The Sun. — London, England, 1850-06-25 00:00:00

i lei it that )ut .occo 'ota him() ether► own' ,n 13 ;re is' Upon ply to' i e do ] in*. L Ord erc Ede Yin °IL; is. t° au sr e .ve had ." 13°rj. yt rtl to in lay s at( Id to ve er to Atiseas eir try by %;\ rbY Gree k to do? s nc 9 Of of axle amtzaement; they did not wi.:h to life their holid.y• They fnt themselves, I Euppoec, somewhat in the situation of English is:)ys, v 61 ,,, would become pleased if they were prevented- froul• burning Goy PAvltes. But, according to the peculiar di-glee of civiliz woo in Oa tao countries, the Engliei blys would only vent their spleen by s. Up - a shout, wlier, , as th , -ze people, in tha broad of day the Christians of Athens are 2.. t charts)—tuese Greeks, heeded hy certain young uc.)- blower, one of whom secs tho E , ldettAun of the Minister of War, attack the house of an Engnshaubject, fzienten and beat his family. destroy his whole propertv, throw everything they can out of the windows, and: is the effervescerice of their spite and malice, pour out oil Upll all the rich furniture that. recuainetl.—(Hear.) Now the letters of M. Pacifico detailing these outrages are all published in the volume before me. I have read the m, and I must say that these letters, if written by M. Pa cifico, prove him to be a man of education, and I should say of honourable feelings. Ido not know him—l only interpret him to be, from these letters which he has written, a man of education.—(Hear, hear.) But I care not what he is. —(hear, hear.) If he were poor and degraded as the poorest Jew that walks and buys and sells old clothes in London, he was born a British sub ject, and he had a right to demand protection from the English power.—(Cheers.) He was assailed in that which was his home, as dear to him as that of the richest end the noblest man is the land, his family dreadfully alarmed, his children frightened almost to a state of madness, his married daughter made seriously ill, she having but a short time before lain in. After hearing all these facts, am I then to be told, "Oh, they ire Jews?" Why, Sir, I think that such an expression is w disgrace to this country.—(Cheers.) M. Pacifico asked the Greek Government for reparation of the injury, and no answer was returned. He is attacked a second time, and then with piteous wailing he implores the pbwer of England to protect him. And who is this M. Pacifico? He is a man who has been trained up after the manner taught him by his father, and he is as much and as honestly a Jew as we are Christians.—(Hear, bear.) I ask you, is there not something in the position of this man that dignifies the appeal which he made upon us? —(Hear, hear.) If the powerful M. Rothschild were so assailed, do you not think that Europe would have arisen in his defence? Do you not think that the indebted depots of Europe would exclaim, " Good God! M. Rothschild to be so treated ? "----(Laughter.) You would then, indeed, have had well-rounded periods and fine grammatical phrases written by the Am bassadors of all the great powers of Europe. But because this man happens to Ix a poor Jew, who has no money to lend, then, forsootb, he is to be treated with insult, and all his demands for simple justice to be turned aside. "Oh," but it is said, •• 1 he has asked too much." Now, the objection to his claim, you must re member, is not made as to its amount, but as to its prin ciple.—(Hear, hear.) And do not let us run off with objections as to its amount either. We have had bad jokes, in French words, uttered in respect to one portion of his claim. It has been called le Tit conjugal. Now, for the life of me, I cannot understan cl where the excel lence of this joke lies. In my opinion, the joke is as pointless in its form as it is vulgar in its sentiment. — (Hear, hear.) But, in respect to the charges made in M. Pacifico's demand, I deny that there is any exagge ration in them. I took the pains of .inquiring at an up holsterer's in London upon the subject, and 1 asked him —not as to the value of the property destroyed, because it was impossible he could tell—cut I asked him whether there was anything in the prices charged that appeared to him to be extravagant or extraor C wary; and if any person were to say, turning round to .a number of Noble Lords, Have any of you anything eel valuable as the furniture here described?" did ho think that it would be answered in the negative? The trader can to whom I ad dressed myself immediately counted u'r m his fingers seve ral Noble Lords who had purchased property at his own shop far more expensive; and he added, "If you should like to go with me to see a cer lain drawing-room you will see furniture of the descriptio n set down in this accouut quadruple that demanded. 'The House should also recollect that this furniture that was thus destroyed was not for M. Pacifico's own use. The fact is, teat this gentleman had bought the props rty for sale, and he expected to sell it to that very Minister who afterwards denied him redress. He bought the property; it was destroyed by Greek assailants. I care not what the ex aggeration in the demands might be. The principal ob jection urged against his claim was, that he ought to go to the courts—he had no right to came to this country f a redress. Now, what was the fact ? The very day upon which the outrage took place a complaint was made to the Greek Government. In Greece they have a public prosecutor. It was, therefore., their business to investigate the whole matter; and though the occurrence took place in the broad day, upon an Easter Sunday, and that those who were concerned in it were well known to the the authorities byname,. they declared that 'hey could not find out the criminal. Now what is that but a denial of justice ? And was not; this man, there fore, fully justified in appealing, thou gh even he was a Jew, to his natural protectors, the Government of England ?