The Sun. — London, England, 1829-06-20 00:00:00

impossible that the Chamberlain could ever use such a sum. Lord IDURIIANI deprecated discussion on evi dence which was not before the whole of their Lord ships. Iho ugh he was alarmed by the opinion of the Noble and Learned Lord, if a c a -c were again to occur, he should move for a similar account. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY would trust the decision of the question bet sveen him and the Noble Earl (Lauderdale) to the judgment of their Lordships when they had read the evidence. On the motion of the Earl of SHAFTESBURY the Standing Order, No. 47, was suspended. The Duke of WELLINGTON then moved that the Bill for making the Approaches to London bridge should be read a third time, which was ac cordingly done, after a few words from the Marquis of Londonderry. The Bill was then passed. SCOTCH ENTAILS. The Earl of ROSEBERRY, after stating that a Committee of the other House had been appointed two years ago to inquire into Scotch Entails, and that two Bills, brought into Parliament by its advice, had been suspended, wished to inquire of his Ma jesty's Ministers whether it was their intention to take the subject into their consideration with a view to introduce next Session some measure into Par liament on the subject ? The LORD CHANCELLOR was sensible of the importance of the subject to which the question of the Noble Earl related. He had conferred with the Gentlemen of the other House who had intro. dticed the Bills, and during the recess it was his in tention to collect such information on the subject as would be necessary to come to the consideration of the question, so that Ministers would be prepared next Session to discuss any measure which might be pry posed. The Earl of LAUDERDALE trusted that any alteration in the law of Scotland would be made in the spirit of that law, and not in the spirit of a law of which Scotland knew nothing. The LORD CHANCELLOR wished it to be understood that he did not pledge the Government to the introduction of any measure, but only to the collecting such information as would enable it to decide on any measure which might be proposed. SUTTEES. Lord HOLLAND - presented a petition from the women of Loughborough, praying that their Lord ships would interpose to put a stop to the burning of widows in India. His Lordship thought the sub ject one in which the Government ought not to in terfere. There was no Englishman who would not wish that such a practice should cease, but he thought it would better be left in the hands of the executive Government. FOREIGN RELATIONS. The Earl of ABERDEEN, by his Majesty's com mand, presented certain Papers to their Lordships, explanatory of the state of our relations with Por tugal. These Papers had been presented to the other House in consequence of an Address, and his Majesty bad also commanded that they should be lei,: before their Lordships. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE rose to ex press his regret that Parliament had not entered into an investigation of our foreign relations; but if the state of them had been overlooked, he trusted that would not be construed into any acquiescence in the policy of Ministers. The present moment was one to justify the greatest alarm and mistrust. There was a time when the voice of this country was in fiuenral, and, indeed, all-powerful in Europe, but that was not the case now. When he contemplated our proceedings in the East, our conduct in the Tagus, and our interference at Terceira, he thought we were now pursuing a very different policy from that formerly pursued by this country. The prin ciple that now guided our councils was that of non interference; but it was impossible that we could so act upon it as to make its observance absolutely in e‘itable. By what right was it, he Should like to know, that we fired into the vessels going to Ter ceira? It was said that they had false clearances, but that did not authorise firing into them, and killing the subjects of Donna Maria. A key to our present policy was to be found in a speech of the Noble Earl last Session, who had described Don Miguel us adhering to our interest. He would like to know what further indignities we were to expect from Don Miguel, and what further insults our Government meant to permit in the absolute King ? It was stated that a Noble Relative of his, who was about to return to this country, had been instructed to propose to Don Pedro that he should consent to the marriage of his daughter with the usurper of his throne and the murderer of his friends. He hoped that the report was not true, and if it were true lie was sure that instructions of so profligate, so revolt ing a nature, had never before been given. The Noble Earl also, he hoped, would give their Lord snips some information as to the state of affairs in the East, and as to what extent he meant to carry into effect the Treaty of Loudon of July, 1826. The Emperor of Russia, it was stated last Session by the Noble Earl, had waived his rights as a bel ligerent in the Mediterranean; but it appeared that he had broken through this treaty and his own pro mises with impunity. It was probable that treaty was to be violated; he hoped not; and he hoped lie should receive from the Noble Earl a well grounded assurance to the contrary. The Morea, it was true, had been pacified, but not by England. That had been accomplished by France. There was another topic he would refer to—our relation with the new States of South America. Govern ment ought to endeavour to promote the peace of those countries, and not leave them a prey to their present anarchy. The Earl of ABERDEEN said if he should then decline all discussion, it was rendered unnecessary by the papers he had ust laid on the table, and to them he referred the N oble Lord. They had been prepared with no niggard hand; and if more were required, he would not say that more should not be produced. The Noble Lord had made no distinct accusation. He complained that we acted on prin ciples of friendly policy towards the present Ruler of Portugal, and allowed the infraction of some treaties, and he seemed to found his complaints on an expres sion which fell from him (the Earl of Aberdeen) last Session. His objections to the character of the pre sent Government of Portugal are nothiog.to the purpose. Any persons could indulge in indignant invectives ; but thesquestion,for us to consider