The House of Commons finished its week's work at four o'clock this morning. The majority that "voted hleek white, to keep out the Tories," was 46-310 to 264.
After the great space that we have devoted to the debate on the pre- vious days, it will be impossible for us to say much at present respecting that of last night The two principal speeches were Lord John Russell's on the Ministerial side and Sir Robert Peel's on the other ; Lord John betraying great anxiety at the supposed combination of parties against the Government ; Sir Robert speaking with regret rather than anger at being obliged to withhold his approval from the Government on their foreign policy.
The adjourned debate, however, was opened by Mr. Commuree ; who fairly distanced Mr. Roebuck in the thorough If inisterialism and partisan force of his advocacy. With extreme ardour he attacked the casuistical, sophistical, and unfair, nisi prius, and deceptive case, presented by Mr. Gladstone on the Greek claims, and laboured to reestablish the Minis- terial vie.* es Lord Pabnerston had left it He propounded the political dilemma to his opponents—what course will you follow if you dispossess the Government of power Is Sir Tames: Graham prepared to take office alone ; or will he not yet longer bide his time ? Is Sir Robert Peel pre- pared ?—where are his staff, where the elements of his political power ? Or is a combination the "third course" only remaining? "We won't have it" He could not suppose that Sir Robert should yield his Con- sular position, and for the sake of office prostitute his met abilities his great name, and great honour, by a union with the party who heaped on him ignominy and contumely not to be heard without burning indignation. Mr. COBDEN vindicated his intended vote against the demand of con- fidence; briefly and oontemptuously disposed of the Finlay and Pacifico cases • and stuck to his old text, that arbitration is fitter for international differences than naval or military armaments. If the people of England but understood the merits of the question, they would be so disgusted that they would raise a subscription to pay back to the Greek Government the money it has given us. If we carry out tho doc- trine of the motion, the Senators of Washington may equally say— "We will have no peace till we make the world Republican." Let Us be content with the example of non-intervention, and no doubt our example will influence the Governments of Austria and Russia. If we leave nations in tranquillity, ideas of freedom will increase, and they will grow to the freedom we desire to see. With considerable force, in manner rather than in set phrases, he sternly rebuked the friends around him, who had expected him to sacrifice principles to expediency ; and being met with groans behind him he said he supposed Members were groaning for their own inconsistency. If it should happen, as he is threatened, that his vote on this question should cost him his seat, he would say that, next to the satisfaction of having contributed to the ad- vance of orie'e convictions is the satisfaction of having sacrificed something for them.
Sir Roseur PEEL, with a special reference to the insinuations of Mr. Cockburn, explained the grounds on which his vote should be given, on strong conviction, wholly apart from personal grounds. He appealed to Ida four years' support of Ministers—" without having the honour and • advantage of possessing their personal friendship" ; repudiated the sup-
position that he willingly came forward to conclemn the- conduct meters—" I think their policy in domestic affairs has thi,e; a conservative policy " ; denied any party combination—"_ believe the existence of any such conspiracy " ; but could not a
in the declaration of positive approbation to which he was invited y Mr. Roebuck, nor join in censuring the policy of Lord Aberdeen, which Mr. Roebuck had contrasted with Lord Palmerston's, and in which Sir Robert had officially taken part. He had seen occasion both to applaud and condemn the foreign policy of Ministers—he had regretted Lord Palmer- ston's conduct in Spain, applauded the recognition of the French Re- public. He agreed they had a right to make a peremptory demand on Greece, their evasive debtor ; but thought that they might have obtained their due without resorting to violence—by the cooperation of the allied protecting powers, France and Russia : that should at least have been tried. He blamed, not their ultimate concessions to France, but their treatment of France after the almost touching offer of mediation—their haggling about words, and the manner of conducting the double negotia- tions. He did not desire to provoke censure ; but being challenged to approve, he found it utterly impossible, with a regard to truth, to de- clare that the course they had taken was consistent with the honour and dignity of this country.
" When I see your present position with Austria, with France, and with Prussia, and when I see also the many questions that remain unsettled with the states in the North of Europe—and when, on the other hand, I know the positive advantage to this country that you should be on the most frieudly footing with all those powers—how can I vote that the course you have been
taking is the best calculated to preserve peace' If you appeal to diplomacy,' let me ask you, in the first place, what is this diplomacy ? It is a costly engine for maintaining peace. It is a remarkable instru- ment used by civilized nations for the purpose of preventing war. Unless it be used to appease the angry passions of individual men, to check the feel- ings that rise out of national resentments—unless it be used for that pur- pose, it is an instrument not only costly but mischievous. If, then, your application of diplomacy be to fester every wound—to provoke instead of soothing resentments—to place a Minister in every court of Europe for the purpose not of preventing quarrels or of adjusting quarrels, but for the purpose of ocadinuing an angry correspondence, and for the purpose of pro- moting what is supposed to be an English interest, and of keeping up con- flicts with the representatives of other powers—then I say, that not only is the expenditure uwia this costly instrument thrown away, but this gnat engine, used by civilized society for the purpose of maintaining peace, is perverted into a cause of hostility and war."
