English & Foreign.

Lyttelton Times, Volume IX, Issue 579, 22 May 1858, Page 3

English & Foreign.

THE DEBATE ON THE ALJEN BILL. In the absence of later European intelligence we continue a more detailed summary of the'debate, on Lord Paimerston's Alien Bill, briefly introduced in our issue of the 15th inst; Although leave to bring ■in the bill was carried by a large ' majority, the opposition'fought a spirited battle,' and the tenor of the debate seemed to create in ( England an adverse feeling to the Minister. ' House opiCoMMONSj-Feb. 8 & 9. < | On the introduction of the question, Mr. A. W. KiNiji-AitE! moved '■ in': amendment—" That: this House, ■ sympathizing • With ffche French nation in ' its indignation - and; : at the late atrocious attempt made against the life of the Emperor; and anxious on a proper occasion to consider the defects of the criminal law of England, the effect of which may be to render such attempts vain, deems it inexpedient to legislate in compliance with the demand made in Count Walewski's despatch of January 20, until'further information be'obtained; arid'until after /the production of the correspondence between the' two Governments subsequent to this despatch?' '!-; " Messrs; H6rsm£n, Hadfield, Fox, and Gilpin, warmly "denounced the billi They took the ground that it wasfunnecessary; and that it would prove 'tobe a mere sham' and a dead letter, unless it provided'for detection by means of French espionage. And if so they might have to extend the privilege to every power in Eurbpe; and thus transform Great Britain into a vast den of foreign spies. They also maintained freely and openly that persons who had waded through slaughter to a throne had no right to ask their neighbours towatch over their safety. Assassins did not'grow in England; They went out of England,' but they had' come into England from" countries administered by Governments who made'assassins. . > ■ : . . Lord: Elchq would neither vote for the bill nor the amendment, but .suggested a commission of enquiry into the state of the law. Mr. Roebuck, although the hour was late, asked the indulgence" of'the House while he stated liis opinionsl There are two questions— Doesthe law require alteration? is this the right time and fight mode of making it? Great Britain ; ahd Ireland; with' a few exceptions, are the sole "depositaries of the liberties of Europe. For the sake of mankind, we should do nothing to circumscribe the liberties of England. We are an asylum to every political offender; we give up criminals, but'not political criminals. According tchtheiaw of England^ conspiring to do anythingiaamisdemeanour punishable by fine and imprisonment. Why should we alter the l«tw?,o/Experience has-taught us' that to make the law: efficient we must: make detection certain. When punishment is severe thereis great difficulty in-bringing a criminal to justice. When it was' found that forgers could not be convicted, we'went to the root of the disease and rendered the law: more efficient by making it less cruel. But the Government now propose a contrary courser Certain persons it is supposedr-but of ■ that we have no evidence—conspired in England to kill the French Emperor. .' Take it for granted: ■ would the discovery of the .'crime have been one whit more easy had the. proposed law been in force? "If you tell us that ,a severer punishment would have induced those persons hot to commit this crime, I ask you to go across the water with me to France. There the crime was carried Ho its consummation, acid ..there it was punishable by death; yet, though the punishment of death stared them in the face, they committed the orime. What ought they then to do in France according to the reasoning of the noble lord? Why this—the crime was not prevented by death being the punishment, therefore they ought

to introducetorture as well as death. If an adfV,l^ t0 + th* Punishment here be necessary, an addition tothe punishment in Trance is also necessary. The only punishment you can add to death is torture; therefore, according to the principles of the noble lord, torture ought to be introduced into the French law." As proposed, the law m no way facilitates discovery; discoy^y,lß*h.e only tWng we want; and What Count Walewski points at is art alteration of our police law-^-is the introduction of the French system ot police to facilitate detection. Yet, in spite of this terrific police, the Emperor's life has been endangered, and he turns round and insults this country. "He too, of all men upon earth, to dare^to: insult England—he who has partaken of her hospitality, who. has been sheltered by her power! A bright example he set to England! Ihere was a man who conspired to kill England's great hero, the late Duke of Wellington, there was a man, great too, but fallen in his greatness, and no one act of his life was more inconsistent with his greatness—who left a legacy to him who had attempted to assassinate the Duke of! Wellington. My only explanation, my only ex-' cuse for that deed is that the great Napoleon's mind was shaken to its base; I do not believe