was, whether or not we were right in observing a strict neutrality in the question of the disputed succession to the Crown of Portugal ? If it were right that we should be neutral, we ought to be so fully and honestly, and not affect a neutrality from which, for motives of conveniency, we were to depart whenever it suited us. He did riot think it correct to deviate from the course we professed to follow, and display against the feeble Government of Portugal the strength of a mighty empire, to gratify some present wish, and still less to gain a hollow popularity among a portion of the people in this country and Portugal. We have treaties with Portugal, and these treaties were still in exilence. We had up to this time exacted from the Government of Por tugal the fulfilment of these treaties, and this last week we had obtained the reversal of a sentence on a British subject, because it was a violation of our existing treaties. With what decency, then—under what pretext could we exact the fulfilment of trea ties, and not preserve that neutrality we professed ? The Noble Lord had contrasted the influence this country new possessed in Europe 'with what it for merly possessed, and lie assumed that it had fallen from its former elevated station. He positively de nied the assumption. At no former period did this country ever enjoy more respect from the Govern ments of Europe than at this moment. We might have lost the approbation of those disturbed and restless spirits who were desirous of being asin let slip to work destructi on; but by the friendsiottpcace and tranquillity throughout Europe—by ensile friends of order, this country was never more regfiected than a t present ; and never did this country more thoroughly possess the Confidence of aU the Govern ments of Europe than at present. The Noble Mars Buis had adverted to the unfortuntre-circumstance which had taken place off Tereeira. He was un willing to enter into an explanation of the circum stance, because it would be found thoroughly ex plained by the Papers just laid on the table. The _Noble Lord complained of our proceedings towards t.ln- subjects of Donna Maria, and of our friendship to Don Miguel; but he had mistaken those proceed ings : we had been compelled to act upon the prin ciples of neutrality we professed. We were bound to act with justice towards the existing Govern ment of Portugal, if we expected that it should be _ _ just to us. The Noble Lord had spoken with hor rer of the reported instructions given to his Ma jestv's Ambassador at the Court of Rio Janeiro with respect to the marriage of Donna Maria with Don Miguel. That union► he could easily imagine would be looked upon by every Noble Lord in that House with dislike and aversion. If it were a mar riage of parties in this country, he should agree with them, and he could only assure the Noble Lord that his Majesty's Government never would make a proposition of that kind if it had not previously re ceived the sanction of her father. Such unions were sot uncommon in the history of Portugal, and that had some additional recommendations. It had re ceived the sanction of agentleman whose views were much respected by the Noble Marquis. It had been destined to take place from the time of the birth of the Princess. It was recommended by the late King, and adopted by his son her father. It was not a suggestion of this country ; and if it had been proposed by his Majesty's Ministers, he could only say, it had not been proposed as a British ob ject. If the father of Donna Maria were in clined to dispose of his darighter, not only was it not for us to object to it, but to support it, as a means of restoring peace, which otherwise did not seem possible. Such a proposal formed no part of the principles of the Briti,h Government. The Noble Marquis had also referred to what was doing in the East, and wished to know if the Treaty were to he executed ? The existing Treaties had been found hard to execute, and he was not obliged to prophecy as to the future events. He had never given his opinion of the Treaty of July, but he always had said, that we would do, and we had honestly and zealously done, our part to carry it into execution. We had done the best in our power, not only to carry it into execution, according to its letter, but according to the spirit in which it was framed. Under the state of circumstances at present, he must decline to give his opinion as to the probable result. He would say, however, that it was not possible to look at the situation of the Turkish empire, and not feel that any great change in the situation of that Power would have a fatal effect on the balance of power. The Noble Lord seemed also to assume that the new States of South America had been neglected by the Government. That they were in- creasing in anarchy and distress was correct, but that could not be laid to the charge of Ministers. He agreed with the Noble Lord in lamenting this state of things, and he lamented it the more that our commerce was injured by it ; but that this should be made a matter of accusation against the Government of the country was what he could not conceive. The N . oble Marquis seemed to wish that we should in terfere to reconcile their quarrels. God forbid that we should ever exercise our influence among them more than we could pos , ibly avoid. The experience we had already of the effects of our interference was not such as to encourage us to extend it. He could not expect for those States any thing better than a long period of distress, before those circumstances could prevail which lead to prosperity and tran quillity. Lord HOLLAND—The Noble Earl expresses his readiness to meet any accusations ; and he seems disposed to consider all discussion as a matter of accusation; but is Parliament, I ask, to be so treat ed ? Is confidence in Ministers so much a matter of course, or necessity, that any refusal to place that confidence, or any attempt to examine into the fo reign relations of the country, is to be considered as an accusation against the Ministers of the Crown ? I regretted the apathy of Parliament last year; and nnder all the circumstances of the case, I thought it my duty, painful and irksome though it was, to in stitute such an inquiry,—and how m as I met ? why by a sort of personal appeal to me that I would not harass the (iovernment by moving for papers which it would then be inconvenient to produce. I have wo wish to harass the Government. Ido not know whom I should be harassing—whether it would be the opposition of Oxford or the opposition of Cam bridge. The Noble Duke, I tecollect, when I moved for certain information, met my motion, as did also the Noble Earl opposite, by representing that it would be better if that information were not then produced ; and the Noble Duke said, in a true Parliamentary speech, that he claimed the confidence of Parliament, and he expected that it would sup port his Majesty's Ministers in not then producing the information. lie said, with respect to Por tugal, there are many important points which are not yet settled, and Parliament shall in due time hare all the information it requires laid before it.