuller information than had yet been furnished was required before the country would fully regard this expedition as necessary and unavoidable.
THE EARL OF DERBY: My Lords, in the first place, I have to return my sincere thanks to my two noble Friends who moved and seconded the Address to the Crown in answer to the Royal Speech. If I may draw a distinction between them, it will be to refer particularly to my noble Friend who addressed your Lordships for the first time this evening, and who, in the course of his observations, spoke with remarkable clearness and accuracy upon subjects requiring very careful consideration, and perhaps more experience than could have been expected from so young a Member of your Lordships' House. I hope, from what we have heard to-night, that we shall hereafter frequently find my noble Friend taking part in our debates. I have next to express the satisfaction which Her Majesty's Government feel at being able to infer from the language of those noble Lords who have addressed your Lordships that it is not intended to interfere in the slightest degree with the unanimity with which your Lordships are disposed to support the Address in answer to Her Majesty's Speech. But it would be impossible for me to pass over in complete silence some of the observations which have been made by the noble Earl opposite (Earl Russell) and from other noble Lords, and I must ask your Lordships' indulgence while I make a few remarks. I understand from the noble Earl opposite that, after carefully considering the matter, he is not disposed to offer
36
any objection to the policy pursued by the Government in despatching an expedition to Abyssinia, but he, at the same time, reserves to himself—as he is perfectly entitled to do—the liberty of expressing any opinion he may come to after more mature consideration of the case. I assure the noble Earl and your Lordships that no Government ever came to a decision with more reluctance, or with a stronger sense of the imperative necessity which would alone justify such a decision, than Her Majesty's Government experienced in deciding on sending this expedition to Abyssinia. That decision would not have been taken had the Government not been deeply impressed with its imperative necessity, and with a firm conviction, shared in, I believe, by all the Members of both Houses of Parliament who have at all inquired into the subject, that the time had arrived when it would have been unworthy of the Government of this country, would have seriously detracted from the estimation in which England is held throughout the world, and would have exposed us to well-grounded reproach, had we decided to leave Her Majesty's subjects in unjust captivity, and left Her Majesty's Crown and dignity to be insulted with impunity by a semi-barbarous Potentate. The noble Earl below the gangway (the Earl of Carnarvon), has expressed an opinion that the course pursued by Her Majesty's Government with regard to the expedition is not the most desirable that could have been adopted. But my noble Friend does not, however, so much condemn the expedition itself as the course which had been previously taken; and, in point of fact, the greater part of my noble Friend's observations referred to a period long antecedent to that at which Her Majesty's present Government acceded to office. He objected to the mission undertaken by Mr. Rassam; and he thought—I do not know whether with reference to that or a subsequent mission—that a Minister charged with the important function of representing the Crown should have been sent to Abyssinia with an escort—with a small escort—of cavalry. I can only say, my Lords, that if my noble Friend had volunteered to go upon that expedition, and had taken with him the Hampshire Yeomanry, I should not have had the slightest objection to his trying his persuasive powers upon the King of Abyssinia. For myself, I can only say that if the mission from this country was not to rely upon

37
the authority of the Sovereign, no scheme, in my mind, could be more untenable, and no plan would be more certain to lead to absolute and discreditable failure than to send out a Minister with a small escort incapable of protecting him or of defending themselves, and who, if the Emperor objected to their presence, would certainly be devoted to destruction, or reduced to a state of captivity such as that which had befallen the previous prisoners. With regard, therefore, to the alternative so suggested, it is the one which in my mind, of all other alternatives, afforded the least prospect of success. But I am the more surprised to hear this objection raised on the part of the noble Earl, because when it was determined to send out Mr. Mad the noble Earl was a Member of the Cabinet, and he was a party to the sending out of that gentleman; and in vindication of my noble Friend and of ourselves, I must say that we had no other alternative with regard to Mr. Flad, because the circumstances when we came into office were these:—Our Consul had been imprisoned for three years, and during that time he had languished in a captivity which varied in severity according to the caprices of the Emperor. The Government sent out Mr. Rassam, whom they believed to be perfectly competent to deal with the question. He was at first received with great cordiality and kindness by the Emperor; but in one of the sudden caprices to which such