Star. — London, England, 1821-06-22 00:00:00

eir apt re. dress from the British Ministry ? He should endea• your, in the following observations, to make out three propositions:—first, that there was no evidence before Europe of the impracticability of the Govern ment established under British auspices in Italy. Secondly, if there were such evidence, the ancient Constitution of Sicily, instead of being restored, was in effect destroyed by the Decree of the King of Naplei. Under this head he would shew that the privileges of the people were abolished. Thirdly, that the late change re-opened the question, that it was a change for the worse, and that by the adoption of measures which involved a flagrant departure from every acknowledged principle, the King of Naples placed a Government over the Sicilians which dimi nished that security and happiness which the Sicilians enjoyed during the occupation of the island by our troops. And,on the first point, he would be glad to know here were the proofs of the impracticability of the constitution of 1812, to the state of the Sicilian p e ople ? He had heard with astonishment and re gret the Noble Marquis attempting to ridicule that creditable effort of the British Commander, to intro duce an imitation of the great model of the British Constitution into Sicily. He had viewed this act of reverential homage to British Constitutional liberty with other feelings. He would have thought that compassion for the poor people who were the objects of the intended benefit—he would have thought that a reverence for the Constitution of this country would have secured the authors of the benevolent scheme from the ridicule, at least, of the Noble Marquis— . and he had thought that it would better become law. giver of the British station to turn with expres sions of cordial approval to the attempts for the esta blishment of the spirit of the British Constitution in Sicily ; and that he would have pardoned, with a cheerfulness, those superstitiously minute feelings manifested by the projectors of the great design, and which every one must regard as the evidences of their extraordinary affection and reverence for the il lustrious of iginal. But they had the evidence of those who were on the spot of the practicability of the scheme as opposed to the theoretic sentiments of the Noble Lord, founded upon general statements and descriptions. The result of the Noble Marquis's evidence was this, that the two Houses of Parlia- rnent addressed the King,of Sicily—upon what sub ject the Noble Lord did not state. He (Sir James Mackintosh) had carefully read all the documents and authentic statements which he could obtain, and was unable to discover any testimony to support the Noble Lord. Where were the Addresses—why not have been laid on the table ?—(Hear, hear).—lf they existed, they were of force enough to silence all ob jection. But was it true, indeed, that the Parlia ment demanded the abolition of the Constitution ? He had heard the reverse. He had understood that ttit Members of the Sicilian Parliament were of opi nion that the Constitution under which they existed had the efficient means of reform within itself. The Marquis de Circello said nothing about the Ad dressot to the King. Both he and Sir W. A'Court had spoken of the difficulties they had to encounter in the bringing about of the projected changes. The whole of the statements that emanated from the Government of Naples, as the foundation for this ex traordinary alteration, were no more than vague generalities. There never was an instance, perhaps, in which so little had been done to compliment the people, whose hope of liberty was about to be wrested from them, by the statement of grounds or pre tences for the important event. It was not by any means an unlikely conjecture that the "difficulties" spoken of by the personages just mentioned, were nothing more than the objections of the Parliament to any change in the Government. But he had it in his power to convince any man that no reliance ought to be placed on the testimony of the Ministers at Naples. The Marquis de Circello entered into a statement of the reasons why the abolition of the British Constitu tion was resolved upon. That those were not the real grounds, as within the knowledge of that Minister, was testified by his concealment, up to the latest pos sible period, of that Secret Treaty agreed upon at the Congress of Vienna, between the Emperor of Austria and the King of Naples, in which was an article binding the latter to consent to no change in the Government of any part of his dominions, which was not sanc tio►ied by his Imperial and Apostolic Majesty. Here then was the true source of the abolition. The Right Honourable Member dwelt upon what he called the false and fraudulent conduct of the Neapolitan Go vernment, and upon what he termed the faithless and hollow friendship of the Austrian Government for this country. He said, that the conspiracies which gave so much inquietude to the friends of the Government in Sicily, were to be traced to the Members of the Royal Family of Naples. He contended that the Go vernment of Sicily, as now established, was a simple despotism. He shewed that the Parliament of Sicily assembled every four years, in contradiction to the Noble Lord, who stated that the Parliament scarcely ever assembled, and had nothing to do with the po litical arrangements of the country. He admitted that the Government which was substituted in 1816, gave everything to the King, except the power of in creasing the supplies. What if the King had said there was not enough—who was to controul him ? Where was the Member of Parliament—where the Member for Aberdeen—(Alau gh)—to detect the false addition of the Royal Person, and check his progress? But it was in this insidious way—by this coup del grace, that the liberties of every country, where free dom had been lost, had been wrested from them.