— What lam the Ministers since done ? They stated that they we re panting to lay this information before Parliament when the circumstances which then pre vented them should have passed away. What has happened ? Why no communication of any sort has been made, Does the state of things that for , merly prevented this information being laid before us remain ? Then would these papers not be granted, and then the Noble Earl would not profess his readiness to give more papers if these are not enough. The Noble Earl now grants the papers, but he grants them without giving aoy explanation, and does not grant them till they have been asked far in the other House of Parliament. This is done, I suppose, ices order to supply a contrast to the Noble Earl's professions last year to his conduct this year. Ministers stated at the beginning of last Session, and at the close of the Session, in the Speech delivered from the Throne, that the Govern ment had three objects in view—the pacification of Greece, the establishing the relations between that country and Turkey on a lasting and secure founda tion, and to preserve the repose of Europe on the • basis of the Treaty of Peace. His Majesty's Speech, which, when stripped of its official dig nity, was only the language of Ministers, de plored a naval victory as untoward, though the Mi nisters do not. seem to find the military successes of the Greeks untoward, and they grounded their hopes on, these --successes,- When we dissected the Speech from the Throne, and threw sways its offi cial integuments, 'we found, in filet, that it stated, there has been a great deal of bungling, we have been got into a sad scrape, but we know how to proceed, we do not want to say any thing of our predecessors, but trust to us, we have great influ ence in all the Courts of Europe—we are well kosown for our political talents—we are different sort of chaps from thoze who went before us, and we shall make all right and proper. This was the official language, but by what measures has it been redeemed, and where is the information that has been laid before Parliament, that we may judge and ap plaud the wisdom of these Ministers ? Luckily, our Ambassadors wereat Constantinople, and some thing might yet be done. A few months past Rus sia went to war with Turkey—l do not say con trary to her promises, but contrary to our expecta tions. There is no individual in the House—none in the country or in the wxld—who has a greater horror, than he who is now addressing you, of war and of the shedding of human blood ; but I must say, that I do not think that a war between Russia and Turkey would be most injurious to the interests of Great Britain, especially if the former were suc cessful. The Noble Earl opposite spoke of this war as a great calamity to Europe, and particularly as a calamity to this country, if Russia were not defeated. Turkey Inn; been called by him, and by hi 3 Col leagues, " our anciea, Ally ;" and Parliament has been this night told, I believe for first time, that the preservation of Turkey is necessary to the maintenance of the balance of power in Europe. If, therefore, according to him, the pending war were to end in the dismemberment of Europe, it would be a most dreadful calamity. Owing to the good managernot of this Government, it was hoped that this war would not happen. Happen it did; and then it was given out by Ministers that the Am bassadore would remain at Constantinople, and that they would yet be able to avert the consequences. But they came away; and towards the end of the Session, when I moved for papers, the Noble Secretary of State, as was well remarked by my Noble Friend below me, admitted that we were placed in a difficult situation by the treaty, which, from what has fallen from him to day, seems to be a great and most inconvenient load. But the Emperor of Russia thought fit to waive his belligerent rights, and if he had not done so, said the Noble Secretary, there would have been an end of the treaty.—(No, no, from the Earl of Aberdeen.)—l beg the Noble Earl's pardon. I well remember, and I think upon reflection he will remember, that he stated that there would have been an end of the treaty if the Emperor of Russia had not waived his belligerent rights. I am not now urging what is my own opinion upon the sub ject ; I am only shewing how strange are those of the Noble Earl—l know no reason why Russia should waive her belligerent rights. Why should she not blockade the Dardanelles ? What nonsense it is to talk of objecting to it, and especially for England, of all nations, to talk of it, since the blockade of the Dardanelles differs from all other blockades, inasmuch as those straights lead to no port that does not belong either to Turkey or Rus sia. Ido not see why Russia should not exercise her belligerent rights, and Ido not see how - it hurts us, if she does. So convinced, however, were Ministers that she would not, that they inserted in the Speech from the Throne a solemn assur ance that they had received such assurance. Strictly speaking in common times, after such a declaration inserted in the King's Speech, and after it was seen that Ministers were wrong in their expectation, Ministers should have come down to state on what their solemn assurance had been founded, and in what way it had been defeated. An assurance is given from the Throne that Russia will waive her belligerent rights, and it is followed by another assurance from the Noble Secretary of State, that, because they are waived, they will be able to carry into effect the stipulations of the Treaty. Ido not bring this matter forward as an accusation, but does the 'Noble Earl mean to say that these facts make out no case for explanation