The Sun. — London, England, 1837-04-20 00:00:00

quentity of muskets and bayonets to the Queen of Spain, but why had he done so ?—(Hear, hear.) Why, because be found it expressed in the Quadruple Treaty that this country was bound to furnish the Queen of Spain with arms and munitions of war.—( Cheers.) That was an express sti pulation, and the Duke of Wellington could do no other wise than comply with it. But it was a different question whether, although by the terms of the treaty, this Govern ment were bound to supply arms and munitions of war, they bad any right to send out troops. If no such obligation were reposed on them, he should then like to know how they could justify the sanction which they had given to the levy of 10.000 men to co-operate with the forces of the Queen of Spain against an insurgent army—how they could justify sending out a body of Marines and a troop of Artillery for any such purpose.—(Cheers.) That was a very different pro position, and the question was—was such a course in strict accordance with the treaty ? Last night a discussion took place between the Noble Lord the Member for Hertford and the Hon. and Learned Member for the Tower Hamlets, with re si ect to the interpretation of this clause of the treaty. He would not pretend to say that the Noble Lord's construction was right; on the contrary, he was willing to admit that the con struction of the Hon. and Learned Member for the Tower Ham lets was the correct one ; but whether that were so or not, did not affect the question before the House. The Noble Lord had said that Don Carlos occupied the northern provinces when the Queen of Spain entered into the treaty with England and France, in order to prevent the insurgent army from obtaining supplies of arms, ammunition, and provisions across the French frontier. The King of France refused to employ his army in co operation with that of the Queen of Spain ; but he agreed to prevent the passing of supplies to the troops of Don Carlos. That, be said, was the effect of the treaty, so far as France was concerned. But as the sea coast was open, and as ammu nition and provisions might be obtained in that way, England undertook to prevent, by means of a naval force, the introduc tion of all supplies along shore.—(Cries of " Oh, oh,' from the Ministerial benches.) He was merely speaking of the construction which was put upon the treaty last night, and he thought the Noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs would not venture to contend that this was not one of the objects of the treaty.----( Hear, hear.) But whether this inter pretation was correct or not, he was satisfied that the construe tion given to the clause to which he referred by the lion. and Learned Member for the Tower Hamlets was not right; because the answer which he gave to the interpretation of the Noble Lord was, that this could not be the construction, and, for this reason, that his interpretation would imply that there was no such word in the English vocabulary as " blockade."— ( Loud cheering.) That was the argument, as he understood it, of the Hon. and Learned Member for the Tower Hamlets. But, surely, if it were intended to stipulate for a blockade, the Forts to be blockaded ought to have been mentioned. Now, what ports were there to which such a stipulation could apply? Why, they were ports every one of which was already in pos. seseion of the Queen of Spain.—(Cheers.) The argument of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, therefore, would not answer his purpose. fie would now revert to the argument of the Hon. and Learned Member for the Tower Hamlets with respect to the Quadruple Treaty itself. The Hon. and Learned ('ntleman contended that the effect of the Treaty, without the additional articles, was to bind this country to co-operate with the Queen of Spain in actual warfare, and to afford as eistance. Dr. LUSH INGTON—No ; what I said was that that was the effect of the two. Sir 'W. FOLLETT—WeII, the lion. and Learned Gen tleman had said that the effect of the two was to bind The King of Engles' to interfere, to take part, in feet, in the war iu Spain, and that, therefore, the Government had done no more than what they were bound to do.—( Cheers.) The Honour able and Learned Gentleman had not adverted to either the time or the circumstances when the treaty was catered into, but the House would recollect that it was entered into after the idant Dan Miguel had been driven from Lisbon to San tarem. and when the Infant Don Carlos was with him there. Ole object for which the treaty was entered into was that of defending . the independence of Portugal, and preventing the ,-;,‘ettieh army from reinaiiiing in that country longer than was srestessary, and the other was to compel the Infantes Don Ali gild end Don Carlos to withdraw from the Portuguese terri tory. Now, what was the stipulation contained in the treaty? - .Vity, it was, " That her Majesty the Queen binds herself to withdraw her troops from the Portuguese territory immediately tit e the expulsion of the said Infamies shall be accomplished, nod Coat the presence of the said troops shall no loiieer be ; equired by her Most Faithful Portuguese Majesty." Th • object of the treaty, therefore, was to get Don Miguel and Den Carlos out of Portugal. But what did the King of reegland contract to do ? Why—" His Majesty the King of Greet Britain engages to co-operate by employing a naval ,i'ree to second the necessary resolutions and operations con teteuent upon the present treaty ;" while the King of' France titian: took to do actually nothing, as would be seen by the 4th article, which was as follows:—" In case the co-operation of France shall be deemed necessary by the high contracting parties, hie Majesty the King of the French engages to do all that pia Majesty end his very august allies shall unanimously eetermiee upon."—(Cheers.) The object of the treaty was, therefore, clear, and defined. There was no obscurity or un certainty about it, or the limits of the ob'egations of the re spective contracting parties. The treaty, then, was entered into r the purpose of assisting in ejecting Don Miguel and Don Carlos from Portugal. That was the effect which it was designed to produce. Now look at the additional articles— se bat did they say ? Why, that—" His Majesty the King of the French engaged to take in that part of hie dominions which adjoins Spain the measures best calculated to prevent any kind of succour, whether of men, arms, or munitions of war, being sent from the French territory to the insurgents in Spain." And that—" His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland engages to furnish to her Catholic Majesty all succours in arms and munitions of war which her Catholic Majesty may require, and further to Resist with naval forces, if necessary." Now. he should like know from the Noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what the construction was which he put on this article? Did the Noble Lord believe that if the people of England knew, when the treaty was laid before Parliament, its object was to lead them to a co-operation in a war about a disputed succession, to oblige them to continue that co-operation until this war was put down—a war that might lead to a general war throughout Europe—that they would ever have sanctioned such policy?—(Loud cheers.) Suppose the Queen of Spain were established on her throne by means of foreign troops and foreign bayonets, what advantage was this country likely to obtain front it? They all knew the jealousy ot the Spa eiards, and their hatred of foreign interference in their affairs. The motion of his Right Hon. Friend was to prevent the con tinuance of the British Auxiliary Legion in Spain, arid to re cal the Marine force and troop of Artillery which had been sent to that country. That was the object of his Right Hon. Friend's motion.—( Cheers.) Was the sending of such a force without the sanction of the Government to co-operate with the Queen's land forces in accordance with the treaty? Until he heard it from his Right Hon. Member the Member for Kir cudbright, that night, he was not aware it could be contended that the Legion, Marines, and Artillery, were in Spain in com pliance with the terms of the Treaty.—( Cries of " No, no.") Now, he would first beg their attention to the employment of the Marines, because that was contended to be in strict accor dance with the treaty. That had been stated both by the Hon. and Learned Member for the Tower Hamlets and the lion. Gentleman the Secretary to the Admiralty, who asserted That nothing more had been done than to give a mere naval co-operation. Let them see that case. Was it a fair con struction of the treaty not only to send to Spain a naval force, but a battalion of Marines, under the command of a Field Officer of Marines, together with a detachment of artillery to assist the Spanish army ? If not to be under the command of a Spanish General, could it be said that this was a naval co operation ?—( Cheering.) Let them see how the Honourable Gentleman the Secretary for the Admiralty proved that it was a naval co-operation. He said that it was so because in the last war innumerable instances had occurred of the sailors and Marines belonging to the fleet acting as land forces— of their having marched across the deserts of Egypt, defending and storming forts. He (Sir W. Follett) could add another instance ; he could tell the Hon. Gentleman more ; he could tell him of a land battle, in which the guns were worked by sailors and marines.