opinion, there never has been a great State | that pay and clothing they would supply whose power of external aggression has been for themselves. This, Sir, is one instance more overrated than that of Russia. It has out of many of the spirit of the people. been said that Russia is powerful in self- Their valour and bravery in the field are defence, and it is inferred from that that known to all the world. The manner in she is equally powerful in aggression. But which Omar Pacha has conducted the camthe very circumstance which makes her so paign in which he is engaged, has proved powerful within, makes her also compara- that he is a man of great military skill tively weak without. The vast distances and ability. Now, Sir, my opinion, then, which an invading army has to traverse is that any one great Power like England or in Russia, the difficulties of obtaining France would be able successfully to assist supplies, and the dangers and fatigues Turkey against Russian aggression. I am of the march, tell in her favour when she convinced that if either England or France is assailed, but equally tell against her alone were to take Turkey by the hand when she becomes the assailant. She has and assist her, Russia would never succeed to march great armies over long distances, in accomplishing her object. But when at an immense expenditure of money and England and France together take the a vast waste of human life, and her inter- cause of Turkey up, I maintain that the nal arrangements for this description of ser- chance of Russia is utterly desperate. And vice are not such as to afford the greatest I think we are entitled to expect that, if result from a given expenditure of money. the war should continue, Austria and PrusWe all know that there is a great differ- sia would not remain idle and passive specence between men paraded on paper and tators of the conflict. There must be, no men marshalled on the field; and we doubt, in Prussia a spirit of public indeknow that an army, very powerful when it pendence and freedom, and, if any of the starts on the beginning of a long march, spirit of old Frederick remains, they will often presents a very different aspect when not quietly permit the destruction of Turit arrives at the scene of operations. We key by Russia. Austria must have forheard last year that hundreds of thousands gotten all her traditionary policy-she of men were to be poured into the Danu- must be blind to all her own interests, if bian Principalities; but that the Russians she could permit the aggression of Russia have never had there any great forces in on the Turkish empire. Therefore, I say the field is proved by the circumstance, that that England and France, being the active in the encounters which have taken place supporters of Turkey, and the whole opithey have invariably had the worst of it; nion of Europe being against Russia, who and that when they have attempted to force will not have a single ally to support her the position of the Turks or to cross the in a career of injustice, I cannot doubt Danube, they have not been able to effect what will be the issue of the coming conthese objects. Well, then, Sir, this being flict. the state of things with regard to Russia; the Turks, on the other hand, have shown an energy and vitality which few people believed them to possess. Talk of Turkish fanaticism! Why, what the Russians call fanaticism we, in this country, should call public spirit and patriotism. The Russians stigmatise as fanaticism the patriotism of the Turks in rallying round the Sultan to defend his throne and person.

I was reading the other day a despatch from one of our consuls in European Turkey, in which he said that the contingent required of the district was 1,000 men, but that 4,000 appeared on the day of muster, and that the remaining 3,000 expressed the deepest disappointment and mortification when told that they might return to their homes, their services not being required. To this they replied that all they wanted was rations and arms, and

I must say that it is a noble sight, Sir, to see England and France, two countries which for centuries have been in rivalship with each other, now united in a common course of action-bound by reciprocal engagements, and having in view as the result of their operations no selfish advantage. It is a noble sight to see them standing forth in defence, not of their own interests only, but of the liberty and welfare of the whole of Europe. It is a proud sight to see those fleets and armies which have hitherto met only in deadly conflict, ranging themselves side by side in generous emulation-not armed for the purpose of conquest, not for the oppression of mankind, but in a noble cause to defend right against might, and justice against oppression. I say, that being the case, I care not for the accusations of credulity or connivance. We are willing on this question

to be judged by this House and by our fellow-countrymen; and I am convinced that the people of England will be satisfied that we have not involved them recklessly, and without due cause, in the necessity of a war. That war, though I do not wish to underrate its consequences, or the exertions which it may require-that war will, I think, be different from other wars in which we at former times have been engaged. But I will not dwell upon that. I feel no hesitation in appealing to the country for assistance in the contest in which we may be involved; but this, at least, I will say, that, if the country or this House think that we have shown the weakness of credulity or the infamy of connivance, let them take from us the conduct of a war which we should be totally imcompetent or unworthy to conduct-let them place its conduct in the hands of those in whose judgment and sagacity they may rely, and in whose integrity they may place their confidence.

warn the House to beware of the noble Lord the Member for London, for he (Colonial Sibthorp) placed no confidence in him whatever.

Question put and agreed to. House in Committee of Supply. (1.) 16,024,1001. Exchequer Bills. MR. J. WILSON moved, that a sum of 16,024,100l. be granted to meet outstanding Exchequer Bills. Agreed to.

NAVY ESTIMATES.

SIR JAMES GRAHAM said, that at that hour of the night he could not of course ask the Committee to listen to a statement on the subject of the naval estimate-that he would reserve for the very first opportune moment. He thought, however, that, as for the present, at least, the discussion on the policy of the Government had been closed, it would be for the interest of the country if without further delay they proceeded at once to vote the proposed increase in the number of men and the increased amount of the estimates.

to.

The following votes were then agreed

(2.) 58,500 Men.

(3.) 2,192,6711. Wages.
(4.) 870,3241. Victuals.

House resumed; Chairman reported progress.