to Parliament ? According to the showing of Minis ters, the assurance given by a great European power has been broken, and the assertion of her belligerent lights destroys one of the most solemn treaties into which this country ever entered. Are Ministers then to wait until some question is put to them be fore they will condescend to give an explanation on a subject which the public regards with so much in terest ? What is the precise state in which we stand ? If we look at the Speech from the Throne last year, and at the speech of the Noble Earl last year, I should infer that we are no longer bound by that Treaty; but reading the Speech from the Throne this year, and hearing the speech of the Noble Earl this night, I find that we are still bound by that Treaty. What then should be done ? The Ministers of the Crown should advise it to confide in Parliament, and to make a full explanation ; and if this could not he done, Ministers ought to take some opportunity of stating why it could not he done. As to Portugal do not wish to enter into any details, although feel most deeply on the subject. Ido not say Out I am prepared to bring forward any motion of cen sure against Government, but I will assert that i❑ Portugal, as elsewhere, all our expectations have been frustrated; and whether in consequence of our actions Ido nut know. The result has been that, which every man who feels for the safety, for the credit, and for the honour of this country, rutr=t deplore. Away with all the nonsense, all the trash, about non-interference. `What is the history of Great Britain with relation to Portugal ? Let the Noble Secretary ransack the archieves of his office, and let my Noble Friend, whom I am glad to see near him (Lord Rosslyn), assist him in his search, and then let them state what has been our history, with relation to inter- ference with Portugal. What ! have there been no interferences about succession—no interferences about changes of the Ministry ? It is idle, at this time of day, to talk of non-interference. The whole of our connection with Portugal has been a tissue of interference. Last year, I understood two things— one was, that Ministers were pawing for an oppor tunity when they could, with safety to his Majesty's Councils, divulge the whole course of the transac tions ; and that, when they gave their explanation, it would extort from Parliament applause and admi ration. The other point was, that this country would adhere most strictly to the system of neu trality. As to the first they have not yet redeemed their pledge, and if they wished that their conduct now should be consistent with, awl not a contrast to their conduct last year, they ought to be prepared to make a full explanation to the country through Par liament of his Majesty's views, and of the success of their intercession with the House of Braganza.. To be consistent, Ministers should have resisted the production of all papers until that time arrived, and when they could have stated their reasons for so long withholding them. Then we come to the ques tion OH the system of neutrality, and I was sorry to hear from the Noble Earl a revival of that sort of (he must excuse the word) vulgar insinuation which we so often heard during and after the French Re volution, that persons at home who took an interest in affairs abroad were restless spirits, designing Jaco bins, and persons wishing only to promote confusion. Allow me to tell the Noble Earl, that no person who has hitherto filled the situation he occupies, has hitherto ventured to disregard the public opinion of Eui ope. Allow me to tell him, that if we lose the good opinion of the universal community of Portugal, we lose one great support of our strength and influence. People at large look to the situation of foreign coun tries, according to their own means and information. They do not merely judge of them by the despatches to Ministers (in which, God knows, there is much less truth than in any other source of information ; for, from the beginning of history, they have been little better than varnished lies), so that nothing can be more absurd or more dangerous than to disregard public opinion. But for the great. and glorious mea sure we have just passed at the instance of the Noble Duke, I should look, 1 must say, with consterna tion at the present state of public opinion-1 do not refer to the opinion of Mr. Metteinich, or of Mr. Nesselrode, but to the opinion of the people of this country and of the civilized world, which, for the last two years, has most materially changed, as far as regards this country. Let the Noble Secretary appeal on this point to the guests he entertains at his table, and none but the basest adulators will deny the truth of what I say—l challenge him in his blunt, plain, straight-forward manner, to appeal to them whether the change of a hick I speak has not taken place in every country from St. Petersburgh to Naples. Returning to the point of non-inter ference, I may remark, that it is somewhat new to say that this country is not to meddle with the af fail s of Portugal as regards the question of the suc cession. What have been our treaties with Spain and France ? That is the very argument which Louis the Fourteenth used, and which Lord Boling broke, who was no Vhig neither, confuted.— It had been said that we must not alter the fundamental laws of France or Spain, to which he replied, with great wit and eloquence, that we are not supposed to know what are the funda mental laws of France or Spain ; " but this I know (he added) that it is not for the interest of this country that the Cro wns of France and Spain should be placed upon one head. So I say, that it is not for the interest of this country that Don Miguel should be King of Portugal. We have declared no hostility, and yet we have withdrawn our Ambassa dor. I do not know that we have any right, ac cording to the practice of nations, to take such a stet); and on the question of neutrality I must say that I never read a more heart-breakin g account than the narrative of what passed at - the island of Terceira,—( Hear, hear.) —I should be sorry to ap ply to that transaction the term of an untoward event," for it seems to me nothing less than a gross • • ti and abominable breach .01:% the law of nations.— (Hear, hear.)