The Express. — London, England, 1848-06-06 00:00:00

Bri a,h Boom of Commons through the medium of t h e f o reign newspapers. (Hear, hear.) That it was with the utmost difficulty that any notice of thew events should have been heard in that chosen temple of the national rights sad national honour, and that at last, when some notice was taken of it, the prune minister should tell the House of Common s that negotiations were going on. (Hear, hear.) That was the great fault which he found with ministers. Be wanted to know why, after such an outrage had been committed, a fall and perfect satisfaction had not long sine* b e en exacted. (Hear, bear.) He said this totally inde pendent of the policy of the government or the character of the ministers. &Attraction was a primary con dition to be fulfilled before they entered into e i t her one or other consideration. (lieu.) They knew that the representative of her Majesty had been dismissed with shame and dishonour, because, as the Under Secretary of State at Madrid had courteously informed Sir H. Bulwer, be had been abused in the English papers and disowned in pulisment, and because his safety could not be ensure I. Fos these sutticieat reasons the BritiAt minister was handed his Deepens, headed into his carriage, and assured of the b pim igh government a high consideration. (A laugh.) But they were told that negotiations were going on to ascertain the reasons for his dismissal. Were those reasons satisfac tory ?—that was the real question. (Hear, hear. i The time had come when such unprecedented outrage must be explained ; end explanation was ceeessiry before any plOl - of policy could be eateitained. If Minkel had been authenticated to the noble lord, and had made his communi =bon, it would have been by thattins• on the table. lf, even taking advantage of the noble lord's indulgent permission, he had, although not accredited,written anything worth attending to, they might have bad it before them. He bad coma to tell the truth, and had started twenty-four hours before the British ministi r. and having up to the pre sent time said nothing. he (Mr. Daireeli) had aright to infer that the Spanish government had no accusation whatever to make against Sir H. Bulwer. Except the expulsion itself, be could conceive no outrage greater than that a person should hotpot over here to circulate rumours which he took no pains to substantiate. (Hear, hear.) He repeated that a gross outrage had been committed, and what he found fault with the government for was that they had entered into negotiations before the honour of the country had been vin dicated. The noble lord who had just addressed the lmps" (Lord J. Russell) hail informed them that he and his col leagues were prepared to take their share of responsibility, end afterwards, ecriching his phraseology, had added that they were prepared to adopt the greater portion of Sir 11. Bulwer's policy. He (Mr. Disraeli) could tell the noble lord that ministers must take upon themselves the whole responsibility. Lord J. RUSSELL : I said so. (Cheers.) Mr. DISRAELI was delighted to understand that the noble lord had spoken differently from what his (Mr. Disraeli's) ears had informed him—(oh, oh)—but he must remind the house that he had not risen to defend Sir. M. Bulwer, who was not attacked in that house, but who had been mercilessly insulted and outraged by the government of Sr.in. (Hear, bear.) It ministers took the whole re sponsibility, the House of Commons could not accept the out rage. They must show the world that they were always prepared to protec, a public servant who in a foreign country bad done his duty, and, as was generally admitted, well. The gentleman whose name formed the text of the present discussion was one who needed not be afraid to meet an English parliament (Hear, hear.) But that was not the present question. It was their duty to show the world that party quarrels would not prevent them from ap preciating the services abroad of a valuable diplomatic ser vant. What must be the position of such a man, enduring outrage such as Sir 11. Bulwer had been subjected to ? Ile had arrived in England, and remained here nearly a fortnight, and as yet had received no public recogni tion of his services, or sympathy from his fellow countrymen. His grievance was a public grievance, an insult to himself, to his sovereign, and to the nation at large. (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Disraeli) asked how must that public opinion on which they so much relied suffer, when, On asking government for redress, they . were told that nego tiations were still going en. biegodations for what ? To receive fresh insult ' - (Hear, bear.) There was a British secretary of legation still at Madrid. Did they want hint to receive his passports? (Hear, hear.) The more they negotiated, the more certain they would be to receive fresh insults. He had formed that opinion from the docu ments which bad been lan before the house. The whole matter was this : Sir H. Bulwer received a certain despatch frurn the noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and sent it to the Spanish government. That was his whole offence. The Spanish government retorted. What happened next ? The representative of government in another place expressed his regret at the conduct of Sir H. Bulwer. They were told it was a de,p itch of the noble lord's that did all the mischief; but it was not that dispatch, but the speech of the minister in another place, that bad caused it. (Hear.) All the misunderstandings that could arise from all the despatches that were ever written, might have been easily explained away by a diplomatist of experience and temper like Sir li. Bulwer, had that speech not been made. The despatch, which was headed " confidential," said, " the re• cent fall of the King et the French, and the expulsion of his ministers, should teach the Spanish court and government how great was the danger of attempting to govern a country in a manner at variance with the feelings of the people." Why this looked like a passage out of Gibbon. That the noble lord could have written a letter such as this to his con fidential agent to a foreign court—a letter full of catastro phes and sesquipedalian sentences as to the consequence of trusting to force, instead of the feelings of the people, in governing a country—was absurd. But no doubt the letter was an excellent one for its purpose, and Sir H. Bulwer was directed to communicate its contents as opportunity occurred; and he did so; but probably not being able to convey the noble lord's meaning in the same style in the French language iota which the despatch won trans lated, it failed in its effect, and at length Sir H. Bulwer thought the time wee ripe for him to show that he was in earnest, and that he was authorised by his government to make the representation, which dur ing 20 days he had been insinuating. If he had written a formal letter to Sotomayor that he had received such in structions, it would have had but little more effect than his conversations—it would have been but the representations of Sir H. Bulwer, and if those representations had failed he would have been responsible to his own government for not having used his discre , ioo, and shown the letter of his prin cipal, and the only chance of success was to make known the communication which had been addressed to him by the British Minister for Foreign Affairs. And after the exhibi tion of conduct, which could only have been pursued by a man of great experience and talent ii, his profession, like Sir H. Bulwer, it was hut poor satisfaction to bins, after it had been stated in the House of Lords, by the Lord President of the Council, that the despatch was confidential, and it , was to be regretted that he had not so understood it; and after that statement had gone forth to the world, and he had been expelled from the court to which he was accre dited, to be told that a despatch had been produced which expressed the entire approval of his own government of the course he had taken. He now came to the important inquiry why these misunderstandings had taken place between mem bers of the sense cabinet. And this brought him to the con sideration of the policy of the noble lord. It had been shown In the debate, and avowed by the right hon. the Ma ter of the Mint, that all our interference in the affairs of Spain had arisen out of the quadruple treaty—that treaty which, ac cording to the right hon. gentleman, was the Magna Chsrta of the continent, out of which our rights to interfere grew, and by virtue of which the ministry had bound thecrown on the brow of the Queen of Spain—not a very flattering or agree able statement to a nation that could scarcely bear an allusion to the victory of Waterloo, as the means by which their in dependence as a nation was secured. Now, what was this quadruple treaty ? It wan the philosophy of that liberalism which, whether it were developed in do mestic or foreign affairs, was, in his opinion, equally feat to liberty, but which had been the characteristic of our foreign policy for too many years. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord who became Lord Grey's foreign secretary, necessarily from his position, wan not only the organ but the expounder, and certainly the most able expounder, of this great diplomatic principle. Now his objection to this philosophy of liberalism was, that it was the introduction of philosophical ideas into life, and the highest and most important affairs of life instead of political princi ples, and that it taught a man who might be accredited to a foreign country not to consider what was best for the in terests of England or Spain, which he hoped were mutual, but to propagate certain philosophical principles, which were to be the bond of brotherhood of a small and miserable f.acrionoshich but for such interference would not exist. The small party in that house who opposed this court, told the. government that they could not carry on the foreign affairs of this country on this system of abstract theories—that they could not go to a nation is ith an absolute government like Spain, and tell the people that the only way to be happy was to have a constitution and an English treaty of commerce. (Hear, hear.) They had never yet obtained the treaty of commerce, thr,,gli they had, by lending the aid of Eng land to some miserable faction, occasioned changes and convulsions in tt,ose countries in whose affairs they had in. terfered. In (very country in which their interference had been felt, from Athens to Madrid, they had deteriorated the prosperity of the people, and sowed the seeds of inextricable ' confusion. He would do the noble lord the justice to say. that advocating such absurd and perilous opinions, he had conducted their development in a business-like manner. (Hear, hear.) But the noble lord, n otwithstanding the quadruple alliance, and notwithstanding that he had succeeded in forcing a constitution on Greece, Portugal and Spain, found that the system would not work. How could It ? During twenty years we had been introducing a senti mental for a political principle in the conduct of our foreign affair'. One instance of this was our efforts to abolish the 'lave trade, without considering whether the course we took was calculated to increase the horrors of slavery and to lay the seer's of endless misunderstandings with foreign countries. Under this sentimental policy the constitution of England was looked upon as a sort of model farm for all the world, and in our dealings with foreign countries we were not to consider the interests of England or of those countries, but the propagation of a system of liberalism which had nothing to do with our interests, and which might be antagonistic to those of the countries with which we were connected. (Hear.) In ISV and 1840 the noble lord finding he could not manage affairs on the principle of the sentimental alli ance into whit:. he had entered with France, returned to the principle he had abandoned, and thus arose all those misconceptions and misunderstandings with France, from which so much evil had resulted. And in 184 G, when the noble lord by an accident found him self again in power, his intended colleagues entered into an in trigue—t iliagr.ceful cabal—to keep the noble lord out of the cabinet—(hear, hear]—lnd their plea was, his meddling po licy—that middling policy which they alleged bad lost us the friendship of France, but which was not found meddling for ten years before when the noble lord and his party was intriguing with every country in Europe. He believed he was right when be said the noble lord was wil ling and anxious to take office, and, if possible, to con duct affairs with a view to promote a good understanding with France. But bow could the noble lord have influence —hum any influence with Europe or France, when his own colleagues had so blackened his reputation in England that when he accepted office the measles es of the tete cabinet went to the Twining, and told the French government, "You see the position in which Lord Palmerton stands; his own colleagues are against him; all you have to do is to thwart him in every way 1" And thwart him they did. And this led to all our misunderstandings with France. The noble lord, so thwarted, was forced to tette up liberalism in foreign affairs again, and of course with the same result. But now not only were we to force constitutions on foreign countries, but we had arrived at that pitch that we actually claimed to select their ministers. rho, being his feelings on this Rubject, he should be exceed- egly loathe to give any vote which should single out the e lord alone from the rest of the government, which had .olto.ve , ' a coulee of foreign policy so pernicious to this county. What the house had to du win to strike at the system, and not at the individual. It might be very convenient to the noble lord at the head of the government to say that this motion was a vote of censure on the government. It was like medicine, very disagreeable to take, but after it was taken they would be none the worse far it—it was a medicine that would nut poison or terminate their existence.—(Hear, and • laugh.) But be that tai t meht, the house was by a course of circumstances forced to express its public. opinion upon one of the most remarkable events in diplomacy that ever occurred. (Hear, hear.) This expulsion of the British minister from Madrid was the consequence of the liberalism in foreign affairs which had too long prevailed in this country, and as such it ought to be accepted and received by the house. They had in his judg ment three duties to fulfil. Without reference to parties their first duty was to express their sense of the gross and unprecedented outrage which had been committed against the dignity of the sovereign and the honour of the country. (Hear, hear.) They had next to show that they would taut allow the diplantatio agent of this country to be made the scapegoat of the policy of the government. And, lastly, they hail to manifest, whatever might he the consequences of the vote, that this was not en attack upon an individual minister, but upon a system which from circumstances that minister had too often and too long been forced to develops, but in whose career he (Mr. Disraeli) recognised many great achievements by which he had inaiiimined the power of this great empire. (Hear, hear.) Sir It. 11. INCILIS raid he believed it was :Omitted on all hands, that it was a fact unprecedented in the history of Eng:and, that such an insult as that which had led to the present discussion had ever been offered to the crown of England in the person cf one of its diplomatic representa tives. This was a matter which in itself ought to command the attention of the house, even if it atood alone, and without any reference to the career of interference which hail marked the course of the noble lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. It might be right for this country in some occasions to interfere in the internal affairs of other nations, but the ,mint at issue now was whether the particular interference, as shown in the pepsin on the table, was or was not justified. His first complaint was as to the matter, and next as to the manner, et this interference. Whatever might be said as to the matter et the interference, he (Sir B. Inglis) believed that for the fi time in diplomatic affairs the noble lord had note infined lii confidential communication to the minister of the court of SeaM, but had aiithorised its communication to an individual, who of all her sex had obtained the most unhappy notoriety, and who was of all persons the least cal culated to receive the confidence of this country. (Hear.) Why should that confidential letter have been directed to be communicated to the Queen-Mother? Ile held that the note cf the IGth March was wholly uncalled for and unnecessary, because on that very dry Sir IL Bulwer intimated that all the noble lord desired would be accomplished by leaving the Spaaish government to the exercise of their own discretion. But after the note had been thrown back in the face of this noble lord's agent, the noble lord wrote that her Majesty's government were not at all offended. The first note might have been written by •Bobridif, while the last was worthy of ancient Pistol ; and in deed the noble lord, like Pistol, had swallowed the leek He hardly knew whether his hon. and learned friend (Mr. Bioko) meant to take the sense of the house upon his motion ; if he did so he (Sir It. 11. Inglis) should give the motion his support. Sir It. FEEL.