Star. — London, England, 1813-06-19 00:00:00

b e append likely to Monet the taker, Porto: in her favour. It was clearly the interest ofifiwedeei to kegp , c lear of the war, and maintain herself in neutrality ; but it was not only natural, but necessary, for Russia to secure Sweden. In the pro:nada% of that endea vour, it appeared that Sweden was ready to yield up Pomerania. But it was said, that nct co-operation on the part of Sweden took place. Wasit nothing, then to screen a considerable portion of the territory of the Allies from attack i By Sweden, Russia was relieved, a nd her troops enabled to defend St. Petersburgh.— But Sweden assisted in another way t she persuaded the Porte to enter into peace with Russia, and there by rendered a most important service to the common cause. Upon the whole, it was clear that Sweden had most honourably fulfilled her part of the treaty. But the stipulation concerning Norway was termed infamous. It should be considered that matters so stood, that there was na alternative but that Sweden must either be at peace with France or with us; and he must be a bold man indeed who should dec ide for the former connexion. No Power was better quali fied, or more ansiousto act a great part in the theatre o f war, than the Crown Prince was ; and, at that period; it was intended to give an indemnity to Den. mark, in possession and not in prospect. After' a few other observations, the Noble Earl concluded by giving his decided negative to the Amendment. Lord HOLLAND explained. The Marquis of BUCKINGHAM supported the Amendment. The principle of this Treaty, he con tended, was the same as that for which we had *so long inveighed against the Ruler of France. We had blamed France for compelling . , against all natural justice, the other powers to join her in her aggres sioas, or to pay the penalty of their disobedience. Was not this the very policy Ministers had pursued with respect to Denmark ? He condemned the Treaty as the most infamous outrage against the rights of nations that had been committed for the last 20 years. E CLANCARTY deprecated the conduct of Ministers, and said he had looked in vain for any ar- gement from the Noble Lords opposite. The Marquis of DOUGLAS supported the Amendment. F.arl GREY took an extensive view of the whole proceedings, and inveighed in strong terms against the plea of convenience set up in justification of the measures adopted and sanctioned by Ministers. After Bonaparte last year had suffered a calamitous defeat, a sort of Treaty was entered into between the Noble Lord (Liverpool) and the Danish Govern ment, through Count Bernstorff, an Ambassador then in this country—a Treaty of Mockery. Afterwards, or about the same time, was a negociatlon with Swe den entered into, to guarantee to Sweden the king. dom of Norway, part of the Danish territory, stipu lating, even at the risk of the surrender of Hanover, and other dependencies of this Crown, together with a stipulation for aiding and co-operating with the Crown Prince, by land and sea, to attain such an. aexation and conquest without utmost exertion in perpetuity to Sweden, in consideration of commercial accommodation to us in certain parts for the term of twenty years only. Was not this a treaty of spolia tion of the Crown of Prince Christian, and eternally 'disgraceful to England, in addition to the cession of an island that was not literally our own; a Treaty against the principles of justice, at a time that Den. mai k was clearly a neutral Powers—and a Treaty in consistent:with the independence of nations—Great Britain_stipulate.for this Treaty, by which Denmark would cease to:he in existence as an independent na tion, are so tponstrope, that language could not ade qtrately describe it, or duly ieprobate . .the principle. Who can longer complain of the treatment of Swit zerland by France, supposing, after what they had already suffered, she told them that they must cede to a nei . ghboufing Power an integral part of their territories ? What effect" would not such a Treaty have upon the noble conduct of the brave and loyal Prussians ? Nothing could justify our conduct. This compact was the cause of breaking off our negotia tion with Denmark, and tended to give to an enemy the means of our naval superiority and glory.' 'The bad effects of this Treaty had the effect of . facilitat ing the success of Bonaparte in the battles of • Lut ten and Bautzen, instead of going to the Dwyna, after which the French advanced one hundred miles. This was subverting and destroying the sacred name of independence, and calculated to create desolation in her streets. Was this the way of retrieving this Country, or contravening the proceedings of -Bona parte ? Were the Ministers to engage to pay five millions of money for the chance of getting a . few men ?