-1 This was :the very receipt adopted on all occasions, where ;h€ hrdeperidence of one nation was to be sa crifiad to the sovereign ambition of another. The *noble Lord, had ridiculed, to his astonishment, the practice which had been. acted upon by the Sicilian Parliament, of coupling a statement of their griev- ' ances with their grants of supply. Anywhere but in a British House of Commons, he (Sir J. Mackintosh) would tolerate levity upon an usage as .old as the British Constitution, and which had beep uniformly adopted, as the most excellent expedient, by their forefathers, for enlarging and confirming the liberties of die country. The Noble Marquis had passed over this, and other painful parts of the subject, in his usual easy, familiar under -tone, implying as much as that the topics were of too trivial a nature to deserve more serious treatment— " Et quz Desperet traetata nitescerc posse relinquit." He remarked, that it was the fate of every free Con stitution to draw upon it the hostility of the powerful part of the world now-a-days. No complaint was ever heard cf the Governments of Morocco or 1 Constantinople. But two years experience of any I state of things founded on principles of liberty, was I generally deemed enough to convince the Sove reigns of Europe, that such a condition of things deserved no longer to exist—(Hear, hear).—Could any man doubt from the state of Sicily now, even upon the chewing of the Noble Lord, and recollecting the condition on which the British Government con sented to evacuate Sicily, that we were bound to in terfere? There remained but a little time, perhaps, when interposition on our part could do any good ; for there were reports abroad of the embarkation of ten thousand Austrians for Sicily—the natural guar dians, indeed, of such a despotism as that which the Government of Austria was anxious to maintain there. There was one passage in the Decree of the King of Naples so shameful and barefaced, that even in reading it privately to himself, he could scarcely suppress his indignation. The King said, " that the Sicilians ha.' as much independence as was good for them,"—that was to say, none at alW(Hear, hear). When he recollected the conduct of 'the Neapolitan Government all through, and saw the completion of the wicked system of monarchical aggrandisement, and contempt for the rights of mankind, he could ex press no other feelings than those of indignation and abhorrence for the system and its authors and pro moters—( Hear, hear). The House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion - - 35 - 69 - -34 Against it Majority - - - THE HOLY ALLIANCE. Mr. STUART WORTLEY rose to bring forward the motion of which he had given notice relative to the dispatch of the Allied Powers issued from Lay bach. He regretted that the task of investigating the principles contained in that dispatch had not fallen into abler hands. It was impossible that an English House of Commons could view with indif ference the spirit displayed by the Allied Powers in this dispatch, or could be at ease whilst they pro claimed that their wills alone were to be the law of Europe ;—a doctrine which took away all security from other States, and would, if acted upon, involve this country, with its best institutions, in the same spirit of condemnation, and expose us to be treated as outlaws.—( Hear, hear).—ln bringing this subject, however, under the consideration of Parliament, he was sure his Noble Friend would do him the justice to think that in no wise did he feel a want of confi dence in the Executive Government of this country. The Noble Lord had himself, on a late occasion, ex pressed his reprobation of the principles, in language which did him credit, and he (Mr. Wortley) felt sa tisfied, therefore, that, on all occasions, the Noble Lord would be ready to discountenance their appli cation. But the time was come when the Commons of England ought, as a body representing the People of England, to express their dissent from the despotic principles contained in this document ; and high and powerful as were the States from which it issued, he was sure such an expression of dissent on the part of this country would not be entirely with out its effect upon the Sovereigns of these States. During a late Congress of the Sovereigns at Lay bach, there appeared a Dispatch in all the Papers, which was signed by the Ministers of Russia, Aus tria, and Prussia, and purported to be a Circular from these Powers to their Ambassadors at Foreign Courts. This document, after stating what had been done at Troppau and Laybach with regard to Na ples, and the efficacy of the measures taken, went on Ito reprobate the restless disposition which it assumed, prevailed in all the States of Europe against the legal authorities, and the dislike which was supposed to elitist in every country to Government in any form. The Dispatch then proceeded to state the evils arising from this restless disposition, and concluded by laying down the mode in which any changes were to be made in States for the future, insisting, without re serve, that in no case would it be permitted a State to make a change in its form of Government without their entire tree will, and that they were responsible to GOD alone—(Hear, hear). Now, if such were the law of Europe some years ago, in what situation would England have been at this day ? Should she have any liberty—for was not the liberty which we now enjoyed, wrung often from the Sovereigns of this country and against their wills ?