—lf I thought so before, lam doubly convinced of it now, after the recent attempted ex planation. Many points of that explanation are ca pable of dispute; but granting them all, the case is one reflecting the deepest...disgrac e . The Noble Earl asked, " Will you use the mighty power of this country against a feeble Sovereign ?" I ask, if you will not use it against a feeble Sovereign, will you wse it here ? The island of Terceira was the terri tory of a neutral Power ; and it admitted the autho rity of the Queen of Portugal, not only defacto but dejure. But no matter whether defacto or de jure, it was part of her dominions; but she was then re siding in this country in so helpless arid forlorn a condition, as to excite the commiseration of the So ►ereign, and of the whole people of Great Britain. Are we, then, to look for nice distinctions about fact and right among the civilians of Doctors' Com mons, in order to justify an act of cruelty and oppres sion ? What was done at Terceira might form a ground of remonstrance with the Emperor of Bra zil ; but what reparation could be made to the man who was killed ? It seems to me a very doubtful point whether you had a right to prevent their sail ing from our port : but when once they had sailed, what jurisdiction had you and what right to pursue them over the high seas, and to enforce obedience to your commands ? I do not see a Noble Duke in his place who has shown much interest on the sub ject of wool, but I may take a humble illustration from the laws relating to that article. During a long period in the last century, a very foolish and absurd law (perhaps these epithets will savour a little too much of the principles of free trade) ex isted, by which it was felony, punishable with death, to carry wool out of the country. If a Frenchman were caught in the fact of exporting wool at Plymouth, well and good—take him and hang him. Ido not say that this was often done under that old law, but it might be done while he !was in the King's dominions; but what pretence should you have for following him upon the high seas, and for threatening to sink his ship if he did not submit, under the batteries of Brest ? Sup posing, therefore, that the wretched but loyal Portuguese, who sought an asylum on your shores, committed an offence cognizable to the laws of the country, they might be punished while they re mained in it; th e o ff ence i n posse against Don Miguel could not be so great as the offence in ease against the power which they came to serve, and when once they were out of port you had no right to enforce by the thunder of your arms, on the high seas, your fanciful notions of justice and equity. It is idle, in my view, to argue such a point ; and I say, therefore, with relation to the affair at Terceira, that all the explanations hitherto given have only plunged the King's Ministers deeper in the mire of that transaction. The Queen of Portu gal was received here and acknowledged ; and I am glad to have the Noble Duke and his colleagues ad mitting the power of a King de facto, although it be in favour of such a being as Don Miguel. Let him recollect that such a doctrine supports the opinion of those who contended in its favour during the french Revolution and after it; let him recollect that the admission of a Government de facto at that time would have saved this country from all the evils she is now suffering. I am not prepared on this account to say that I would not acknowledge a de facto King of Portugal, unless it were connected with direct injury to the interests of Great Britain. I should like to know what is the nature and the result of the negoeiations with the head of the House of Braganza, and I trust that no such pro posal as that alluded to by the Noble Marquis below me would come from Ministers ; I was glad to hear the Noble Earl say that it would never be a British proposal. With due allowance for oratorical free dom, and for that latitude of speech which we are all allowed, I may remark that I was somewhat surprised to hear my Noble Friend below me (though my connection with him will hardly justify me in calling him so), recollecting the connection which must always be dear to him, state that the proposal of such a marriage came from a late Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Canning). We know, indeed, that in Catholic countries, dispensations fur such unions may be obtained from the Pope, and it is not on the ground of consanguinity that the people of England object to the marriage; they are averse to it, because the hand which Don Miguel would pledge at the altar is soiled with blood—be cense he has been guilty of treason and usurpation—because he has shown contempt and disdain for all that is held good, honourable, and sacred among the rest of mankind. Therefore they feel disgust that an innocent and helpless female should be placed within his grasp, and think that the promotion of such an union would plunge their country in the lowest gulf of disgrace and infamy. If, therefore, Mr. Canning contemplated such a mar riage, though torn from us too soon, he fortunately did riot live to witness how Don Miguel was capable of breaking the most solemn promises and engage ments that could be entered into in the face of Eu rope, or contemplated by the mind of man. I, for one, cannot acquiesce in this doctrine of non-inter ference. I think the historian will say that Don Miguel would never have obtained ascendancy in Portugal, but for the assistance of England and Austria—he will say further, that the presence of a British force enabled him to accomplish his usur pation ; and I will maintain even now, that if the same pains had been taken to shew the friends of Don Miguel that we disapproved of their actions that were taken to give him countenance in his treacherous enterprizes;he never could have attained his power, or if attained, he would have tottered on his throne. I have already detained the House longer than I intended, and shall only remark in conclusion, that I shall most heartily rejoice if the Noble Duke is able to add to his great merits on the score of home politics a claim for respect and applause in connection with the conduct of our fo reign relations. The Duke of WELLINGTON—The Noble Lord has complained that Government has not vo luntarily laid upon the table certain information re garding the foreign transactions of the country. I believe there is no instance in which, where it was not thought necessary to call for a vote of the House, the Minister of the Crown has come down with such information. The