Earl Grey's speech. This was an undoubted breach of
privilege, and if passed over, a most mischievous
precedent would be laid down.—The Duke of NEWCASTLE
said the return, in being made up to a date subsequent
to the date of the motion, though technically irregular,
was not quite without precedent. The return was made
exactly as the papers had been sent in; and as they
contained a defence of two officers in the commissariat
department now absent from the country, who
conceived their characters to have been affected, he had
not deemed it his duty to withhold them, though he
admitted that it was irregular to refer to their lordships'
debates.—The Earl of DERBY said the better course
would have been for the noble duke to have received
these explanations from the parties, and used them in
his place in parliament, rather than have made them
part of a return. The return, as it stood, was much
more than a technical violation of their lordships'
privileges.—Earl FITZWILLIAM took the same view, and
observed that the two commissaries in question could
not have written these replies unless previous
communications had been made to them. He recommended
that the return should be withdrawn and amended.—
The Duke of NEWCASTLE expressed his readiness to
withdraw the return, and produce another in an
amended form.—The return was consequently withdrawn.

On Friday, June 23, the Marquis of CLANRICARDE
presented a petition from Hull praying for a Rigorous
Blockade of all the Russian Ports; and called attention
to the necessity of immediately exercising this important
right against Russia in the ports of the White Sea, in
justice to our own mercantile and shipping interest.
Within the last three weeks no fewer than 400 neutral
ships had been chartered for Archangel and Onega,
mainly belonging to Holland. The Dutch were thus
allowed to carry on a most prosperous trade; and by
way of a return, the Czar had been enabled to raise a
loan in that country upon terms which could not but be
considered favourable. If this practice were to be
continued, the war might be indefinitely prolonged; and
he urged that the contest could only be terminated
speedily by pressure upon the Russian population in
every quarter where they are accessible. He complained,
too, that the Sea of Azoff was not blockaded.
In conclusion, he contended that it was absolutely
necessary that some explanation should be given of
these circumstances.—The Duke of NEWCASTLE, in
reply, said that in the first instance the French government,
owing to the nature of their engagements, could
not consent to blockade the White Sea, the necessity for
which her Majesty's government entirely admitted.
Communications with the French government had been
continued, and the result of the last correspondence was
a considerable alteration in their views, which might
before long lead to an alteration of policy on their part
and on ours. His noble friend might, however, rest
satisfied that the moment an effective blow could be
struck at Russia, whether in the White Sea, the Sea of
Azoff, or elsewhere, without injuring other interests,
her Majesty's government would be ready and anxious
to strike that blow.—Lord BEAUMONT urged the necessity
of an immediate effective blockade of the White
Sea, on the ground that the course now being taken
would change the current of traffic when peace was
made.

On Tuesday, June 26, the Earl of ABERDEEN moved
for the Production of a Despatch often referred to in
parliament, but never hitherto communicated to the
legislature, which he had himself written in the year
1830, in reference to the Treaty of Adrianople. In
proceeding to offer some explanations upon his speech of
the previous Monday, the premier submitted that he
was pursuing a course which, however unusual, was
justified by the circumstances of the case. There was
nothing in that speech which he found occasion to
retract or to regret; but some imperfectly expressed ideas
it contained required elucidation, and it was necessary
to remove some misapprehensions to which it had given
rise. Among other erroneous assumptions was the
extraordinary statement that he had claimed the
authorship, partially or entirely, of the treaty of Adrianople.
To show the absurdity of this assertion, Lord Aberdeen
read an extract from the despatch which was the subject
of his motion, showing that at the time he had described
that convention as being to the last degree dangerous
and mischievous. The policy of the British government
had subsequently been modified by their deep impression
of the perils to be apprehended from that treaty,
but which it was admitted were much exaggerated.
His statement in his former speech, that Russia
had acquired little addition to her territory since 1830
was strictly correct so far as Europe was concerned,
though he confessed that many points of vantage had
fallen into her possession. But the fact was that the
Russian tactics had undergone a change, and the
enhancement of political influence had been sought
by the Czar more anxiously than territorial
aggrandisement. Of this change the noble earl cited some
proofs, comprising the diplomatic mission of Prince
Menschikoff to Constantinople. Another assertion
had given him still greater surprise. It was that he had
specifically announced a willingness to accept of peace
under Austrian negotiation on the basis of the status
quo ante. This result would have been satisfactory
before war actually broke out; but the occurrence
of that event completely changed the aspect of the
question. Respecting the absolute terms whereon
peace should be now accepted, it would be imprudent
and premature to say anything. These must, indeed,
depend upon the eventualities of the war, and would
differ by the whole range of possibilities between the
entrance of the Russians into Constantinople and of the
allies into St. Petersburg. But in any contingency,
peace must obtain and secure the integrity of the
Ottoman empire, and could not be accorded until that
result was by some means or other satisfactorily
guaranteed. After reiterating his conviction that the
power of Russia was not formidable to Europe; that
the Turks could cope with her single-handed; and that
France alone was stronger than Russia and Austria
together, Lord Aberdeen alluded to some personal topics.
A multitude of imputations, varying only in their
degrees of malignity and absurdity—he would not
condescend to notice, but declared that if he had laboured
most earnestly to avert the calamity of war he had also
been most anxious, when once begun, that it should be
vigorously prosecuted, and had urged more strenuously
than any one the advance of the allied forces upon the
Danube and into co-operation with Omar Pacha. A
war waged for the sake of peace should be waged with
the utmost possible spirit and activity. Believing the
war in which we were engaged to be just, he should
forego no exertion to make it brief and successful; and
the success to be striven for was the conclusion of a safe
and honourable peace.—The Marquis of CLANRICARDE
reviewed at much length the ministerial career of Lord
Aberdeen from the date of the treaty of Adrianople, and
through his connexion with several different administrations.
Through all he declared that the noble earl had
shown himself the constant supporter of arbitrary
power in every nation of Europe, a partisan of
Russia, and an opponent of every national effort to
obtain constitutional liberties wherever undertaken.
To the present government he contended that the
prime minister was an evil genius. Attributing to
his influence the fact that Lord Palmerston was not
made war minister, though best fitted by abilities for
the post and called to it also by the public voice,
Lord Clanricarde referred to the acknowledged
talents of other members of the ministry, all of
whom also led sections of representatives in the House
of Commons, and yet their combined forces had proved
unable to save from defeat every measure of importance
brought forward during the present session. This
paralysis of governing power resulted, he believed, from
the presence of Lord Aberdeen. It was his own conviction
that the continuance in office of the prime minister
was contrary to the interests of the country, and the
only reason why he did not propose a formal vote to
that effect was the doubt he entertained respecting the
further arrangements which such a vote, if successful,
would necessitate.—Lord BEAUMONT, after a few general
remarks, inquired the truth of a statement hazarded by
some newspaper, that Count Metternich had, at the
request of his own sovereign, the Emperor of Austria,