The Sun. — London, England, 1830-05-25 00:00:00

which would enable hiro to maintain order within his own territofies, and friendly relations with the Porte. The Allies thought they had found such a Prince in his Royal Highness Prince Leopold. The choice was highly honourable to him ; and suffer me to add, it was also ho nourable to Great Britain; because, proceeding as it did from our Allies, it gave the strongest proof of their confi dence in the enlightened policy and honourable conduct of this country. We might, therefore, well feel proud when a British Prince was proposed to us by our Allies as the object of their choice ; and we could not avoid assenting to it, the more especially as this throne had long been an object of kis Royal Highness's ambition, and had been solicited for him; while it was known that Greece herself was anxious for his Royal Highness's appointment. Well, the offer was made to his Royal Highness on the 3d Fe bruary. The acceptance followed close upon this ; and the negociations respecting it turned exclusively on one point. By a provision of the last Protocal, the Allies, in consideration of the desperate condition of Greece and the absolute necessity of the advance of a sum of money by way of subsidy, were urged in the strongest manner by his Royal Highness Prince Leopold to agree to the advance of this money; and the other great Powers, preferring a pri mal.) sacrifice for the purpose of enabling Prince Leopold to maintain his station and dignity to the alternative of his resignation, agreed to a subsidy under the form of a guarantee on a loan to be raised by the Greek Govern ment. Now we thought it our duty to resist this demand, as not being authorised by the wants of the State, or the obligations into which we had entered. We did not con sider that it would be right for us to expose this country to the chance of any burthen beyond that which was ho mediately necessary to carry into effect the objects for which we had united with the two ether Contracting Powers. But his Royal Highness maintained his demand with so much pertinacity, and gave us so fully to under stand he would resign the high honour to which he had been raised unless this demand was agreed to to the utter most farthing, that we saw we had nothing but the alter native to which I before alluded ;. and as our Allies had agred, we felt that it would have been an odious respon cinil y for Great Britain to destroy the prospects of a British Prince being raised to the throne of Greece by refusing that to which other Powers had agreed ; and we oonsented. This was the situation of things some time since, when I replied to a question from a Noble Friend of mine, that the final arrangements were only delayed in consequence of negociations still pending upon points of minor importance. These points, which I then celled points of minor importance, only related to the form of the loan, and 1, therefore, trust the House will consider me justified in so naming them. Well, my Lords, even the arrange- Ineut of these points now in progress, when, in a few days after, we found that fresh grounds of hesitation had sprung op in his Royal Highness's mind, and late on Friday night I received an intimation from his Royal Highness of his intention to resign the situation he had accepted, and to abdicate the high honour to which he had been raised. I do not enter on the reasons be assigned for resigniag.— Your Lordships will have laid before you, as speedily as possible, all that passed upon the subject. Already the information respecting these transactions is entire, with the exception of the last papers; but all up to the close will be prep:lied as speedily as possible, that your Lord ship may be enabled to form your own judgments. certainly had hoped that the papers upon tire table would have been more than necessary to explain all; unfortu nately it is necessary to produce others; but, as I before said, your Lordships shall have them as speedily as pos. siide. It would be dissimilation in sne, if I did not avow that I feel the inconvenience and pain which must arise from this resignation; I have, hen ever-, the satisfaction to infirm your Lordships that the most perfect union sub sided between the three Contracting Powers, and that they ectertain the same views of the event. Entire concord subsists between them, and I trust that at no distant time the affairs of Greece will be settled to the universal satis faction. Lord DURHAM protested against the line of conduct pursued by the Noble Earl. He had no objection to the historical relation he had given respecting the papers be bad said upon the table. He would not quarrel with hi►n for that, if he had abstained from giving utterance to his (pinions upon another subject; or if the Noble Lord had coufined himself to the simple fact of the resignation of his Royal Highness, he (Lord Du►ham) would not have troubled the House with a single word. But the Noble Earl's statement was neither more nor less than an accusa tion against Prince Leopold, founded on papers which were only in his own possession. He thought that the Noble Lord should have deferred his allegations until the House was in possession of complete information. He thought he hail a right to call on the House to pause, and when the papers were before the House, he felt convinced that the Prince would prove himself worthy of the high opinion of the House. The. Earl of DARNLEY would wish to learn of the Secretary of State how soon the papers could be pro duced. He trusted that the delay would be as &ion as pos.ible ; and he wished to know whether the. Noble Earl intended to fo,und any motion upon the papers when they were produced. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY did not think that the Noble Secretary of State had treated an Illustrious Person as he ought. He wished to know what the Illustrious Person had done, for it was impossible at present to know wh a t had been the transactions between the Government arid the Prince. He wanted to know if the Noble Earl would lay on the table of the House the papers prior to the date on which his Royal Highness had declined the honour intended for him. It was known that his Royal Highness did intend to accept the offer, but with regard to the mode in which the country had been established the House was entirely ignorant. It was understood that the Prince's acceptance was conditional, but it was not known whether the condition had been kept. The House was likewise ignorant whether a greater power was a party to this establishment for Greece, and he would like to know if Austria had assented to the arrangement. He called upon the Noble Earl to say if he meant to give up the com munications with Prince Leopold up to the present day, and if he would present them ungarbled. He had always thought that Prince Leopold had done wrong in looking for the Sovereignty of a people so unworthy of him, and of a country that must be a prey to Russia, and the source of future wats. He already saw in embryo causes which would create future wets of fearful extent. Russia had brought Turkey to accede to this arrangement for her own advareage. Could the Noble Earl deny this, or that Russia had given 1,000,000 of ducats to Turkey to accede to the arrangement. Turkey was now only a Russian province, but it would have been attached to England, had she afforded her proper support. The - Earl of ABERDEEN had already stated to the House that it was only on Friday night that he had re ceived the determination of his Royal Highness. The Noble Lord should have papers to his heart's content, but not a syllable should be kept back, for he had no desire to conceal anything. Ho wished no Noble Lord to entertain any opinion respecting Prince Leopold ; but when he had sand to the House that nothing but money matters were to be settled, he had added.that new difficulties were rising,, but their Lordships would soon be in possession of the whole ease, and till then he begged them to suspend their judgment. Lord LONDONDERRY explained. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was not willing to put any question that was not necessary, were the interest of an illustrious and excellent individual was concerned ; but Lis Noble Friend having accompanied his presentation of these papers with a statement which might create preju dices, it became necessary that he should be clearly under stood. Ile wished to know whether the refusal of Prince Leopold was founded upon money transactions ; and whe tter upon this alone ? The Earl of ABERDEEN—Before his Royal Highness had given an acceptance of the dignity, a discussion had taken place which had led to the correspondence up to the 20th February, which ebould be laid be ore the House. To the last week no question was agitated with his Highness but that of money; but in the last week new grossed' arose, and the resignation bad reference to these grounds alone. The Earl of DARNLEY thought this statement would east reflections on a high Personage , and he wished to know when the papers could be produced. The Earl of ABERDEEN would produce them as speedily as possible. The Earl of WINCHILSEA thought that the fair course would have been fur the Noble Earl to have ab stained from all statements until the papers were before the House. _ _ The Marquis of BUTE had distinctly understood the Noble Secretary of State to say, that the Prince's resigna tion was totally distinct from any question of a pecuniary nature. Earl GREY could not but regret that the Noble Earl had not refrained from saying anything on the subject until he had all the papers ready. Ex-parte statements had been made, calculated to lay a heavy imputation on the Pe inee, for which he could not be defended till the papers were produced. All papers prior to the 20th of February should be produced, and he wished to know whether, when the papers were produced, the Noble Earl intended to found any motion upon them. The Earl of ABERDEEN had every disposition to give all the papers; but at present he had no intention of found. jog any motion upon them. Lord HOLLAND asked if the Noble Earl did not intend to found any motion either upon the papers already produced, or that were to be produced ? The Earl of ABERDEEN - -Certainly not. FOUR-AND-A-HALF PER CENT. DUTIES. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE wished to ask the Noble Duke whether he had any objection to produce the warrant or order under which, for the last two years, the Four-and-a-Half per Cent. Duties levied upon sugar, had been remitted? The Duke of WELLINGTON hatl no objection to give the information, if the Noble Marquis would move for it regularly. The Marquis of LANSDONVNE then gave notice that he should move for it to-morrow. EAST RETFORD. On the motion of the Earl of SHAFTESBURY, the House resolved itself into a Committee upon the East Ret ford Disfranchisement Bill. Witnesses were examined at the bar, and at Nine o'clock the House adjourned. HOUSE Or COMMONS-(LAST NIGHT.) Mr. Sheriff Richardson appeared at the Bar, to present the petition of the Corporation of London agairet the Scotch and Irish Pauper Removal Bill. Mr. Alderman WOOD moved that the petition be read, and observed that it would most unjustly affect the inhabitants of London. Re trusted that, alter the general expression of opposition to the Bill, it would be withdrawn. Sir J. WROTTESLY supported the Bill. Colonel DAVIES thought, that as the Scotch and Irish paupers contrived to come here and create a ruinous com petition against our own labourers, they should not be permitted to inflict on the inhabitants of London the ad ditional evil of paying for their return to their own country ; they should be made to find their way back as they came. Mr. WARD expressed his disapprobation of the Bill. Lord OXMANTOWN presented a petition from War ren's-town, Queen's County, against the proposed increase of Stamp and Spirit Duties. Lord OXMA"N TOWN presented a petition from the Directors of the Provincial Bank of Athlone, against the punishment of Death for Forgery. Mr. BANKES presented a petition from the proprie tors of licensed public-houses in Sherborne, against the Beer Bill. Sir J. MACKENZIE presented a petition from the county of Rows, against the increase of Duty on Corn Spirits. Lord KILLEEN presented a similar petition from Ki kenny. Sir J. SEBRIGHT presented a petition from certain farmers in Hertfordshire, praying, that if an increased duty was imposed on corn distilled spirits, the same in crease of duty might be imposed on rum. Mr. MARSHALL presented petitions from Bramberr y, from the Dissenting Congregation of Broad-street, Leeds, and from Holmfirth, in Yorkshire, praying for the aboli tion of Negro Slavery. Lord MILTON presented petitions to the same effect from seven places in Yorkshir e . _ _ Mr. MARSHALL presented a petition from Dewsbury, praying that the Assizes might be removed from York City to Wakefield. Lord MILTON presented a similar petition from the Merchants and Traders of that place. Lord MILTON presented a petition from the Free thinking Christians of Dewsbury, praying for a change in certain parts of the Marriage Ceremonies. Lord ALTIIORP presented a petition from Crediton and another place in Devonshire, against the punishment of Death for Forgery; and another petition from Mr. Richard Page, who stated that lie had lost 1,0001. by forged bills and notes; that he had clear proof of the guilt of the suspected party, but would not prosecute him be cause the punishment of death was awarded fur the offence. Mr. J. WOOD presented a petition from Liverpool and its vicinity, relating to the Grand Jury System in Lanca shire. Mr. STANLEY denied that any imputations could justly be thrown upon the Lancashire Grand Jury. Sir G. PHILLIPS had frequently heard objections to ;he Grand Jury system in Lancashire. Mr. R. SMITII presented a petition from Chesharn, against the punishment of Death for Forgery. Mr. HOLAIES presented a petition from Bishops' Castle ; against the Beer Bill ; and another from the Owners of Licensed Public Houses there, against the same Bill. Sir T. D. ACLAND presented a petition from the Stage and Mail Coach Proprietors, relative to the hiv making them liable for the value of lost parcels ; and at the same time he gave notice of his intention to move on Wednesday next, for leave to bring in a Bill on the subject. Mr. DICKINSON presented a petition f. om Glaston bury, against the punishment of Death for Forgery. Mr. J. GRATTAN presented a petition from Shive lagh, against the Increase of the Duty on Spirits. Mr. LYTTLETON presented a petition from Dudley, complaining of the present Law of Arrest. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from an indi vidual, complaining of the conduct of certain Police Offi cers in killing an Irishman (we believe) in seine part of the county of Clare. The Maine rioN. MEMBER. moved for a copy of the In. structions given to the Constabulary force in the county o Clire, respecting the Night Patrol. Mr. HERRIES requested the Hon. Gentleman to post pone his motion until the arrival of Lord F. Gower. Mr. O'CONNELL bad sent notice to the Noble Lord, but he was quite willing to defer the motion until to morrow. Mr. O'CONNELL presented the following petitions:— From Patrick Grieve, complaining of the costa of the Se neschal's Court of Charleville—front the Landowners of Carrick-on-Suir, against Increasing the Taxation of Ire land—from Butterstown, from two parishes of Wexford and Galway, and from St. Mary Shandon, Cork, against the Vestry I3ill—from Glenmore, praying that Govern ment would take into its hands all Tithes and Church Lands, in order to provide for the Church Establishment. BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. Mr. R. GORDON had been requested by Mr. W. Clifford, in the custody of the Serjeant at Arms for his conduct in the House on Saturday, to present a petition for his release. He had had an opportunity of seeing the individual, and found him labouring under incorrect views upon certain subjects, which rendered him a fit object for the mercy of the House. He therefore moved, that he be discharged. It was ordered, that Mr. William Clifford should be dis charged out of the custody of the Serjeant-at-Arms. FORGERY. Mr. A. ELLIS presented petitions from St. Mary Axe and Saltford, for less severity in the law punishing forgery. Lord CLIFTON presented a petition with the same prayer, from Canterbury. Sir M. S. sTENyART begged leave to present the petition of the subscribing Magistrates, Clergy, Banke rs , Merehants,Thwetiaurers, and other persons of the city of Glasgow, to the number of 641, imploring this House, for the sake of the common feelings of humanity, the moral sentiments of the community, the regular and impartial dispensation of justice, the consequent value and security of property, and the avoidance of the evils resulting from the frequent impunity of crime, to consider the propriety of a change in the law which visits forgery with death, and of the substitution of such other punishment, or gra dation of punishments, as may be deemed most consistent with justice, and most conducive in all respects to the public good. It was impossible that he could state too highly the respectability and intelligence of these benevo leat petitioners : they consisted, as he was informed from undoubted authority, of all the Bankers in the city of Glasgow without a single exception, of all the Magistrates at present resident there, of many Justices of the Peace, of al the Established Clergy, of all the Dissenting Minis ters he believed, some of the Professors of the University, and Members of other Learned Bodies, together with a great number of those who are more immediately and per sonally interested, the Merchants and Manufacturers of Glasgow. It would be superfluous in him to add any thing to such an enumeration of those petitioners, who bad done him the honour of placing their petition in his bands; and he was the more anxious to enumerate an I characterize these humane petitioners, and to show to the House how much consideration was due to this their public and united testimony on this deep'y important national sub ject, because he felt that he could nut c4nscientiously concur with them in urging the immediate adoption of the prayer of their philanthropic petition. For listen ing as lie had the good fortune to do to the luminous state ment of his Right Hon. Friend, on the introduction of his Bill on a former night—and considering the vast in= tei esti involved—and the immense and ever undulating circulation of the country throughout all its mediums and facilities, he could not hot feel satisfied, that in the re mission of the punishment of death, his Right Hon, Friend had gone, in the first instance at least, as far as a prudential consideration for these tnultiplie I interests would justify, or the public opinion itself was prepared as yet to follow him—(Hear, hear)—and he came to this conclusion the more readily, and refrained from urging the prayer of these most respectable petitioners with the less reluctance, when he recollected that in the speech of his Right Hon. Friend, to which he had alluded, lie avowed himself to be a strong advocate (and indeed had already proved himself such) for the mitigation of capital punish ment, but he wished that mitigation to be gradual, that it might thereby be safe, and become perma nent.—(Hear, hear, hear. )_ln deference to the num bers, the station, and the liberality of these petitioners, and the great consideration due to them, and in justice to himself in venturing to differ from them as to the public expediency of the immediate adoption of their wishes, he begged the permission of the House to read one or two sen tences of his Right Hon. Friend's speech on the introduc tion of his Bill. He said, "In looking at this question, I think it to be a most important object to diminish, as much as possible, the number of offences to which the punishment of death has been attached. I have indeed no hesitation in avowing that I am a strong advocate for the mitigation of capital punishments, but I confess I wish that mitigation to be gradual, because I should like what is done to be permanently disposed of. In the various ef forts which for years I have had the honour of making to reform the criminal code, my principal object was always as far as possible to remove the punishment of death from all offences in which a less severe penalty could he inflicted without disadvantage to the community. In looking at the safe and steady mitigation of our criminal code of late years, it is right to observe the careful and co-operating principles on which we depended. So that we had the benefit of a two-fold operation in the course we were pur suing. First, we began by diminishing the number of offences punishable by death ; and we have also in these cases where the capital penalties remained, gradually in flicted it with a more sparing hand, so that we have pro ceeded, as it were, double-handed in our work. Looking therefore to the extent of the injury, the tremendous loss of property, the ruin of families, and the general character and situation of those who commit this crime, I confess I should deprecate any sudden and entire cessation of the punishment of death for forgery. Let us watch the effect of the gradual abatement of the severity of the law, which will enable us hereafter to see how much further we can go, desirous as we are to mi tigate the severity of our criminal code."—(Hear, hear, hear.)—ln these sentiments he could not but con cur, and with much deference and the sincerest respect for the sentiment of the petitioners, he did not, therefore, feel himself justified in urging upon the House or his Right Hon. Friend, the further extension at present of the remission of the punishment of death : for although it might, in many instances, be true, as stated in this petition, that the consideration of the awful consequences of a capital conviction prevented the prosecution of offenders, yet he believed that it was at least equally true that the dread of the punishment of death, and of death alone, prevented in quite as many instances, the commission of the crime of forgery altogether.—(Hear, hear.)—And until an adequate secondary punishment, adapted to the habits and feelings of this country, the effect of which public sympathy would not weaken or defeat, he dis covered, lie feared, it would neither be safe oriust to the pub lic interest to do away with the capital punishment alto gether. He mast sincerely hoped that such a discovery and adaptation of an adequate secondary punishment would soon be made. Without, therefore, presuming to make another observation on this deeply interesting question, he would only further ask the indulgence of the House, in consider ation of the weight due to the collective opinions of such a body of enlightened petitioners, and from whom he to a certain extent unfortunately differed, and as the petition was very short and very well drawn, he would ask the permission of the House, after he had got leave to bring it up, that it be read at length at the table.