—or was it for the interests of this country and :he common cause to run such hazards upon' the proposal, merely on the chance that such a proposal would be successful; or was it reducing public opi nion in favour of the enemy ? Our languge should Lave been different or the very contrary. An expres sion of a pacific disposition on our part would do more than twenty such subsidies. Moderation in suc cess would give more hopes of a certain peace than any false and disgusting principle, that would and must divide and separate the Powers of Europe, as well as sink our reputation as a great country. Null upon your-Lordships, and ask, will you not call upon those Ministers for betraying the interests of this na tion by such a disgraceful system, that leads to every tvil without any possible good ? Earl BATHURST rose, and forcibly defended the Treaty as wise and politic, even by the admission of the Noble Earl (Grey), on the ground that it was wise to adopt any measure of annoyance against the common enemy, it being admitted that it was much "better to have Sweden on dui side than against u 5...- What, said the Noble Earl, were our stipulations and engagements at the Treaty of Amo, in March, 1812? —.They were, that Guadaloupe, and not Norway, should be ceded to, Sweden, in consideration of 35,000 men to conquer Norway. Was it for the interests of. this Country and the common cause to join in this Treaty, was the question. Can that be called morally wrong, being done conjointly with others, which would be morally right in us to do separately. No treaty could be more advantageous, and it was im possible to shew or read any rule or order from the Journals of the House, against such a treaty or stipu lation as that under discussion. Earls GREY and LIVERPOOL, and Lord HOLLAND, severally explained, after which a divisioa.took place, when there appeared, For the original Motion, - " 140 For the Amendment, - .•• 6 7 Majotity for Mbibrera. • • 'TS Adjmited at LteI.FrPAST TWO this MOrgitag• noun or cbmmoNs. lorthe impieties ista , learorterprellotli" at the tarot the House Amounts of ME** =perryto oloirloo parts of the world from the kingdom of Great Britain, from, 1804 to 1812 inclusive, pursuant to the' motion of Mr. CAL CIATT; 'which mere ordered to be lald'on the Table. The Naval Pensions Bill passed through a Committee, and was ordered rn be reported on Monday. On the motion for the Irish illidt Distillers Bill being com. mirted, Mr. W. POLE signified his intention of opposing the inanity, and dividing the House on the subject, when the Report of the Committee should be brought up. The Bill then passed through a Committee, and the Report was ordered to be brought up on Monday. The Irish Tobaced BM was read a third time and passed. The Irish Malt Bill passed through a Committee, and the Res port was ordered to be brought up ote Monday. Mr. L. KECK reported from the Committee appointed to et amine the Contested Election Petitions of the Town end County of Galway, that the Hon. Frederick Ponsonhy was found not duly elected, and Valentine Blake, Esq. was found duly returned ' as Member for that Town and County. The Loan Bill was read a third time and passed. A Messenger front the Lords informed the House, that their Lordships had given their assent to the Wexford arbour and Liverpool Dock Bills without any amendments. The Irish Militia Clothes' Bill passed through a Committee, i and was ordered to be reported on Monday. The Hothe on its rising was ordered to adjourn to Monday next, on the Motion of Mr. VANSITTART. The further consideration of the Report of the Poor Laws' Bill was axed for Tuesday. • • The Committal of the Land Tax Amendment Bill was order ed for Monday. _ The Funded Debt BM was read a second time and ordered to be committed on Monday. The Local Tokens Bill was read a second time, after a few observations from Mr. Huskisson, Mr. Rose , Lord A. Hamilton, and Mr. Grenfel, and ordered to lie committed on Monday. VICTUALI.ERS' PEWTER POT BILL. Mr. ROSE moved the Order of the Day, that the House should Moles itself into a Committee on the Victuallers' Bill. Mr. - DAVIES GIDDY opposed the Motion. Why did not the Publicans enter into a compact to send out their beer in a different sort of vessel, if, by such a circumstance, they would be less exposed to depredation ? Why not send it out in iron or tin ? They might easily form an association amongst themselves, without throwing a solemn absuldity into Parliament, for the purpose of preventing the use of pewter pots. But they would not, for they knew the Public preferred pewter pots, and that those who would subscribe to the proposition would not sell.— He concluded by moving, " That the House do go into a Com ndttee this day three months." Mr. ROSE did not conceive how Mn Giddy could oppose sn violently a measure which would operate evidently to the advan tage of the Public, if there was not in his views something be side the general considerations upon which he had professed to act. It was an appeal to the humanity as well as to the justice of the House.