—(Bear, hear.) I hope, Sir, that the Government of England will be supported in rendering that protection which every English subject is entitled to demand. But lam told that there is a rule of inter :national law which forbids such an ap peal, inasmuch as :no one can expect to be placed in a bet ter situation than the subjects of the country in which ho happens to be residing. Sir, I deny this assertion. altogether if it is stopped here, but it was guarded by this strong condi tion, " under e, constitutional Govern nent." Now what is a constitutional Government? Russia would call its Government a most constitutional Government ; and what would be the consequences if ar.t Englishman went to Russia? The Emperor of Russia's rule of law is that which pleases him. He may take one of his subjects, and without giving any account or ex planation of his ac tione,he might put him in a sledge, tie him neck and heels, and send him at once to Siberia. Now, I appeal to Hoe. Members on both sides of the House, if an Englishman were treated thus, would you permit it?--(Hear, hear.) Well, if you would not, where ie :your rule of law 'S It is good for nothing. The truth Ls, the law is really, in the proper sense of the word, not law. Each particular case must be governed by its circum atances and exigencies, and by the discretion of the . particular authorities of the country in which it arises. This is the rule of law that ise adopted by Ares vice as well as England. I know of MO American citizen 'who would consider himself to be unprotected, even is Russia, though he were taken as I have described by the neck and heels and sent to Siberia. What, then, is the rale of law? Why, according to that which has been road the other day in total ignorance of the subject, the rule is suppose i to be this—that the persons situated like M. Pacifico must, of necessity, go through the courts in pursuit of justice. Now, I say that that is not at all .necessary. If you have reason to believe that what you deem justice cannot be obtained by following the rules of what is called international law, you have a perfect right to make an appeal to the Government of that country of which you are a suhjec t. And in the cases which I have read to the House there are many instances, both as regard France and the United States, in which such appeals have been made directly contrary to the determination of the courts of the country. Therefore, I say that the rule laid down in snot her place upon this subject is not the rule of international law. As re gards, then, M. Pacifico's claim, justice bas been altogether denied him by the Greek c:lovernment. Now what is the next argument urged in respect to this matter ? They say, " Why, this is but one isolated case." Are not all the cases referred to isolated ones? Was there not an accumulation of them one over the other, including that of the poor Jew at Athens, and the canny Scot. Then as to the ease of the Fautome; a young gentleman twelve years of age, son of a general officer, was on board this English vessel. He went on shore accompanied by the coxswain, when they were im mediately set upon by a gang of Greeks, who were armed, and who wounded severely the coxswain, whilo the young gentleman escaped. " Oh!" but it has been said, " this allegation is false, from the well-known gal lantry of British seamen." Now what had occurred? Why, upon an investigation being demanded, they said that this young gentleman was rte officer belonging to ithe Spitfire and not to the Fantom a, thereby denying the honourable word of an honourable young man, and de vying altogether their right to give any explanation or make any apology in the matter. They further said that these were two English vesselin that had entered the Grecian harbour with the jute et to create an incur eestion, and to overturn the Government, and that several persons had been put on board these vessels that were running away from one , of the neighbouring islands. They said that the E aglish party had in vented falsehoods for the purdose of hiding the truth. Why, if an English gentlen ran, representing the English nation, did not, under suck circumstances, in sist upon an immediate apology, lee would be wholly unworthy to represent this country again.—(Hear, hear.) I t-11 this House and the Government, that if we once relax the rules by which our people- are guarded in their rights and privileges there would be no safety for Eng lish commerce.—(Hear, hear.) Bett lam told that me diation was offered, and now I suppose I shall be met by favourite phrases borrowed from the Peace Society; but if anybody hopes to preserve peace by making all the world believe that nothing shall induce us to go to war, these are facts which, I think, will induce them to alter such opinion. I shall never f. get the lesson read me by the Hon. Member for the West Riding of York shire (Mr. Cobden) on a very particular occasion— namely, at a peace meeting, when he allowed his feel ings to get so much the better of him that he begged pardon of the people be was addressing, and said to them, " though I wish you to become members of the Peace Society, I wish to say a few words in favour of the war in Hungary."—(Laughter.) I well understood the ge neral impressions of the Hon. Mem her. He became a war advocate, in spite of the Peace Society, and if he had been a Hungarian he would asseredly have been found amongst the baud of rebels.—(ft snewed laughter.) We are told what the mediation was that was offered. Now, I have already quoted an instancy in which France was offered our mediation in 1831, and declined it. Anil we very properly sent directly to make our demands through our Minister and to get redress. Being urge I on at last by the necessity of the case we adopt strong measures. The Minister who bad done so was acting under instructions, and he had no power to accept of any mediation ; but the Noble Lord at the heal of foreign affairs havingthe power in his hands did adopt the me diation that was offered. He accepted of what Was 1111. derstood in diplomatic affairs to be the good offices of the French Minister. Now what did that mean ? And what did Baron Gros understand by them when he first accepted the office of mediator ? It was perfectly evident that he understood he was to endeavour to make sthe Greek Government yield to our demands. The justice or injustice as regards the principle of the claim was not the question. Of that we alone should be the judges. And here occurred the circumstance that is made the foundation of all those charges against the Noble Lord. There were many things we complained of at this time. The loan was one thin, and the question in reference to the islands of Sapienza and Cervi was another. One of those Ckirl:ll was wholly our own, referring as it did to English honour and English rights. 