that.in his right senses Napoleon would have perpetrated such an infamous act. But the man i who.had received the protection of Englaad, who had come here after attempting crime after crime against his native land—that man, when he had climbed to his present height and power, what did he do? He paid to this foiled assassin the wages of his dirty deed. ("No, no!"from Mr.; Bowyer.)1 Oh! I have heard the honourablegentleman defend the King of Naples—(Loud cheers rand laughter)—therefore I shall not answer; him. This man has received his wages—; he. is now living in Paris; and it was stated publicly, and ostentatiously that the present Emperor of the French had paid the legacy left by. the great' Napoleon to CantUlon the disappointed assassin of the Duke of Wellington; (Cheers.) And now, in this House of Commons; panegyrics are showered profusely over the head of Louis Napoleon by the honourable baronet opposite. I hope he recollected this transaction ——(Sir John Walsh, "I had not heard of it.") The honourable baronet:says he never heard of it, and yet hepretends to speak upon this matter!" Mr. Roebuck insisted that, even if it were necessary, this is not the time to alter our law. He made a pointed application of the popular belief in Lord PalmeTston as a thorough English Minister, the enemy of despotism in Europel In conclusion, he called upon the Commons, " ai freemen and the great protectors of the oppressed in Europe, to throw out the bill with all the ignominy which it deserves." ! The debate being resumed on the second day!, the bill was opposed by Mr. Bovill, Mr. Ward Hunt, Mr. Monckton Milnes, and Mr. Dent; and supported by Mr. Collier, Mr. Whitbread, and Mr. Napier. Mr. Coluee defended the bill as a measure of . law reform. Until the Lord Chief Justice made his statement, there was no lawyer in Westminster Hall who could affirm with positive certainty that a conspiracy of two foreigners to murder a foreigner out of this country was ah offence against our laws. The law would apply to two Englishmen who conspired to murder the French Emperor, but not to two foreigners. Then ijfc was absurd to rank conspiracy to murder with conspiracy to defraud tradesmen. Mr. Nafiek regarded the bill with favour, as one that assimilated the law of England and Ireland, and was in itself a just, wise, and equitable amendment of the criminal law. ; Lord John Russell opposed the bill. He began by poiiitiug out the disadvantages of the discussion. It led them to discuss the conduct of the ruler of France; it'cailed-forth adverse opinions which cannot but be distasteful to the French nation, at a time when all should join in expressing horror at the atrocious attempt on the life of the Emperor. It was assumed: that the bill would be an improvement of the law; and they were asked if they would be so unjust as to refuse to improve the law because it would be ■agreeable to the Government of France. Now to argue so was to confound two distinct questions. He would discuss them apart. He desired to observe that respect due to the ruler of France, — a sovereign who has deserved well of England, and one who has consulted the interests of Europe, and the balance of power both in wars and in treaties. If the measure would give safety to the life of the Emperor, Lord John would willingly support it, but considered as an improvement of the law, he was very sceptical : as, to its merits. If it were so urgent, why did Ministers, who had extended such vigilance to the protection of deer and rabbits, remain silent on the subject until they received Count Walewski's despatch? The law-reformer is compelled to consider not only what punishment the criminal deserves, but how the crime may be prevented. For many hundred years conspiracy to murder has been treated as a misdemeanour; and no subject of the Queen has felt that his life was insecure under that law. Lord Hawkesbury would have held that a law which has been found sufficient for all the subjects of the Queen should not be altered at the wish of a foreign power. Has life been more safe in Ireland, where the punishment for conspiring to murder is death? Juries are accustomed to consider the punishment affixed to a crime; and it might happen that they would deem evidence of the kind produced in these cases sufficient to convict a man of misdemeanour, but not of felony involving transportation for life. It does not therefore follow 'that a higher punishment would prevent- this horrible crime. The spirit of the proposed bill is contrary to the whole course of our legislation since the days of Romilly. Look to the nature of this crimeconspiracy to murder. The men Avho from political exasperation risk their lives in these attempts are riot likely to be deterred by the substitution of penal servitude for two years' invprisonment. He related an instance to illustrate the spirit by which these misguided men are actuated. The night before the assassination of Rossi the Minister of Rome, some young men met at their club and declaimed against Rossi's despotism. One said, they spoke brave language, but none were prepared to kill the tyrant. Upon this some said they were ready to do it. The next day Rossi was stabbed to the heart. Would any one have had the least influence with them