—( Hear.) Lord W. PAULETT presented a petition from the shipowners of South Shields, against the Coal Duties. Mr: FYLER presented a petition from Coventry, com plaining of the mode in which certain tenements were rated to the poor. Mr. DENISON presented a petition from Bermondsey, against the Bill for passing Irish and Scotch Poor. THE KING'S ILLNESS.—MESSAGE FROM THE THRONE. Sir R. PEEL having gone to the Bar, was called upon by the Speakers and replied that he had been entrusted with a Message from his Majesty. The Rrnirr HON. GENTLEMAN then brought it up, and it was read by the Speaker, in the same foi m as in the other House of Parliament. Sir R. PEEL then said—l am confident that I shall be acting in concurrence with the unanimous feeling of the House, if I proceed immediately to move an Address, ex pressive of the deep regret of his Majesty's faithful Com mons at the intelligence just communicated, respecting the indisposition under which his Majesty is labouring.— (Hear)—and conveying to the foot of the Throne the earnest prayer of the House of Commons that his Majesty may be speedily restored to health.—(Hear.)—The Ad dress I propose will, in addition, merely pledge the House to take into consideration, with the least practicable delay, the means which may enable his Majesty to provide for the attachment of the royal signature to the public instru ments that require it. Perhaps it may be convenient to state that the Bill for effecting the object in view will ori ginate in the House of Lords, and it will therefore not be necessary to move immediately that the Message be taken into consideration. I beg to move " That an Address be presented to his - Majesty to return the thanks of the House for his most gracious Message—to assure his Majesty that his faithful Commons have heard with the deepest regret that his Majesty is labouring under severe indisposition, and that they earnestly pray, under the favour of Divine Providence, that his Majesty may be speedily restored to health—to assure his Majesty that this House will, with the least practicable delay, pm oceed to the consideration of such measures as may enable his Majesty to provide for the temporary discharge of that important function of the Crown referred to in his Majesty's most gracious Message." Mr. BROUGHAM—I beg to second the motion of the Right Hon. Gentleman ; and in doing so I consider that I adopt a course by no means inconsistent with my deep impression of the great importance of the motion. The course we have to' pursue is, I believe, unprecedented. We shall derive no light upon it from the practice of for mer times in either House of Pat liarnent. I deem it con sistent with the last part of the address, which expresses the determination of the House, speedily to provide for supplying the defect in the discharge of the Royal func tions, in the way best adapted to the exigencies of the public service, to state that we ought to take those steps most cautiously and deliberately, and in a manner best calculated to prevent our rashness on the occasion being drawn into precedent. I wish to abstain, for obvious reasons, from making a single remark not most necessa rily called for; but all must be aware of the danger, in cases of this sort, that may arise from rashness of pro ceeding, and the absolute necessity of never adopting a course which hereafter may be employed in a manner which, while adopting it, we are far from contemplating. When driven to a necessity like that which now unfortu nately exists, we must guard most scrupulously against the possibility of a door being openorl, which our succes sors may have cause to wish had for ever remained closed. The question was then put, and the Address was car ried nern. con. GREECE. Sir R. PEEL brought up and laid upon the table, by command of his Majesty, papers relating to Greece. In moving (he said) that they do lie upon the table, I feel it my duty, as the House has had no opportunity of becoming acquainted with the contents of the papers, not only to ab stain from any discussion upon them, but from all refer ence to them. It may be convenient, however, to state shortly what are the transactions to which they refer. They may be divided under three heads—l. Protocols from the date of the signature of the Treaty bstween'this country, France, and Russia, on the 6th of July, 1827, to the 14th of the present month-2. Protocols of Con ferences which took place at Constantinople, between the Ministers of the Allied Powers and the Porte, from the pe riod of the signature of the Treaty to that of the departure of the Ministers of the Allied Powers from the Turkish capital—thre e documents relating to these transactions, not immediately connected with the execution of the Treaty, but still growing out of it, and which Parliament expressed a desire to have an opportunity of inspecting- Those tbr.-e transactions are—l. The Convention con cluded at Alexandria by Sir E. Codriagton, for the evacu ation of the Morea ; 2. Papers relating to the blockade of the Dardanelles by Russia, and to the circumstances connected with it; 3. Documents regarding the raising of the Greek blockade at Patras. I feel it my duty also to state, that the expectations entertained by his Ala h signifi e d to hi s M a j es ty's to jesty's Government that his R oya l Hi g h ness Prince Leo pold would become the Sove re i gn o f G reece, h ave b een disappoint ed, nGovernment his determination m relinquish the trust he had undertaken. All the papers conn ec t e d w ith th e ac ceptance of the trust, and with its resignation, will be presented to the House in the course of a f ew d a y s . Until and tiathe the House is in possession of the requisite information, it will be much better for me to abstain from all observation. —(I-fear, hear.) Mr. BROUGHAM bad heard without the least sur prise what had just fallen from the Right lion. Gentleman, for, from certain tokens that he had observed, he was pre pared to expect it. He would, for the present, abstain from further observations, as the papers were not in the hands of Hon. Members. Those documents, as the House would see, were very voluminous ; but if the short account which he should read was to be relied on, though the documents presented large masses, yet, upon exami nation, they would be found larger than the question re quire& It was Ms opinion that that question would be found within a narrow compass ; narrow, however, as it might be, he thought, perhaps, that the most advan tageous course was not to raise any discussion, until the House had time to consider the information laid before them. Mr. HUME Wished to inquire of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, if those papers contained any in formation relative to the sums which this country might be engaged for, arising out of those transactions. Lord JOHN RUSSELL wished to put two questions relative to the difference between Prince Leopold and the Allied Powers—it was said, that there were some points of difference between them on the subject of a loan—some bartering about money. Now rumours of that nature must be injurious to the honour and character of the Illus-. trious Personage in question, and, therefore, it was ma terial that the matter should be set right with the world. It