1 1 1na ,ot.kner uas euee euteed by three separate itetiens, Thee° feces were, therefore, tweet distinctly unde;stecal by iron Gros, and if any person could be partioularle m•-ked and coo efal in; his instructions rest unity; ti.ern it was the NetOts Lord. His instructions e ere C' pl4> t e end defined to the Minister, send he said, " Mind, you low drip for tine prerent all consideration of the two islends 8116 the loan." It was clear from the strstemeute of M. Drell r n de I'lluys, that these two matters were taken out r f the instructions given by the Noble Lord. Baron Oro:, theuga understanding perfectly before going out what his instructions were, did change the character e,f them S.j121:10 Lime atter he had gone out. The explanation given by him on first meeting Mr. Wyse wholly demenstreerd the fact that he knew full well what ha was t do. Wxiile staying in Greece be changed from day to day his office, and at last pretended to he a mediator iu respect to the whole of our claims. But here comes the question with regard to Franca. While the negotiations were g oin g on between Mr. Wyse and Baron Gros, M. Drouyn do l'Huys says to the Noble Lord, " Dou't you think we can settle it among ourselves?" The Noble Lord imme diately acquiesced. An arrangement was then entered auto. which did not arrive at Greece before an arrangc men: had been made by Mr. Wyse. Baron Gros gave up his mediation, saying, " I will withdraw from it professionally—l can do no more—therefore I with straw." Mr. Wyse acted under instructions, and had only one course to take. Now comes the point which gave offence. After Baron Gros had withdrawn from the mediation, he received a letter from M. Drouyn de l'Huys, dated the 19th of April. The Noble Lord wrote to Mr. Wyse on the same date, informing him of the plan, but this letter did not get to Mr. Wyse as soon es the report had reached Baron Gros of what had taken plead between the Noble Lord and M. Drouyn de l'Huys. Baron Gros. writes to Mr. Wyse, informing him that he had heard of this arrangement, and, on the 221 April, Baron Gros writes a letter to Mr. Wyse, of which the following is an extract : " A dispatch, dated the 6th of this month, received by the last courier, contains word for word what follows. It ap pears from the language held by Lord Palmerston to M. Drouyn de l'Huys that, if the British Envoy should refuse to accept a compromise which you might judge reasonable, and to which the Greek Government had acceded, the affair must be referred to London, and that until a definitive deci sion all things should remain in suspense.' " If Mr. Wyse does not think he can subscribe to the last amicable arrangement above proposed, and which the Hel lenic Government is disposed to conclude, the undersigned demands of his Excellency the Minister Plenipotentiary of her Britannic Majesty urgently, and in the name of the im portant interest which may be compromised, to consent to maintain the status quo, and to refer on the subject to his Court." Now, Mr. Wyse writes to Baron Gros a letter, dated April 24. 1850. nine o'clock:— " I have just received an express which gives me impor tant news. Lord Palmeston requires some changes in my first draft of convention, which is very incomplete, I con fess, but which has been in a singular degree improved as regards English views. But this is better than all. He has said to M. Drouyn de l'Huys, If the arrangement pro posed by M. Gros does not meet the concurrence of Mr. Wyse, tee negotiation would remain open. Mr. Wyse would submit the preposals of the negotiator to the British Cabi net, and would wait for instructions. Measures of coercion would be resumed without fresh orders, only in case M. Gros should declare that he renounces the part of mediator.' —(April 12 ) " What can be more precise? "Well, then, I have not renounced the part of mediator; I have submitted to you a project which I believe to be just and satisfactory. In God's name submit it to the judgment of Lord Palmerston. " This is what 'propose. " I will withdraw my note ; I will return to you yours ; all that has happened shall be but as a disagreeable dream." irlr. Wyse, by this paper, seemed to renounce the idea of mediation, and had given orders that the embargo should be reinstated. It was reinstated, and an agree ment made with Mr. Wyse and the Greek Government. In the meanwhile comes the statement of the Noble Lord. And as the sensibilities of the French people appear to be much aroused in respect to this matter .1 beg leave to say a few words. Of the two plans of arrange ment that had been taken into consideration, I believe that of the Noble Lord's to be the most favourable to the Greek Government. I believe that the only difference between them is this, that the Noble Lord had asked for a larger sum down at once than Mr. Wyse, who did take a portion of it by way of se curity. It was ordered that the parties who complained should be paid something for redress. The Noble Lord said it was not worth while to disturb what has been already done, and thereupon up starts the insulted French nation. But is it the French nation? Was there not a curious coincidence apparent here? Was there not a patty anxious to get up an emeute in Paris? Did they not try to cause a diversion by talking of war with England, that they might prevent the occurrence of that which they so much dreaded? Were they not going to make a change upon their own constitution? Did they not mean to effect that by getting up an ap parent quarrel with England? But the body of con spirators, as I will call them, who hold in their own hands now the power of the French people, and ignorant of the means of conducting a constitutional government, are endeavouring by the force of the bayonet to put down all who say a word in opposition to them—these are toe party that are endeavouring to get up a quarrel with England. Freedom' does not exist in France. Newspaper after newspaper is put down there; and in order to gratify their own wishes they will at tempt anything. And this is the morality of the ex citable people who talk of the honour of France. I be lieve that the honour of France is like the honour of England—beyond the reach of such petty artifices. — (Hear, bear.) If we look around this European world of ours, where is the people save England who could safely go to war? Could France go to war? Could Austria go to war? Where would Italy be in such a case? Could Russia go to war? The fact is we are forbearing because we are so powerful.