—I have heard with great satisfaction the noble lord the first minister of the crown declare that it WS the intention of her Majesty's goveinment to avow their public approbation of tee conduct of Sir Henry Bulwer, end to adopt for themselves the risoonsibility of that conduct. (Hear, hear.) I assure the noble lord that in his speech he did qualify his approbation of Sir 11. Bulwer by stating, as was represented by the hon. member for the county of Buckingham (Mr. Disraeli) that the government would assume the greater part of the re.monsibiiity for that conduct; but the noble lord in his subsequent explanation led me to think that he would take the more manly and just course of adopting the whole of the responsibility, and identify himself and the government with Sir H. Bulwer. (Hear, hear.) I think it is but just that the noble lord should do to, and I also am of opinion that it is the more in cumbent on the government now to adopt the responsibility, and to sanction the conduct of Sir H. Bulwer, because it ,ppears on record in these papers that one of the reasons assigned by the Spanish government for removing Sir 11. Bulwer was that public opinion was adverse to him in Spain. Sir 11. Bulwer was placed in Spain not by the noble lord opposite (Lord Palmerston), but by my noble friend Lord Aberdeen. He was sent there be my noble friend, not In m any political connexion between them, but because my nal - , friend thought Sir H. Bulwer'a past con duct in the profession he had chosen entitled him to the favour and confidence of the government, even though he differed in politics with the government. (Hear, hear.) My noble friend thought, and thought most justly, that the diplomatic profession should not be made subservient to the commotion of party politics. (Hear, hear.) His noble friend thought that the diplomatic profeoi in partook of the character of the naval and miiitary professions, and that it would be most unjust that a man who had entered into the profession and had proved himself worthy the confidence of any government should be removed from the pesitien to which his abilities entitled him merely b,cause be differed on politics with the government. (Hear, hear.) My noble friend has been blamed by acting upon that sentiment ; but lam sure the true way to encourage diplomatic exertions is to show that, provided there was no such difference of opinion as ti dieentitle a man to the confi fence of those who employed him, those who engaged in that profession en served their country faithfully and honestly should not lose the prospect of reward because the party entertaining die .ereat political views came into power. (Hear, hear.) It was on these grounds that my noble friend Lord Aberdeen advised her Majesty to place Sir 11. Bulwer in the respon siele and difficult position of British minister at the court of Spain, and I must say that during the whole period Sir 11. Bulwer acted is communication with us, his conduct was such as fully toustify the confidence we had reposed in hint (Hear, hear.) I confess that looking at these despatches now before the house I do not see the shadow of any grounds for imputing blame to him in these recent transactions. The instructions sent to Sir H. Bulwer by the noble lord opposite were such as to defy any man to draw any other conclusion from them than that it war meant to instruct Sir 11. Bulwer to make the com munication to the Spanish government, and alto at a fitting opportunity to the Queen Mother. (Hear, bear.) Such was Sir H. Bulwer 's construction of the noble lord's despatch, and accordingly, as he tells us, he took an opportunity, and made the communication to the Queen Mother. Whatever might have been the intention of the noble lord opposite, I think that Sir H. Bulwer was justified by the circumstances under which he made the communicetion, in communicat ing the letter of the noble lord in extettso. Let it be remem bered that Sir H. Bulwer had seen the fall of thrones around him—he hail found that his own representations and remelt. steences to the Spanish government w' re of no avail—that since he had received those instructions there had been an insurrection in Madrid; and under these combined circumstances he felt it necessary to make a strong appeal to the Spanish government, but he doubted his own powers of remonstrance, and thought they would be made in vain unless he could show that he was armed, that wee armed with higher authority than his own fears, and therefore h- communicated to ths Spanish government the opinion of the government of England as stated in the letter of the noble lord opposite (Lord Palmerston). I think Sir 11. Bulger exercised a wise and just discretion in the peculiar circumstances in which he was placed, and I further think that if the govern uent had abandoned hen, they would have set en example whim woulu have warned every honest and faithful servant of the crown against incurring a similar responsibility. (Hear, hear.) Hence it is that I heard with satisfaction the declination of the noble lord at the head of the administration that the acts of Sir If. Bulwer are adopted and defended by the government But the immediate matter for us now Wheel° is how we shall dispose of tee motion brought forward by the hon. and learned member for the county of Dorset (Mr. Bankes). The hon. member for Buckinghamshire Rays that we have three duties to perform on this occasion : first, to manifest our determination to exempt Sir H. Bulwer from all blame in ceueure; secondly, we are to maniteßt our deter• mination to support the British government in maintaining the honour of England which has been outraged by the court of Spain ; and, thirdly, we are not to condemn the noble lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, but the system of liberalism which has influenced our diplomatic proceedings with all foreign nations. Now, I confess that I cannot see how we shall fulfil any one of these duties by voting for the resolution which has been moved by the hon. and learned member for Dorsetshire. First of all, I see in it no recognition of the good conduct of Sir IL Bulwer, but I do see a resolu tion which, if adopted by the house, would imply that he had acted improperly. At least there is nn distinction made between his conduct and that of the government ; but we are called upon to vote that " a proposed interference with the internal concerns of the Spanish government, as con ducted under the authority and with the entire approval of her Majesty's ministers, has placed the British government and our represer tative at the court of Madrid in a position humiliating in its character." If we really wish to exempt Sir H. Bulwer from any share of the responsibility, we ought, if we are to vote any resolution, distinctly to declare that we do not disapprove of his conduct- (Hear, hear.) Another of our duties is to manifest on the part of the house a desire to support the crown in vindicating the insulted honour of the country. If so, we certainly ought to convey the expression of our opinion in some less iquircal form, if we wish to put on record that Spain has committed an out rage by her abrupt dismissal of our ministn, and the assur ance that the House of Commons will support the crown in its vindication of its honour. (Hear, hear.) Instead of that, if we vote " that a proposed interference with the internal affairs of the Spanish government has placed the British go vernment in a position humiliating to its character," so far from aiding the government in vindicating the honour of England, you send the British government to conduct this negotiation with disgrace round its neck by a vote of this house, and you incapacitate them from making the vindica tion you wish. (Hear, hear.) How is a 4overnment, branded with this vote of censure, to take a high tone towards the Spanish government ? The Spanish government will reply, THE EXPRESS, TUESDAY EVENING, JUNE 6, 1848. " We cannot defend Sir H. %dem. N pen will not defend him; we will pay no attention to your representations; for the Ileum of Commons bas told you that you bays pleeed the government of England in a humiliating position. Had you approached us armed with the express authority of that house, we must have deferred to it; but, as you have been censured by the House of Commons, and have con tented to remain in office after that, it is utterly impossible fur us to attach any weight whatever to your representa tions." (Hear.) Therefore, I think this second duty would be most ineffectually discharged by affirming . hie resolution. With respect to the third duty, of condemning the system, and net the noble lord (Palmerston), I know not what the noble lord's feelings might be after this vote; but as it die tinctly resognius him as the author of the interference, which it says has placed this country in a humiliating posi tion, I think the noble lord would not be able to maintain hie post, notwithstanding the construction put on the tenor of the resolution by the hon. member for Bucks—that it goes to condemn the:system, not to inflict punishment on the individual, (Hear.) Therefore it appears to me that no one of these three objects will be accomplished. Now, although I cannot concur in this resolution, yet I must not have my refusal to concur in it to imply approbation of the course the noble lord has pursued. (Hear.) I think the noble lord was fully entitled to give earning and advice to the Spanish government. (Hear, hear.) I don't object to the tring ; I do object to the manner in which it was done. (Hear, hear.) After all our relations with Spain, seeing the peculiar position in which Europe is placed, seeing the tremendous events that have been and still are of daily occurrence, I do not think it was an illegitimate or an unfriendly act of the noble lord to say to Spain and the Spanish government, " Beware —be cautious—watch the mute that are passing—rlace not your reliance on armies, however numerous or however disciplined—conciliate the general good will of the people, on whose support alone you can safely rely." (Hear, hear.) Ido not find fault with that. But, adverting to the true description of the Spanish , people and of our relations with them, which has been given by the noble lord—remembering that they are a people inferior to us in power—a people under deep obligations to this country, not only fir advice tendered, but for exertions made, for vast sums expended, for noble blood shed in the defence and vindication of their li berties remembering, above all, that they are a gallant nation, peculiarly jealous of their independence, sensitive upon the point of honour—(hear, hear)—it is he eau's, 1 believe that the noble lord hus correctly described our relations with them, has formed a just estimate of the Spanish government, and has justly dwelt upon its pride, its gallantry, its sensitiveness, its jealousy, if you will—that I do think, if the noble lord wished to make an impression upon the minds of that people, it would have been wiser to have held different language, and to have presented it in a different manner to what he has done. (Hear, bear.) Of course, the object of the noble lord was that the friendly advice tendered by him should be adopted and followed be • cordial spirit r but I think there is an abruptness in the original letter that was pri sented—(hear, hear)—there is the assumption of a tone of superiority which I think was calculated to offend the Spanish govern ment— there is that Iw:ordain) of past assistance which has very much the air of erprobalio, which I think might as well have be. n avoided towards a people sensible, no doubt, of their obligations to us, but not very fond perhaps of being reminded of them. (near.) But the first letter, I think, might be excused ; it is perhaps no: very surprising that the noble lord wrote hastily, and I really do not Mid so much fault with the first letter as I do with tee second. (Hear.) There is that reminiscence of the great obligations which Spain is under to us which its cal culated to give offence. That personal weal to the Spanish ministers, in which the noble lord reminds them that hut for British assistance they might then' have been exiles from their country was certainly not calculated to win their con fidence, or conciliate them into the adoption of the advice he was tendering. (Hear, hear.) Now the noble lord the Prime Minister vindicates the noble lord ( Palmerston) 'ay reciting • story which he had from Lord Holland, which did not appear to me to be very germane to the met.' ter. Lord Archibald Hamilton had the alternative in that case of laughing at the offender or knocking him down, and it might be very welt to do either one or the other. Liughter.) But here the noble lord had done both. (Hear.) If Lord A Hamilton, efter adopting the milder alternative, had addressed the offender is the longest sentence that was ever written in the English language—(laughter)—and had ceded by saying, " Sir, it it had not been for me, you would now have been a beggar in the stints." Lord Holland would certainly not have admired him for choosing the mildest of the two alternatives. Look at the sentence of the noble lord (Palmerston), in which, after declaring that he was not in the slightest degree offended, he proceeds to adminider punishment in 29 consecutive lines—he was so im patient that he did not take breath till he had penned the whole. (Laughter.) I think he is much more like Sir Fretful Plagiary than Lord A. Hamilton ; for he winds up with that reminiscence so painful to these dukes and distinguished generals—" If it had not been for me and my nicest policy, you would have been at this time exiles from your country." That is ungracious; and I think that is the part of the tranuelon which is most to blame. (Hear.) At the same time, I apprehend it is very difficult to conduct the diplomatic transactions of this country with out occasionally making errors, and even grave errors. The teem in this instance in my opinion is not an error of act, but an error in the mode in which the noble lord has exer cised Isis authority, which is much to be regretted. I regret the mere because I feet that he has defeated his own end. Instead of conciliating the Spanish government, and esta blishing the legitimate influence of England, by making them feel that we were a friendly power, amidst all these storms and convulsions, animated by a sin , cere desire for Spanish welfare, the noble lord has alienated the Spanish government and a part of the Spanish nation entirely by the mode in which good , advice has been tendered to them. On that account I deeply regret it. (Hear.) Ido net think the terra, of this , motion well chosen. Oa the very second letter that was t presented it appears the Duke of Sotomayor invited Sir H. Bulwer to an interview, when Sir H. Bulwer gave his advice , very cordially, and it was well received ; and even Nunez himself admitted the justice of Sir Henry's views, and was ready to conform to them as far as he could. It seems that , when advice was presented to him in • proper form, he went ' so far as to say that he would abandon office, and let the pro. gresistav come into power, with the provision, I think, that they should adopt metered° opinions. (Great laughter.) Siff: it is quite clear that Sir 11. Bulwer had the opportunity of offering advice to the Spanish government, end that it was taken in a kindly spirit, when offered in the manner that true wisdom and policy dictated,—as a friend speaking confidentially on affairs of state. ' Sir, I object to this resolution, because Ido not think it con sistent with justice. If there has been an error in the mode of conducting this transaction, I do not think it would be just to visit in so heavy a manner, with the censure of the House ef Commons, the minister by whom these transactions have been conducted under such difficult circumstances. I Mao object to it, because the question is still pending as to the reason of the dismissal of Sir llenry Bulwer in a manner which. judging from these [epees, appears to me to be wholly unjustified. (Hear, beer.) The passing of this resolution would tend to weaken the authority of the government; it would make us appear as partisans of the Spanish govern ment, and assailants of our own : and it would prejudice the chance of a perfectly amicable and satisfactory settlement by showing, at an eventful time that there was a material differ. ence of opinion between the ministers of the crown and the House of Comnenue (Hear, hear.) Sir, I will not nut upon r, cord that my country is in • humiliating position. (Hear, hear.) I will not take the first part of a trinsactinn, and visit the conduct of those who have been and are still engaged in it with censure. The period at which the resolution is proposed is altogether premature. (Hear, hear.) If the house is to express an opinion on this matter, it would have been muck better to wait for the whole of the reports and transactions, than to select the first act of a complicated and unperformed drama, and take one particular scene in that act, and visit it with censure, un• mindful of the effect it may have upon the denouement of the drama. (Hear, hear.) Upon these various grounds— because I thick the motion premature—because 1 think the conduct of the noble lord, the act of giving advice, as distin guished from the tone and manner of certain despatches, was