—( Cheers.) He would give him one instance more, in which the sailors and marines of this country had acted as land forces. If he mistook not, they had acted in this way under the Duke of Wellington, in Portugal. But surely what was done by the British navy, at a time when this country was waging a war—(Cheers)—a war of life and death against the power of France—was no argu ment in support of the construction which bad been put by the Government on this treaty. It was impossible that the same rules that were applicable to the naval service of this country Le a time of war could be applied to the part which the sailors wed marines of this country had taken in the contest now go ing' on in Spain. The sailors and marines co-operated with the land forces in the lines of Torres Vedras. If the crews of the two brigs stationed on the coast of Spain were alone em ployed in that country in the manner which had been de scribed, there would be some pretence for the defence at tempted to be set up ; but as this was not the case, as whole battalions of Marines and Artillery bad been sent out, they .might just as well have sent out a regiment of foot, or a bat- Valion of the Guards.—( Cheers.) If they interfered at all ti. ey should interfere in a manner becoming the dignity of this eotentry.—( Cheers.) He wished when they had determined on interfering that they had done so openly. His Right Hon. Freeiel bad pointed out the destitute condition in which the .Legion had been left by the Spanish Government—they were without hospitals, beds, clothes, or provisions. Now he would ask. the Noble Lord if he could deny that statement ? kch,ers.) Double the number that had been killed in battle had he Wieved died of privation. The Government ought to bare taken upon themselves the responsibility of sending an army to Spate'• or, at all events, of stipulating that the men who went out t:'ere were properly treated. There could be no difficulty in instating on the latter point. Now, with re spect to the Foreign .Enlistment Act, what had the lion. and Learned Memb for the Tower Hamlets said ? Why, he had maid that, by the old law .of this country, any subject of the Crown was at liberty to enter into the service of any foreign :State he pleased. He could not concur in the doctrine laid town by the Learned Gentlemen, nor did he believe such to a* the constitutional law of the country. The Foreign En ttment Act had added nothing to the prerogative of the Cr. 1" , 11 in this respect.—( Cheers. ) lie contended that the °reft r in Council did, in effect, sanction the sending out of the Legion to Spain, but he left it to the Government to deft , nil Their policy in that particular, and to show that they were s justified in allowing 10,000 British subjects to go to that country to take part in the war carrying on there. Hs ; vas at a loss to know how any person could defend the, e °Hey of sending ten thousand of our countrymen to int e11 . ..we in this contest, when the Government did not ven ;me to interfere openly in the affairs of the Peninsula.-- ( Loud cheers.) He wished that the Noble Lord had at te. **led to ?That had been stated on this subject by a French General of very great experience. He did not recollect the exact words, but the substance was this, " that if you interfered at all, you ought to interfere openly. If you send an army, let it march under your national colours, and with all the credit and weight that ought to attach to a national army.—( Cheers.) Such an army you should not send unless you had first taken care that it should be provided with every necessary supply, and that you should take care that the competent maintenance of that army should be previously stipulated for."—(Loud cheers.) That was the advice of an experienced French General— advice which the Noble Lord opposite had disregarded in every particular. The Noble Lord had forgotten to do an) one of those things here pointed out.--( Cheers.) With re spect to interference, he would remind the Noble Lord of an opinion on that subject by one whom no one could accuse of any favourable leaning towards despotism. The President of the United States said—" We endeavour to conduct our in tercourse with openness and sincerity, promptly avowing our objects, and seeking to establish that mutual frankness which is as beneficial in the dealings of nations as of men. We have no disposition, and we disclaim all right, to meddle in disputes, whether internal or foreign, that may molest other countries, regarding them in their actual state as social communities, and preserving a strict neutrality in all their controversies. Well knowing the tried valour of our people, and our exhaustless resources, we neither anticipate nor fear any designed ag gression ; and, in the consciousness of our own just conduct, we feel a security that we shall never be called upon to exert our determination never to permit an invasion of our rights without punishment or redress." He wished that the Noble Lord either had not interfered at all, or that he had inter fered with frankness and sincerity.—(Loud cheers.) It had been loudly asserted on the other side of the House that Don Carlos was the author of the Durango decree. They said that Don Carlos was an assassin, and they called on the House not to affirm a motion which they said would have the effect of placing such a criminal upon the Spanish throne. He must confess that that argument, coming from the other side of the House, perfectly astonished him.--( Cheers.) Now, it ought to- be recollected that the present Government of Spain was not the Government that existed there at the time of the Quadruple Treaty. The present Government of Spain was of recent origin—it was the Constitutional Government of Spain. 'Now if that Government was so popular in Spain as it was represented to be, it perfectly astonished him ( Sir W. Follett) how any motion in that House could interfere av'th the stability of that Government. It was stated in the course of this debate, on a former night, that William 111. came here with a foreign army, and that the revolution was effected by foreign interference. Now that was not the fact. Surely the Noble Lord who had used that argument did not mean to say that the six or eight thousand Dutchmen brought over here by King William had any effect in the expulsion of the Stuarts from the throne of this country. No, that re volution had been effected by the people of England them selves, and if the Spanish people desired a Constitution, or were worthy of Constitutional liberty, they ought to be al lowed to earn that Constitutional liberty themselves, without any foreign interference. They had been taunted at the other side of the House with being the supporters and abet tors of Don Carlos. Now, no Hon. Member in that House felt a greater abhorrence of those decrees and acts than he did. He ( Sir W. Follett) was neither their abettor, their apologist, nor their vindicator. He, for his part, felt no interest what ever in the success of Don Carlos. He had no sympathy with his interests, neither did he feel any sympathy with the existing Government. But when the atrocities of Don Carlos were talked of, let him bring to the recollection of the House and of the Noble Lord that his Majesty's Ministers were the abettors of a Government in Spain which had Mina as one of its military cernmanders—( Cheers)—and which had continued him in his command after he had been guilty of conduct much more atrocious and abominable than the promulgation of the Durango decree.—( Cheers.) What he was interested in was this, that we should put a stop to the further effusion of the blood of our countrymen.—(Cheers.) He had an interest— the House had-an interest—and the country had an interest— in withdrawing our countrymen from participating in a brutal and demoralising contest. In conclusion, he demanded of the House no longer to permit a country which was historically connected with England by the proudest and most glorious recollections to become the scene of the misfortune, the dis grace, and dishonour of the Britith name. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman sat down amidst great cheering. Viscount l' A L ME RSTON rose amidst cheers from the Opposition, which were continued for several minutes. When silence was restored he said—l think the House will suppose that I was only Tel forming what I conceived to be the duty which I owe to the situation I hold, and showing that respect which is becoming from me to the House, if I have delal;ed till this period of the debate—( Loud cries of " Hear," filial t! • Opposition)--to rise to address myself to the subject before it—( Cheers)---became I consider that haring the honour to fill the situation of Foreign Secretary—the office peculiarly connected with the subject of the present discussion—it was my duty to wait to hear the arguments by which the motion would he supported before I presented myself to the attention of the House.—( Hear, hear.) I must say that I think the reproach which has been cast upon us by the lion. and Learned Member for Bath (Mr. Roebuck) comes very ungraciously from him, because he, having begin his speech by saying that he had made up his mind not to vote at all upon the question, could therefore have no ol,ject in hearing my speech—( Hear) —with a view to any conduct of his upon the occasion.— ( Hear.) Therefore I think that the reason he gave at the commencement of his speech at least exempts me from the necessity of making any explanation to him of the reasons which have induced me so long to delay my address to the House upon this question.