—(Hear, hear.) There can be no doubt that it is weak people thatl are the most sensitive,—so it is with nations. The most powerful can afford to receive an insult without being insolent, and meet petulance without quarrelling. I acknowledge that it is totally impossible for me to go over every step that hashbeen brought under our consideration. I will only add one word as to the form of our decision. I hope that the House will not shrink from a fair discussion upon this important question. I hope that my Hon. Friend opposite will not attempt to evade the difficulty by pressing his amendment on the House. If the policy of the Government, after being condemned by the House of Lords, does not receive a clea r, distinct, and unambiguous approval of the House of Commons. it is impossible that they can remain any longer in the seats which they now occupy.—(llear, hear.) It must be no half opinion. It must be nothing that can admit of the excuse of one Hon. Member being siek or another dead. The vote in their favour must be clear, strong, and decided—such as shall enable the Government to maintain the dignity of the country in the face of the whole world, even if the world be opposed to them. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman concluded by moving the resolution of which he had given notice. (We regret exceedingly that the low tone in which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman spoke, particularly towards the conclusion of his sentences, rendered it very difficult for the reporters to catch the actual words he used.) The question having teen put, Mr. HUME rose to withdraw the amendment of which he had given notice. He could not exactly agree in all that was said by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who moved the resolution. He expected that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman would have been able to vindicate the whole of the foreign policy of the Noble Lord, com mencing with the year 1830. But after mentioning the proceedings in Belgium, he jumped over a considerable period to eulogise the foreign policy of the Noble Lord. No man heard with greater pleasure than he did the let's Earl Grey's memorable speech in which he stated that non-interference should be the ground of his policy. He certainly would not now stand in the way of the appeal made to him, lest it might be supposed that he had improper views on the question, and meant to injure the Govern ment. He was most anxious that they should retain their position, as ho thought that the welfare and pros perity of the country required their services. It was upon that ground he interposed. He was sorry he did so; for he found he did not understand those with whom he sat.—(Lsughter.) He expressed his regret that anything should pass in this House that should create anxiety and uneasiness in respect to the relations be tween this country and France. He believed that the connexion was essential'for the peace of Europe, and he would be sorry that anything should occur to estrange the affection that should exist between the two countries, and upon which the interests of the world mainly de pended. He was sorry he had undertaken this most tie satisfactory duty, and he would most willingly withdraw his amendment. —(Laughter.) He was never ashamed to admit when he felt that ho bad not acted exactly right. He certainly would not press his motion. Sir F. THESIGER said that it was impossible, notwith standing the great extent of the motion which had been made by his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Shef field ( Mr. Roebuck), not to look at the circumstances under which that motion had been brought forward. On Monday last a resolution was adopted elsewhere in these terms : "That while this House fully recognise the right and duty of the Government to secure to her Majesty's subjects residing in foreign states the full protection of the laws of those states, it regrets to find by the correspondence recently laid upon the table by her Majesty's command, that various claims against the Greek Government, doubtful in pod of jus ercivetice, or exaggerated in amount, have been enfoe by co measures, directed against the commerce and people of Greece, and calculated to endanger the continuance of our friendly relations with other powers." That ' resolution was said to have been carried by a majority far beyond the gloomiest anticipations of the Go ) vernment, and necessarily created some difficulty in their minds as to the course which it would be proper for them to pursue. For two 'days a silence, deep and mysterious, had been preserved, when at length his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck) asked a question, and elicited from the Noble Lord the remarkable declaration which he made on Thursday last, when, after ad verting to the terms of the resolution, he stated it was not the intention of Government to depart from their policy or resign the reins of government, in consequence of the reso lutions of the other House. The Noble Lord (Lord J. Rus sell) cited certain authorities as precedents for the course pursued. In the first place he told them that 140 years ago there had been a resolution and address of the other House against the propriety of assenting to any treaty which would leave Spain in the possession of any branch of the house of Bourbon, and yet, notwithstanding, a treaty had been concluded iu direct opposition to that vote. He then adverted to a resolution of the House of Lords, moved by the Duke of Wellington in the time of Earl Grey, who declared that if it was carried he should consider it a vote of censure upon the Government. It was carried by a majority of ten, and he nevertheless did not resign, and continued to pursue the same course of policy. In stating these authorities, the Noble Lord was certainly not very ingenuous, as he had only mentioned that portion of the precedent which answered his purpose, and had forgotten to mention the other portion of the precedent which he had not