—( Rear, hear).—At the time of passing of the first Bill the licenses did not amount to more than Xi. 10s. and now that the duty an licences had increased to six fold, were the Pub licans less entitled to that which could never be called even an indulgence T—f Hear, bar) --Be ides this, they paid more per sonal taxes than any other people. He had brought in this Bill from feelings of justice only. The Bill might be discussed with out throwing any reflections upon the publicans, except Gentle. men wished to add insult to injury.—( Hear,' hear). Mr. CROKER said, the preamble of the' Bill was totally un grounded; and, as he conceived it to be, a measure wholly use less to the publicans, as well as injurious to his Majesty's sub jects, he should give his most decided opposition to it. Mr. WHI TBREAD said, he really should think, from the violent manner of the Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Croker) that be was a very great porter-driaker, although his appearance was not much in favour of such a supposition, (a laugh), and that he, was oath an epicure Ica that beverage as not to relish it from any other vessel than a pewter pot. It was impossible, he said, to form any association against sending out pewter pots, for every new comer into a house in the public line% who thought himself wiser than any body else, would immediately commence the practice front which the established man had abstained, for the purpose of getting a number of customers, and every body must be aware that such an example, if not checked by parlia mentary interfereuce, must necessarily be followed. The publi cans would, he knew, a ff ord pots which would be as agreeable In appearance , as cle anly, and as wholesome as those of pewter; and he (Mr. Vhitbread) would be happy if the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Croker) would make a trial from one of them of the beve rage he would put into it. (4 laugh.) As to the morality of the Bill, he should only state, that he knew it for a positive fact, that children were reared up •in the practice of pot-stealing, and if this Biio answered the purpose of preventing that vice, there could scarcely exist a doubt that it contained a system of me nlity of a very exalted kind.—(Near, hear.) .The House then divided, when 42 Members voted for the amendment, and 67 for the original motion, upon which the 818 passed through a Committee and was ordered to be reported oa Friday. TREATY WITH SWEDEN. Mr. WHITBREAD inquired of the Noble Lord' opposite, what time the Treaty between Sweden and Russia had been communicated to Ministers ? He saw. that it had been signed in March, 1812, and he knew that it bad not been acted on till March, 1813. ~. Lord CASTLEREAGH said, the communica tion had been made to his Majesty's Ministers during .21 the month of July. ' Lord CASTLEREAGH then moved the Order of the Day, for the House to resolve itself into a Corn awe of Supply, to which Committee his Lordship further moved, that the Papers on the Table relative to the Treaty with Sweden be rerred. Mr. PONSONBY then rose and spoke in sub stance as follows :—(6 Sir, in order to discuss the merits of the Treaty which has been concluded with the King of Sweden, I have judged that the most convenient method will be, to address you before you leave the Chair; because, if the House should first go into the Committee, nothing more could be argued than the propriety of granting the supply ; and it this should be granted, nothing further upon the subject would appear in the Journals. As it is my intention, Sir, to move that an Address be presented to the Prince Regent, on the subject of this Treaty, praying that such steps may be adopted as are consistent with l ' the good faith of the country, and the honour cf the I Crown; for the purpose of suspending the execution i of the treaty. I have thought it better to move the Address in the present stage. I believe, Sir; that this is the first instance, in the history of the negotiations in•this country, where the cession of a valuable pos session has been stipulated, and the Papers relative to it laid on the table, without the Ministers of the Crown taking the sense of Parliament upon that assertion. If it was merely a treaty of subsidy, it might be re ferred to a Committee of Supply—its merits might be argued in that Committee, and the approbation or disapprobation of the House signified upon it.