--( Hear ) I must even now— even after the speech of the Hon. and Learned Member for Exeter ( Sir IV. Follett), who, having been moved by a sud den thought in the course of the evening —( Laughter and cheers)—has most opportunely, and I must say not without necessity, rushed to the rescue—(Cheers)—even after that speech, able and learned as it was, I must say that, as far as the vote of to-night is to depend upon the arguments used on the two sides of the House, I should be perfectly ready to go to the vote upon the statements and arguments which have been made by the Hon. Gentlemen who have preceded me on this side--( Hear, hear)—and should be perfectly con tent to rest the judgment of this House, of this country, and of Europe, upon the powerful aguments which have been used on my side of the question by my Hon. and Right Hon. Friends who sit near me, with what I must be allowed to say, without intending any offence, the lamentable failure of the Hon. Gentlemen who sit opposite.—(Cheers.) I say lamentable failure, because when the character and ability of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who has just addressed the House has been unable to make an impression upon the powerful speech of my Hon. and Learned Friend the Mem ber for the Tower Hamlets (Dr. Lushington)—(Laughter and cheers)—l say when that Honourable and Learned Gentleman has failed, I cannot anticipate that any aid that may be afforded by his Learned or unlearned Friends near him will succeed in destroying or impairing the argu ment of my Hon. and Learned Friend.—( Hear, hear.) I say, then, that I think I owe no apology to any one in this House for not having at an earlier moment addressed myself to the subject of debate.—( Hear.) I must first of all beg to say I regret the line of argument which the Hon. and Gallant Offi cer ( Sir H. Hardinge) who brought this motion forward was induced to adopt, because it led him into a number of details with respect to Gen. Evans and the Legion, because I know, and I speak this really sincerely, that the Honourable and Gallant Officer, whatever the strength of his political opinions may be, is at heart an honourable and generous man. I re gret, therefore, that the line of argument to which he was driven to have recourse for the want of any better made it ne cessary to string together s number of details which, whatever the conviction under which the Gallant Officer stated them, must have the effect of producing a powerful sensation on the minds of the persons concerned.—( Hear.) The greater part of the speech of the Hon. and Gallant Officer, and the chief ground upon which he rested his motion, was the suffer ing of the Legion in Spain, in consequence of the defi ciency of the Spanish Government in providing them with those resources which were necessary to their comfort and well-being.—( Hear, hear.) I must do the Hon. and Gal lant officer the justice to say, that there was nothing in his speech to reflect in the slightest degree upon the character of General Evans ?—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Gallant Officer honestly and distinctly did justice to the bravery of General Evans in the field, and to his anxiety for the welfare of his men; and I beg leave to say that I can bear my testi mony, too, to the same facts, because I have had communica tions with General Evans which testify the nobleness of mind which induced him to undertake a task in which I think he has done himself great credit.—( Hear, hear.) I can say that it was no mercenary motive—( Hear, hear)—that it was no mean desire of obtaining any personal advantage to himself, beyond that which arises from the performance of an honour able duty, and the promotion of those great principles by which his public conduct has been invariably guided.--( Hear, hear, hear.) General Evans thought that by taking the command of the Legion in Spain he should be promoting the interests of his country, the policy of its Government — (Loud cheers from the Opposition), and those principles which he himself had always advocated.—( Continued cheering from the Opposition.) Surely this could not be a new discovery on the part of the Hon. Gentlemen opposite.—( Cheers.) Are they really doubting whether it was the policy of the Government that the Order in Council should be acted upon, or do they suppose that the order was intended to be regarded only as a dead letter, and never to be carried into effect?— (Hear, hear.) I say, therefore, that the conduct of General Evans did him honour, and has protected him from any im putation from any man or any quarter whatever.—(Hear, hear.) It is not fitting for me to discuss with the Hon. and Gallant Officer questions of a military kind; but I must sub mit to his higher judgment in these matters, whether the po sition in which General Evans was placed was not one of peculiar military difficulty—( Hear, hear)—and whether ever, he must not acknowledge that it has seldom happened that an officer acting under such trying circumstances has conducted himself in a manner less subject to censure. What has been General Evans's situation? It has been that of an officer having the command of 8,000 or 9,000 men, upon a coast within musket shot of the enemy—of men few of whom had ever seen each other before, who were not organized, who had the whole process to go through of being converted into regular and disciplined troops, and that too upon the spot where their active and immediate services were re quired —(( Hear, hear.) Therefore, when Gentlemen com pare the discipline of the conduct of the Legion in its earlier career with that of the more regular troops in the King's service, I must call upon them to recollect the distinc tion between the cases of the two.—( Hear, hear.) The one consisted of troops half organized and half disciplined, the other would take into the field all the qualities that result from a long course of discipline and control.—( Hear, hear. ) With respect to the sufferings of the Legion, and of the number of men who fell sick at Vittorio., I must be allowed to ask the Hon. and Gallant Officer (Sir Henry Hardinge) whether, in the course of his military experience, particularly in the Peninsular war, and especially in the neighbourhood of Badajos, after the battle of Talavera, the sickness which took place in the British army, far better equipped and pro vided for, but consisting in a great degree of men recently ar rived in the country, was not quite equal, if not much greater, than that which took place in the Legion at the period to which he has alluded ?—( Hear, hear, bear.) So far, then, from making these circumstances which are the ordinary evils and inconveniences of war a ground for a specific charge against the Government, Isay I do not believe, if the facts were well looked into, that it would appear that the inconve niences which the Legion had sustained were greater, if so great, as those sustained by the regular troops of England employed in the Peninsular campaign.— (Hear, hear.) But, then, the Hon. and Gallant Officer dwelt greatly upon the de moralizing effect upon troops serving in conjunction with men guilty of the cruelties practised by the Christiuo troops. In the first place, I believe that if any cruelties have been prac tised in Spain, they have been pretty much confined to the troops to whom the Legion were opposed, and not the troops with whom they served. But it is too much for the Gallant Officer who served during the Peninsular war in co-operation with the troops of Spain—who saw the arms of England aided by the co-operation of the guerillas, and who must recollect the cruelties then committed upon the French, upon all strag glers, upon prisoners, and upon the wounded—enormities which I will not repeat to the House, but which every one who hears me and recollects that period of war must have present in his mind—it is too much, I say, for the Hon. and Gallant Officer, or for the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel), who, I suppose, will follow me—(Laughter and cheers)—it is too much for them, who did not think that the army of the Duke of Wellington ought to be recalled from Spain or Por tugal, for fear the morals of the men should be contami nated by the co-operation of General Mina—that same Mina whose continuation in command by the Government of Spain we are told to-night by the Hon. and Learned Member for Exeter (Sir William Follett) ought to be a sufficient reason to induce us to break faith with the Spanish Government—l say it is too much for these Gentlemen to tell us now that the reason why the Legion ought to be recalled is because the morals of the men may become contaminated. I regret these atrocities, whatever they may be, or by whomsoever committed, as much as any man in this Honsc can possibly do. But, un- s fortunately, Sir, history tells us that it is in the character of the Spanish nation, and has been so in all,time, whether in war or in peace, to be more cruel and bloodthirsty than any other nation in Europe.—( Hear, hear.) Look at their conquest of America 1—( Hear, hear.) Look at all the wars that have taken place in Spain from the war of the succession down to the war of 1815, and you will see that in all cases they have been peculiarly fond of blood. And then I invite you to look at their civil commotions, when you will see upon all those oc casions a greater disregard of those principles of humanity, which we are so justly proud of, than are to be found in the annals of any other country in Europe. But I trust and hope that one of the results, at least, from the regeneration of Spain, through the medium of a free constitution, will be, by the creation of public opinion, which such a constitu tion must produce, that these defects and vices in the na tional character will for the future be corrected.