followed. He had not stated that upon the last occasion he had men tioned four days after the resolution was carried in the House THE SUN, LONDON, of Lords, ad habitual supporter of the Government, of course tkv.. arraegeepept avit.h.paem, brought forward the motion in Chit Houee of approval I of; the course phesued• by the Goa vertiment, and that it was carded by a majority of 293 to 98, who voted in the minority against Ministere. `'ow that was a reo:t knee:tent state of circumstances to dietin guieh between whet took place in 1833 and the present oc caeien. The vote of censure of the house of Lords was set aside by an enormous majority in the House of Conic cone. Why was it that the Noble Lied who was se fund of citing precedents when in his favour, had omitted to follow the whole precedent? Why was it that he had not thought proper to come forward there and ask explicitly for it re versal of the House of Lords' condemnation of their foreign policy ? (Hear, hear.) if he valued precedent, he was bound to have done so. If ae had dons s e he would have found their policy regarding? _ the Greek nation a very hazardous experiment. The Noble Lrrd thought it neces sary 'that the question eh uld be submitred to the House for its opinion, and in this difficulty the Hon. and Learned Member for Sheffield stepped forward to their rescue. He would not say that there had been any preconcerted ar rangement between himself and the Government, but he would say that the Hon. Member for Sheffield had pur chased a substantial claim to the gratitude of the Govern ment.—(Order.) , Mr. SWIERS here rose to order, and said the observation of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was invidious and unfair, and uncalled for. The SPEAKER said he had not heard anything fall from the Hon. and Learned Gentleman contrary to the orders of the House. Sir F. THESIGER was never more surprised than when he found the Honourable and Learned Gentleman stand for ward in this gap, because in a debate in 1843, in which he (Mr. Roebuck) took a part in reference to the affairs of Alf ghanistan, althought there was no immediate and direct allusion to the foreign policy of the Noble Lord (Lord Pal- merston), he said he might be unhappy, most unhappy, in his opinion, but it was his impression that the Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) had exercised a most pernicious effect upon the foreign policy of this country. He had, at the same time, made use of some ludicrous illustrations, liken ing him to Phaeton driving his chariot round the world to set it on fire, and to a ••lucifer match."—(Hear.) He declared that the Noble Lord's mischievous activity extended over the whole habitable globe, and that he looked with suspicion upon every fact adduced in his vindication.—(Hear, hear.) Now, those were his sentiments in 1843. The Noble Lord had returned since then to power, and now presided over the foreign affairs of this country. He was the same man, retaining every activity and pursuing the same policy. There was the " lucifer-match" in the Foreign-office ready, like another Phaeton, to set the world on fire.—(Hear.) Now certainly with these impressions on his mind, and not observing any alteration in his policy, this resolution, as emanating from him, was one of the most extraordinary and inconceivable that could possibly be imagined. His Honourable and Learned Friend had not pursued the course which was most proper—confining the question to the Greek question, and to a reversal of the vote of the House of Lords, but he had taken a much more prudent course, and made his resolution general, including Greece, but at the same time including so many topics, and giving so ample a range to the discussion, that any Honourable Member, if inclined, could find some excuse for voting with the Govern ment. He wished the House to concur in a resolution that the principles upon which the foreign policy of the Govern ment was conducted were calculated to uphold the honour and dignity of the country. He confessed he thought there was some ambiguity hidden under the word " principle." They were all agreed as to abstract principles. He thought he never meant to confine the House to a question of that abstract kind, and therefore he concluded that the House was called upon to approve the principles of foreign policy as carried out by the Noble Lord the Foreign Secretary. Again, the words "foreign policy calculated in times of difficulty and danger to preserve the peace of the world." Did that apply to our own, or foreign countries? The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had been pleased to explain that would-be principle, and there was no doubt but that they were called upon to sanction the foreign policy carried out, in contradistinction to that carried out by the last Ministry. It was impossible to have heard the speech of the Noble Lord, and not to see that there had been a striking differ ence between the policy of the Noble Lord and that of the Ministry of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Tamworth. He called upon them to approve the former as most likely to uphold the honour and dignity of the country, in opposition to that of the policy of the last Ministry. New, that being so, let them trace the policy of the Noble Lord in his intercourse with different Governments of Europe, and he would venture to say, that so far from its being calculated to preserve the honour and dignity of the country, there never was a course so likely to embroil them with all na tions, and which had resulted in the deepest humiliation to England. He proposed, .in considering the question, to confine himself to two or three prominent occa sions, travell . ng as rapidly as possible over the ground. He impatiently hung on the words of his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck), expecting every moment that he would make some allusion to Greece, brit regretted to say—and he felt assured that the House ge nerally sympathised with him—that he did not allude to the subject-matter of his resolution till the end of his speech, and that conclusion was characterised with an approval of the Noble Lord (Palmerston's) conduct. In consideration of this question, he hoped that the House would duly weigh the position of Greece with respect to the three