minds are subject, the Emperor, while professing great attachment to Mr. Rassam, placed him in captivity, loading him at the same time with assurances of the most profound friendship and esteem. Mr. Rassam was the bearer of a letter from the Queen, which was treated by this Potentate with entire contempt. He was also the bearer of presents; but falling under the displeasure of the Emperor, he, together with the other prisoners, who had been actually liberated, and who had been sent for by the Emperor in order that there might be a formal reconciliation, were to be detained until certain artificers for whom the Emperor had asked for the purpose of instructing his people were forthcoming. Mr. Rassam thereupon inquired what messenger would be most acceptable to the King, and the answer was—Mr. Flad, a German missionary; and it was arranged that he should come to this country and have a personal interview with Her Majesty, and receive from Her her commands. That was the state of things when we
38
assumed the responsibilities of office. Mr. Flad arrived in this country in July, which was about a month after we became Ministers of the Crown. In the course of October he returned to Massowah, bearing an autograph letter from the Queen, which he was to deliver to the Emperor, and also bearing with him certain presents and assurances that if the prisoners were released Her Majesty would overlook what had passed, and still entertain for Theodore sentiments of friendship and goodwill. At the same time, in compliance with the desire of the Emperor, and with their own consent, a certain number of artificers who had had the terms clearly explained to them were sent out, and these artificers were to proceed to the Emperor on the delivery of the captives. On the arrival of the presents and the artificers at Massowah, the Emperor expressed great pleasure, but said nothing about the release of the prisoners. Colonel Merewether regarded this as a one-sided proceeding, and accordingly intimated that the presents and the artificers would be sent on the release of the captives. No reply to this communication was vouchsafed, and the Emperor was informed that they would be returned to England, and that Her Majesty could not think of entering into friendly relations with him as long as the captives were detained. In April, 1867, my noble Friend and Relative at the head of the Foreign Department sent an imperative message to King Theodore, demanding the release of the captives on pain, in case of refusal, of forfeiture of Her Majesty's friendship and goodwill, and three months were allowed for an answer. The message was forwarded on the 15th of April, was received on the 13th of June, and from that time to this not the slightest notice has been taken of the communication. Thus matters stood before the prorogation of Parliament; and as some question has been raised partly as to whether all other means have been exhausted, and partly as to whether Parliament has been fairly dealt with in the matter, I hope that your Lordships will permit me to refer to what took place in the House of Commons on the 26th of July, about four weeks before the rising of Parliament. The question was brought forward by Mr. Seymour, and supported by Sir Henry Rawlinson, as well as by a more significant authority, when we consider the position he had occupied in the previous Government—I mean Mr. Layard.

39
The object of the Motion was to present a humble Address to Her Majesty, praying that proper steps might be taken to procure the release of the Abyssinian prisoners, if necessary, by force of arms. No opposition was offered to the Motion except on the part of Her Majesty's Government. I trust your Lordships will permit me to quote one or two passages from the addresses which were delivered in support of the proposal. Mr. Seymour said that some of the prisoners had been detained for upwards of three years, and the question was, what was to be done for their liberation? Conciliation had been tried and failed. Mr. Seymour then proceeded to state the courses which he thought were open to the Government:—
"In the first place, it was impossible that the captives could be left in their prisons. … The missionary whom the King had permitted to leave Abyssinia had returned with the much-coveted artizans and presents, and the autograph letter of Her Majesty, which was couched in the most conciliatory terms; but even this had not proved successful. Further attempts at conciliation would be not only useless, but derogatory to this country. It had been suggested that we should ask Egypt to assist us in obtaining the release of these captives. He thought it would not be wise to do so."—[3 Hansard, clxxxix. 233–4.]
And I must say that I entirely concur in that opinion. Nothing would so surely tend to failure as to act in concert with Egypt, a country which has been regarded by Abyssinia for generations as her hereditary foe. The Princes and Chiefs in the latter country, who are at present at feud with Theodore, and who would rejoice at his overthrow, would at the supposition of our acting with the Egyptians effect a reconciliation with him. Mr. Seymour continued—
"The only course which remained was to undertake the release of the captives ourselves. After so great an insult had been inflicted upon us we were bound to take this course, and send an expedition to Abyssinia from India."—[Ibid.]