if in the midst of their deliberations he had said, recollect.you are conspirators; you are conspiring to murder; and if you commit the crime you may be condemned to penal servitude for life?" Such an intimation would not have had any effect whatever. ; Sir George Grey contended that the bill was not intended to reach those who risked their lives in committing murder, but the conspirators remained hidden in comparative security. In illustration of his argument he quoted the following paragraph from Count Walewski's despatch, to show what really the French Government so urgently desired .--—Count Walewski says— -.■-.; . • ... , ;' It is no longer the hostility of erring parties manifesting itself by all the excesses of the press and every violence of language; it is no longer even the labour of the factious seeking to agitate opinion and to provoke disorder: it is assassination reduced to a doctrine, preached openly, practised in repeated attempts, the most recent of which hfcis just struck Europe with, stupefaction. Ought, then, the right of asylum" to protect such a state of things? Is hospitality due to assassins? Should English legislation serve to favour their designs and their manoeuvresj and can it continue to protect persons who place themselves by flagrant acts outside the pale of the common law, and expose themselves to the ban of humanity?' Also the following paragraph from Count Walewski's speech at the Lord Mayor's dinner:— , -. 'Permit me to tell you what is the true question. It does not lie in the attempts at assassination in themselves, nor even in the crime of the 14th of January, which your Government would have hastened,to warn us against if it could have known it beforehand; the whole question is in the moral situation of France, which has become anxiously doubtful of the real sentiments of England. Reasoning in effect by analogy, popular opinion declares that were there in France men sufficiently infamous to recommend in their clubs, in their papers, in their writings of every kind, the assassination of a foreign sovereign, arid actually to prepare its execution, a French Administration would not wait to receive the demands of a foreign Government, nor to see the enterprise set on foot. To act "against such conspiracies, to anticipate such crimes, public notoriety would be sufficient to set our laws in motion, and measures of security would be taken immediately.'! The Solicitor-General repeated Sir George Grey's argument; and further contended that the bill could not have been placed along with those measures of legal reform prepared by the . Statute La%v.Cpmrnission, because itwould have been inconvenient to introduce such " totally novel legislation as that contemplated by the bill" among the measures sanctioned by the commissioners. . Mr. Disraeli took up a middle position. He brought forward precedents to show that it is not unusualfor Parliament to legislate with a view to special cases. The assault upon Mr. Harley.by Guiscard led to a special act making it felony even to assault a privy councillor. The prevalence of conspiracies to murder in Ireland led to,special legislation. In the present case, if nothing had .happened beyond the attempt on the life of the Emperor it would have been the universal opinion that we should .respond to his feelings with perfect sympathy. ~ But much has happened to disturb the generous emotion of the people of this country. The despatch of Count Walewski is not written "with that dignity, good temper, and good sense which usually characterise his lucubrations." (Laughter.) The observations of the French Colonels amount to " the height of impertinence." The publication of ,• those observations in an authentic journal rwas an " act of signal indiscretion." But after the frank and full expression of regret on the part of the Emperor, he was not disposed to dwell upon those phrases. Other nations, nations as great as England, have been subjected to equally flagrant annoyances, and have borne them with great forbearance. In 1853, some eminent statesman of England denounced the Emperor of the French as a tyrant, usurper, and perjui'er; and when Mr. Disraeli brought these speeches under the notice of Parliament, they saw Cabinet Minister after Cabinet Minis- ' ter rise and apologise for" the offensive expressions he had used. That was a salutary^ spectacle, and it conduced to the mahitenance'of the peace of Europe only because the Emperor of the French is a forbearing and forgiving man. " If the French Emperor and the French nation could endure with equanimity the insults heaped upon them by English Cabinet Ministers, the .people of England might afford to pocket the insults of the French Colonels." Mr. Disraeli proceeded to show, that to preserve the French alliance, that " keystone of modern civilization," something should be done. He was willing to vote for leave' to introduce