was also said that the proposed territorial limits of Greece formed matter of dispute. Now, h e w i s h e d to know which of these, or whether it was on both, that the difference arose that brought about the unfortunate termi nation of those uegociationl? Sir ROBERT PEEL said he laid the documents on the table of the House; that in doing so he thought it his duty to state what they were, but strictly to avoid any comments upon them until they should be in the hands of Hon. Members. He thought he was bound to observe that course in fairness to the House, and to the parties in terested, he being now acquainted with their contents, and other Hon. Members not having that advantage. As to the questions which had been asked of him, he should willingly reply to them, but in doing so he wished to avoid all discussion. In answer to the question of the Hon. Member for Aberdeen, he bad to state that full in formation would be found in those papers respecting the pecuniary engagements of this country, as they were set forth in the detailed account of those negociations now upon the table of the House. The Noble Lord opposite inquired if any differences respecting loans, or any points of disagreement relative to the proposed territorial limits of Greece, formed any part of the grounds on which the negociations were broken off. On a former occasion he stated that all the great points had been settled, which, up to that time, had been rained between the Allies and Prince Leopold. He understood since, however, that points of difference arose which were of a pecuniary na- ture. As to the second ques:ion, he was unprepared now to give it an answer, as he was when he last ad-- dressed the House. The House, he repeated, would be in possession of the papers before four-and-twenty hours, and then, but not until then, he should consider that they were in a condition to discuss the question. . . _ _ Mr. AGAR ELLIS was desirous of knowing whe ther it was information recently received from Greece that decided Prince Leopold in breaking off those nego ciations. Sir R. PEEL said, that in the communications tween Prince Leopold and his Majesty's Government, his Royal Highness stated, that in despatches received from Greece, he certainly had received information which had decided his conduct on the matter of his resignation. Mr. BROUGHAM adverted to what fell from his Noble Friend behind him, in which the resignation of Prince Leopold was spoken of as unfortunate, now he con fessed lie considered it as anything but unfortunate. He should rejoice in anything calculuted to promote the ho nour and glory of that Illustrious Personage, but he could not held considering it as an excellent thing, that by that resignation this country was enabled to avoid the entangle ment which the acceptance of that Sovereignty might eventually have brought about. Sir R. PEEL recommended the postponement of any further discussion until Hon. Members were in possession of the papers. Lord J. RUSSELL explained—he wed the term unfor tunate in the usual way in which that' term was applied to negociations terminating unsuccessfully. THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE. Lord MILTON rose to present a petition from British settlers and others resident at the Cape of Good Hope, praying for a Representative Government.—(At the mo ment his Lordship rose the House was pretty full, owing to the interest excited by the topics previously under con sideration, and when the conversation respecting Greece was at an end, so many Members left the House, that the confusion and noise which prevailed prevented his Lord ship from being audible for a considerable time.)—After calling the attention of the House to the importance of the question which the petition raised, the respectability of the parties petitioning, and the obligation there lay upon the Legislature to protect the inhabitants of that colony from the effects of arbitrary power ; he proceeded to say that he considered the arbitrary imposition of taxes as one of the most objectionable exertions of arbitrary power. The petition which he held in his hand was from British set- tiers, who desired to carry with them to the colonies where they settled the privileges which they left behind them in their native country, and which they were accus tomed to enjoy before they left it. He did not call upon the House to institute any proceedings immediately for the purpose of complying with the prayer of the petitioners, but he hoped that they would, at some future time, and not very distant, take it into their serious consideration. Sir GEORGE MURRAY said the petition, the House would perceive, came from only a portion of the colony, and from that portion, too, in which slavery did not exist —And that made a material difference—indeed there was no country where slavery existed in which the expediency of introducing a Representative Legislature might not most seriously be doubted. The state of that colony, likewise, with reference to population and civilization, ought also to be taken into account. The extent of the colony was nearly equal to that of the United Kingdom— about 600 suites long and 300 wide. The colonists amounted to only 119,996 souls. A population so scat tered, and in all respects circumstanced as they were, could but poorly exercise theprivileges and powers of re. presentation. Again, they were made up of Dutch and British, and if they had a Legislature, that body would be divided into two parties—the Dutch party and the Bri • tish party—and thus one of the most important benefits of representation would be counteracted. Another objec tion t• the introduction of the representative system was, that were it once established, all the power would speedily centre in the hands of those who resided in and near Cape Town, for those who resided at a distance would never think public affairs worth such a journey. After a few words from Mr. Wilmot Horton, Mr. Mar ry.at, Mr. Wna. Smith, and Mr. Labouchere, Mr. HUME said he was sorry to hear the Secretary for the Colonies say that there was no hope of a Represen tative Government at the Cape until slavery was abolished —when did he expect that slavery would be abolished— what had he done towards forwarding that object? He resisted representation on the ground that the population of the Cape was scattered ; but did he remember the colony of Upper Canada, where the population was scattered, where the system existed, and where it worked well ? No objection could be less valid than that. Further, he was at a loss to see upon what just principle they could tax the people at the Cape without representation. There was no check arising from public opinion in that colony—the only check of that nature was to be found in the influence of public Opinion in this country. If they wished the colony to be no expence to England, they ought to give it a local Legislature—an advantage to which it was justly entitled in every sense of the word. Dr. LUSHINGTON agreed with the Secretary for the Colonies that at the present moment it would not be at all convenient to attempt a Representative Government at the Cape. He begged to offer his thanks to the Secretary for the Colonies, for the wise, humane, and 'statesmanlike measure, which placed the Hottentots upon the same foot ing as British subjects. Sir G. MURRAY, in justice to his predecessors, was bound to state, that though the full completion of the measure for improving the condition of the Hottentots took place while he held the seals of office, yet that the first steps had been taken during the Government of Lord Caledon, and