Sir Henry Rawlinson also thought it would be impossible to take any other course—
"We have done everything we could to obtain the release of the prisoners by fair means, and we have failed. If we abandon any further effort, and our present inactivity is prolonged, that the prisoners will, one and all, in due course, sink under their sufferings is almost a matter of certainty. The question, therefore, resolves itself into a choice of evils."—[3 Hansard, clxxxix. 239.]
In answer to those who objected to the probable cost of the expedition, and disregarded altogether the question of prestige, Sir Henry Rawlinson said—
40
"Having been employed officially in the East for nearly thirty years, and having passed by far the greater portion of that service in immediate connection with Native Courts, my opinions with, regard to 'prestige' are not derived from theory or from books, but are the result of personal experience and observation. I would say, then, that I look on 'prestige' in politics very much as I look on 'credit' in finance. It is a power which enables us to achieve very great results with very small means at our immediate disposal. 'Prestige' may not be of paramount importance in Europe, but in the East, Sir, our whole position depends on it. It is a perfect fallacy to suppose that we hold India by the sword. The foundation of our tenure, the talisman—so to speak—which enables 100,000 Englishmen to hold 150,000,000 of Natives in subjection, is the belief in our unassailable power, in our inexhaustible resources; and any circumstance therefore which impairs that belief, which leads the nations of the East to mistrust our superiority and to regard us as more nearly on an equality with themselves, inflicts a grievous shock on our political position."—[3 Hansard, clxxxix. 241.]
Mr. Layard said—
"Matters, however, had now gone to a length when some step must be taken, something must be done on behalf of the unfortunate people still kept in captivity. …. With great reluctance he had come to the conclusion that there was only one course left to us now, and that was an expedition to Abyssinia. He did not conceal from himself all the difficulties of such an undertaking—difficulties which his hon. Friend who spoke last was near the truth in describing. The expedition would be really a very arduous one. But the question was, whether the honour and credit of the country did not render such an under taking absolutely necessary. If he entertained the remotest hope that any kind of negotiation, or that any other measure would be likely to release the captives, he should be totally opposed to a military expedition; but with a full knowledge of all the circumstances, he had been compelled to relinquish all such expectations."—[3 Hansard, clxxxix. 245–247.]
Here is the opinion of a Gentleman who had been Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and who for three years had been exhausting every means of conciliation to obtain the release of the captives. He says that all efforts have failed, and he has been compelled to come to the conclusion that nothing but force of arms can procure their release. And now I come to the answer made by my noble Friend and Relative the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. My noble Relative said—
"I am sure, therefore, that the House will feel that, however anxious we may be to attain the object we all have in view, it would be madness to throw a British army into an unknown country, in a tropical climate, far from the sea, very far from its reserves and its supplies, without a full previous investigation as to the means of moving, feeding, and keeping them in health. That in-

41
quiry we look upon as an indispensable preliminary. I have been in communication with the War Department and with the India Office as to the best mode of proceeding. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for India has telegraphed to the Indian Government to send over an officer or officers on whom they can rely to meet Colonel Merewether at Aden, and with him to examine minutely the points on which information is necessary. I do not wish to anticipate the result of that inquiry; but I hope that the House will be of opinion that in making it we have only done our duty. On the one hand, we cannot consent to leave these men to their fate without some attempt to rescue them. On the other hand, by precipitation and by acting in the dark we should be running the risk of involving ourselves in great calamities, and might bring on ourselves not only political, but also the possibility of military disaster. It is possible that when King Theodore sees that we are in earnest, he may take warning, and release the prisoners without giving us further trouble. We may hope for this; but we ought not to count upon it. If he should not, the responsibility rests with us of deciding upon our future course. We must be guided to a great degree by the reports we receive from those whom we employ to make the investigation to which I have referred. I do not think we should be called upon even now to give any pledge on the part of the Government as to an expedition, unless it is found to be practicable with only a reasonable expenditure of men and means. It may be said, 'Send it to the coast of Africa, that will be enough.' Possibly, that may be enough; but if you send an expedition to the coast and that fails, you cannot rest there, you must proceed further, you are free to send an expedition or not to do so; but having once begun, you are not free to leave off without success. If you undertake the enterprize at all, you are bound to carry it through. I hops the House will leave the decision where the responsibility must be left. I think they will see by the Papers, which are now all but ready to be laid on the table, that whether we have taken the best or the wisest course or not—on which differences of opinion may exist—at any rate, we have not been guilty of neglecting or treating with indifference this most painful business."—[3 Hansard, clxxxix. 252–3.]