usual practice, I ap prehend, has been, that when the Minister wishes to take the opinion of Parliament, he does not pre sent the documents before he asks for the expression of that opinion. They are, therefore, not brought forward, excepting when a vote is to be given, or w hen Parliamentary grounds for their production have been produced by some Noble Lord. I say this, because I have anxiously, most anxiously, wished that the House should have full knowledge of the transactions at Terceira. I have wished it since the commencement of the Session, when the Noble Baron stated it to be his intention to bring for ward a motion on the subject; but calumny affords no around for a Minister to come clown for informa tion, and to require the expression of an opinion upon it. The Noble Lord contends that we ought to have brought forward all the information regard- ing Portugal ; but I beg the House to recollect that it refers to still pending negociations, and that Portugal unfortunately remains in that state in which we found her two years ago. Such Papers as could properly be produced have this day been laid upon the table, and were moved forabout afortnight ago in the other House. We have presented them under the conviction that it will be found that in every part of the transaction to which they relate we have done our duty to our Sovereign and our country. The Noble Lord has thought proper to ridicule the idea of neutrality and non-interferenc e with the internal affairs of Portugal, but I defy him to shew a single instance within the last century and a half, in which we have interfered with the internal affairs of Por tugal _ by arms. I say, that notwithstanding our treaties with Portugal go to every point of interfe reuce, both as regards her internal affairs and her Colonies, yet, that since the commencement of the last century, it has not been the practice so to con strue the treaties, but only with reference to pro tection in case of foreign invasion. If the Noble ~`~~C-_ f~~~. .~ ~' Lord will be kind enough to refer baek to the events of the last ten years, both as they regard commotions in Portugal, and the separation of her Colonies, he will find that upon this principle Great Britain has acted. Did we interfere in the instance of the rebellion in the Brazils ? We did not, though we were bound to do so by the terms of subsisting treaties. Did we interfere with the subversion of the Monarchy of Portugal in the time ofKing John ? We did not.—Did we interfere during the internal commotions In the year 1826 ? We did not. In that particular case, I say positively, and I defy the Noble Lord to contradict me, the Commanding Officer of our troops had distinct orders to refrain from all interference with the internal affairs of Por tugal. He was directed to oppose a foreign enemy only; with this exception, that he was to protect the persons of the Royal Family. Lord HOLLAND—What is that but interference ? The Duke of WELLINGTON—Dees the Noble Lord mean to compare interference for the protection of the Royal Family with interference for the purpose of effecting a revolution, or even a change of Minis try ? I am convinced the Noble Lord, with his usual candour, will not say that the two cases can be compared. Lord HOLLAND—They are just the same. The Duke of WELLINGTON—If he looks at the instructions to the Commanding Officer, he will find that I have under-stated the matter: he was only to interfere in case of an invasion by Spain, or of danger to the person of the Sovereign. According to all examples, all precedents in modern times, we were bound to remain neuter during the contest in Portugal; but the Noble Lord asserts that the uni versal Portuguese nation is opposed to the present Sovereign. Upon that point lam able to give the Noble Lord the most positive contradiction. Lord HOLLAND—I never said that they were. The Duke of WELLINGTON—I beg the Noble Lord's pardon ; I understood him to say so, and I am able to give his statement the most direct con tradiction. Lord HOLLAND—The Noble Duke mistakes what I said, but I shall be able to explain. The Duke of WELLINGTON—My authority for contradicting the Noble Lord is the Marquis Palmella himself.—( Hear, hear.)—We know pretty well what passed at Oporto: what occurred was said to be occasioned by our recognition of the blockade—during which blockade, be it observed, these gentlemen quitted the army and came to Eng land. For what reason did they quit the army at Oporto, the only efficient force to restore the Mo narchy for which they contended ? Their reason was neither more nor less than this—that they found the whole population of the country against them, and in favour of Don Miguel. They there fore felt, and very properly, in my opinion, that it was of no use to maintain a military contest. But, says the Noble Lord, we ought to have interfered, at all events, to force down the throats of the people of Portugal a Sovereign inconsistent with their wishes. Surely that cannot be the doctrine of the Noble Lord, and it certainly is not a doctrine I would recommend this country to adopt in a contest between two parties, each claiming the Government, Those who quitted Portugal, as 1 have mentioned, sought an asylum here, and it was naturally to be supposed that they would conduct themselves so that every body would be satisfied with their con duct ; but we soon found that they were here as a body of troops; that they received pay, had their officers, and, moreover, that other forces were ex pected to join them from Germany. These facts appear in the papers upon the table. We know, likewise, that the object of these troops was to form an expedition to the Azores, part of the kingdom of Portugal. We were expected too to convoy them to their destination ; but I maintain that we should not have done our duty if we had not protested against such an expedition. One of the grossest frauds was then committed that could be perpetrated by a diplernatic servant; a fraud in spite of the vigilance of my Noble Friend (Lord Aberdeen). We re quired that the men at Plymouth should be sepa rated from their officers, and that they should be quartered in certain proportions in different villages. I want to know whether this was any very unrea sonable request ? Certainly not ; and we had a right to expect that the plan proposed would be cheerfully carried into execution. The Portuguese did no such thing; as appears by the