th e work was advanced under Gen. Burke. Mr. ROBINSON was decidedly of opinion that free in stitutions ought to be given to the settlers at the Cape, and to all other colonists, as soon as they were fit to receive them, and capable of appreciating their value. He by no means understood the Noble Lord as recommending the immediate adoption of a measure such as the petitioners prayed for—all he urged upon the consideration of the House was, the necessity of speedily turning their attention to the subject, and taking such preliminary steps as might forward the object in view. Mr. WILMOT HORTON explained. The petition was then brought up and read. It ap rated to he from the Btitish settlers, agriculturists, and others, resident at the Cape of Good Hope. Lord MILTON, in moving that it be printed, was sorry to learn that an improved system of Government at the Cape was to be postponed until slavery should be abolished. Sir G. MURRAY wished the House to analyse the com position of society at the Cape. The number of females was 55,000, males 64,000; from those deduct the slaves, the Dutch, the Hottentots, and the persons under age; and the number of British colonists capable of exercising the elective franchise would be found exceedingly small. Mr. lIUME observed, that persons of Dutch descent resident at the Cape were as much British subjects as any men c,mld he. The petition Was ordered to be printed. • Mr. J. RUSSELL presented a petition from Kinsale, against the further increase of Stamp Duties in Ireland. To lie on the table. FORGERY. Mr. BROUGHAM presented petitions against the punishment of death for the crime of Forgery, from New port, in the Isle of Wight, Stockton-upon-Tees, Wake field, and a district in the West Riding of Yorkshire.— To lie on the table. Mr. BROUGHAM had next a petition to present, which, as he considered it of peculiar importance, he would solicit the attention of the House to circumstances which, in his opinion, imparted considerable weight to that peti tion. The petition was signed by bankers, and none but bankers ; they were residents of 214 cities and towns within Great Britain; there were '735 individual signatures of • persons who were either bankers themselves or Directors of Joint Stock Banking Companies. At an average of three and a half partners to each firm, there were 233 firms consenting to that petition ; if the names, then, were added of those whose consent might be implied from the fact of their partners having signed it, it might be asserted that upwards of 1,000 bankers had signed the petition. The total number of bankers had been estimated at from twenty to four and twenty hundred, therefore they had actually the names of one half of the bankers ; that they had not more was not owing to a majorityof the body being favourable to a continuance of the punishment of death.— Of those who refused their signatures, several gave some such reason as this—that they had signed other petitions in another capacity ; some of them declined on the ground of their being junior members of firms, and that from considerations of delicacy towards their seniors, they were unwilling to give expression to their own opinions ; others declined from other mo tives, which had nothing to do with a desire to continue the punishment of death ; and here he would observe, that amidst all the petitions against that punishment they had not one in its favour. With the present petition the bankers of London had nothing to do. The Bank of Eng land declined to support the petition, and some who took a lead amongst the London bankers, also declined to sup port ; it but he believed, if the sense of that b o dy cou ld b e ascertained, it would be found that the majority was in favour of abolishing the punishment. He anderstood that his Hon. Friend the Member for Limerick would that night present a petitionto the same effect from the bankers of Ireland. Having now called their attention to the grounds upon which he thought the petition entitled to great consideration, he should (remembering that a discus sion upon the question generally was to take place that evening) not trouble them further than to move that the petition be brought up. The petition was then brought up and read. It was as follows To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in Parliament assembled, " The petition of the undersigned bankers, established in the cities and towns of Edinburgh, Dublin, Glasgow, Manchester, Liverpool, Chester, Belfast, Birmingham, Lichfield, Wednes bury, Bilston, Dudley, Wolverhampton, Bristol, Bath, Leith, Huddersfield, Midfield, Wakefield, Dewsbury, Leeds, Ply. mouth, Devonport, Tavistock, Portsmouth, Norwich, Shef field, Rotherham, Nottingham, Sunderland, Newcastle-on- Tyne, Durham, Darlington, Stockton, Richmond, Leyburn, Ripon, Knaresborough, I3oroughbridge, Thirsk, Aberdeen, Paisley, Tiverton, Collumpton, Honiton, Barnstaple, Ilfra combe, Bideford, Torrington, Totness, Newton-Abbott, Exeter, York, Yarmouth, Beccles, Stockport, Wigan, Worcester, Eves ham, Ipswich, Needharn-Market, Woodbridge, Hadleigh, Man ningtree, Banbury, Shipston, Leicester, Oxford, Carlisle, Brigh ton, Lewes, Reading, Maidenhead, Henley, Windsor, Lyme-Re gis, Canterbury, Lancaster, Chelmsford, Winchester, Southamp ton, Bury St. Edmund's, Guildford, Kendal, Chippenham, Salis bury, Ringwood, Poole, Bradford, Halifax, Wakefield, Ponte fract, Doncaster, Barnsley, Derby, Inverness, Burton-on-Trent, Leighton-Buzzard, Newport-Pagnel, Burslem, Hitchi n, Bedford, Newbury, Abingdon, Wallingford, Uxbridge, Wisbeach, Truro, Falmouth, Penzance, llelston, Penrith, Kirkby Sluice, Work ington, Chesterfield, Teignmouth, Kingsbridge, Darmouth, Bridport, Yeovil, Dorchester, Blandford, Harwich, Saffron Walden, Tewkesbury, Cheltenham, Cirencester, Tetbury, Farringdon, Burford, Dursley, Romsey, Basingstoke, Odi ham, Hereford, Ross, Duckenfield, Leominster, Ledbury, Royston, Hemel Hempstead, Gloucester, Stroud, Dart. mouth, Ramsgate, Margate, Deal, Boston, Spalding, South Spilsby, Horncastle, Staines, Newport onmoutlishire), Monmouth, Chepstow, Diss, Northampton, Towcester, Wel lingborough, Daventry, Vellington (Shropshire), Shill: nall, Colebrookdale, Bridgenorth, Wenlock, Trowbridge. Wells, Frome, Wiveliscombe, Wellington (Somersetshire), Taunton, Leek Congleton, Halesworth, Sudbury, Stowmarket, Reigpte, Croydon, Dorking, Rye, Hastings, Kirby Lonsdale, Swindon, Malmesbury, Marlborough, Melksham, Devizes, Stourbridge, Skipton, Settle, Selby, Howden, Scarborough, Malton, Whitby, Pontipool, Abergavenny, Brecon, Carmar then, Swansea, Neath, Haverfordwest, Annan, Cupar, Auch termuchty, Dumbarton, Elgin, Forfar, Galashiels, edburg, Kirkcaldy, Wigton (Scotland.) Showeth,—That your petitioners, as bankers, are deeply in terested in the protection of property from forgery, and in the conviction and punishment of persons guilty of that crime. " That your petitioners find by experience that the infliction of death, or even the probability of the infliction of death, pre vents the prosecution, conviction, and punishment of the cri minal, and thus endangers the property which it is intended to protect. "That your petitioners therefore pray that your Honourable House will not withhold from them that protection which they would derive from a more lenient law." Sir ROBERT PEEL requested the House to suspend its judgment till the facts were fairly before them. The petition was ordered to be print e d. - _ ..... Dr. LUSHINGTON presented petitions to the same effret from Stockton, Macclesfield, Bristol, Spalding, Holstein, Wooburn, Reading, Farringdon, Haverly, and a place in Kent.