LORD PALMERSTON—MINISTERIAL EXPLANATION.

Lyttelton Times, Volume II, Issue 80, 17 July 1852, Page 4

LORD PALMERSTON—MINISTERIAL EXPLANATION.

In the House of Commons, in the course of the debate on the address,

Sir B. Hall said in the present aspect of foreign affairs, and considering the important changes which had taken place in the administration of the country, he thought the noble lord was called upon to give some explanation to the house.

Lord John Russell said he would answer the question put to him, though it required him to go into considerable detail. He had, he said, so high an opinion of the capabilities of Lord Palmerston, that when he was himself offered by Lord Melbourne the post of Foreign Secretary, he strongly urged the propriety of giving it to Lord Palmerston, and subsequently, when forming his own government, he at once secured the services of his noble friend. In the course of last autumn, however, the aflairs of the Continent wore an aspect requiring* great caution on the part of this country, and a rigid adherence to the principle of non-intervention in the concerns of other nations. In furtherance of this principle, it was arranged that be (Lord J. Russell) should be responsible that the crown should be kept in constant possession of all communications of importance with foreign powers, and this arrangement was assented to by Lord Palmerston. Soon afterwards an incident occurred which caused him some uneasy feelings. His noble friend had received at the Foreign Office some deputations and addresses in which very offensive language was used towards foreign powers, and subsequently, when the President of France dismissed the Assembly, and abrogated the constitution, his noble friend had been reported to have used expressions to the French Ambassador, approving entirely of the course pursued by the President ; and when repeatedly written to by him for an explanation, which was required by her Majesty, he preserved a disdainful silence. He wrote, however, a despatch to the Marquis of Normanby, giving an opinion, favourable to the President, which could only be taken as the opinion of the crown and the government, although the matter had never been submitted to either. He again applied to his noble friend, requiring an explanation; and, after waiting three days for a reply in vain, he made up his mind that his noble friend could not any longer be retained as a member of the Cabinet, and he at once wrote to him to that effect. He thus assumed the entire responsibility of dismissing his noble friend, and he did so without consulting his colleagues, in order that there might not be even the appearance of anything like a cabal in this proceeding. He received a reply from his noble friend before he sent the dismissal, but in that reply his argument was altogether beside the question, for the real question at issue was whether the Foreign Secretary should issue dispatches of importance of his own accord, or whether he should in the first instance submit them to tlie crown and the Cabinet. He did not for a moment believe that the noble lord intended any offence to her Majesty; but he had been so long in his position that he felt that he must know better than any one else what course should be pursued in cases of difficulty. He added, that subsequently, when he called the Cabinet together, they were unanimous in thinking that he (Lord J. Russell) couid have pursued no other course than that which he had adopted. Lord Palmerston said he should be sorry if the house should come to the conclusion that he had abandoned those constitutional principles which he had always hitherto advocated, or that he was in favour, as the speech of his noble friend was hut too well calculated to convey, of anything in the shape of military government. With respect to the deputations "he had received, he regretted that expressions with respect to foreign sovereigns had been mixed up Willi other matters in the addresses, and he would have taken steps to have them altered had he taken the precaution of askino- for copies of them before they were presented ; but he never anticipated at the time that they were to become newspaper paragraphs. With respect to what had passed in conversation with the French Ambassador, the statement as to what lie had said was, in the main, correct, though somewhat highly coloured ; and when subsequently asked by his noble friend if he couid contradict the statement, a delay occurred

from the 14th to the 17th, which was entirely owing to the pressure of business, and a desire on his part to write his views upon the subject very fully. But he was informed that he was not the only member of the Government who held similar opinions, for even the noble lord himself, and the President of the Council, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer also, had expressed opinions upon the occurrence to the French Ambassador, and some of them not very different from his own. He was also informed that Earl Grey and the Secretary of War had expressed opinions—that in fact every member of the Government was at liberty to express an opinion except the Secretary of State, to whose department the consideration of the subject naturally devolved. He did not dispute the right of the noble lord to remove any member of his Government, but he must say that, after acting as had been said of him by his noble friend— not as Minister of Austria—not as Minister of Russia —but as the Minister of England, he now retired from office, leaving England on good terms with every country in the world, and without a question between her and any of them calculated to disturb the general harmony. Mr. Muntz, Mr. Baillie, Mr. Geach, Mr. M. Milnes, Lord D. Stuart, Mr. B. Osborne, Mr. Roebuck, Mr. Napier, Mr. E. B. Roche severally addressed the house. Mr. Disraeli said he had listened with great attention to the explanations given that night, but he must say that he could derive little information from either of the noble lords.