Now, my Lords, it has been said that this language was held on the 26th of July, while the first intimation given to Parliament of an intended expedition was contained in the Queen's Speech on the prorogation of Parliament on the 21st of August. The explanation of this circumstance is perfectly simple. At the commencement of the month of June my noble Relative had, as he stated in his speech, taken steps to obtain the most perfect information from the most reliable Indian sources with regard to Abyssinia; but that information was not obtained until the 13th of August, when we received intelligence which led us to believe that we might, with a reasonable prospect of suc-
42
cess, send an expedition to Abyssinia to accomplish the object we had in view. Parliament was prorogued on the 21st of August, and it was not until the 19th of August that, having carefully considered the information we had received from India, we came to the determination to send out an expedition to Abyssinia. Having come to that determination on the 19th of August, at the earliest possible opportunity—on the 21st—we communicated that determination to Parliament. I trust, therefore, that your Lordships will see that there was no desire on the part of Her Majesty's Government to keep back from Parliament their determination to send an expedition to Abyssinia in order to procure the release of the prisoners, and that there was no contradiction between the language held by my noble Relative on the 26th of July, and the subsequent determination on the part of the Government to send out the expedition. Having come to the determination to send out the expedition, what was our next step? And here I may mention that some time ago a noble Lord who has spoken this evening (Lord Houghton), and whom I now see opposite to me, expressed his opinion at a scientific meeting—that of the Geographical Society—that Her Majesty's Government had not taken proper precautions for obtaining information which would be necessary to enable them to make the proper preparation for securing the success of the expedition.
LORD HOUGHTON: What I said was, that unless Her Majesty's Government had used every means in their power by consulting distinguished geographers as to whether there were any other means of obtaining their object before this costly expedition was sent out, they would not have taken all the precautions that were necessary.
THE EARL OF DERBY: Very well; the noble Lord did not make a statement; he merely made a suggestion; but the purport of his observations was such as to cause the President, Sir Roderick Murchison, to rise and state that from his own personal knowledge the greatest pains had been taken to obtain information likely to promote the objects of the expedition, and that every care had been bestowed in preparing whatever was required for its use. When we determined upon sending out the expedition we also determined for various reasons, with which I need not now trouble your Lordships,

43
that it should take its departure from India. We also determined that the command of the expedition should not be divided, but should be placed in the hands of one person; and as such a position would be one of heavy responsibility, we selected with the consent, and I believe on the suggestion, of the illustrious Duke (the Duke of Cambridge), as the most proper person to take the chief command of the expedition an officer who has obtained the highest reputation in India—namely, Sir Robert Napier, on whose strategical ability and in whose talents we felt we could place the most entire reliance. It was left to him to name the force and the equipments he would require to enable the expedition to effect its object. A full statement of all matters of detail connected with the expedition your Lordships will find in the blue-book which I shall have the honour of laying upon, your Lordships' table in the course of this evening in pursuance of the statement in Her Majesty's Speech, from which you will see that the greatest possible pains have been taken that the expedition shall not go out unprovided with anything likely to conduce to the health and comfort of the troops. The expedition was to be sent out from India. The noble Earl opposite (Earl Russell) has expressed an opinion that as its objects were entirely of an Imperial character, therefore the expense should be entirely borne by England, Now, that is the precise ground on which we have advised Her Majesty to call her Parliament together. I need scarcely tell your Lordships that, under the peculiar circumstances of the case, it was absolutely necessary that Parliament should be called