—(Cheers.) There Is one point of which I wish in the first place to dis encumber this question. We have been told that it is a great crime on our part to have allied ourselves with any parties in an endeavour to rob the Basques of their privileges. We have been told that we have been endeavouring to oppress, to subjugate, to subvert a free and independent people, who are fighting for their liberties and their privileges; and, to hear the honourable gentlemen opposite, one would suppose that the question was, not whether despetisin is to be im posed upon the people of Spain, but whether the inhabitants of the Basque provinces are to be deprived of free institutions and be reduced to arbitrary sway.—( Loud cheers.) Now I say Sir, that is not the question ; but that the reverse of that is the question. The war in the B ;slue proVinces, the insur rection, as the Hon. and Learned Gentleman calls it—and I thank him for the word, for he talks of the insurgents, although the Hon. Member for Sandwich calls them, I presume, the royal forces—(Much laughter)—but that war, what was it ? Why did the imurgelits, as the Hon. and Learned Gentleman designated them, take tip arms? Was it because their privileges were invaded? No such thing. They took up arms for Carlos and despotism against Isabella and constitutional government.—( Hear, hear.) And what is the present state of war in those provinces? Why, if I am not very much misinformed, the Basques aro as tired of the war as any people can be of any great infliction from which they arc unable to escape. The army of Carlos, I believe, is mainly composed of persons not belonging to those pro vinces. The councillors of 'Carlos, General Moreno and his other generals, are not persons belonging to the Basque pro vinces ; and although a portion of his army is composed of the Basque people, it consists in a great degree of men who cannot quit his service, because thei: 1 repsrty, their rela tions, and their families arc in the country occupied by the troops of that ferocious man.—(Cheers.) They know—they are told, and more that told, because the threat has been executed—that if they desert his service their families will pay the forfeiture of their offence ; these men are therefore compelled, whether willing or not, to continue in the service of Don Carlos.—( Hear, hear.) One honourable gentleman, I forget which it was, but after all I think it was the noble lord the member for South Lancashire (Lord E. Egerton), said, that he believed it would be a greater advantage to the Basques to get rid of those privileges for which they were fighting than to retain them. I concur with that noble lord in that opinion. Those privileges were great and valuable so long as the rest of Spain was sulject to arbitrary govern ment and a despotic king. So long as neither justice nor law were to be had, then their exceptions gave them an approach to constitutional freedom. But when the whole of Spain is to be governed, as I trust it will be, by a free Government, with independent and impartial tribunals, with laws properly admi nis:e-ed, and with a Government responsible to public opinion, then, I sly, the Basques will find it far more to their advantage to be incorporated pith the rest of the Spanish nation, than to be excluded, is a corner of the land, from those benefits which the rest of their countrymen enjoy. What were the privileges of the Basques ? No man will pretend that exemption from cus:om ses is a real advantage to them, because they them selves have frequently petitioned to be relieved from that privi lege, and to be allowed to be placed on the same footing with the rest of their countrymen. The great privilege which they enjoyed was the possession of local self-government—( Hear, hear)—those municipalities by which they governed their own affairs. And what are we to think of the consistency of those gentlemen—(Tremendous cheers)—who, while, on the one hand, they are endeavouring to deprive their own coun trymen—( Cheering)—of those corporations to which they are attached, on the other hand, stand up and entreat us not to interfere with the municipal corporations of the Basques— ( Renewed cheers)—that invaluable legacy, bequeathed to them from their remotest ancestry ?—(Cheers.) I beg, Sir, that we may hear none of this affecting compassion for these Basques fighting for their privileges.—( Cheers.) The poor Basques are made the victims of persons who have other views, and by whom arbitrary power is sought to be supported.--( Hear, hear.) The war which is carried on in the Basque provinces is not a war between the institutions of Spain and the institutions of Biscay. —( Cheers.) It is there, upon that contracted scene, that is to be decided by the issue of battle that great contest between the opposing and conflicting principles of government—arbi trary government on the one head, and constitutional govern ment on the other—that contest which is going on all over Europe, only fortunately for mankind, in other countries it is waged by argument instead of by arms, and the peaceful opera tions of the people are not disturbed by it.--( Cheers.) I trust that in all countries ere long, that contest will be carried on„in the same manner that I am now describing.—(Cheers.) I trust that no violence of party, either on the one side or the other, may disturb the peaceful character by which that con test is carried on in almost every country in Europe. But that is the contest—that is the question at issue ; and those who endeavour to limit us to the question of the privileges of the Basques, give an unfair representation of the real nature of the contest now going on. I am glad that the Right Hon. Gentle man has at last brought this question fairly to an issue to be de cided by a vote of this House. I think that mode of deal ing with it fairer to the question, and, I must say, more worthy of the party by whom it is adopted, than the course they have hitherto pursued. For, whatever has been or may be the strength of their opinions, I do not think that the course the) have hitherto pursued has been much calculated to impress other people with a notion that their convictions were very strong indeed upon the subject.—( Hear, hear.) Their courage upon this question seems to have ebbed and flowed according to the fluctuations of the tide of war.— (Loud cheers ) When things went a little favourably for Don Carlos there was to be observed a great movement on the other side of the House—(Hear, hear), but when bis affairs went ill there was a silence in their ranks.—(Cheers.) Last autumn it was thought that Bilboa would be taken, and great was the song of triumph which was raised by the friends of Don Carlos. Parliament not then being sitting we could not have those rejoicings here; but great was the triumph that resounded from all their acknowledged organs of public opinion.—(Cheers.) But Bilboa was relieved, and relieved by that naval co-operation—( Hear, hcar)_which, according to the Honourable Gentleman opposite, has been of no use to the cause, which has done no good to the interests of England, though it relieved a town in which there were many English merchants, and in which there was much Eng lish capital, from a fate which I fear, if that town had fallen would have embarrassed it in a most unfortunate man ner.—(Cheers.) In spite of shat has been said to-night by one Hon. Member, namely, that Don Carlos abstained from taking Bilboa because he did not wish to do the people any harm—(Laughter)—and that the people had nothing to eat, although they invited Don Carlos to come into the town and dine with them—the contrary of all which I most firmly be lieve—but in spite of this I am persuaded that the army of Carlos had the most blood-thirsty intentions, and that, if 1311- boa had fallen, a scene of massacre and devastation would have succeeded its fall, exceeding any of those horrors which the Hon. Gentleman on the other side have referred to.— (Cheers.) Well, Bilboa was relieved ; Parliament met ; did we shrink from discussion ?--( Cheers.) We put foreign affairs in the first paragraph of the King's speech—( Cheers.) Yes, foreign affairs were put forward in the speech. The Hon. Gentleman opposite contented themselves with some slight allusions to it, but the objections which are now made it did not suit them at that moment to bring forward.--( Hear.) Then came the unfortunate affair of Fuentarabia ; and then the courage of the Carlists in Spain, and the courage of the Carlists here, was once more aroused—(Loud cheers) —whereas before that, and when the success of Bilboa had not been followed up with that degree of activity which had been expected, the Noble Lord the Member for Hert ford went so far as to call the attention of the House to this subject, which he did after the House had gone into a Com mittee of Supple. The Noble Lord on that occasion very candidly stated, that he waited till the Speaker left the Chair, lest, if he had made his speech at an earlier period, some other Hon. Member might have moved a resolution against it, and have carried it by a large majority, Well, whereas beg fore this last encounter—this last misfortune—they bad got so far as a speech in a Committee of Supply, whea the defeat at Fuentarabia took place, and they were induced to think that , things were going much worse for the Queen, they became encouraged, and hence the present debate.