— But this is not merely a treaty of concert or subsidy, it is a treaty of cession—the island of Guadaloupe has been ceded, and I did expect dm his Majesty's Minis ters would have moved an address to the Throne upon the occasion, by which course the House might have had an opportunity of signifying their approbation or censure of the measure pursued , by the confidential servants of the Crowa. The Noble Lord however has thought proper to pursue anodic* , course. He has referred the Treaty to a Committee of Supply, but in the other House of Parliament (if he may be permit ted tomake an allusion to it on the present occasion) the Minister roust move an address, and upon that address the sense of the Meuse can be taken. I am obliged, in consequence, to have recourse to this unu ' anal mode of marking my opigice of the merits of the *stipulations which have beets entered into, andof *seer lidding the *titan of Parliaasent upon tbeetAudoiag this, Sir, the first and most remarkable feature which 'presents itself is the Treaty existing between the King of Sweden and the Emperor Of Russia, and the ob ject of it, as'professed by the two contracting powers, which object, as substantially laid before the House by the Noble Lord, is said to beu for the purpose of securing reciprocally their states and possessions against the common enemy." That is their professed object, 4 t to secure their states and possessions against the common enemy," meaning France, no doubt, for there was no other country with which both those Powers were at war. In the course of the last war between Russia and France (which was terminated 'by the Treaty of Tilsit) . there were certain negocia tions carried on between the then Governments, the object or nature of which was not immediately divul ged, but soon after the Emperor of Russia attacked the territories of the King of Sweden, and acquired the dominion of Finland—a dominion which. had been long desired and ardently sought by that power, in different wars and various negotiations. Being put in possession of this valuable acquisition by the corees nivance if not by the open assistance of France,'Rus. sia afterwards, when she saw herself likely to bd in: volved in .a new war with France, sought to 'secure herself in the unmolested possession of Finland, b 7 buying off the Power most likely to disturb her, and transferred to that Power part of another's dominions. In order to induce Sweden to acquiesce in her views, Russia entered into an understanding with her, and concluded the ConventiOn stated in this Paper, in which it is stipulated that Norway is to be procured for Sweden, either by negociation or by military co operation ; and, in the first instance, that Russia is to furnish an auxiliary force of 15 or 20,000 men, which is afterwards carried to 35,000, in the Convention ' signed on the 30th of August, 1812 ; and I do be. Bove that at the making of this last Convention, the British Ambassador, my Lord Cathcart, was present at Abo. Nov let us inquire what steps were taken by the two contracting parties in order to induce the King of Denmark to agree to the cession of Norway. They express themselves thus—' As the King of Swe den cannot make this diversion in favour of the com mon cause, consistently with the security of his domi nions, so long as he can regard the kingdom of Nor way as an enemy, his Majesty the Emperor of Russia engages, either by negociation or by military co-opera tion, to unite the kingdom of Norway to Sweden. He engages moreover to guarantee the peaceable posses sion of it to his Swedish Majesty.' Such was the engage l ment—not to procure for the King of Sweden any security that the force of Denmark or Norway shall not act against him—not to procure the occupation of any fortresses in Norway so as to give the King of Swedan military possession of the country--.not either of these stipulations, but to procure, either by negoci ation or force, the perpetual cession of Norway itself. and they go on to say—' The two contracting parties being unwilling, if it can be avoided'—(A laugh from the Omosition Benches)—Oh ! matchless tenderness of heart !—Oh I kind and considerate politicians I— ••-• being unwilling, if it can be avoided, to make an I enemy of the King of Denmark'—with whommeither, observe, pretended any cause of quarrel—' will propose to that Sovereign to accede to this Alliance, and will offer to his Danish Majesty to procure for him a complete indemnity for Norway..by a territory more contiguous to his German Daminkns.'— (Crier of Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) Here.are the mighty deliverers of Europe—( Hear, hear)—c3n trading, for the purposes of their own ambition-, to take from an unoffending Sovereign part cf minions, and transfer it to another ! But they pro pose to give him a compensation by granting certain other territories in lieu of those which they deprive him of. I beseech you, Mr. Speaker, to mark the wisdom and policy of this proceeding. Germany was to be delivered—France was to be driven'back with in her proper frontiers—Alexander proclaimed him self the deliverer'—the Russians were to be the saviours of Europe—and in order to encourage Ger many to throw off the yoke by which she was op pressed and to rally round the standard of indepen dence, this deliverer of the enslaved nations of Europe engages to take part of the dominions of Germany and to bestow it on a Monarch whom he had stipu lated to deprive of his own.