—Ordered to lie on the table. FORGERY. Petitions praying for the mitigation of the punishment of Death in cases of Forgery, were presented by Mr. Leonard, from Coggershall ; by Mr. Protheroe, from Neath ; by Mr. Pendarvis, from Redruth ; and by Mr. Fowell Buxton, from Bridgewater, Lothbury, Basing stoke, Rochdale, a place in Berkshire, Great Yarmouth, Blackburn, Clonmel ; from the Protestant Dissenters of Brighouse; from the Lewisham-street Chapel, West minster ; from Ryegate, Chudleigh, Monmouth, and the inhabitants of London and Westminster. TRUCK SYSTEM. Mr. BENETT presented a petition from the Inhabitants of Bradford, Wilt,hire, against the Truck System. FOUR AND A HALF PER CENT. DUTIES. Mr. HUME said it had been his intention to make a specific motion to have the opinions of the Law Officers of the Crown on which the Government had came to a resolution relative to the Four and a Half per Cent. Duties laid before the House ; but understanding that it would be more convenient to submit a mo ti on on t h at su bj ect at so me future time, giving a proper notice, he should, therefore, only move for a Copy of the Minute of the Lords of the Treasury under the authority of which the Customs Duty on the Sugar sent to England in payment of the Four and a Half per Cents. had not been pa , d since March, 1828. _ Sir JAMES GRAHAM seconded the motion. He could not avoid taking that opportunity of expressing his extreme satisfaction at the vigilance of his Hon. Friend, the Member for Aberdeen, who had with gt eat patience exerted himself in attracting the attention of the House to this subject, which he considered as of vital importance. It was of importance not only as regarded the disposal of the duties of the Customs without the sanction of Patna ' melt, but as involving on the part of the Crown Law yers a claim for a more arbitrary and monstrous exercise of prerogative ; in which light, perhaps, his Hon. Friend would not regard it as so important, since the accession of the House of Brunswick to the Throne. It was such a violation of constitutional principles that he should think he did not discharge his duty to the public if he did not support his lion. Friend. If the Ministers did not give notice of their intention to bring in a Bill, before the close of the Session, to limit and restrain the prerogative on this point, he should consider it his duty to move a resolution to that effect on the Motion for the House to go into a Committee of Supply. If the Crown were ad vised to stand in the extreme of its prerogative, nothing more could be done but that, following its example, the House must stand on the extreme of its privileges, and withhold the supplies by a motion of adjournment. If his lion. Friend would turn the matter over to him, he would endeavour to bring it before the House and the public in a plain and intelligible shape. The motion was then agreed to. Mr. HUME then moved—" That an humble Address be presented to his Majesty, praying that he would be pleased to lay before the House an account of the proceeds of the Four and a Half per Cents. during the last ten years, how they were appropriated, the balance that Wam paid into the Exchequer, the deficiencies (if any) and how they were to be made good." The Hon. Member said it was impossible that his lion. Friend could regard the subject as of greater importance than he did. lie should be very happy, as be had much other business on his hands, and his taking up this was turning over a new leaf, to resign it into the hands of his Hon. Friend. At the same time he could assure his Eion. Friend, that he would give him all the support in his power. Sir J. GRAHAM thanked his lion. Friend for aban doning the subject to him. His Hon. Friend, however, would excuse him if he did not bring forward the subject in exactly the same form as he would have done. His motion would he a resolution something to the effect of what he had already stated. The motion was then agreed to. EAST INDIA COMPANY. On the motion of Mr. STUART WORTLEY, there were ordered to be laid before the House Accounts both of the Commercial and Territorial Branches of the East India Company, sinca May 1, 1814. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then moved the Order of the Day, for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of Supply. Sir J. NEWPORT rose to . ask the Right lion. Gen tleman a question concerning the transmission of tnone) from Ireland. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was not then capable of giving an answer; but he should melt probably be able in a day or two. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. Sir JAMES GRAHAM then asked the Right 110 1 Baronet, the Secretary of State, what arrangement he meant to make as to the business of the House? Some conversation took place in a low tone of ♦oice he' tureen the Right Hon. Baronet and Mr. Hums, the re sult of which we understood was, that the House wouid adjourn on Thursday to Wednesday next. Sir JAMES GRAHAM then gave notice, ‘! That he would, on the motion for the House to go into a Commit tee of Supply on Friday se'nnight, move a resolution on the subject he had before mentioned." MEXICO. Sir ROBERT WILSON rose to call the attention of the Right Hon. Baronet to the important subject on which a petition was presented to the House on Thursday, and' which concerned the credit, the interest, and the prospe rity of the country. He was then gla.l to hear from the Right Hon. Baronet, that it was the determination of his Majesty's Government not to infringe that system of neu trality it had always acted on towards Spain and the nen , States of South America. The Right Hon. Gentleman had then stated, that if it ever were proved to him that Great Britain had interfered to restrain those new States in the exercise of their belligerent right., he should feel himself bound to give them protection against any opera tions directed against them from the points we had 'pre vented them from attacking. The Right Hon. Gentle man had then stated the reason why he did not believe that the country hat ever laid any interdict, or intended to pay any interdict, on the warlike operations of those States. The reasons assigned by the Right Hon. Ba ronet were rather inferences than facts, and they, were all derived from the circumstance that there was no cor respondence between Mr. Canning and the South APlgn rican Ministers on this subject in the Foreign Office. This might, perhaps, be accounted for by the fac t that the agents of the South American Govern ments were not recognised till 1826. The first o fficial document of the Mexican and Colombian Ministers was dated July 19, 1826. But though there were no official documents of our interference contained in the Foreign Office, he could show what was the impresiii - on Made by the conduct and language of our Government on the South American. The Hon. and Gallant General then quoted a variety of documents to slow that the new States of South America, relying on the friendship of Mr. Canning, which was to them invaluable, had defer red to his opinion, expressed out of the best motives—the motives of humanity to the Blacks, and a due regard to the interests of the British West Indies—that the Crowe of England would not see with pleasure any attack made by them on the island of Cuba. The Gallant General also quoted several official documents, drawn from the Chancelleries of Mexico and Bogota, to show that the Governments of Mexico and Colombia had understoOd Mr. Canning to interfere, and that they had suspended the great expedition against Cuba, on account