protecting powers, England, France, and Russia ; and he felt the deepest regret that he looked upon those powers seeking more their own individual interests, by intrigues and cabals, rather than exercise their great powers for the protection of a weak and feeble nation, which was the pledge they had given at the time of establishing Greece on the constitutional grounds of a nation. He next thought, considering the strength of England and the weak mess of Greece, that the Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) should abstain altogether from using threats and menaces, which would not be offered to any strong power of Eu rope. He admitted that the claims of British subjects should be defended, but should at the same time say that he felt assured that many of them were exaggerated, and he did not mean to adduce this in the light of a mere as sertion, but would support it by the most irrefragable argu ments. First, he would refer to the claims of Mr. Finlay, in which case he considered the conduct of the Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) as most ungenerous and unbecoming ; and he regretted to add, that he feared that such a line of policy as that pursued by the Noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs had left an impression on the minds of the people of France which would not be speedily removed, and which could not, therefore, fail to do much injury to this country. He should enter into the details of Mr. Findlay's case, and show that he, a British subject, in 1830 had pur chased a small plot of land, not much more than three-quarters of an acre, for which he paid 101., or 300 drachmas. Now when it was deemed necessary by the Government of that country that this plot of ground should be taken for the King's garden, an offer of 3,000 drachmas was made, but re fused by Mr. Finlay, on the ground that the land was worth four thousand five hundred drachmas, or 1,5001, for a piece of land for which he paid only 101.—(Hear, hear.) At the time of this altercation between Mr. Finlay and the Greek Government there were 100 other claimants of a similar nature, but all agreed to the proposition of that Go vernment, as they knew that a constitutional government, formed in 1843, placed their property . under different cir cumstances to what they had been previously. However, as Mr. Finlay persisted in his demand, it was considered most judicious on both sides that the matter should be left to ar bitration ; and should the arbiters not agree, that an umpire of unprejudiced opinions should decide as to the sum to be paid. He should here say, that the wish of the Greek Go vernment at first, rela'ive to the appointment of an umpire, was not just or fair, because they required that one of them selves should be appointed to the office of umpire in case the subject of litigation should go beyond the arbitrators. Now he had one remark on the matter to make, which was to be found in the blue book of 1850, page 50, that the case of Mr. Finlay was closed on the 9th of August, 1849. He therefore referred to this im portant question, whether it was justifiable on the part of the British Government to interfere with an armed force as they had done, particularly as the matter was closed, according to the above quoted evidence between the two litigant • parties. He should say that he felt really startled when his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck) asserted that there was nu inter national law violated by such hostile interference; but such an assertion he begged leave to gainsay, for it is unjust for any nation to interfere, except when justice is refused, or when the right of a subject is violated by the seizure of his pro perty, neither of which occurred in the case of Mr. Finlay, for there was nothing more than a delay, owing to the mat ter not being adjudicated on. He was astonished that his Honourable and Learned Friend (Mr. Roebuck) should hazard such an opinion on the laws of nations, particularly as the contrary was agreed upon by all philosophers and jurists,' and also when Montesquieu and Lord Campbell approved of the opinion given that night by him (Sir F. Thesiger).—(Hear, hear). Lord Mansfield also said, that the law of nations, founded on justice and equity, does not allow reprisals, except in cases where the parties from whom reprisals are taken are the aggressors.—(lronical Cheers from the Government party.) If Honourable Gen tlemen would not inte-rupt him by such cheers, he would fully explain, for he did not mean to say that Mr. Finlay was not wronged, but what he wished to explain was, that as Mr. Finlay took the matter to a court, he should wait for the decision of that court before he should apply to the ambassador of his native country, to assert his claims by an armed naval force. It would be found in the blue book of February, 1830, that the interference of this Government was meat unsatisfactory to France, and most unfair, and perhaps injurious, to this coun try particularly. As far as related, to Mr. Wyse's letter of October 18, 1849, in which it was stated that the claims of Finlay were left, with the mutual consent of both p'arties (Finlay and the Greek Go vernment), to arbitration, and that such a line of procedure was the best that could be adopted for the decision of the question at issue, he therefore, under those circumstances, considered it most unwise and unjust that an armed inter ference should take place, and expressed his regret that the high honour and unimpeachable character of this country should be looked upon in the light that she now was by the other nations of Europe, and for that reason he con tended that the case of Finlay should not: be made ex clusive for the introduction of the hostile interference of this country. (Hear, hear.) He would next refer to another case, and should at the same time express it as his strongest hope that no Honourable Gentleman would for one minute suppose that he bad any unreasonable prejudice against any one because of his religious persuasion, or that because of his religion he would make an exorbitant claim, and he therefore did not question whether that individual was a Jew or a Christian ; but in the case of Pacifico, he be lieved that there could not be a more exaggerated case, for while he (Sir F. Thesiger) admitted