—(Hear, hear.)—Here was a transaction whose policy was only transcended by its justice, and how any Cabinet acting under a Sovereign who had ever been remarkable for good faith through the course of a long and eventful reign, and who had been and still was engaged in a pro tracted and bloody war against France for the pur pose of resisting the establishment of such monstrous and iniquitous principles as were contained in this Treaty—(Hear, hear) —how a Cabinet so circum stanced could countenance such a proceeding, i am at a loss to conceive ;—how they could so act in the faceof a generous and enlightened nation attached to the sacred principles of probity and honour, I am equally surprised— that they should have the hardi hood to propose such flagitious stipulations to such a Sovereign and such a people, exceeds any thing I ever heard of in the annals of Mi:iisterial d ravity. (Hear; hear, from the Opposition.)—l knowlsot how fhe Noble Lord could have advised or taken a more decisive step for establishing the power of France.— Do we find in any part of this Treaty the smallest regard to the rights of nations or the liberties of mankind ? We, indeed, are made to say, that this transfer shall be made 6 with all possible regard and consideration for the happiness and liberty of the people of Norway.' (Hear, hear.)—Was it thus that the inhabitants of Europe were to be encouraged to resist the domination of France ? Was it thus that the Emperor of Russia was to entitle himself to the reputation of being the deliverer of Germany ? Was it by acting in the same spirit that d;ctated the partition of Poland—that act which laid the founda tion of the subversion of the law of nations, and substituted in its place the law of the strongest ? (Hear, hear !)—ln the late campaign, however, the iniquity of that dismemberment was visited on those who had been its authors, and France had profited by the doubtful allegiance of Poland. This Treaty would speak volumes to the Poles and to the nations of Europe, and when it came to be read upon the Continent, I know not what the European Powers will Say to the Noble Lord when he speaks of the rights of nations and the independence of Europe. And now give me leave to ask what was the pro fessed object of our concert and treaty of accession ? That his Majesty the King of Great Britain and Ireland, and his Majesty the Xing o? Swedes. Pfe. laatadieidt theargeat assegai* of ettakilikhita each•other a close concert,'—for What?—' the ma a tenance of the independence of the North, 'and ill order to accelerate the so much wished (or ePodhtbf a general peace, have agreed to provide for this two. fold object by the present Treaty.' So the iniecien. dente of the North is to. be established by wresting a part of his dominions from one of the most itxlepent dent and ancient of the Northern Powers, and A ge neral peace is to be brought about by transferring a portion of Germany to the King of Denmark, from whom you propose to take the kingdom of Norway In short, you will effect the two avowed objects of this Treaty, by lending yourselves accessary to state of things which were calculated to produce war if none had existed, before. But is it for the interest of England, that Norway should be taken from Denmark ? I have always understood that Norway was as happily placed for the security of England as it was possible for any country to be. To put the independence of the North, therefore, hypocri tically forth in the front of the Treaty, and to talk of peace as its object, exceeds all that the most con. fident Ministers have ever ventured to set forth in their instruments. But the King of Sweden, it seems, is compelled to seize Norway. I moved for an account of the negotiations which had taken place bete een this country and Denmark, and was told by the Noble Lord that it was unfit they should be disclosed, though I find it difficult to con ceive what objection could exist, because either Denmark or France must be so concerned as to make it public, whether Ministers do so or not. Does the Noble Lord imagine that Prance is ignorant of -the nature of those negotiations ? As we, however, are left to conjecture, I can only argue upon what I sup. pose them to have been, andl do shrewdly conjecture that much conversation passed as to the nature of the compensation to be offered in lieu of Norway, and that this is the conversation which his Majesty's Mi nisters are unwilling should be made public, for that this