justifiable—(hear, bear)—because I think the penalty would lie far too severe for the offence, for the heaviest penalty that can be inflicted on a minister is the censure of the House of Commons—because I think it unwise for this house to pl ice upon record that the country is in a humiliating position—(hear, hear)—because I believe that such a record of our opinion would paralyse the executive government, lead the Spanish government to entertain false expectation., and place us in the situation of partisans of that government, insead of impartial arbiters, with a na tural leaning in favour of our own,—licceuse I think that the public interest will be affected by our affirming this re solution, I shall, instead of staying away from the house ,which would perhaps have been justifiable , as I have hardly read the second delivery of papers presented this day), give that vote which certainly will not imply entire approbation of the manner in which this core spundence has been con. ducted,—l shall vote for passing to the committee of supply, instead of affirming the resolution of the bun. and learned member for Dorsetahire. (Cheers.) Viscount PALMERSTON—Sir, I certainly commie in what appears to me to be shams the general opinion, even in the view of the hon. and learned member who has made this motion, that the motion itself is premature and inexpedient. (Hear, hear.) For while the hon. and learned member ex pressed a wish to vindicate the honour of the country, if it should turn out to require vindication, he begins by propos ing to us to affirm that the country is in a state of humilia tion. That certainly is not the mode in which his object can best be accomplished. If he finds fault with the tint part of the transaction—the despatch which I wrote, and which was communicated by Sir H. Bulwer to the Duke of Sotomayor —to that his motion ought to have been directed, and upon that ground I should have been prepared to defend myself, as I now am. First of all, I will answer the question he put, as to who was reeponsihle for the approval of Sir Henry's conduct. Sir, I have no hesitation in us tuff that I and I alone am responsible forevery aetof that kind, for the signification of approval communicated from that department over which preside ; and if the house be of opinion that that approba tion was improperly conveyed, and that Sir H. Batwer's conduct ought to be censured, it is upon me, and me alone, that that censure ought to fall. (Cheers.) Sir, I think no censure is due for that approval ; because, in my opinioo, Sir H. Bulwer acted according to the best of hi' judgment, and exercised a proper discretion ; and I thick I was borne out in giving him the approval which that despatch con veyed. (Hear, hear.) But I must add, that that despatch of mine of the 16th of March was not for the purpose of being communicated in writing to the Spanish government. Any man who reads it will see that it was not so intend ed . (Hear, hear.) First of all, the form is not that of the draft of a note to be prevented to the Spanish go vernment ; had it been so there would have been a greater development of views, and it would have been written in a very different manner. (Hear, hear.) However Livonian the sentences may appear to the hon. member opposite, undoubtedly if I had been writing a note to be sent to a foreign government it would have been written in a very different manner. It was a text upon which Sir Henry Bnlwer was to speak, not intended to be Fermitted in the shape in which it stood. After what has allen from the right hon. baronet opposite, it is hardly ne cessary for me to pally myself for having written that des patch, instructing Sir H. Bulwer to give advice upon those matters to the government of Spain. Those genUensen who have looked at the papers will see that, some days before I wrote the despatch, I had received information from Sir Henry that the Spanish government was meditating a course which, in his opinion, was likely to produce great opposition in parliament, if parliament continued to sit; that the op position was likely to induce the government to prorogue and get rid of the parliament; and that if that course were pursued there was the greatest danger of insurrection ' in the different parts of the country, more especially where the Carlist party was in force. The state of Europe at the time, the mighty and disastrous events which came to our knowledge from day to day, and the representations of the course likely to be pursued by the Spanish government, and its probable consequences,-1 thought a full justification for instructing Sir H. Bulwer to bring under the consideration of the government of Spain those matters which pointed out danger on the one hand, and on the other the means by which that danger might be averted. I had no reason to think that such a course would give °Bence to the Spanish government; because it will 'he seen that on a recent occasion the Duke of Sotomsyor had had o,ocia;;;ailonWith flit H. Bulwer on other ;natters and, of his own accord, had turned the conversation toward; the internal condition of Spain,. he spoke to Sir Henry of the intentions of the Spanish government; Sir Henry's opinion being invited, he gave it ; and they discussed in a very friendly and animated spirit the opinions and the regions by which they were supported. (Hear.) Now I have been asked about the asterisks in one of the despatches, with all that curiosity which attaches to something unknown; it is supposed the pasiage contained some grave and important matter bearing on the question we are now dimming, I have here the despatch from which that extract is given, and I can read to the house the passage omitted, but perhaps it will not ask me to do so when I state the nature of the I passage, which is this:—That the Duke of Sotomayor stated to Sir H. Bulwer what were the views and intentions of Spain with regard to her relations with a third power. It had nothing to do with thn relations between England and Spain, but with the relations between Spain and a third power ; and I think the house will agree with me that it would not be fair to publish that. (Hear, bear.) So much with regard to the asterisks. Both the Duke of Sotomsyor and General Narrate permitted Sir 11. Bulwer to talk freely to them on the internal affairs of Spain, and I had no reason to think that the instruc• done which I gave Sir H. Bulwer were catenated to produce irritation or unpleasant feelings. In point of fact, the instructions of the 18th of March only stated that which Sir H. Bulwer had before stated verbally, thus anticipating the instructions which he afterwards received. Then the question is, was Sir H. Bulwer, having received that despatch which was meant to be only personally and verbally communicated, justified or not in applying that des patch to a different purpose and in communicating it to the government of Spain I think he was, and the reasons he has given for pursuing that course were sufficient to justify him in exercising his discretion. (Hear.) He had exhaust , d all means of personal and verbal exhortation; he represented the facts and arguments to the Duke of Sotomayor, and the Duke of Valencta, but he found that his representations were uitavailing. Wader these circumstances, he was naturally desirous of giving to those representations that weight which they would derive from its being manifest that they came not from himself but from his government. Another motive for putting his representation in writing was, that by so doing they were likely to come to the knowledge of persons to whose knowledge they would not come if communicated personally. I was of opinion, and I still am of opinion, that Sir 11. Bulwer was borne out in the course he pursued, and, therefore, I gave him that approbation, for which I am • responsible. (Hear.) If I had even doubts, which I have not, as to the discretion which he exercised, I think that when the despatch and letter were rejec'ed as they had been, it would be a shabby abandonment of a public officer if I did not arm hint against the government from which that rejection proceeded, by giving hint the full and entire appro val of the head of the department under which he served. (Cheers.) His letter was not calcula.ed to produce the irri tation which it seems to have existed. It was not trans mitted in that formal manner in which diplomatic docu ments are usually communicated. It did not say, "the un dersigned is instructed to inform you," but he says, " I beg to transmit to you some remarks which I lately received from the Secretary of State," qualifying the despatch which he communicated not as advice to be given, but as remarks communicated to him on the state of affairs in Spain. With regard to the