—( Hear, hear.) They now come forward not merely upon the Speaker's leaving the Chair, but with a formal motion, in order to per suade this House to pass a vote which is intended to be, and . would be, if adopted by the House, a censure upon the Govern ment of this country, and a call upon that Government by this House to break faith with the Queen of Spain—( Hear) — to abandon their engagements—(No, no, hear, hear)—to tear their treaty in pieces -4 No, no, hear, hear)—and to desert— ( Energetic cries of " No, no," from the Opposition, responded to by loud cries of " Hear," from the Ministerial benches) their ally, because some temporary disaster had befallen their I arms.—(Cheers.) What is the motion, then, before the House ? It is true that the motion of the Right Hon. Gen tleman does not in words go to the extent I have just de scribed.—( Hear, hear.) Quite the contrary.—( Cheers and laughter.) Oh dear, no ; he knows too well—( Cheers)—he and his friends all know that there is a feeling of honour in this House—that there is a regard for national faith—that there is a spirit, too, of good wishes towards a nation strug gling for its freedom ; and if they had acted in a manly way, and had come boldly forward and put in words which they meant to be the object of their motion, they know that they would have a most inconsiderable minority, and that there would be no chance for them whatever of success.—( Hear.) That is the meaning —no, I will not say the meaning—but at all events that must be the effect of the motion of the Right Hon. Gentleman if that motion should be adopted by the House. Because, will any man tell me that if this House were to say that the Order in Council was improper, 1 and were to affirm by implication that the naval co-operation which has been afforded was not justifiable on the part of the Government, the effect of that, both in this country and in Spain, would not be—that England was to abandon the cause of the Queen of Spain, and that our engagements and our mode of executing them had been specifically condemned by the House of Commons ? Now, what is the fault which the Gentlemen opposite find with the Quadruple Treaty ? They say that it has been detrimental to the interests of Eng land, and injurious to her honour. Is that really the case ? —(Hear, hear, hear.) If it be, why have not these Gentle men come forward sooner ?—( Loud cheers ) Why have they not stretched forth their saving hand to rescue the interests of this country from detriment, and to save it from dishonour ? Have they, during the many years that the treaty has been be fore this House, proposed a resolution of censure on the Go vernment for concluding that treaty ? Censure 1 Why, they have acted upon it themselves—(Great cheering)—they have applied it themselves. Is it, then, that treaty which they call upon us to disavow ? Is it that treaty which they would have us abstain from executing ? No, it is the Order in Council.— Why, it is two years since the Order in Council was issued.— ( Hear, hear.) Then there is the co-operation, also, equally denounced. Why, that co-operation has been going on for a twelvemonth. It has been known during tpat period to all the world, and has been avowed from its commencement in this House.—(Cheers.) What, then, I ask, is the reason of this tardy interposition ?—( Loud cheers.) Hon. Gentlemen may talk of " postliminious" prefaces ; but what is the reason of their not rescuing this country from the injuries al ready inflicted on it when they had it in their power to state their views, and when there was a time, if those views were correct, for some good to have arisen to the country by it ?—( Hear, hear.) Has the secret been let out by accident, by anything which has been stated in this House in the course of the last week ?—( Hear, hear.) Is it that there is any where any prophetic spirit of things which may occur ? ( Hear, hear.) Do " coming events cast their shadows be fore ?"—( Hear, hear.) Is it thought by anybody that it might be tor certain persons in certain contingencies conve nient to have a Parliamentary sanction for abandoning a Treaty which in certain quarters was not much approved of, and for receding from engagements which it was felt so grievous to execute ?—Haar, hear.) I have upon other oc casions complimented the Right Hon. Baronet for the faithful and honourable execution of the Treaty when in office. I should be sorry if there were any reason fur any man to think that the Right Hon. Gentleman was not prepared under any circumstances, and let what might befal him, to continue to act in the same honourable manner in which he did before ; or that it would be agreeable to him to have any pretence fur breaking the engagements sad altering the policy of this coun try—a policy which has for its object the freedom of Spain.—(Cheers.) There are three subjects involved, then, in this discussion. There is the Quadruple Treaty, there is the Order in Council, and there is the naval co-operation. The Right Hon. and Gallant Officer did not in his speech al lude to the treaty, but other gentlemen have done so. It has been discussed before, when the question was before the House, with regard to the policy upon which it is founded, and in re gard to the manner in which it has been executed. I will take leave to trait of these three subjects separately and distinctly. There are those on the other side of the House who know as well as I do under what circumstances, and for what objects, that treaty was concluded.—( Hear.) Every man—even the most superficial observer—must have perceived that the change which was made in the succession to the Spanish Crown, though it was made by the will of the Sovereign, carrying into effect also the recorded will of a predecessor, though it was sanctioned by the constitutional authorities of the country, though it was adopted by the people at large, and though, therefore, it was accompanied by every circumstance of legality and regularity, yet that that change in the succession laid the foundation for a great revolution in Spain. It was not merely the substitution of a grown man for an infant female. It was evident that out of that change must grow an entire change in the internal institutions of Spain, and that with such a change in its internal institutions there would also arise a change in the tendencies of its external policy. Upon this subject I will take the liberty of saying a few wordy to my Right Hon. Friend who has seconded the present motion, (Sir Stratford Canning) and who, not deliberately I am sure, but in a moment which would perfectly excuse any thing he might have done under the circumstances, adverted to the in structions--( Loud cries of " Hear")—under which he acted when he went on his mission to Spain. I can assure my Right Hon. Friend it is the last thing I could do towards any person to whom I gave the name of friend, to say any thing with an intention for it to be at all painful to the feelings of the individual.—( Hear.) Therefore, it is not with any view to himself that I advert to what he did. He must, I am sure, in his cooler moments consider that he was not at liberty to advert to instructions given to him upon a mis sion which had not been fulfilled.--( Hear, hear, hear.) I wish to call to his mind what then took place, and when he stated a portion of the instructions I then received, I must be allowed to follow his example, and allude to what occurred. I wish to suggest to him, as bearing on this sub ject, the object for which he was sent to the Peninsula, and the purpose which he was employed to carry into effect. Does my Right Hon. Friend forget the purpose which rendered it necessary to send a legation to Spain, and to take the steps which followed ? My Right Hon. Friend left this coun try in December, 1832, and arrived at Madrid at the com mencement of 1833, and he went, as he stated, at a moment when the death of the King was apprehended. The direct object of the proposition to make to the Spanish nation was this :—The King ( Ferdinand) had resolved that his daughter Isabella, and not his brother Carlos, should succeed him on the Throne of Spain. It then appeared that Donna Isabella was placed in a situation analogous to that of Donna Maria in Portugal. Under these circumstances, my Right Hon. Friend went out to urge the course of policy that was deemed desirable for the interests of both countries in the Peninsula. He had, in conformity with his instructions, to represent to Ferdinand that if that Monarch was anxious that his daughter, and not his brother, should succeed him on the Throne of Spain, his policy should be directed to the establishment of Donna Maria, and that Don Miguel should not be allowed to succeed in placing himself on the Throne of Portugal, whose cause, however, that Monarch had hitherto supported. This was certainly in harmony with the treaty which had been described, and in conformity with the policy that had been pursued, be cause the treaty was founded on the assumption that the will of Ferdinand would be carried into effect, and that his views would be to enforce the object of it. The treaty which had been entered upon would bear out their views, and was in conformity with the instructions which my Right Lion. Friend then advocated. Those interests which he then advanced were adverse to those which he now promulgated.