together at the earliest possible moment, to give its assent to the course we thought fit to adopt in sending out the expedition. It has been supposed that there is no power on the part of the Crown to employ Indian troops for Imperial purposes, except in India itself, but that is a misapprehension. The prohibition that exists merely extends to the Crown applying any portion of the revenue of India to external war, whereby the control of a war might be withdrawn from Parliament. We do not propose to impose a single farthing of the cost of this expedition upon the revenue of India. India will continue, as before, to pay for the troops as if they were in India in the service of the Crown; but every expense attendant upon the expedition will be borne by the
44
Imperial revenue. There is one more point connected with this subject to which I must refer. The noble Earl opposite has expressed a hope that he would hear from Her Majesty's Government an emphatic declaration as to the objects of the expedition. I certainly thought that nothing could be more emphatic than the language of the Speech from the Throne upon this point, which declares that the expedition has been sent out for the purpose of obtaining the release of the prisoners, and for that purpose alone. If, however, by doing so I can render these words still more emphatic, I will now declare that it is the firm intention of Her Majesty's Government that nothing further than the release of the prisoners shall be attempted by the expeditionary force, and that that object being accomplished, that force will at once retire from Abyssinia. Suggestions for occupying Abyssinia for sanatorial and other purposes—God knows what—have been made to Her Majesty's Government; but it has never crossed our minds to go one step further than to obtain the release of the prisoners. The noble Lord opposite (Lord Lyveden) has made a slight error in stating that it has been suggested that we should occupy Abyssinia for the purpose of protecting the Red Sea. Your Lordships are doubtless aware that there lies between Abyssinia and the Red Sea a large tract of territory which does not belong to the King of Abyssinia, and therefore the occupation of Abyssinia will not enable us in any way to protect the Red Sea. [Lord LYVEDEN explained that this was not his suggestion.] I think I have now said all that is necessary upon this subject—as to the course the Government have pursued; as to the understanding upon which the expedition has been sent out; and as to the preparations that have been made for securing the comfort and the safety of the troops.
I must now turn to one or two other subjects, which I shall touch upon as briefly as possible consistently with their importance. In the first place, the noble Lord who has just sat down (Lord Houghton) has expressed something like an objection to the paragraph in the Queen's Speech which expresses a hope that His Imperial Majesty the Emperor of the French may find himself enabled to withdraw the French troops at as early a period as possible, and thereby remove any possible ground of misunderstanding between His Majesty's Government and

45
that of the King of Italy. Now, my Lords, I am happy to find by the Speech of His Imperial Majesty, which was delivered yesterday, that His Majesty's views upon this question entirely coincide with the hopes which have been expressed by Her Majesty's Government, and that he sees the time approaching when the French troops may be withdrawn from Italian soil. The noble Earl who opened the debate (Earl Russell) has commented upon the terms of the Convention of September, and has expressed his opinion with regard to various parts of it, and particularly the arrangement whereby the Papal Government might employ mercenary troops. I, however, may say that Her Majesty's Government were no parties to that Convention, and that therefore it is not their duty, nor that of any British statesman sitting in his place in Parliament, to comment upon the terms of that Convention, with which this country has nothing whatever to do. The Convention was between France and Italy, and in my opinion those countries alone are concerned with it. Nor, my Lords, do I think it necessary—nor do Her Majesty's Government think it necessary—to express any opinion whatever upon the policy adopted by the Emperor of the French in despatching the expedition to Rome. The Emperor of the French, no doubt, felt himself bound by the terms of the Convention to protect the Papal territory, not against the population of the Papal States, nor against the Italian Government; but against certain Italian invaders who had managed