—(Hear, hear). It would put an end to Reform in every shape, and stifle amendment, however salutary, unless Monarchs could be prevailed upon to give up their despotic propensities. if this Circular had confined itself to the States of those Powers from whom it had issued, of course he (Mr. Wortley) could not quarrel with it; but when it was laid down as a public law for Europe, it was then the duty of every State to pay attention to it. With regard to the proceedings of Austria against Naples, he had before given an opinion upon the subject; and though that Revolution, which was certainly the work of a faction, not of the people, was put down, yet he could not but condemn the conduct of the Austrians, because that Power went on this ground that there was to be no reform, no ameliora tion, without the concurrence of those who govern. As an Englishman, therefore, he protested against the promulgation of these principles, as most danger ous to the freedom of this country, being certain that, if they prevailed in former times, this country would never have compassed its liberty (Hear). If they could be enforced in Spain (and they would had not France interfered) they would destroy the mannood institutions which the Revolution had given birth to' in that country. The Noble Lord had himself ad mitted, that things were in such a condition in Spain that a change was necessary, and that many salutary effects flowed from it. With regard to the docu ments which were published in the Newspapers, as he was not sure that they were true copies, it was difficult to found any motion upon them, and he should therefore move for the production of the on- 1 ginal Papers, that the House might take what steps they thought proper upon them. If, however, the Minister of the Crown would stand up in his place and declare that there was no danger to the liberties of Europe from the promulgation of these principles, then he (Mr. Wortley) would not press for them.— What he wished was, that the attention of the People should be roused, through the medium of this House, to the tendency of those principles, which seemed to be destructive of all civil liberty, and of the inde pendence of every State in Europe. The Honourable leniber concluded by moving for Copies of the Do cuments alluded to. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, that he' agreed in all the general principles laid down by the Hon. Member. He objected, however, to producing these papers, as it was against the usage of Parliament to call for papers when no ultimate proceeding was to be founded upon them. There was no question as to the authenticity of the documents, but he would recommend that they should not be called into notice. The House did not think it necessary in the case of the Declaration of Troppau, and this was a weaker case. So long as Ministers did their duty, it was better for the country to leave the management of foreign affairs to the Executive Government. The principles laid down in the document alluded to did not apply to this country; there was in them an ab stract generality of application, but there was nothing to call for the interference of Parliament. If this document was replied to, there was a replication on the part of the Allies, and this would lead to endless literary altercations, which in the end might produce a war, or at least disturb the relations which at pre sent subsisted between States—(Hear). —The Decla ration of Troppau was more directly addressed to this country, because, in that case, this country was called upon to sanction the promulgation of certain principles, and to act upon these principles in the furtherance of a practical object—namely, the put ting down of the revolution at Naples. Yet, in that case, the Executive Government acted for itself, and he trusted the House and the country approved of the steps which it then took—( Hear, hear). — It would be most mischievous to he producing every public paper for no other purpose, as it appeared, but that of examining into and refuting their doc trines, and the States of Europe would be thus turned into a Debating Society for the discussion of general principles. No ostensible good could arise from the production of this paper when there was no practical result expected from it. This Government had be fore expressed its opinions in a way which could not be misunderstood by Europe. The moving for this Paper and suffering it to lie upon the table would be to detract from the former spirited proceedings taken by this Government. The Noble Lord then declared his total dissent from the princi les contained