the bill; but he should reserve his right to consider the principle on which it is founded when it reached the second reading, if it ever reached that stage. Mr. Sidney Herbert delivered his opinions in a short but comprehensive speech. The Government, he said, had abnegated its duty in conducting our foreign affairs, and had left to the House of Commons the duty of answering the despatch of Count Walewski. It behoved them not to add to existing irritation feelings of chronic hostility. He had never been an adulator of the Emperor of the French. He rejoiced that under his guidance two great nations had been brought into relations of great amity; but his attachment to constitutional principles was not so shallow as to make him say that he wished to see France the leader of European civilisation. A change has occurred in the feelings of this country with regard to the Emperor; and he traced that change to the address of Count de Morny, the publication of the addresses of the Colonels in the ' Moniteur,' and the despatch of Count Walewski. The Emperor could not be held responsible for the address of Count de Morny, but he was responsible for the other fact, and for that he had frankly expressed his regret. But the despatch of Count Walewski had not been answered. In that despatch things are assumed as facts for which there is not a tittle of evidence. But before it is answered several other things ought to be answered. " I want several lawyers of high authority to expound the state of the law, upon which, if the

rumour be true, they do not entirely agree. I want to know whether the law is sufficient to reach aliens conspiring to obtain the death of another alien in a foreign country? Before we say aye or n> upon the merits of this measure as .one of legal reform, I want to know that which the Foreign Office alone can answeris .it true, or is it not true, that the GoGovernment have given notice,—and if they have, they have done it most properly,—whenever any information has come to their hands which has led them to believe some plot or crime was being concocted, and that the French police, being -so warned, have been entirely unable to ' detect the criminals. I want to know, again, whether it has ever been the practice when men have been thought dangerous and troublesome, ' pour soupcons graves,' to ship them in steamers at Boulogne and put them upon the English shore. I want to know what is the effect of • converting a misdemeanour into a felony, as regards the power of the police to enter a house or to search a house, or to invade the free action of suspected persons. If we have Frencli police in England, which—of course—we have, they may make charges againsit men which may put them to great inconvenience, although the accusation be utterly groundless; and I am not sure that conspiracies on the part of the police are not worse than any other kind of conspiracy. For all these causes, I plead for time before we come to an ultimate decision. But I have another reason for pleading for time. As I said before,-there is no doubt that despatch is to be answered by this House. It is not often that a popular assembly is trusted to answer the despatch of a foreign government upon a very grave international question upon which public opinion on both sides of the Channel is very much heated. For the character of the House, I say do not let us answer it by a precipitate decision." Let us take care that in the answer does not appear the tone and spirit of the 82d of the Line. He asked them not to refuse the Government leave to bring in the bill, but to consider its merits with due deliberation on the second reading. Lord Palmerstcn brought the debate to a close with a general reply to various speakers. He said that England does harbour assassins, though not intentionally; and that fact prevented him from making an indignant refutation of Count Walewski's despatch. He repeated Sir George Grey's statement that the Government had taken the law into consideration before that despatch was received. Lord John Russell's argument respecting the efficacy of mitigated punishment he met with the old rhyming joke—. " Then 'twould be greater if 'twere none at all." He contended that the bill, in spite of the maxim of the Barons, and Lord John's new-born attachment to the old Jaws of England, is a great improvement of the law. We have our honour and character to maintain, and it would be disgraceful were we to refuse to stamp these conspiracies with our condemnation by a new law. We should be open to censure were we, " upon any paltry feeling of offended dignity, or of irritation at the expressions of three or four Colonels of French regiments, to act the childish part of refusing an important measure on grounds so insignificant and so trumpery." Mr. Cox moved the adjournment of the debate; but, at the instance of Lord Palsierston, he withdrew his motion. At the suggestion of Lord John -Russell, Mr. Kinglake withdrew his amendment—the papers he wanted having been read in the debate. The house then divided on the question that leave be given