papers, they obtained arms—on a fal+e pretence embarked—on a false pretence procured clearances for Rio Janeiro, and set sail for Terceira. They set sail with the positive information, that if they went there, they would not be permitted to land. Then, says the Noble Lord—" admitting all you allege to be true, it was a most horrible act of cruelty —you had no right to prevent the troops from going to Terceira." I am informed that the Law of Nations is otherwise; aid I say that they were acting in breach of the Law of Nations by remaining an organised body at Ply mouth, when they were ordered by the Ministers of this country to disperse. They were further guilty of a breach of the Law of Nations in forming in this country a plan of attack upon the dominions of a Sovereign (whether de facto or de jure has nothing to do w ith the question) to whom we were engaged by treaty. They resorted to every artifice and subter fuge that could enter the mind of man—first ask ing for convoy, next for safe conduct, then taking out false clearances, and finally sailing for a destina tion where they knew their landing would be pre vented if it were attempted. Such being the case, and knowing how much the matter has been misre presented in every part of Europe, it is Hot extraor dinary that I should wish for an early discussion, in order that all calumnies might be removed. 'I he next subject to which the Noble Lord adverted was the state of our relations in the East of Europe; and here I must remark, that we now stand pre cisely in the situation in which we stood last session that is to say, the Treaty not having been carried into execution, we are unable to give explanations of any part of the transactions connected with it. 'We have done every thing in our power to carry that Treaty into execution, strictly accord ing both to its letter and spirit, and we have made great sacrifices for the purpose, and 1 am con vinced, when the documents are produced, the Noble Lord will himself admit that there is no reason to find fault with any thing that was done. He has adverted to some statements in Speeches from the Throne, and to others in speeches from my Noble Friend ; but as to one point, his recollection appears to have failed him en tirely. He says, that when the King's speech was delivered in the last Session, we imagined that our Ambassadors would not leave Constantinople ; whereas, they had, in truth, withd-awn before Par- I !lament assembled. He adds, that 'e expressed the strongest expectation that war wood not be 'the consequence of the Treaty of the 6th of July. Wheri he examines the documents on the while, he Svili find it positively denied that the war ha- been ,tb consequence of that treaty ; the present was s is 034 tirely owing to different circumstances. .' „;bid then known, indeed, what was passing at St pes o burgh, we might have been aware that wst sesol ; be declared ; but we had not themo li st F d r iaten iend t ,stwoeudi have , of the any h knowledgeekind, norsva ofits s it possibleprobailib ff Thea!ewe si ?Ole, Lord next observed, that my ii itto s belligerent ob in the last Session, that we were linable to carry execution the Treaty of the 6;° of 4 61 Y, because the Emperor of Russia waived tits enabling, u s to catry the we cannot now explain v-:set, was the fact; buts suppose the Noble Lord .nay imagine thai there ne s some eTsruebasty intoequetlt aerxra,ceuefinsoneuC- , although wi t h out h e naval co-operation of a belligerent power. Al I ask is, that until ve are in a condition to explainthe whole circumstarices, the House will give us cedit for having acted fairly by the Treaty, and for hying done nothing i e cOmilitent with the honour T cha racter of the eajiStsir s in endeavouring to wry it into execution&Oil'e4reilOar.)—The Note Mar quis who co, mencetr the 'discussion was ;eased to reprove u s , - as if we bad` been backward it carrying into execution the measures now ccmpleed in the Mediterrar salt, which have deprived tie Turkish I power of ,he peszeeeion of the Moiea. If he will be A ilaaa fi v~ t. 1 so kind as to look at the details of the transactiot he will see, that though the blockade, for certo reasons, did certai n ly n o t p ro d uce a ll the col quences expected f rom i t , y et t h at i t produced such a consequence—th a t t h e P ac h a o f E gypt found n necessary to agree to a convention for the ev acust by his troops of th e f o rt resses o f t h e Mores i his possession. In order to carry into execution one of the articles of th e T rea ty, i t was t h oug ht tha t fe land expedition sho u ld b e sen t t o t h e Morea; i t will be readily admitted, that for this purpose G,T e ‘ c Britain has not th e same resources as his ivi n Christian Majesty. As th e Ki ng o f F rance offer s his services, it was th oug h t r i g h t t h at t h e should avail themselves of them, rather than until each could furnish its proportion. 14 `: now gone through near ly a ll t h e pa i nts ur ged 1 ), the Noble Lord, with the exception of the negoto tiona with Brazil. Those negociations, like othe r !' are not yet brought to a conc l us i on ; b ut there ', no indisposition in Government, at the p ro per din!' to communicate to Parliament all the particuls; necessary to elucidate transactions in that gua rt of the globe. He reproaches us with having in. tended to effect a marria ge b e t ween t h e I n f an t D o n Miguel, and his niece, the Queen of Portugal, p° 11 ; na Maria. What we f e lt on th at su bj ect wa s, in anxious desire to reconcile differences between cOO tending branches of the House of Braganza. saw no chance of concluding them but by sot' e compromise of the rights of both parties—the on_ enjoying the ri g ht o f success i on , an d t h e ot h e r the right which h a d b een g i ven b y t h e vote o f th e n Cortes of Portugal. A s Ministers of the Cro"" of England we should not have done our duty if '' ve Lead not concurred with other Powers in endeavouh to conciliate; and the marriage having b ee n calc` proposed by t h e F at h er o f t h e Q ueen o f Portugal' it seemed a delicate matter for us to say, when the Father had abandoned the claims of his daughter fo r the sake of conciliating his brother, that the mar riage, the means proposed for effecting the object' should not take place ; under the circumstances, We should be the last to oppose it, as we should have bet a s the last to propose it. But the Noble Lord