In foreign policy, Sir Robert maintained the principle of Mr. Fox, Lord Castlereagh, and Mr. Canning—that of nonintervention. Ministers were now acting on the principle of the French Convention in November 1792—abandoned by the Convention in 1793, as incompatible with peace ; on the principle of the Duke of Brunswick's manifesto—the right to inter- fere in the domestic affairs of another country, Those two principles formed the question at issue in the motion befeee the House—a much larger question than the interests of a Ministry ; and he would not, by absence or silence, evade the duty of dissenting from a doctrine which could not be carried into practice without imminent danger to the best in- terests of the country.
I Lord JOHN Rossini, made a long speech, the leading features of which were, a disclaimer of the extreme propagandism of Mr. Roebuck's speech, and the enunciation of a policy on foreign affairs which alike evaded the dangers of interference and refused to encounter the opposite dangers of inertness in critical circumstances. This was the line which Lord Aberdeen himself had adopted. Lord John gave his testimony that Lord Aberdeen's policy, during his four years of office, was on the whole such as tended to maintain the honour of the country and preserve peace ; but during the time the present Ministry has been in office, "his Lordship, prompted, as I believe, by foreigners and other persons with whom he has been in communication, has from time to time uttered the most unfounded imputations and made the moat unfounded attacks on the Government." Though the rumours of political combination might not have reached Sir Robert Peel's ears, and though the Protectionists would consider him the last person to be ad- mitted to power, yet the rumours are rife that a way has been discovered —a mode as yet imparted only to a few—by which the dissensions of 1846 may at once cease and harmony be reestablished. But he could not believe that those who so loudly declared their adherence to the principle of protection would now on a sudden abandon it and give cause for bear- ing in their own persons the invectives and the reproaches which fell on Sir Robert Peel and those who followed him in 1846. Then, indeed, in- stead of the inspiriting cry held out to the farmers of England from the lips of their leader, of "Up Guards and at them!" we should have a to- tally different manteuvre—instead of the victory of Waterloo, the capitu- lation of Ulm—instead of the glory of Wellington, the disgrace and de- gradation of Mack. Early in his speech Lord John had insinuated, in a disparaging way, the presumption that Mr. Gladstone was to be the leader in the Commons on behalf of the now coalition-
" If the right honourable gentleman is in future to conduct the debates in this House on behalf of the great party opposite, I am afraid we must not
expect the same fairness and justice as we have ex d from the honourable Member for Buckinghamshire during the timeTifilfillerebeen their leader." Mr. DISB.AELI declared his ignorance of what rumours Lord John Rus- sell referred to : in a country like this rumours are always flying about. Very recently, for example, a rumour was rife that Lord John was going to propose an eight-shilling duty : perhaps that did not reach the noble Lord's ears ? Without making any "personal attack" on Lord Palmerston, such as he deprecated, he aught express his disapprobation of the idea that you should look to the head of any department solely, and visit on him the consequences of a policy for which the whole Govern- ment ought to be responsible,—a course not only unconstitutional, but gross- ly insulting to the colleaguesof the Foreign Secretary, and more particular- ly to the Premier, who, having no department himself; controls all alike. Mr. Disraeli gave a warning. At the end of the fifteenth century, Venice held the Orient in fee ; the richest mercantile islands in the Medi- terranean and Atlantic were hers ; she was supreme on the sea, and her prosperity on land was unrivalled : her insolence was proportionate, and she assumed an isolated position. On one and the same day, the representa- tives of great powers who had never agreed on any question signed the treaty of Cambray, with the sole object of terminating the intolerable career of the great commercial aristocracy; and from that day the star of Venice paled. Is them no lesson for England in that reeord of the past? This w.ound up -the debate :the other speakers hadbeen Mr. Mosrokton. Mixes for dm Motion, and'hir. WALPOLE -zigaiDst. it We have alretuiy
mentioned the division. • In both Houses of Parliament, Ministers expressed loyal sympathy with the Queen respecting the personal insult Which had been offered to her on Thursday evening. The Peers and Members heartily concurred in the in- dignation vented, and Lord STANLEY and Mr. Hessian suggested the pro- priety of an address ; but on the intimation, by Lard. LANSDOWNE and Lord Joon( RUSSELL, that such a course was not thought advisable, the Houses concurred.
In bringing up the report of the Australian Colonies.Bill, in the House of Lords, FAA GREY stated that the clauses relating to the Federal As- sembly had been withdrawn, because it was found that the machinery provided by them was in some respects defective. But a federal authority might be easily created under the bill.
The following members of the Peace Society voted for Lord Palmer- ston'a War policy—Mr. Ewart, Mr. J. Ellis, Mr. L. Heyworth, Mr. J. Kershaw, Mr. Brotherton, Mr. Scholefield, Mr. Cowan; Mr. Harris, Mr. Brocklehurst. Voted against it—Mr. Cobden, Mr. Bright.