—(Hear, hear.) Now, I say that the change that took place in the policy of the Government of Spain was the natural consequence of the change in the order of succession that was established. It so happened that up to the death of Ferdinand, Spain had inva riably exhibited the greatest hostility to the Government of Donna Maria in Portugal, and had supported Don Miguel by every possible indirect manner, and even it had proceeded to the extent of offering the assistance of troops. From the time that Ferdinand died, a change took place in the conduct of the Spanish Government towards Portugal. This coun try had hitherto remained neutral in the contest that was go ing on in Portugal as to the succession to the Government of that country, as my Right Hon. Friend well knows. What was then the language of my Right Hon. Friend to Spain, with reference to the policy of Ferdinand to wards the Government of Portugal ? He said to the Spanish a uthories, " If you send armed men across the frontier of Portugal to assist Miguel, the British fleet in the Ta gus will instantly co-operate in every possible way with the forces of Donna Maria. If, however, you do not send troops, or otherwise interfere, we will not take part in the contest." What was the result ? Spain remained neutral, and so far the object in view was accomplished.—(Hear, hear.) What hap pened on the death of Ferdinand? So far from their taking part in the cause of Don Miguel against the cause of Donna Maria, a change of policy instantly occurred. A Spanish Mi nister came to London to ask the English Government to send a force to assist in expelling Don Miguel from Portugal, and also to co-operate with the establishment of Donna Maria.-- ( Hear, hear.) Nothing was more natural than this, because Don Carlos at this time was in Portugal organising an army for the invasion of Spain. What was the answer of the Eng lish Government? " We will not comply with your request; we will not give the assistance you desire to the cause of Donna Maria ; we have taken our line of policy, and we do not intend to depart from it. We will, however, give you something which will be of advantage to you—we will not give you an army, but we will give you a Treaty."— ( A laugh from the Opposition and cheers from the Ministerial benches.) This offer was accepted ; and now let us see what this Treaty was. One of the objects of the Spanish Government was, that part of the Spanish army should be allowed to pass the frontier and enter Portugal, with the view of taking steps to put down the army of Carlos ; and for the attainment of this object it was necessary to enter into a convention between the Spanish and Portuguese Govern ments.—( Hear, hear.) This afforded an opportunity for the attainment of a greater object. The English Goverment said, We will embrace the circumstance of this treaty to join the , four great powers of the west of Europe, namely, France, ' England, Spain, and Portugal, in one alliance-.,.we will unite them for the attainment of one common and general object." —(Hear, hear.) England and France had for ages been ene mies. Spain and Portugal for a long period of years had ! been accustomed to regard each other with feelings of jealousy, and, without going into all its bearings and contingent possi bilities, he could not help feeling that it could not fail to be of material assistance for preserving the peace of Europe thus uniting the four great powers, when there were so many great points of contest and difference constantly arising between them.—( Cheers.) He proposed this alliance to the French Government, and that great power joyfully acceded to it. I need not say that the offer of this treaty was thankfully re ceived by the Spanish Government, and the Queen of Spain jumped at tht opportunity of adopting it.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite laughed when I mentioned that we had given a treaty ; but I am not sur prised at this, as they have been so much accustomed to laugh at treaties and protocols—( Hear, hear, hear, and laughter)— and no doubt they think they are justified in doing so, as they have paid so much attention and listened so much study on the subject ; they may therefore suppose that this treaty was of no weight or importance; they may think that it was a mere mockery to Spain and Portugal.—( Hear, hear.) The treaty was concluded in April, 1834, and was ratified in Lon don, I believe, on the 31st of May, and was then sent to Portugal to be signed and sent back to England. This was in conformity with the stipulations of diplomacy, for the gen tlemen opposite are aware that a treaty is not in force until the ratifications are exchanged. But such was the effect of this treaty, that before the ratifications were exchanged, Don Mi guel, although with an army of 12,000 men, found it necessary to abandon Portugal without further resistance. Thus the pre tenders to the two thrones of the Peninsula abandoned Por tugal. If, instead of a treaty, the English Government had offered the assistance of an army of 20,000 men, the same re sult would not have been produced in the same time. But this treaty consisted of two parts. In the first place there was the general principle and object of it, which was stated in the preamble; and the second part, there were the general acts of executive which were to grow out of it. Now, the pre amble to which I wish to call the attention of the House states the views of the parties, and the objects which they had in view. Hon. Gentlemen opposite said that it merely applies to the in vasion of Portugal by the army of General Rodil, and to the object then immediately in view, namely, the putting down the forces of the two pretenders. The preamble, however, says no such thing ; but it states the object when the parties entered into the treaty. It said that " her Majesty the Queen Regent of Spain, during the minority of her daughter Donna Isabella the Second, Queen of Spain, and his Imperial Majesty the Duke of Branganza, regent of the kingdom of Portugal and of the Al garves, in the name of the Queen Donna Maria 11., being impressed with a deep conviction that the interests of the two crowns"—the object, then, was not merely securing the inheritance of the crown of Portugal, but of both king doms—" being impressed with a deep conviction that the inte rests of the two crowns and the security of their respective dominions require the immediate and vigorous exertions of their joint efforts to put an end to hostilities, which, though directed in the first instance against the throne of his most Faithful Majesty, now afford shelter and support to dis affected and rebellious subjects of the crown of Spain." It is here obvious that the interests of both nations were in ♦olved. The preamble proceeds, "and their majesties being desirous at the same time to provide the necessay means for restoring to the subjects of each the blessings of internal peace, and to confirm by mutual good offices the friendship which they are desirous of establishing and cementing between their respective states, they have come to the determination of uniting their forces, in order to com pel the Infant Don Carlos of Spain, and the Infant Don Miguel of Portugal, to withdraw from the Portu guese dominions."—(Cheers.) The obvious purpose of this was not merely to compel Don Carlos to withdraw from a place where he was not. Such a treaty would have been well worthy of the merriment of honourable gentleman op posite. In consequence of this agreement to provide for the security of the two countries, and to secure the internal peace of the two kingdoms, these two powers addressed themselves to the King of England and the King of the French. What were the answers of the King of England and the King of the French ? Was the answer of the King of England to the effect—" although I am bound by treaty to Portugal to afford her aid and assistance under certain circum stances, I have no interest in Spain : I will therefore abstain from being a party to the treaty ?" No ; the King of England and the King of the French considered the first objects they had in view—the interest which they must always take in the security of the Spanish monarchy.—( Hear, hear.) This was the first object in view in joining in tl.is treaty. They were further anxiously desirous to establish peace, not merely in Portugal, but in the Peninsula.—( Cheers.) Was this all ? No ; they were anxious as well to establish peace in every part of Europe.—( Cheers.) Her enemies think that the peace of the Peninsula has no connection with the peace of the rest of Europe.—( Hear, hear, hear.) I will tell Honourable Gen tlemen that if Don Carlos could succeed in establishing his power in Spain, certainly peace might exist there—for the iron tyranny that would be established might secure a species of tranquillity; but if this tranquillity of death were procured in Spain, peace, I am satisfied, would be destroyed in the rest of Europe.—( Cheers.) Look to the condition of France if Don Carlos should succeed.—( Hear, hear.) What would be the condition of the Government of France if this should happen ; and instead of there being on the other side of the Pyrenees a friendly power, and a com mon understanding and common interest existing between the two nations, there should be established a Government in Spain similar to that which existed when Ferdinand ruled ? ( Hear, hear.) I believe the statement I am about to make is correct, but I am not able to state it officially, that when the Revolution of France in 1830 took place, and when it was a doubtful matter whether or not the great military powers of Europe would not unite, and endeavour to put down the French Government there established by force, a message was sent from a great Northern Power to Ferdinand, as I have heard, and as I believe, to the effect, that as such a Govern ment had been established in France, you must send an army of 40,000 men to the foot of the Pyrenees to control the energies and embarrass the operations of the French Govern ment.