to bring in the bill, and the numbers were—Ayes 299, Noes 99. The bill was brought in, and read a first time # We must defes a summary of the debate, on the same question in the House of Lords to a future issue. PRANCE. Addresses of congratulation from all parts of Europe have poured in upon the Emperor of the French; even the King of Naples did not forget to express his sympathies, through the Austrian Ambassador. But by far the most remarkable series of addresses are those which have been received from the army. Selections from them haye been paraded in the ' Monitenr,' with an intimation that it may be useful for the country to be aware of the spirit that animates the army. These selected addresses have caused some sensation outside as well as inside France. A few extracts will show " the spirit which animates the army." The Army of Lyons.—"ln expressing our | wishes that your Majesty's life, so intimately connected with the repose and prosperity of France, may be eyer preserved from ajl parricicidal attempts, it does not suffice the army to form a rampart round its sovereign; it is ready to shed its blood in all places to reach and annihilate the artisans of regicide." The Fifth Lancers. —" The army is afflicted that powerful friends, whose brave armies so lately combatted by our side, cover Avith their protection, under the name of hospitality, conspirators and assassins who exceed those who have gone before them in all that is odious." The Nineteenth Military Division.—"This odious and cowardly attempt has filled our hearts with indignation and wrath against those who become the accomplices of these sanguinary anarchists by giving them an asylum." The Eighty-second Regiment.—" Those wild beasts who at periodical epochs quit a foreign soil to inundate the streets of your capital with blood, inspire us with no other feeling than that of disgust; and if your Majesty wants soldiers to get at these men, even in the recesses of their den, we humbly beseech you to choose the S2nd regiment as part of the advanced guard of that army." Further specimens of the Prastorian outburst of ancient enmities in the French army have been iurnished by the correspondents. We select two containing marked expressions. The Fifty-ninth Regiment.—"But in our manly hearts indignation against the perverse, succeeding to our gratitude to God, moves us to demand an account from the land of impunity where are the haunts of the monsters who are sheltered under its laws. Give us the order. Sire, and we shall pursue them even to their places of security."

The Rouen Division.—"Let the miserable" assassins, the subaltern agents of sucli crimes-, receive the chastisement due to their abominable attempts; but also let the infamous haunt-where machinations so infernal are planned be destroyed for ever." There is a certain uniformity of phrase in the effective part of these* addresses which would seem to indicate a common and central origin. Prompted perhaps by an expression, not ujh studied, in Louis Napoleon's speech, these addresses and other manifestations in France are brought to a point by a resume in the official ' Moniteur.' The paper states that not only the people, the national guard, the army, the cities, and the press of every country, but all the sovereigns of Europe, have hastened to send illus^ trious persons to convey their congratulations to the Emperor; the Government journalist proceeding in a strain of crescendo— " The army, that faithful guardian of om- institutions, in its noble frankness, declares that it has not merely taken the oath of fidelity to the Emperor, but to the Empire also, to the Emperor's son and his dynasty; and that it will ' defend them, as ifc now defends the august chief who restored to it its eagles and its glory. And it is not in France alone that the Imperial <$irone rests upon the public consent; the whole of Europe, which formerly leagued to overthrow it, sees in it now the firmest guarantee for her owil tranquillity and prosperity." The indictment against the persons arrested in Paris on the night of the 14th January will, it is said, comprise only four of the prisoners now in custody on the charge of attempting the assassination of the Emperor: the evidence against the others is not complete. These four' have been already specified—Pierri, Orsini, Da Silva or Rudio, and Goumez. Orsini and Pierri are not very communicative in their answers to the questions put to them; Rudio is said to have fully avowed his crime, but ifc is not known whether he has implicated any third parties. Rudio threw two of the grenades; Orsini had two also to throw, but, being severely wounded by the first, and seeing thai all the chances were against him, he slunk away, deposited his other grenade and a revolver in the Rue Rossini, and retired home. ■UNITED STATES. The North America arrived at Liverpool with advices from Portland to the 30th January. The Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Mr. Douglas dissenting, have made a report upholding the Neutrality laws, condemning Walker's proceedings, and inflicting on Commodore Pauiding for arresting Walker "no further censure than as it might hereafter be drawn into a precedent if suffered to pass without remark." m'hey suggested that offenders of the Neutrality laws captured at sea should be surrendered to the United States authorities at the port whence they started. It is stated that General Scott is to organise a column in California for the invasion of Utah. When the news of the death of Sir Henry Havelock reached New York, the flags of the shipping were hoisted half-mast high, and the newspapers published eulogiums upon the British General. Mexico.