that some of his furni ture was materially injured by the mob in that country, he could not be induced to believe that it was worth 4,916/., as the man was in most needy circumstances, being obliged to pledge his plate for 301., that he might lend out to the poor people of that country, at a very usurious interest, and he consequently confessed that he did not believe that be was possessed of all the drachmas which he alleged he lost on that occasion ; and he also wished to add, that when the mob left his house they did not take with them the accounts which stated the amount due to bim by the Portuguese Government. He therefore felt astonished that the Noble Lord (Lord Pal merston) should support such a claim as that of Pacifico for such a sum ; and not only support him, but to enforce that claim by force of naval arms. For he considered that a Foreign Secretary should. act with the greatest gentleness and urbanity towards all other nations, particularly towards a nation that he was bound to protect; particularly as Pacifico also left his case to arbitration, on which occa sion he endeavoured to implicate six persons, who were all acquitted by the court.—(lronical cheers from Mr. Roe buck.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Roebuck) must know that that trial was not brought on for the in demnification of the losses sustained by that person, but for the punishment of those six persons, should they be found guilty of having violated the law of the country. He should say that the tribunals of the country were open to Pacifico, and that he should have gone to those tribunals before he would plunge the honour and character of this country in jeopardy, which latter course would be only justifiable, should he, as a British subject, meet with injustice in those courts. Suppose that in 1780 a violent and infuriated mob had broken into the house of a Roman Catholic (a foreigner), many of which cases had then occurred, would the Hon. I and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Roebuck) agree with the fo. TUESDAY EVENING, JUNE 25, 1850. reigner's Government, that they would be justified in pro claiming war against this country? He believed not. 9 the whale, he believed, that t case.,of the Pacitico required calm consideration and d'he Inqtfiry, and he felt assured that the result -would bet hat there was a. very great exaggeration of the claim of this moo. Ha contended that the interference of France was perfectly justifiable wider all tile circumstances that he had elreadv stated, as well as with respect to the capture of the six lonian boats at the custom house of sakina. I-la did net metre-to trespass on the House much longer, and for that reason had confined h nisei to the three claims which were ordered to be entbiced by the L'ritish squadron. He should sav that the claims of the two persons, Finlay and Pacifice, was without any foundation, and thus the cool and firm answer of M. Londos to Mr. Wyse. Nothing in his (Sir F. Thesiger's) opinion could be more ceim or more dignified. And how was it answered by the British Government? By an overwhelming armed force, which was sent against a friendly Government, and against whose commerce a heavy blow w,s dealt, and ves sels were seized of the value of 17,0001., in satis faction of the claims of M. Pacifico, amounting in the most to 7,000/.—(Hear, hear.) Looking at the whole of the cir cumstances in those proceedings, he would ask the House whether they were prepared to vote for the motion of the Hon. Member for Sheffield ?—(Hear, hear, from the Oppo sition.) He would now refer the attention of the House to the policy of the Noble Lord at the head of foreign affairs, and ask the House if that policy was the policy of peace?— (Hear, hear.) There were two small islands, Cerva and Sa pienza, about which the question had been raised, as to whe ther they rightfully belonged to, and should be considered as part of, the dominions of Greece, or ought to go with the seven islands which were in possession of Great Britain. A correspondence took place on the subject, and the Noble Lord sent instructions to Admiral Parker to proceed with an over whelmingarmed force and seize those islands. That proceeding led to the interference of Russia, and to a correspondence be tween the Noble Lord and Count Nesselrode, which assumed a rather serious aspect, and led to the withdrawal of the Noble Lord's demand.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then directed the atten tion of the House to the negotiations which commenced on the subject of the claims of M. Pacifico and others on the Greek Government, and the offer of friendly mediation on the part of France, and acceptance by the British Govern ment of such mediation. He then passed to the arrival at Athens of Baron Gros, as representative of the French Go vernment, the interviews between bins and Mr. Wyse, the British Minister at the Court of Athens, and of all those subsequent proceedings in the history of the case which have been already so frequently discussed, and are now publicly so well known. In the course of the negotiation a demand, he said, was made that 180,000 drachmas should be deposited pending the negotiation, in satisfaction of M.Pacifico's claim& ; and on the failure of compliance with those terms, coercive measures were resolved on and resumed, in consequence of which the King of Greece was compelled to pay one million of drachmas.—(" No, no," from the Ministerial benches.) Then it was not important.—(Laughter.) He now found that 330,000 drachmas were only demanded ; but it was not of lin portance.