in the Circular alluded to. He denied that this country had any right to take notice of the doctrines promulgated by any other State—this would be to infringe upon the independence of these States. He avowed that the Ministers of the Allied Powers were ill-advised to publish a declaration which was against all prin ciples of sound policy ; but still he was convinced the Powers had not done it with any view to aggran dizement. It was certainly the privilege of every State to make what internal changes it thought pro per; but he hoped we were not a people attached to re volution for revolution sake. The revolutions which took place in this country did not resemble those lawless changes which the Allies by Circular decried. In 1688, the leaders adhered to and acknowledged constitutional forms. They considered revolution the greatest evil, but they justified it from necessity. The revolutions on the Continent were brought about by factions, and as one was the organic source of others, there was no knowing where the evil would stop. He did not stand up to justify the Sovereigns, but he should say, that a great spirit of insurrection was abroad, and the Sovereigns were perhaps justified in' meeting this before it attacked them on their own soils. The revolutionists were given to extreme prin.' ciples, and the Powers did certainly promulgate ex treme principles of a counter-nature, in the hope neutralizing the effect of the former—(Hear). What did the Greek insurrection present but an indiscri minate slaughter? No tyranny stood in the way of liberty so much as the vices committed in her name. This country had already declared its sentiments, but that circumstance had made no alteration in our relations with the Court of St. Petersburgh. He could assure the House that the breathing time which this country enjoyed after her struggles in the late war would not be soon broken in upon. The Noble Lord concluded by opposing the motion. Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH contended, that the Noble Lord's technical objections would cut up the constitutional right which every Member had, to call for such Papers as he thought the Public were inte rested in. It was absurd to use the argument that they were not to be forthcoming because no ulti mate motion was founded upon them ; for a motion of that nature might be made after the Papers were brought before the House. He was glad to hear the Noble Lord avow such principles as he had done.— The Noble Lord was incorrect in saying our ances tors considered revolution as the worst evil, but that ' they justified it by necessity ;—the greatest evil could not be justified by necessity, for necessity itself was a choice of the lesser evil—(Hear).—The greatest of all evils was perpetual slavery—(Hear).—lt was the scourge and bane of human society. To oppose it, any sacrifice ought to be made. If these principles had been promulgated by an obscure State, no notice should be taken of them ; but was it forgotten, that they who issued them gave their orders at the head of armies, and that a great country in Italy had been conquered under them ? These declarations were not, therefore, idle speculations. The Allies would sweep away the laws of nations altogether ; and Count Nesselrode had expressly declared, that Na ples was attacked, not because the revolution was brought about by a faction, but because the peo ple there had dared to rebel—(Hear, hear, hear). And these despots made no distinction as to their objects; so that if it was said that anarchists made no distinction amongst Kings, the charge could now be retorted upon the Kings themselves—(Hear,, hear).—Here were the three greatest Powers in Eu rope in conspiracy against the peace of Europe— (Hear, hear).—The principles which they avowed made them the enemies of every nation, for they at tacked all those fundamental principles upon which every State depends. This then was a case for this House to interfere in ; and he assured them that the expression of the People of England would not be without its effect. There was no security for nations after the acts which the Allied Powers had been guilty of. At one time, the divisions amongst the Sovereigns of Europe afforded a security for the minor States; but this security had been done away by the system of partitioning, which the Allied Powers had resorted to. Neither were the personal characters of the Sovereigns any security ; for in 1807, when Prussia and Sweden refused to follow Russia in her alliances, she punished the latter for her refusal, by robbing her of 'Finland ; and in 1812 treated Denmark in the same way, by robbing her of Norway. The Honourable and Learned Gentleman, after some further observations, concluded by sup porting the niotion. Mr. HUTCHINSON denied that the spirit of con spiracy was atm oad in Europe. The Noble Lord had last night libelled as Revolutionists all those who, through the different States in the South of Europe, had made any efforts for the recovery of their liberty. The Noble Lord bad said, that a disposition to pro pagate Revoluf had arisen hi neighbouring na tions; and the Noble Lord seems to discover the na tions from which these revolutionary principles pro ceeded. Did the Noble Load, as Minister of this country for Foreign Affairs, mean to say that those principles had sprung up in France? He would again charge the Noble Lord and his colleagues with li belling those nations which made an effort to free themselves from shivery. Ile would repeat the charges which he ma ie last night against the Noble Lord and his colleagues, that they were partners in the despotic measures of the Allied Sovereigns, who commenced their system of dictation by dragging to Troppau the King of Naples, and then obliged him to violate his most sacred promises to his own sub jects, and to commit acts of the grossest perjury— (Hear, hear).