—Advices from Mexico to the 18th January state that desperate fighting was going on there. Mexico had been bombarded by the opponents of the -President, Comonfort, and a coalition was marching on the city. Mr. Lettsom, our Charge d'Affaires in Mexico, has had a narrow escape from a band of robbers. He was riding home from the city to Tacubaya on the night, of the 16th December, when he and1 his servant were attacked by a gang of robbers, who fired pistols. Mr. Lettsom's face was blackened by the powder of a pistol. The thieves earned off the horses of Mr. Lettsom and his servant, and Mr. Lettsom's watch. It is believed that this was an ordinary robbery, not an outrage specially directed against the English official. The last advices say that the assassin of Mr. Sullivan in Peru has been discovered—he is a Frenchman. An has been murdered in Turkey. Mr. John Tenniswood, an English engineer employed on a mine which is being worked near Ismidt, came to Constantinople a few days before Christmas to receive a sum of money, and it is supposed, that the object of his visit to the capital had become known. He returned to Ismidt late in the evening of the 27th December, and, immediately set out on horseback for the mine, followed by a servant. When between Guebeze: and the mine a report of fire-arms was heard, and the servant saw his master fall from his horse. The man was seized with alarm, and galloped off to the mine for assistance. On some persons returning with him to the spot, they found Mr. Tenniswood lying'dead on the ground. He had received five wounds; the left arm was. fractured above the elbow; two balls had enter- ; ed the right side, and one of them had lodged in the spine, after cutting the arteries. Another I struck the upper part of the right hand, and the last broke the fourth finger of the left hand.As soon as the event was made known at Constantinople, the Minister of Police sent off. three skilful officers to Ismidt. An inquiry having been instituted, it was ascertained that two servants of the deceased had disappeared, and it is therefore supposed that these men committed the murder, in order to rob their master of the money which they expecfea he had about him. The trial of a married woman named Mar--guerin, for swinding, at Lisieux in the Eure, shows what gross superstition and ignorance are to be found in France. This woman, who lived in the town, professed to be a sorceress, and* to have the power of curing maladies by incantations. The wife of a'man named Boutrin; having fallen ill, he called the woman in, and she demanded for her services 100 francs, which were at once paid. The woman, producing a pack of cards, arranged them.in a peculiar manner; then she called for a pound of nails, and. placed them in the cover of a saucepan on the fire until they were red hot; then, with a variety of strange gestures, and muttering incomprehensible words, she cast water on the nails j and then, lastly, removing the sick woman from the. bed. she made her plunge a fbitfc into the bubr bles created by the water. This done, she declared that the patient would be cured next day, as the fork had stabbed the spirits that bewitched her. But the next day the patient, to

'her own astonishment that of her husband -was considerably worse. • On this the pretended sorceress triedfa nevr;plan, which she represented ■to be infallible. She took?a wreath of ivy, and attached to each leaf a piece of paper, on which was written " Our Lady of Deliverance," " Our Lady of Grace," or the name of some saint. each leaf she said "an Aye and a Pater, and then plunged the wreath into water, and -made sundry incantations-over it. After awhile -she withdrew it, and seeing that some of the leaves had ■become dark, declared that it was 'the saints whose names-they-bore-who afflicted 'the woman, and that-she must go on apilgrim■age to their chapels. That operation, however,' though it cost some money, did not oure the: -woman. Several other --persons were cheated; >out of different sums by the same or similar means, and one of them out of as much as 300 francs. Sometimes her dupes, on seeing that -her incantations failed, talked of calling in a doctor; but- she^declared solemnly that if they ' did so the-sick-person would instantly die. The consequence-of this was that her dupes were' sometimes "in serious danger, and one of them* actually aied; in her hands. The. Tribunal sentenced the impostor to thirteen months'imprisonment and 50 francs fine. :