to elude the vigilance of the Italian Government. But that object having been effected—a perfectly legitimate object I may venture to say on the part of the Emperor—notwithstanding that Her Majesty's Government do not feel called upon to express any opinion upon the policy of that measure, it was perfectly legitimate for Her Majesty in her Speech from the throne to express a hope that all ground of a misunderstanding between the French and Italian Governments may be prevented by the withdrawal of the French troops, whose continued presence in Italy must be a source of jealousy to the Italian people and of additional embarrassment to that Government. The noble Lord has also expressed a hope that no hasty decision will be come to by Her Majesty's Government with reference to the proposed Conference on Italian affairs. Her Majesty's Government have been invited, in
46
concert with the other Powers, to join in a general Conference for the settlement of this question; but that invitation they have neither accepted nor declined. Her Majesty's Government would be most happy to second the efforts of the Emperor to restore peace and to secure Italy against further complications, and on personal grounds I am bound to say that we should deem it a most satisfactory thing to be enabled in the slightest degree to relieve the Emperor of the French from any embarrassment he may feel from the state of his own country in return for the cordial friendship and the goodwill which he has always exhibited towards this country. But, before accepting the invitation to a Conference, various subjects required to be taken into consideration. First, is the Conference acceded to, and will its determination be accepted by the two Powers mainly concerned—Italy and the Pope? To call for a Conference to arrange the affairs of two countries, neither of which concurs in being represented, and neither of which holds itself bound by the decision that may be arrived at, appears to me, my Lords, a perfect waste of diplomatic energy and ability. But, again, have we any reasonable prospect—where the points of divergence are so great as between the Papal programme and the Italian programme—of having to the Conference a practical basis on which its proceedings may be founded? To call for a Conference of the Powers without any basis on which they should proceed, simply to discuss the affairs of Italy and the Pope, would be only launching on an interminable sea of difficulty, which could afford no definite prospect of improvement. Therefore, unless these questions were satisfactorily answered, I confess I cannot see any advantage in entering into a Conference of so vague a character. That, in point of fact, was the answer we sent to the invitation—that we should first know whether the consent of the two parties mainly interested had been obtained; and next, what definite basis would be submitted for the consideration of the Conference.
I now turn, my Lords, to the next paragraph in Her Majesty's Speech, which treats of the Fenian conspiracy, with reference to which I heard with great regret the noble Earl (Earl Russell), in commenting upon it, cast some imputation on the Government and on the local authorities for what he considered great remissness in not having taken more complete precau-

47
tions. Now, in the first place, whatever degree of blame there be, if any—which I do not admit—it did not attach to the Government, because it was entirely attributable to the course pursued by the local police of Manchester. But the noble Earl greatly misapprehends, and therefore misrepresents, the course which was pursued. The noble Earl says the Fenian prisoners were left under the protection of three policemen only. Now, that was by no means the case. They were sent to prison specially guarded by twelve policemen, some of whom were on the van and others were following in cabs for the purpose of affording protection. But certainly, it did not enter into the conception of any of the authorities that an attack would be made, in broad daylight, in the middle of the town of Manchester, of so determined a character as that which took place, and consequently the police were only armed with their ordinary weapons, and were not in sufficient force to meet the forty or fifty men who made the attack armed with revolvers and quite prepared to take life for the purpose of effecting their object. I do not think, therefore, that the police of Manchester are liable to the charge of remissness in duty which the noble Earl brings against them.
EARL RUSSELL: They had a telegram from Dublin, had they not, informing them that a rescue would be attempted?