—The Noble Lonu could not und rstand the description of Minor Stales; but his own conduct has! brought among that description a State which once stood high among the Nations of Europe. No thing could be more tremendous than the present state of Europe, under two States, who considered themselves the Dictators of all the States of Europe. The Noble Lord said they only fought for the peace and liberty of Europe; but he would tell the Noble Lord, they had fought for their own aggrandizement, and against the peace and happiness of all others. Wherever they moved, desolation tracked their walk; the protection they afforded, was such ai the eagle , gave the lamb, " covering and devouring!" Colonel DAVIES said it was high time for his Ma jesty's Ministers to make some declaration as to those Documents which had issued from the Allied Mo narchs. It was well known that 'it was the object of Russia to get some settlement in the Mediterranean, and it was her wish to be the rival of this country in the Mediterranean. Thi Marquis of LONDONDERRY said he was not bound to answer every question which the ima gination of any Hon. Member would suggest to him. If a Sovereign Power had invited into his territories foreign forces for his own protection, another coun try had no right to interfere. Sir It. WILSON insisted that it was incumbent on this country to take cognizance of the possession of Naples and Sicily by Russia and Austria, because that possession might have the effect of annihilating the ascendancy of this country in the Mediterranean, and his Majesty's Ministers were bound to satisfy the House on it. After a few words from the Marquis of LONDON. DERBY and Mr. S. WORTLEY, the House divided— For the Motion Agait st it Majority • —6O SLATE QUARRIES. On the re-admission of strangers to the gallery, Mr. Alderman WOOD was found on his legs, charging the Commissioners of Woods and Forests with im providence in the management of the tru-t commit ted to them. The Hon. Alderman then moved that a Committee be appointed to inquite into a lease of Slate Quarries granted by the Commissioners of Woods and Forests to Lord Penrhyn in 1784, and to Dawkins Pennant, Esq. in 1816, and whether they were fully worked according to the usual practice? Mr. HUSKISSON opposed the motion, and de fended-the conduct of the Commissioners of Woods and Forests. Mr. PENNANT maintained that the mines were not worth working. Mr. FIUME contended that this question involved considerations affecting the Crown Lands generally ; and from the present instance, general mismanage ment might be inferred. Ile thought an inquiry e,.- sentially necessary. Mr.CREEVEY supported the motion. He thought the question had been met in a very indecent man ner by Gentlemen on the other side, who treated it with unwarrantable levity—(Hear, hear). Mr. Alderman WOOD replied, and said he was willing to withdraw the motion if he was allowed to send down a surveyor whom he should select himself. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and a division having taken place, the numbers were— For the Motion - - - 29 Against it Majority - - -—7 l On the re-admission of strangers to the gallery, Mr. DICKENSON was on his legs, moving that an Or der be discharged, for a Report of the visiting Ma gistrates on Ilchester Jail. Mr. Alderman WOOD opposed the motion. He could see no reason why the Order of the House should be rescinded without better reasons than those adduced by the Honourable Member. Mr.CREEVEY said a few words to the same effect. Mr. HOBHOUSE spoke briefly against the mo tion. It was the practice with Gentlemen on the other side to defend the conduct of every man in office, however strong the allegations might be against him. Mr. ELLICE was only anxious to have the truth developed, on whatever side it might be. Mr. BRAGGIi 11ATHURST said, that the wis ' dom of the Houle was surprised by the motion of the Hon. Alderman. Mr. GORDON supported the motion, not wishing that the question should be taken up in an exparie manner, when a Commission had been sent down to inquire into all the particulars. Mr. BENNETT said that his Hon. Friet.d, the Alderman, had not been treated with the common decency of Parliament in this affair. Mr. WARM?. wished, in the first instance, to havn the Report of the Commission, and should therefore support the motion. Mr. HUME thought that the Hon. Alderman had been treated with peculiar harshness in this caae. Mr.W. S.IITII did not think that the Report of the Commission made any difference to the worthy Alder man, who was perfectly kistified in acting as he had done, from the information he had received. Mr. BROUGHAM believed that if the Report ware produced it would go against the jailor. MABERLEI put it to the character and honour , of the House, whether the production of the paper in