—( Loud cheers.) I am sure that the Government of Ferdinand would ha►e willingly done this but for the circum stances that then occurred ; for the Spanish Government was not then an independent Government, but swayed and con trolled by great foreign powers and influenced by the Czar. I say, then, that the establishment of Don Carlos on the throne of Spain would be incompatible with the independence and the security and tranquillity of France. I am sure if the French Government thought that the cause of Carlos was likely to be successful, and the government of Isabella and a free Constitution was likely to be followed by the rule of that Prince, that it would not be able to withhold the exercise of such a direct influence and interference as would secure the independence of the Government of Isabella, and the expul sion of Don Carlos from Spain.—(Loud cheers.) Therefore it was thought desirable to procure by treaty the fulfilment of these great objects.—( Hear, hear.) I have before said that the present Government in Spain was established by a revolu tion, and I say so now. 1 am aware on this point that there is a fundamental difference of opinion —I know that there is a party who believe that nations, like a private estate, should not depart from the heir in succession without his consent, while another party believe that a government should be made for the benefit of the nation and the happiness of a people—( Loud cheers)--and that it is necessary that there should exist, in every community, the power of changing, if necessary, the head of the government.—( Cheers.) This was the painciple on which our own Government was founded in 1688.—( Cheers.) This was the principle on which the present Government of France was founded by the revolution of 1830. The Govern ment of Isabella was on the same principle, and was as much a revolution, although a peaceable revolution, as that of July in France.—( Hear, hear, hear.) It was brought about by the legitimate organs of the nation ; and I will not dispute that one of the consequences which had followed from it are the calamities which now afflict parts of Spain.—( Hear.) Now, as I have before said, this treaty is founded on the bounden obligations under which we are with respect to Portugal, and in the view of the interest of this country, as connected with Spain, and also as connected with the peace of Europe. I think that it was a wise and honourable measure, but I am sure, at all events, that it will not be considered by my Right Hon. Friend opposite, as opposed to the first object in view. When a wise Government enters into an engagement, it is apt to limit its engagements to the circumstances of the case, as they then stand—therefore the obligation on our part to afford a naval and military co-operation in Portugal. But will any man contend that we were merely bound to compel Don Carlos to retire from Portugal, and then to allow him to depart and land in Spain ? Would this be honourable, or in conformity with good faith, when we interfered to give him a free passage to England, when Rodil was within two hours' march of him, and would hare known how to -have dealt with him ; and surely this was not done with the view of giving him an oppor tunity of going to invade the country elsewhere. I am sure that no man would get up and say that when this treaty was signed this could have been contemplated. If we were bound to adhere to the strictest letter of our engagements with Spain, would this be done by the interference that took place to protect Don Carlos, and by which he was able to put himself at the head of the insurrection in the north of Spain, and then refusing to take any further steps. If, un der these circumstances, we shrink from our engagements, we should be justly exposed to the charge of the grossest treachery towards Spain.—( Hear, hear.) That power might justly say you pretend to be anxious for the tranquillity of the Spanish monarchy, yet you have taken from our arms the in vader and usurper of our territory ; you took away the Pre tender to the crown of this Kingdom in a man-of-war ; you secured him and entertained him hospitably in your country, and you then allowed him to proceed through France to invade the northern provinces of Spain.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Now you quibble with us as to the meaning of words, you shrink from your engagements, you shuffle as to the interpretation of the treaty, you set up a distinction between men firing off guns from a ship and men firing off guns on shore, you set up a distinction between naval co-operation with our own army and naval co-operation with the army of an ally.— ( Hear, hear, hear.) Sir, I say that Spain would have had a strong cause for proving England guilty of the grossest bad faith had not the Government acted as it has done, and I should have been unable stand up in my place and defend the Administration of which I am a member, had we deserted Spain. I am justified in stating, and my Hon. Friend who has spoken with so much ability on the subject is fully. justified in arguing, that we must take the treaty and the additional articles together and in connection, and that we must construe the one by reference to the text of the other.—( Hear.) But then, Sir, came the escape of Don Carlos, and his placing him.. self at the head of the insurgents in the Basque provinces. Did the four contracting parties then consider that the treaty was no longer applicable—that the object of the treaty having elided by its complete execution, a new engagement was ne cessary for anything else they might have to do ? No ; quite the contrary ; they considered the treaty to be quite in force, and that all that was necessary to be done was to prepare new articles, in order to provide for the altered circum stancesift and localities of the case ; and therefore, instead of entering into a new treaty respecting Spain, they deemed _ sufficient to draw up these additional articles, which enab led them to adopt all such measures as might become necessary to the full attainment of the object which it was the purpose of the treaty to accomplish. These additional articles, in other words, are complementary of the treaty. Anioeg these articles was the one by which an engagement was en- . tered into by this Government to give, if necessary, the aid of a naval force. Sir, some Hon. Gentlemen have been g ood enough to expound for us the meaning of this treaty, and they state that the only manner in which this naval force was to act was by a strict blockade of the northern coast of Spain. But I, Sir, take leave to say, that so far from this being t h e our manner in which the article should be carried out, it is p re : cisely the only manner in which it is utterly impossible that the article could be carried into effect.—( Hear.) Sir, I have not to tell Hon. Gentlemen that the right of blockade is e l°. gether a belligerent right, a right which can only be exer cised by the principals in a war, and not by those who olilY act as assistants • and I have already over and over ag ars ' until I thought I had fairly tired the House by repeating. it, stated to the House that in this war we are only auxiliar ies, and not principals.--( Hear, hear.) Sir, under such circuill' stances, the law of nations prevents us from instituting ! blockade ; the law of England forbids it.—(Hear, bear.) Were we to stop a neutral vessel we should have to ,an swer it to the country to which the vessel belonger i ' d Were we to seize a merchant vessel, its owner sr"! have a clear ground of action at law against the captain t of the seizing vessel.—( Hear.) It is, indeed, somewhat curious that the only true and real way in which some kW' Members say we could carry out this treaty does in fact hap pen to be precisely the only thing which, in virtue of th at , article, it was absolutely impossible for us to do.—( Hear; l _ In our interpretation of the article, and in our reply to the Spanish Government, to have taken a different course from that which we had adopted would have been disgraceful to the Government of England.—( Cheers.) The only question to be considered on this point is, what has been the manner in which our navy, our seamen, and our Marines, have coseP. e : rated with our army when both were employed in conjoin' operations—(Hear, hear, hear)—when co-operating, I say' either with our own army or with the army of an allied power Sir, Hon. Members appear to think that they destroy t he force of the instances quoted by my Hon. Friend the Secrete,' to the Admiralty, by saying, " Oh, but these are only case s which occurred when we were at war ;" but this seems to al e to confirm my Hon. Friend's argument. The argument lie' on this foundation. I would ask, do these Hon. Gentlemen call on us to show them instances of naval co-operation ill, time of peace ? Do they wish us to show them instances of of our naval force acting on shore when there was no enemy to meet, no place to take, no operations to be carried on ? this sort of thing is on a par with their calling on us t° sign articles to expel Don Carlos from Spain at a tiale when Don Carlos happened to be in Portugal.