right to give friendly advice, I do not put that simply on the ground of obligations which we have conferred, not on the ground of gratitude due from the Spanish nation and government for services rendered by England, though even upon that ground I think we might establish a claim to give friendly advice for the interest of Spain itself ; but I put it on the higher and more indisputable ground, that we were liable under treaty to be called on for assistar.ce by Spain in cases that may arise. (Hear, hear.) The Quadruple treaty was not an engagement volunteered by this country. It was ur gently sought for by the Spanish envoy, who was sent to this couritry for the express purpose of entreating the En glish government to step forward and mist Spain. It was said , we gave that assistance because we thought the Queen of , Spain had the beet right of the two claimants. That only formed • part in the decision to which the government came. , Undoubtedly if we did not think the Queen of Spain bad the best right, we would not have given her the support asked fur • but we would not have given it merely on that ground, but bemuse we believed that her cause was identical with the liberties and independence of the Spanish nation ; , and that the people of Spain were almost universally en , listed on her side, and that the banner under which they fought was not the banner of Isabella, but the banner of the constitution ; and that, therefore, we would be backed by the approval and support of this country. (Hear, hear.) It was upon that ground that support was asked for wLeu the first act of that transaction was cernplete, and when Don t Miguel and Don Carlos were expelled from Portugal and Spain, and when application was made to complete the ad ; ditionel articles, which applisd more specifically to Spain, the ground on which additional assistance was asked f. r is thus stated by M. Manistee de la Rosa: He dwelt L on the manifold evils which were to be apprehended from a return of the Pretenders to the l'eninsula. He said that the , question was not only sue relating to the succession of the thrones of Portugal and Spain, but to those con stitutional principles which agitated Europe, and which I sooner or later would disturb England and France. It was on that ground that the support of England was asked for. , If that were so, into what position would this country be put , if we were appealed to under the conditions of the quadruple , treaty, not to assist the Spanish nation in establishing the , constitution, but for the purpose of enabling the government to overturn that constitution, and to establish in Spain that very despotism against which the treaty was originally made. ( bleer.) It has been said that it is a boastful assertion to say that the Queen of Spain owes her throne to the support of England. It may be boastful, but it is founded on face. (Hear, hear.) And it has been matter of reproach to me in this house by gentlemen who were in favour of the contending Prince. There was on the one hand the great bulk of the Spanish nation contending for Isabella and the constitution, and on the other a smell party, but a party supported by foreign influence, whose expenses, as is now well ascertaitied, were supplied by large contributions of money from without. (Hear, bear.) It was not, therefore, a mere contest between two parties in Spain, but one of a larger and more comprehensive scrip (Hear, hear.) We have been told that non-intervention ' in additim to peace, retrenchment, and reform, was the creed of Lord Grey's government. But what did that nou-intervention apply te ? It was to what was going on in Belgium where a revolution had taken place, in which it was apprehended that England and other powers would interfere by force of arms to compel the people of Belgium to acknowledge the authority of the King of the Netherlands. But so far was Lord Grey's government from being founded en the principle of non-intervention, that one of the first proceedings they were obliged to adopt was the joint interference of the five powers in the themes between Belgium and Holland. (Hear, hear.) I contend that in writing the dispatch of the 16th of March I did no more than on point of principle the government was entitled to du and when the right hon. baronet thinks there were words in that despatch which were not cal culated to conciliate or persuade, my answer is, that it was not intended to be communicated. The right hon. baronet thinks that there was an allusion to benefits conferred ; but he will find that it is not so, the al lusion to past benefits being in the subsequent despatch. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. baronet says that I both laughed at and knocked down the government of Spain ; but some gentlemen think that in that despatch I was not spirited enough, and that I ought to have been more offended than I stated myself to be ; whilst others think that I showed too much irritation. I leave those wfio entertain these dif ferent opinions to discuss them amongst themselves. It ap pears to me that this is • case in which the British go vernment need not be offended; and I believe say person who reads the note of the Duke of Sotomayor, in which the despatch was returned, will say that it is net calculated to raise any feeling of anger or indigna tion in the mind, but that it is calculated to raise • far dif ferent feeling. (" Hear," and laughter.) If I erred in showing too much forbearance to the government of Spain, I can only say that I would rather be blamed for being too slow in taking offence than for being too prone or too prompt to resent it. (Hear, bear.) With regard to the other stage of the matter, communications are go;ng on with the minister of Spain on the subject. When these communications are completed, and when her Majesty's government shall be able to come to a decision, I shall be prepared to communicate to parliament the correspondence that has passed. While these communications—l will not now call them negotiations—are passing, I am sure the house will feel that it would be highly improper in me to state the precise nature of what is passing, or that I am pre pared to lay the papers oa the table of the house. (Hear, hear j Though I declined to have any direct communication with Count Mimed, as having no official capacity and no diplomatic character, and whose assurances therefore could have no official value, and whose statements could have no official authenticity, I nevertheless expressed to M. Is!urive, the minister of the Queen of Spain, that her Majesty's government were ready to receive any statements which he may think fit to communicate. I shall only say that, in a country like Spain,*which has been subject to such multiplied changes, it is difficult for an am bassador who represents a foreign court not to hold com munications with men of all parties. (Hear.) In a country where, between 1832 and 1847 there have been 30 presi dents of the council—(laughter)—and 38 ministers of foreign sffairs--(laughter)-1 think it must have been difficult in deed for any man having to deal with those various and successive ministers not to hold social and personal intercourse with those who for the six months may be in oiliest, and that it cannot be considered surp risin g if he keeps up habits of intimacy with the thirty-seven ministers of foreign affairs besides the one in °Moe, or the twentr.nine espresidenta of the council, which were in habits of personal intercourse with him. (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) I really feel, after the manner in which this question has been discussed, and after the small difference of opinionou the material points which has prevailed that 1 may leave the matter in the hands of the house, little doubting how it will dispose of the question. (Hew, hear.) lint, if any responsibility attaches to any person, I am ready to take on myself that responsibility which it is my duty and my desire t i take on myself. (Hear, hear.) It seems to be the opinion of all that no blame attaches to Sir H. Bulwer for his conduct on tale oceadon. If that be so I was right in approving of it also ; but if any censure is due, if any error was committed, on me let the judgment of the house fall, and on me let the responsibility rest. (Hear, hear.) Mr. HUME said he hoped, after the debate which they had heard, that the motion would be withdrawn. (Hear, hear.) He entirely approved of the conduct of Sir H. Bul wer, as far as the documents enabled them to judge, and he considered that the Spanish government were guilty of the greatest ingratitude towards this country. He hoped the noble lord would take warning teem this, and would not in terfere any more in the affairs of foreign countries. (Hear.) Mr. URQUHART expressed his intuition of supporting the motion oft • hon. member for Dorsttsbire. Mr. BANKES declined to divide the house, and the motion was negatived. The house adjourned at &quarter past 1. ELECTION COMMITTEE—YESTERDAY. Dunum.