The House adjourned at a quarter after Two o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS,

Tuesday, February 21, 1854. MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILL.-1a Law of Landlord

COLONEL SIBTHORP said, he had heard with deep regret the remarks of the noble Lord who had just sat down on the Mahomedan religion. He thought that they were unworthy of the noble Lord, whom he regarded as a most sincere Protestant. In his opinion there had been, on the part of the Treasury bench, a gross, unworthy, and unjustifiable system of delays; they had shown themselves political toadies of the Emperor of Russia, and he believed they would yet succumb to him, as he had told them last year they would. It was unworthy of this great country to be giving way either to Austria or France; and he would tell them no man entertained a greater suspicion of the subtlety of the French Emperor than he did; and he hoped the country would not be humbugged. He was afraid it would, though. Let England only rely upon herself. He himself only held a small appointmenthe was merely a colonel of the militia, but as such, even also in a pecuniary point of view, as well as with all his energies, he was prepared to come forward in defence of his country, and was ready to be sent any where in its cause. He was one of the old school, and he hoped that England would not lose sight of the principles of that school. He would, however, thank the noble Lord opposite (Viscount Palmerston) for what he had done in organising that opponents, Sir Wm. Fraser and Mr. Bremmost useful and constitutional force-the militia; and he hoped the Government would rely on that force. But he would

and Tenant Consolidation (Ireland).

BARNSTAPLE ELECTION.

The

THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURY presented a petition from Viscount Ebrington complaining of the manner of trying Election Petitions, and praying that they may be treated in a more public manner. petitioner stated that he was a candidate for the borough of Barnstaple at the last election, and was defeated by sixty-one votes, in consequence of abstaining from bribery and treating, both which means of securing their return were adopted by his

ridge; that he undertook to carry on a petition against the return, but did not pray for the seat, because, as was shown by the

subject, for it was much easier to ask for a reniedy than to grant one, as, before doing so, they must discover a remedy that would be effectual in preventing a mischief, the existence of which could not be doubted, nor its extent possibly be exaggerated. Until the other House would consent-he would not say to part with its right to investigate the claims of Members and their defences-but until it would consent to modify its proceedings in election matters, so as to obtain a more properly constituted tribunal of justice, and judges duly quali

questions of fact-until some exception was made to that strict rule by which all interference with the other House had, since the passing of the Grenville Act in 1770, been prevented, he much feared the evils complained of would remain.

THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURY said, that his noble Friend suggested the appointment of a public prosecutor as a remedy for some of the evils of which he complained.

expense of the proceedings before the Elec- | his noble Friend who had presented it had tion Committee, it would have been ruin- not entered a little more at large into the ous to have attempted, and impracticable to have effected, the disqualification of sufficient voters by scrutiny. That just before the sittings of the Committee commenced an overture was made to him that one of the sitting Members should withdraw in his favour if the petition was abandoned; but as this would have prevented an inquiry under the new Act, the petitioner peremptorily refused to listen to the proposal, and proceeded with the petition at a heavy expense; that the Committee unanimously found the sitting Members guilty of bribery and treating, and that Mr. Brem-fied to dispose of legal questions as well as ridge was guilty of the cognisance and ratification of one offer of money to a voter; that at the recommendation of the Committee the issue of the writ was suspended, and a Commission of Inquiry was sent down to Barnstaple, before whom it was proved that more than 250 of the sitting Members' voters were corrupt, and that neither of them had polled 150 pure votes, while the petitioner had more than 320. That the petitioner, therefore, thought it hard that he should continue to be excluded from the honour of a seat in Parliament because he had refused to obtain it either by bribery, or afterwards by a compromise, while seats were at this moment notoriously enjoyed in consequence of compromises come to by their occupants, who had been previously guilty of bribery and treating. That he also thought it hard upon the 450 pure electors of Barnstaple that they should remain two years unrepresented because they and the petitioner acted up to the spirit and the letter of the law. In conclusion, the petitioner prayed that some remedy might be applied to the present fundamentally erroneous mode of dealing with election petitions; for that so long as they were dealt with by private individuals, and were left to be carried on or dropped as it suited their interests, instead of being considered as public matters deeply affecting the honour of Parliament, so long the petitioner feared would the ends of justice continue to be defeated by private compromises and arrangements; the responsibility for which, in fairness, attached rather to the Legislature, who neglected their obvious duty, than to individuals, who only exercised what was at present their undoubted legal rights.

LORD BROUGHAM considered the petition which had just been presented of the greatest importance. He regretted that

THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE expressed his satisfaction that this petition had been presented, because it put the evils of the law, as it now stood, in a very striking point of view. For what was the case set forth in the petition presented by the noble Earl? It was, that under the existing law all those parties whose conduct had been in conformity with the intention and spirit of the law had been losers, while all those whose conduct had been against the spirit of the law had been gainers by it. The petitioner refused to bribe, and had lost his seat in consequence; the other party bribed, and had obtained that seat. An opportunity was offered to procure the seat by compromise, by a mode other than by election:-again, the petitioner conceived it his duty to conform to the spirit of the law, and did so in such a manner that he was again deprived of that seat to which he was entitled. On the other hand, the voters who had received bribes deprived, not only the candidate who should have been elected, but the honest unbribed voters, of the free exercise of that suffrage to which they were entitled by law. Could they have a stronger case to show the necessity of putting the law in such a state as should obtain for it the respect, obedience, and conformity, of candidates and voters, and should not make it equally the interest of both to set it at defiance?