unwillingness should arise from any regard to the interests of Denmark or fear of the power of France, is what I cannot be persuaded to believe, until I shall have heard more upon the subject. On This part of the subject there is something in the second article of the present Treaty very curious and worthy of Attention, and, at the first glance, one would be led to suppose that it was perfectly optional with Denmark to surrender Norway or not. Now it happened that in stead of this, it is exactly the reverse, there is, in truth, an exact stipulation that Nor way at all events mustgo, there is nothing optional left; but let me read the article, [Here the Right Hon. Gentleman read the 2d article of the Treaty, as it appeared in the SrAn of the 12th inst.]-0n reading this article (continued Mr. P.) it is so worded that you might suppose that the King of Denmark might join the alliance and yet keep Nor. way ; whereas it only contains an exception, and his only choice is to oppose force to its execution, or to accept the compensation designated for him by Swe den and Russia, on giving up Norway. It is so longer at his option to preserve those ancient heredi tary dominions, and those faithful subjects, so remark. able for their attachment to his person and govern. meat. He is compelled to part with them, and to , take under his government a nation of strangers— ! bound to him by no tie, attached to him by no mo. tire—who never owed him the allegiance of sub jects.—(Near, hear.) —I defy the Noble Lord to con. tradict the statement. f say that, under the stipule. tionc of the treaty, there was nothing which would I sat ify the contracting Power but the cession of Nor way to Sweden, and the sole option left to Denmark was, to op pose force to force, or to content herself with what they might give. Now, as to the principle of the Treaty, it was clear that it was worthy of the true and legitimate followers of those who had par.' titioned and plundered Poland, and I know not what was the inducement with England to assent to it. That this country should agree to a treaty founded on fraud and violence, is what no present profit os advantage could for a moment justify. But let us see what this present profit is—the alliance of Swe. den ? But you have provoked the hostility of Den mark —you gain the alliance of Sweden, and you lose the friendship of Denmark. Then it is said that we are at war with Denmark, and therefore it is just to annoy her. (hear, hear, from the Ministerial ride. )—• Let U 3 examine this principle a little farther. Ths . . only legitimate end of war, it has always been atIN muted, is the attainment of peace. It has never been acknowledged by any Government, however profligate, that war should be carried on for tho utter extinction of any Other Government. A. Power complains of injuries received, and seeks by war for satisfaction and redress, or it suspects thee secret hostility of another Power, and seeks to obtain a security against its effects. (Loud cries .1 (fear, hear, from the Minitterial ride.) Now, in con. ducting a negociation of this kind, the first duty of . an able and virtuous Minister is to endeavour to pro. duce such a state of things as may render a return to peace not only possible but sear. Instead of abet. ting the treaty between Russia and Sweden, which embroiled and divided the North, a wise statesman would hale applied himself to produce au union of all those Powers in one common interest, and would have directed their force against France, the con;. mon enemy. But the justification offered here, is, that we are at war with Denmark. True, but not for her extinction. We went to war with her on tht plea of necessity, lest France should have seized the fleet, and we resorted to the argument of self de fence, as a justification of the steps we then took.— But if we admit this reasoning for one moment, ) .wnuld ask, what there is on the 'face of this Treats to justifp our having acceded to it, or having sea dered Denmark more unfriendly than heretofore ?-9s In order to engage the co-operation of Sweden, Rue six stipulates to send 3500 men to assist in the con quest of Norway, before Sweden affords any direr co-operation in .Germany. That was the stipulatiot which Ministers found existing when his Majesty wa invited to accede to the terms of the Treaty. It wa not suited, I suppose, to the views of his Majesty' Ministers, that Sweden should employ force in Nc way against the Danes, for that would be buying diversion against ourselves in favour of France. Th being the state of things, his Majesty's Minim, wished to change the stipulations, and how did the accomplish it ? Sweden, then, the friend of EN ) land ; Sweden, on whom we rely for useful co-oper. tion—Sweden refuses to give up the attainment of h. immediate ot) ; ;ect, unless ,he alu obtain A greater a I 7 i i