—The set utiny was continued. Two votes were objected to, but the committee decided that they should remain on the poll. Zile erpreoo. MAILS, The Mat for Vigo, Oporto, Lisbon, Madeira, Cadiz, and Gibraltar will be made up on the morning of the 7th June. The overland clewed malls, Maneilles, to the Mediterranean, Egypt, Aden, Celine, India, llong-bong, Sec., will be made up on the evening of the 7th June. The meta for British North America, and the United State., will be made up au the evening of the 9th June. The West India Mails, excluding Bermuda, Name; Havanna, llondurae, New Weave, Vera Ceoz, Tampion, and Porto Rion, and including those for Madeira, Jaernel, Carthage et, Santa Martha, Chagree, Panama, West Coast of South America, and St. J usn.de. Nicaragua, will be made up on the mining of the lith June. The overland mails foe Gibraltar, Malta, Greece, the lonian blends, Egypt, Aden, Ceylon, India, Ilong-Kong, and China, via Southern'• ton, will be made up on the morning of the 20th Jane. The mails for New South Wides, Van llieman'a 'sad, and New Zeeland will be made up on the evening of the 30th June. The roans for the Weal Coast of Africa and Madeira will ,be made up on the ovening of the 30th June. The nude for the Brasile, the River Plate, Monte Video, Pernam buco. Bahia, Madeira, and Buenos Ayres, will be made up on the evening of the 4th July. NOTICE TO ADVERTISERS. The number of STAMPS issued by the authorities of the tamp-olfiec, during 1847, to the DAILY NEWS was 3.447.009 • This, we believe, is within eight per csnt of the number issued to the Morning Herala, Morning Chronicle, and Meriting POll, ALL PUT TOORTHEIt. In addition to the above, issued to the DAILY NEWS, Morning Paper, there were issued for the Evening Edition, THE EXPRESS 778.714 Which was more, we believe , than were issued either to the Globe or Stand ard, Everting Papers. HIGH WATER AT LONDON ENDRE. T.. OAT .blerl,ll.lg. 13 nit. we 6t Alumoss. 14 .1.. We 0. T o . Norm& 49 Mac*. i. Al m. Z... pm B. LONDON. TUESDAY. JUNE 6. WE were very silly to have been in any pain for Lord PALMERSTON or Sir HENRY HULWER. they were last night, indeed, brought out for execution, as interesting criminals are treated upon tbo stage, not only to be spared the axe, but complimented, crowned with flowers, and paraded like heroes. Mr. HANKER enacted the part of executioner on the occasion. He spoke i very loudly and very solemnly,was very awful, at least in the way of dulness. Fiercely did he wave his wooden sabre over the head of the Foreign Secretary, hut, after all, it was not h!ii intention to slay. On the contrary, he handed over his victims to Mr. Disitsvii, who burnt all manner of incense before them, and performed a kind of apotheosis of Lord PALMKRsTON, Sir H. IlutwEtt, and their policy. The fact is, the debate was not a serious one. And of those who joined in it not one seemed to have a Meter or more serious object than to make a speech. Mr. HANKER evidently knew as much of Spain as of I Kamchatka ; he talked of the Cortes, of its majori ties and its liberal measures, and he expatiated on the , sensitive nature of the 11 ,, Ae of SOTOMATOR, for NA hose I delicate and offended nerves he demanded respect and reparation. Mr. Snell., on the other side, did the indignant. SOTOMATOR, who was a mild innocent in the por traiture of Mr. B %NICER, was a fierce Saracen in the representation of Mr. SHEIL. With him Great Britain was the disinterested saviour of Spain, and had rescued it from the Carlists, from pure love of the beaux yeux of the young Queen. This romance of Mr. SHEIL'S was fully taken Ld vantage of afterwards by Mr. DISRAELI, who be mocked England as Quixotic, and as playing knight errantry in favour of mere romantic theories. Neither of these gentlemen could think of stooping to a little humble truth. The fact is that England was not so very disinterested in stepping forward to the recogni tion and the support of ISAREL. The government of 1834 was disinterested enough for honourable purposes. But it w as not, as Mr. DISRAELI represented it, merely carried away by a poetic love of freedom, or an abstract admiration of constitutional systems. From 1820 to 1830, England, thrown out of the Holy Alliance, deserted by France, Austri ), and Spain, saw all Europe united in an absolutist league against her—a league that threatened seriously the power, interests, and peace of this country. This menacing league of despotism was broken by the fall of CHARLES X. England, even under the tories, hailed the opportune conversion of France to free go vernment and liberal ideas. To complete this, by rescuing Spain from the sceptre and the cause of absolutism, was a great object, and was eagerly seized. For this in fact liberal ised the west, and formed a league of free states on the Atlantic to be opposed to the absolutist courts of the east and centre of Europe. Mr. DISRAELI is utterly mistaken when he styles this a substitution of philosophical principles for political interests. This was our true political interest, and as such was supported by Lord PAL MERSTON and the liberal party. The liberal party is now contented with the part it played, and the aims which it achieved. Teat liberal policy which Mr. DISRAELI denounces has attained its object. It has not only rescued the states of the west of Europe from absolutism, but has dissolved absolutism itself. For Austria and Prussia, and the Italian states, are undergoing that process, that break-up of despotism, which Spain under went eight( en years ago. But the liberals of England who then re commended and pressed that degree of interference which was indispensable for the nascent liber ties of Europe, now deprecate and denounce interference of any kind, because, in fact, the , liberties of neither Spain nor Europe require it. Free dom on the continent is no longer newborn. It is not a child in leading-strings. It is full grown, and promising, and strong—can battle its own way, and ineteadof requiring our constant interference and sup port, rather takes offence at it. Let us leave liberty, to itself, then, in Spain as elsewhere. That is what the liberals would impress upon the government. They have no wish to be hard upon Sir HENRY BtLWER: and although they may not go the length of Mr. DISRAELI'S panegyric, they applaud the manliness of Lord JOHN RUSSELL in supporting him. Neither do they wish to be hard upon Lord PALMERSTON. On the contrary, they join Mr. DISRAELI in ample gratitude for a host of bold and liberal acts of that minister. Their ad miration is, however, not that of Mr. DISRAELI. The member for Buckinghamshire deprecates the Quad ruple Alliance as sentimental and philosophical, whilst he lauds the intervention in Syria as "practical." Now we take a very contrary view, and consider the quadruple alliance practical, at least for the time when it was framed, whilst the intervention in Syria strikes us much in the light of a volume of Mr. DISRAELI'S "Tencred," as fine, visionary, and untrue. Another mistake of Mr. DISRAELI was his accu sation of our liberal counsels in Spain " having dimi nished the prosperity and deteriorated the condition of the people." The first Spanish traveller he meets can inform Mr. DISRAELI that the very contrary is the fact, and that Spain is no longer to be recognised, such has been its progress and improvement since 1831, despite the effects of civil war and defective go vernment. In our sweeping condemnation of the unreality of the debate and its speeches we must ex , cept that of Lord JOHN Rt:SSELL, which fully cap tivated the adhesion of the house. The manner in which his lordship spoke of Sir H. BULWEB, of the Spanish minister, of his own intention, and general policy towards Spain, was well received, and showed that in questions of foreign policy there was no very severe difference between parties. If Mr. DISRAELI in the latter part of his speech drew down equal applause to contrary assertions, it was that the house was more delighted with the malice than touched by the truth of what he said. We have not time at present to allude to the speech of Sir ROBERT PEEL, who, as usual, was half and half, nor of Lord PALMERSTON, who closed the debate. The result, as might have been anticipated, was the withdrawal of Mr. BANKES'S SeRSIIIIL MR. Stirrif O'BRIRN has seized upon the circum stances of Mr. MITCHEL'S conviction to cast off the penitentiary robe, with the black patch over his eye, which he has worn since his discomfiture in his native , city. The opportunity for him was certainly too good to be lost. And he has mide the most of it to come forth once more as a hero. The worst of a state of feeling, such as that which pervades the Irish at present, is that a man to put himself in front of that feeling, and to run the risk of being its victim, for the sake of being its idol, will never be wanting. MITCHEL dethroned Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL, and Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN now steps to the foremost rank ; w--_ --- 1..