THE EARL OF DERBY: No doubt there was a telegram from Dublin to Manchester to say that a rescue of the prisoners would be attempted, and that therefore it was desirable that extra precautions should be taken. But those precautions were taken in a very large increase of police in attendance on the van. Certainly no information reached the authorities which led them to apprehend so desperate and bloody an attack. My Lords, I ought not to say anything, more especially under present circumstances, when four men are lying under sentence of death—I ought not to say anything to aggravate the crime of this Fenian conspiracy; but, at the same time, I must protest in the strongest terms against those who, in the public press or elsewhere, have assumed that those outrages—those cowardly and dastardly outrages—are to be classed in the category of political offences, and therefore to be treated differently from murders ordinarily committed. In the first place, the object of this Fenian conspiracy—indefinite, reckless, hopeless—is not the removal of any grievance, not the redress of any evil
48
of which they have to complain, but the avowed distinct object is to upset the Government of the Queen in her dominions and to constitute an Irish Republic. That is a distinctly treasonable object, and I must say there is a ludicrous side to it, because the very idea of an Irish Republic is one that to any man who knows that country and the condition of its population must appear entirely ridiculous, and there is no possibility of any such a scheme, under any circumstances, being carried into effect. I am as satisfied as of anything in the world that if an Irish Republic could be established and every British soldier withdrawn from Ireland every cultivator would be driven from Ireland; in less than six months the leaders would be quarrelling among themselves, and in twelve months they would be cutting each other's throats from one end of the island to the other. But there is some respect to be paid to those who may entertain opinions however erroneous—some respect to those who openly and avowedly come forward to oppose constituted authority, and are prepared by force of arms to establish their principles and views. To such cases as these the character of political crimes may be attached; but no such character can be given to crimes where the sole means of effecting the object of disturbance—subversion of authority and complete anarchy throughout the country—are secret incendiarisms, attacks on unprotected houses, murders of single and unarmed policemen, attacks on police barracks which are known not to be defended, attempts to fire houses by men who have not courage to show themselves, who at the appearance of a corporal's guard betake themselves to flight and leave their unfortunate comrades to suffer the penalties of their crimes. Therefore, whatever may be urged in mitigation of the crimes committed under this Fenian conspiracy; whatever the disposition on the part of the Crown and people to show all mercy in consistency with the judicial vindication of the law, I cannot for one moment—and I am sure the country will not for one moment—connect the idea of offences of this description with those ordinarily known as political offences, and which, as political offences, may be regarded with some sort of respect by a large portion of the people.
My Lords, I do not think it necessary now to deal with those measures which Her Majesty's Government announce their

49
intention of bringing before Parliament, nor will I follow the noble Earl into his discussion of the general principles of the Reform Bill which was carried last Session in reference to England. That Reform Bill, he seems to think, ought not to be introduced for Scotland and Ireland. I am not prepared to enter into any discussion with regard to the merits of those Bills. The noble Earl will have an earlier opportunity than last year of discussing the merits of the Scotch and Irish Bills; and in the meantime, though greatly indebted to him for the arguments by which he suggests I might vindicate them, I must be permitted to use my own discretion and to use my own arguments when I bring them forward. I will not deal with the other topics adverted to in the Speech. The question of Education, no doubt, is one that requires the most serious consideration of Parliament. The circumstances of the three portions of the Kingdom are very different in regard to it, and it may be necessary to deal with each in a different manner and at a different time. For my own part, I agree with my noble Friend behind me (Lord Hylton) in regard to education in England; it requires much more information than we possess; and I cannot but feel that the time is hardly ripe for coming to a definite conclusion in regard to it. Though we have ample information as to assisted schools and some unassisted schools, yet, with regard to that large portion of the population absolutely without education at all, we stand in need of much more information than we possess before we can safely come to a conclusion on the whole subject. The question of education for Ireland is under the consideration of the Commission, with reference to the appointment of which considerable difficulty has been experienced, owing to the reluctance of the Roman Catholics of Ireland to take any part in assisting the Government to come to a careful and unbiased investigation on the subject, and also from the lamented death of the Earl of Rosse, who was so universally respected, and who from his singularly conciliatory and discreet course would have been a most efficient president. My Lords, I leave the other questions noticed in Her Majesty's Speech to be dealt with when, in due time, they are brought under your Lordships' consideration. I will therefore content myself with expressing my satisfaction that the noble Earl and your Lordships generally do not see any ground for objection to Her Majesty's Speech, and
50
that on this, the first day of the Session, there is entire unanimity among us.
Address agreed to, Nemine Dissentiente, and Ordered to be Presented to Her Majesty by the Lords with White Staves.

CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES.
The LORD REDESDALE appointed, Nemine Dissentiente, to take the Chair in all Committees of this House for this Session.
COMMITTEE FOR PRIVILEGES—Appointed.
SUB-COMMITTEE FOR THE JOURNALS—Appointed.
APPEAL COMMITTEE—Appointed.
House adjourned at Eight o'clock, to Thursday next, a quarter before Five o'clock.