—( Hea r ' hear, hear.) Sir, my Honourable Friend has quoted cases enough—be had more ready had he not thought that to ad duce them would weary the patience of the House. Nay, 111/ has quoted cases enough to prove that it has been the invariabl e practice of our navy at all times and in all quarters of the globe, when in co-operation with our own or an allied anal , not to limit their operations simply to acting on shipboard. --- ( Hear, hear.) Our marines have been marched across de serts, have raised batteries, have stormed and taken towns' Sir, my Honourable Friend has quoted sufficient instances to make out the position laid down. There are, however, two cases which I shall beg leave to mention, in addition to those already adduced, and I quote them the rather that they refer t to the country now under discussion. The question is, Vill a our naval force ought to do in connection with an army acting in Spain. The cases I shall mention are certainly not of recent occurrence, but they are not the less well known, and not the less important in the annals of this country. The instances I shall mention are both in connection with transactions occur* ring in what were Spanish territories—the first relating to the capture of Gibraltar ; the second to the taking of Minorca i in both which events our naval force acted on shore.—(Hem hear, hear.) What is the history of the taking of Gibraltar as related in an excellent work ? It is this :—" Sir Georg e Rooke, the English Admiral, and the Prince o f Hessil Darmstadt, the Spanish General, with five or six thou' sand land troops, returning from an unsuccessful at tempt on Barcelona, in 1704, determined to attack Gibraltar. They summoned the place ; but the governor, Diego de Sa' lines, refused to surrender. On receiving his answer, the Prince of Darmstadt immediately landed with 1,300 searineg on the isthmus, while Sir G. Rooke opened his batteries Id sea. The bombardment began on the 2d of August, and cow' tinued till the 3d, when part of the garrison went to prayers* it being a saint's day. While they were thus employed the eastern quarter of the rock was left unguarded, and a par t ): of English sailor s seiz e d thi s o ppo r tu n ity t o sca l e t h e alrees` inaccessible precipice, thus threatening the fortress from the heights which overhang it. Captain Whittaker manned hi° boats, stormed the molehead, and carried the town ; and the garrison havi ng ca pit u l a t e d, Si r G. R oo k e t oo k possess ion at the place in the name of the Queen of England, and it ha continued in our possession ever since." What, Sir, is the history of the taking of Minorca ? It is this :—" In 17 0 General Stanhope and part of the fleet of Admiral Leake reached Minorca on the 14th of September. The whole force , including the marines who served on shore, did not e xceed 2,600 men, about one-half of them being English ; and the artil lery from the ships consisted of 42 great guns and 13 mor tars., On the 30th of Sept. th e pl ace surren d ere d. A mong t h e kale was General Stanhope's brother, the captain of the Milford, who had determined to head his own marines on s hore.' Now Sir, we have been found fault with for employing 1 118 '; rine artillery on shore. Ther e i s a tt ac h e d to t h e cor p s °` marines a train of field artillery, as a part of the regula r equipment of the marine force. In the case quoted this er' tillery was used with good effect, and I should like to krlo' where the marines are to use this field artillery except 0 0 shore ? To insist that they were not to use it on shore, W i. B% making them out ho r se- mar i nes indeed.—( A laugh.) The very motto of th e mar i ne f orce , p er mare , per terram , s h° ,ll: "" that their operations are not intended to be limited to the sea' The Hon. Gentlemen opposite are desirous of making it PP' pear that it is contrary t o th e p rac ti ce o f war to l an d the sr' tillery from the ships, but it seems to me that the contrail position has been clearly pr ove d i n th e course o f t h e statemer'' which have been made, proceeding from men of great W e ,: rience and k now l e d ge o f t h e su bj ect . Th e b ook I quote ft°'" is the work of a man who writes in a spirit well worthy of th e e nation to which lie belon gs ; an d t h e H ouse w ill f u ll y b ea r al out in saying so when I have read another short extract from the work, an extract also somewhat applicable to the preset discussion. In speaking of the abolition of the Catalon ia l ; Fueros, in 1707, by a d ecree o f Phi l i p the Olt,' he says, " A n d th us di spute d success i on and con tend ing parties, which to most nations have given a tls w e of liberty, in this ill-f a t e d country on l y adde d to 't, e " darkness ; a n d i ns t ea d o f augment i ng and confirming tmg popular power, overthrew the frail remnants of its past tu thority." ( Hear, hear.) Si r , if th e mot i on o f Hon. _ie*-1 bers opposite be 'carried—if their object be effected---ann,lf this country shall d ec l are to E urope t h at i t withdraws its from the allianc e w ith Sp a i n — t h at i t a b an d ons its so l em a i e"; gagements—it is very possible that the present disputed s e m cession and contention o f p ar ti es i n S pa i n may l ea d to t result which the author of this book so warmly d epre catell ( Hear.) Th e b oo k f rom w hi c h I h ave quoted, a boo k *h i % does such high honour to th e au th or ' s c h aracter an d talents, is the " History of the War of the Succession, by Lord Mab ee t o . --( Cheers.) I repeat, then, that it is a mockery to trio draw a distinction between men waging war on shipboard , are the same men waging war on shore.--( Hear, hear.) are told that we had no right to send marines to S u° ig the Basques two miles in shore ; but there is no harm' is seems, in the marines shooting them from the ships - tt is said, " If y o u l e t th e mar i nes kill men on s h or e, 1 - o 0 commit an outrage, you violate the law of nations ; b ut your marines kill men f rom th e s hi ps i t i s a ll ver y proee. ,. r , you are fulfilling your engagements, and we hold you P t l e fectly harmless." Now, Sir, I will put this question attack on the lines of San Sebastian the Phenix fired its t he with such admirable precision and effect, that though aide distance of two or three miles from the walls, the shot Ina' ar , breach in the walls, through which the troops entered.--( He t if hear.) Now, Sir, can it be asserted that this was allowable it it be forbidden us to land cur men on shore in order that t o, may do precisely the same thing? Is an assembly of 111 , te t i a n gent and practical men to be gravely told that the diatl e- m ile between right and wrong depends on whether men act 11 o de one way or a mile the other? Sir, this seems to •me r i a of reasoning a lt oge th er unwort h y to b e a dd resse d to a li e P t ae lative Assembly lik e thi s . B u t suppos i ng i t a d m itted tha t vo a employment of the Marines at a distance within s hore oe . somewhat exceeding what the treaty called upon o r et ty; ered us to do, I will beg to ask who is th• complaining P Islo• who states himself aggrieved ? Does Don Carlos ? s ib's There are only two parties who could have any floa t ground of complaint.—( H ear , h ear .) Th e Q ue en al i bit, and the Spa n i s h G overnmen t m i g h t comp l a in, n e acros i; l that we were e xe rc i s i ng an i n t er f erence i n t h e a ffairs 01 a mile or so more inland, than we were called urn- t ?„, ?•••: but has such a c om pl a i n t b een ma d e b y t h e se Par"' bete ( Hear, hear.) Sir, I will undertake to answer O r t s e e• these parties. I will undertake to assure Honourable be tlemen opposite that no complai n t h as b een m ade, or f_ e t ' v ' es id made, by the Spanish Government o f our h av ing gone V i a their wishes in the assistance we have afforded them. Id hd complaint were made by these parties, I imagine it vgl u ld a ol of a very differe n t c h arac t er —l d ou b t w h e ther it. W e atcA ire' be a complaint th a t we h a d no t yi e ld e d t o t h e ir rePeo tt quest to give the m more ac ti ve an d stea d y a id. Are we baud rines the complaining party ? l am we ll ass ured thrat , 0 00 1 : no forgiveness to ask at th eir h an d s . Th e Marines 0 0 _ 0 for of England have never comp l a i ne d o f an y Governa l _ h e eg e o sending them upon distinguished services—for putting,_:,, fro° the field of honour.—( Cheers and cries of " Oh, the Opposition benches.) Sir, the Marines here hav e the po t been sent on distinguielsed service, and been put O 0 . 44 of of honour, but they have been put under the coall ore fes' distinguished officer—distinguished not more by has jtadC, sional talents, than by his prudence and co nsunarn" c b.aerre/ ment, arid by the utmost gallantry in the field. s 'ar o Sir, Lord John Hay's natural bias and connection rood favourable to the present Ministers, but al li ,_P ee su e _ express my feeling that his conduct h as ie c a otintr y-- as to earn for him the applause of h ie d to re f: the warm approbation of his Sovereign, and /ee der him a distinguished object of admiration to all Aispa t ( Loud cheers.) What says Lord John Hay in th:a a u nn er 1 7 which has been laid before the House as to 4 2;01 ° va s forc e , which the marines acted, as to how far or nea. as a na La d bee./ —for I am ready to concede that if f. 1 , 50 battalion h a nd marched into the interior, and plis' ae d under the co.t! c " - en eel; Spanish or other military offieers, this would have " ar i t ioa). as exceedins , the meaning of' the term " naval coli ere but I contend' thAt TO long al they were under the °Pilot oil of THE SUN, - LONDON, THURSDA Y, APRIL 20, 1837.