`n0 avulse, nom deficit alter. Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN, in the name of the confede ration, declared that he does not identify himself with Mr. IklyrcnEes opinions. We cannot descry in what the member for Limerick dissents from them. He is for physical force. He exhorts the Irish, by the at tachment they bear to their homes and by their regard for their chil dren, to lay up materials for civil war, and to go on their beaded Icrese to invoke a blessing on the deed of blood, Mr. SMITH O'BUIEN shames that he and the confederation prevented an insurreo tion, which was to have taken place tor the rescue of Mr. MITCHEL, his sole reason for doing so being its _ ... small probability of success. We really can see no difference in this manifesto of Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN and those for which Mr. MITCHEL has been sentenced, except that they are marked by a little more taste and much less courage. Mr. O'BRIEN'S Exhortations arc quite as sanguinary, quite as provocative of a war of race. In the same spirit of blind frenzy, they commit a question of right to be decided by an award of migh'. And in this Mr. Ssetru °Titles preaches the self-same doctrines as the Orangeman, the absolutist, and that school of politics now so prevalent, which puts exclusive faith m the military and the police. We were the first to condemn and the loudest to reprobate the composition of the jury which tried Mr. MITCHEL. It was indispensable, in order to the good effect of such a sentence—that is, its deterring the froward without irritating the well-disposed—that the sentence should have been passed with more than the ordinary conditions of fairness. Front the mani pulation of the jury, but half the end has been attained. Joust MITCUEL has gone less as a victim than a martyr • and thousands of the susceptible and oscillating Irish who opposed the incendiary have been brought to commiserate the felon. We cannot say, that we are more satisfied with the new law and its working, now that it has for the first time come into operation. It has been for well nigh a century the good fortune of England to find its sole disaffected or treasonable persons in the inferior grades of society. It has therefore been able, we think unjustly, to apply to them the same punishment as that which awaits the meanest robber. This has never been the custom of any, even the most despotic country. In Austria, in France, and elsewhere, the politically condemned always form a class apart, se verely treated no doubt, but never visited with peines infantantes. This is justice. And we cannot bat think our own system of confounding the traitor with the murderer, and the seditious writer Stith the bur glar, one of the most gross perversions of justice. It is one, moreover, which der, ats its own end. For it infallibly excites sympathy even for the mo-t inexcus able offender, like MITCHEL, and marks the sentence, as not that of justice, but of a vindictive government. Deep as is our indignation on perusing the sufferings of Sthvto PELLICO, how much would the feeling be increased, had the suffering man of letters and taste been handcuffed with ruffians and set to work with galley-slaves? It as impossible to deny that Repeal is a difficult antagonist to deal with, and that the government in Ireland had but the choice of perishing in weakness, or of putting forth strength in coercion. Still, every one admits, that the physical force party in Ireland form a contemptible minority, and that the way to keep them so, and thus render them powerless, is to employ no mode of repressing them which could have the effect of irritating and Hinging over to them the lsrge class of moral force repealer', who are not irre claimable by just treatment, by fair and successful government. - This large and intelligent clam of Irish repealer! do not think even repeal worth a civil war. They cannot but see, too, that the whole body of the Ilish people, if bent upon one put pee, and striving towards it, persevering, without pike, arms, or even threats, must in the end throw such a mountaiu of embarrassment in the way of England, that their desires must be granted. These are the truly formidable repealers, and compared with them MITCHEL and O'BRIEN are but mischievous schoolboys. But these schoolboys must be whipped and chastised in such a way as not to offend the sus ceptibility and the sense of justice of their more rational countrymen. The government of Ireland is not a work of ven geance or of war, as the big blundering Times would have it; it is simply an affair of tact. GERMANY. PRUSSIA.—Our Cologne correspondent writes follows: COLOGNE, JUNE 4. The excitement in Berlin is still on the iricrea;c. Tens thousands of individuals, principally belonging to the work ing classes, thronged the public thoroughfares on the 2nd of June, and loudly demanded the general arming of the people as well as the occupation of the arsenal by the eivc guard. It is asserted here, in well informed circles, that the g.)vern. meat, to appease the operatives, has promised to give a gun to every one amongst them who can produce a cert ficate from the authorities of his district respecting his right to ha domiciled in Berlin. The people are exasperated by the re port that several students, who followed a boat laden with fire-arms, were arrested in Charlottenburg, and grossly treated. General Von Aschoff, commander in.chief of the civic guard, has resigned, in consequence of that body having declared that he had lost their confidence. All the clubs have resolved to go in procession en Widt-Sunday to Friedricha•Hain, where, it will be remembered, those - , , ersons were buried who fell during the Berlin revolution, in MArch last. It is clear, from public and price's accounts which have reached this city, that Berlin is in an alarming xi t.te. It appears by the reasisehe Zeitung that the town of Posen is placed in a semi-state of siege. All the Ewes are closed at 9 ~ and no one after that hour is allow,: 1 to pars through them until five the next morning. Orders have been received at Grandeur to place the fortress there imme diately in a state of defence. It is believed that this measure has reference to soma threatening movements on the p at of the Russians. The greatest a-tivity also rrevails atWesel, in nuttinv that town and the adjacrits. Rhine Island in a complete s'.ite of defence. On the lot instant all persons , n the We , : dis trict who serve I in the army from the year 1816 to 1330 were called out again, in order, it is said, to form a reserve battalion of landwehr. The free traders of Stettin have forwarded an address to the constituent assembly at Frankfort, in favour of a common lint of customs for all Germany, and the greatest possible Ireduction of all import and export duties on manufactured articles and raw materials. The Nene Rheinisehe Zeitung (an ably conducted paper just established in Cologne) severe:yew:mires the government for having ordered several companies of the tat Artillery Brigade, and other troops, to quit Konigsburg and Pillan for the Rhine province, and contends that it is far more ne cessary to have an imposing force on the Prusso.Ruaisa frontiers (where real danger exists) than on the Germano- French ones, where no foe is making military preparations. AUSTRIA.—VIENNA.—The Wiener Zeitan•/ of 31st of May contains an official statement of the re venue and expenditure for the month of April, 1848, and also for the half year ending 30th April, 1848. During the month of April last the receipts were 6,756,194 florins; the expenditure amounted to 10,267,474, leasing a deficit of 3,511,280 florists. The receipts during the half year ending 30th of April, 1848, were 71,123,882 florins ; the expenditure was 78,868,549, leaving a deficit of 7,744,6 6. In addi tion to the above half-year's income, 11,908,100 florins were raised by extraordinary loans, but the expenditure for extraordinary purposes amounted to 16,204,182, leaving an additional defier. of' 4,296,082 florins. The outlay incurred during April last, on ac count of Hungary and the Lombardo-Venetian pro vinces, was 4,900,000, and no revenue was remitted from either. By the 29th ult. the shops were all re-opened, and ._i