of Mr. Canning's wish. The Gallant Officer also quoted the cor respondence between General Michelena and that officer's Government, to show that he had made a communicatica to it to that effect, as coming from Mr. Canning. Ele had had a conference with Mr. Planta in 1825, Mr. Can ning being then sick, and had in consequence, at the re quest of that gentleman, given him in a memorial, to which, it was true, no answer had ever been returned, but which must exist still in the Foreign Office. The Gallant Officer also referred to the Proclamation issued by General Santa Anna, to show that the expedition had been reAdy to sail for Cuba, and had been aban doned at the representation of the English Govern ment. It was true, that at a much later period the Earl of Aberdeen had informed these States and the public that they might attack any of the Spanish possessions they pleased ; but when he did that, these States were weakened in their resources, and had no fleets; wh ereas w h en Co- lombia and Mexico were desirous of attacking Cuba, they had, for such Stites, a respectable navy, while Cuba was almost destitute of troops, and was altogether incapable of making any defence. The Gallant General, after quoting a variety of other official documents, supplied to him by the South American States, concluded by observing that these things must convince the Right Hon. Baronet that these New States bad understood the language and conduct of Mr. Canning to amount to an interdict laid on them not to attack Cuba. Mr. PLANTA begged merely to observe that he bad no recollection of the transactions to which the Hon. and Gallant Member alluded, nor were there any copies of correspondence relating to it in the Foreign Office. As to the communications front General Michelena, he recol lected having received them at the Foreign Office, and forwarded them to Mr, Canning, but no answer in writing was returned to them. Sir ROBERT PEEL was sorry that his Hon. Friend (Sir R. Wilson) had renewed the discussion on this sub ject, and he was confident that the Hon. Metnh.r and the Representatives of the States of Mexico and Coiombia were not consulting the true interests of those countries, by wishing to fasten on England an engagement to enter into a defensive alliance with them against Spain ; an alli ance which no Minister of this country ever contem plated, and which he repeated, it was injurious to the interests of those States for their Representatives to insist on, through any construction put on the corre spondence of Mr. Canning. There never, indeed, was anything clearer than that Mr. Canning had not, by any language in any public document, interdicted _ _ . Mexico and Colombia frObi; the fair aggression of a belligerent against Spain, and that he had not entered into any obligation, either formal or moral, to assist those States against Spain in consequence of their refraining from their contemplated attack on Cuba. What, however, had his Hon. Friend done ? He had produced no authen ticated document from the Foreign Office—no paper bearing the signature of Mr. Canting; but he had read to the House the memoranda of a series of conversations which the Mexican and Colombian Ministers are said to have had with Mr. Canning ; but memoranda of conver sations which that Minister never saw, and which he had not by his signature acknowledged to be genuine. The Hon. Member however said, that the reason why these documents were not to be fr and in the Foreign Office arose from the circumstance of the Minister of the New States not being at that time formally received in this country, or acknowledged by the Minister of Foreign Af fairs. Whether, however, they were Ministers or Agents there could not be the slightest doubt, that if any such ad mission as that attributed to Mr. Canning had been made in these conferences, some notice of it would have hen found in the Foreign Office. In the discussion on a former evening, he (Sir R. Peel) had stated distinctly, that although Mr. Canning declared an invasion of Cuba in the manner and under the circumstances of that con templated by Mexico, would be displeasing to Great • Bri tain, still no interdict of any kind whatever had been laid ou either Mexico or Colombia from prosecuting the war, it they thought proper. When General Santa Anna had as sembled about 700 men in the province of Yucatan and issued his proclamation, this country and the United States of America did protest, as they bad a right to do, against the attempt to conquer Cuba through an insurrection of the slaves, but they did not attempt to restrain the fair exercise of their rights as belligerents when exercised according to the acknowledged rules of war against Spain. Ilis Friend (Sir R. Wilson) said, however, that Mr. Canning advised the Mexicans not to invade Cuba. Why at that time the New States of America were not recognised by this country; but, even if it had been, be expressly de nied that Mr. Canning adopted any other course than that of expressing the dislike of this country to that mode of warfare which the States seemed disposed to &doll. The Right Hon. Baronet here referred to time instructions risen by Mr. Canning to Mr. Dawkins, when he attended the Congress of Panama, and read, in addition to what he had stated on the former evening, a concluding sentence of the same instructions, in which Mr. Canning says, that much as this country would regret an expedition like that medi tated by these States, it had no right to controul the right of one belligerent to make war against another. This was the clear and express language of Mr. Canning at the very time when the Hon. Member supposed he was interdicting the invasion. He would state, however, one other fact which was convincing mm the subject. In 1526 MexieJ and Colombia again determined on fitting out an expedition to blockade the Ilavannah, and it was announced at me same time that the President meditated the collection of a body of troops.to be marched front various places, in order Ito co-operate with the blockading squadron for tare reduc tion of Cuba. At that time Mr. Canning was informed of the expedition, and the British Minister wrote to hinm, communicating the nature of the expedition, and asking • for instructions. In answer to the demands fur instruc tions on those points which were likely to ari,e with re ference to the interests of England, Mr. Canning mei ely replied, that it was necessary for the writer to make a division somewhat more distinct than he had made, belin e he could answer his questions ; but not one word was to be found of the existence of any interdict to the inva-ion of Cuba—a fact which could not have at such a moment been passed over in the instructions fur the government of the conduct of the British agent, if that interdict had been ever put forth by Mr. Canning. Sir R. WILSON here said that the blockade was pre vented, however. Sir R. PEEL said the blockade was prevented by in ternal dissensions among the States, but not hy the iniei lerence of England. The Right lion. Gentleman then tondo protes of co , kind, 1 alliane of the Sir Match Cuba. Thi A. GI Res tute, critnir Oa refuge( gradua The lotions other 1 of prix other O defray Comm Mr. Comm tim e fi The On Aft agreed orderer CHAD stood 1 of pros Sir the sul d ri hemp Sir Hon. , Com m shoUld went a 4 that ei Sir to moll Mr. to a C would —but mangy the pc would and of Sir . Chair. the ini notice was iii that C 4 'louse fixed f The c Sir with Priem] th e fr ( delay as it c O n Into On o f Ex, of Aloi and pr degree vast 1 and sti Past pi in the univer which to glor %everit. deniqui beginn