is plea°, to say, that all that pass e d at Vi enna an d e l se where originated in this country; that I positively deny' it is not true that Don Miguel went to Portue through the instrumentality of Great Britain; proposition to make him Regent originated here; " came from Brazil, and from thence was sent in Vienna, and Brazilian officers were charged with the execution of the plan. It is perfectly true that our Ambassador was called upon to be present on the occasion, to arrange both with reference t° Don Miguel's voyage to Portugal, and the mea sures to be adopted when he arrived there; but it is not true that he entered into any engagement, ex' cepting merely as as he was a witness of wha t passed. Having gone thus far in answer to the Noble Lord, I have only to add, that had I bee t ' aware of what was intended to be done to-day, should perhaps have been better prepared wit' some filets; but as far a e my memory goes I hav e supplied them. First, I contend that Governmen t are not to blame for not producing information at an earlier period. Secondly, that they are not to blame for any of the transactions at Terceira; and thirdly: that in maintaining neutrality between Portugal si! Brazil, we hive only followed the course befor e pursued in affairs of the s ame d escr ip t i o n. All , shall say in addition is, that we are at all time ready to meet inquiry. Lord HOLLAND—I throw myself on the itt . dulgence of the House, and as I shall confine nir self strictly to explanation, I am sure I shall only occupy a short time. If I were to go into all the points on which the Noble Duke has misrepresented me—unintentionally, I admit, from the bottom of my heart--I should be obliged to claiai a m uch longer indulgence. The point on which lam par' ticularly anxious ia, that where he supposes I sai d that the universal community of Portugal was against Don Miguel. True it is I might use thi words " univer sa l commun i ty ," b ut I spo k e 0' g the degree of interest and influence we ought to preserve in Portugal. I am afraid the effect of these transactions, whether right or wrong, has been to estrange the universal community of Portugal from England; and I believe our conduct has sunk us in the eyes even of the Miguelites. 1 0 that body we never had many friends, and the large majority are governed by a hatred of our policy and institutions. I believe the object of those who poi' seas the greatest abilities is ultimately to effect union of Portugal under a Bourbon Prince, and the abolition of the line of policy pursued by what is called the Apostolieal Faction in Europe. I believe they think that the power of Great Britain is less to be dreaded than might be imagined. On the whole question of interference I could not have made myself understood to the Noble Duke ; for I can admit all he says, with one exception only, and yet my argument remains untouched. I say that we have interfered in Portugal —not by arms indeed, but in the same way in which we interfered with o ther Powers—in the regulation of their internal affairs. If we had not interfered to oppose Dou Miguel, we should have been successful; and the Noble Duke adds an exception to the order of non-interference given to the commander of our troops ; he was to in terfere for the protection of the person of the Prince, but he was not to interfere for the pro tection of the people. If the Prince were exposed to peril in consequence of his tyranny, the British troops were to be immediately called into action; but if the people were attacked—their dearest rights invaded by the Prince, and their persons exposed to death, torture, or imprisonment—the British army was to stand by and patiently suffer and counte nance the infliction. I should like to know w hat would have been the state of this country if the same argument had been applied to it by foreign Powers in the reigns of Charles I. and, James II.? Yet, guilty as they were, it is npou those Princes to compare th e m with Do n Miguel. : I do not call for such interference e twAe Britiph,Corn mander was to exercise ; an4 r sy.ll4o. e tl;cpap u l ar feel ing was outraged, I would pogreginrchim to:say to the usurper—" Fear nothiagiatibtiadthintonearth— do what you will, we williiotiprevont yats—:do what you will, we will protect you." Notwithstanding all that the. Nob:e Duke I T satisfied that, but for the Council of Vieiyia and London, Don Miguel would not h*All;4ble to accomplish his purpose of usuipatfoft'Od reiSiOn. On some other points I acttrilt that 't i ksi Duke hus made out a fair Parliamentary cas% ppa that it is in fact the satut.which he stated last year. There is one more point,on which I do not seem to have been clear: tvhcial sakiCi. that last year Ministers held out hopes that, theteLwoultl be no war, and yet that a war brake 604.4 did not refer to the war in the Mores, butrint 'War between Russia and Turkey. In thwitirita 4 Speech we were assured that there would be ntNtdelilliar, and afterwards, when a question was Ole yitrui"the subject, it was said that, although the j fiefore express e d w ere cons id era bl y fa i nter , .st .D i f p ill t was thought th a t h ost ili t i es wou ld b e avoided. I thank the House for having indulged we with this explanation, and I was particular':} rnxious not to be misunderstood on the point of the Popularity of Don Miguel. Although I do not (now much of the people of Portugal, I believe that ,heir opinions are very much divided on the question of succession,—of this lam sure, that there is a very formidable anti-Anglican party. The Duke of WELLINGTON—When I re ferred to the instructions to the Cominanding Officer o o t dntfn h o s saoo hrio a e f r o fri dee l t vy cm i et n t o l sKk h l hi o t pr t n lc e r ie e itdi l e t no e i a l Fs kg f : l n e v pi n o , f r i sss oef o r e At e t rtc : f s e hov i e ns oi e r af s p n) in te rf e rence ors . t rTltrahe a usecA n rt tk d lf)Ayet: pem J atr hr : ab,a n ;r l w:d e e s av the when were we ' 1 the Treaty thy' it ' would nuogt aware that o s ur. and That e x h p o r p e e s s ewitsdogurroulropiteheoe (Awn from the Turkish of the sixth July, though we the Ambassadors had with ( ' fnt eti eNc t o hn vtoc h . t e hhip f h e l t o eceyh s r% s‘ s mo h,l e e‘, eraovrhlsttlsa:a. triregdchseedtretbatiheaesrlei( uea f el l no,d, ,itoe:be:P,trtlieoiee co rrectly tnddfosirt alludedrt gr (ali latteri m o t ia: thenaisand means, t eewo r notioloepttrs