--(Hear, and laughter.) What was the condition in which the Noble Lord stood at that moment? .The Noble Lord was accused and insulted in certain grave charges made against him—charges followed up by the _withdrawal of the French Ambassador (M. Drouyn de l'lluvs) from the British Court ; and at that moment the Noble Lord was compelled to accept of terms quite contrary to those cf the convention in the first instance—terms, mark, not containing one word of thelpoints insisted on by Mr. Wyse. (The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then read a copy of the communication made on the subject of the settlement of the Gr e ek question by General Lahitte to the National Assembly, indicating that France had not yielded anything of the conditions which she at first proposed.) The Noble Lord, he said, held out until he had almost driven the two nations to the verge of war, and had subjected his own nation to humiliation; and was at last compelled to accede to that which he might and ought to have acceded to in the first instance. The opinions of the French Government, and of the greater part of Europe, was against the course taken by the Noble Lord. General Lahitte had said that the French Government had no other motive in the affair than to aid in effecting justice between the parties, and the opinion of Russia and of all the other powers were averse to the course taken by the Noble Lord. He should be glad to know whether the course of the Noble Lord was the course best calculated to procure peace. He thought not, and that, so far from that, it was calculated rather to subject the British nation to humiliation and' degradation. With respect to the assertion that Lord Aberdeen had used quite as strong language as that used by the Noble Lord on the subject of the Greek loan, he ( Sir F. Thesiger) must say there was a very marked difference. The course adopted by the Noble Lord (the Earl of Aberdeen) was of a very different character. He could not conclude his remarks without alluding to a state ment of the Noble Lord, in which the Noble Lord had said that he would not be the Minister of Russia or of France, or of any other power—(Hear, hear)— but that be would be the Minister of England only. lle must say that he hardly understood the meaning of that statement of the Noble Lord, but he presumed that the Noble Lord meant to say that " upon every occasion while he was at the head of the foreign affairs of this country he would be found to act with regard to the sustainment of British interests, but not with regard to the interests of any other country." Now, if that was the meaning of the Noble Lord, he (Sir F. Thesiger) thought it was a very unsafe and a very danger ous one. He apprehended that in political ethics a state should be regarded in the same manner as an individual; with all his responsibilities and rights; and the Noble Lord, acting as the Minister of England, would be departing from the rule of right if, in his management of the interests of England, he were not to give the same at tention to the interests of other countries that he would to his own. There was a difference between domestic policy and foreign policy, according to the Noble Lord. • Itnvas not a very high eulogium on a Foreign Minister to say that he would be the Minister of his own nation only, and not or any other. Now, in what situation would they be placed, should the House assent to the motion of the ?lon. Member for Sheffield ? They were not called upon to express a direct opinion or censure on the policy of the Noble Lord. A general resolution, approving of the Noble Lord's policy, was presented to them in relation to his course on the ques tion now before the House. But a vote of this House in fa vour of that resolution 'would lose more than half of its effect by a reference to a vote which had been come to on the question in another place. Foreign nations were aware that en opinion had been pronounced by a majority of the other' House of Parliament, condemnatory of the Noble Lord's po licy on the question now under the considerationof this House e and the sentence which had been pronounced by that House had gone forth to all. lands. The Noble Lord had been cone victed by that sentence, and let this House do what it might, it was quite impossible that he could refute that sentence or reinstate himself in the confidence of foreign nations. - (Hear, hear,) He ventured, on the facts which he had sub mitted, to maintain that the Noble Lord at the head of fo reign affairs had constantly intervened, not to secure free dom, but for the puiPose of either insisting peremptorily for demands which should not be made, or for the purpose of encouraging revolutions which were called an approach to self-government, and he could show that, having so inter fered, the Noble Lord had lett these revolutionary parties to their fate. For these reasons, and being influenced by these considerations, he intended giving a decided negative to the motion which the Hon.• and Learned Member for Sheffield had submitted to the House.—(Cheers.) Mr. P. WOOD said that he came down to the House be lieving that the Commons of England would . have to discuss a question of the greatest importance, and deeply affecting the interest, the honour, and the dignity of this country. He had no idea that the motion would be met by such ar guments as those which' had been used—of details of the exaggeration of Don Pacifico's claim, or of the paltriness of the vulgar speculation of Mr. Finlay , which he confessed every one of which he had either heard or read before, and which filled him with such ineffable disgust that he did not believe they would have been sanctioned by the Hon. and Learned Member for Abingdon adopting them. He was surprised, too, that the lion. and Learned Geutleman should have thrown out the miserable insinuation that the Hon. and Learned Member fur Sheffield had earned a re ward, or was entitled to receive a reward, from the Government for the part he took in con nexion with this question of such serious import. He told the Honourable and Learned Member for Abingdon that the Hon. and Learned Member for Sheffield had already earned a reward which it was in the power of no Government to confer, namely, the affection and attachment of the people of England. The Hon. and Learned Gentle man, however, was quite able to defend himself against such an attack, and he (Mr. Wood) merely noticed it to show the nature of the arguments they had to expect from the quarter whence such insinuations emanated. The question they were to discuss was one of great and serious import. The determination of another place, as he suspected by their resolution, was founded on this avowed principle, that they desired to announce to Europe that time Foreign-office was not England. That principle had been well and promptly met by the counter-resolution of the lion. and Learned Member for Sheffield, in which they were called on to state that the Foreign-office had been well represented, and that the course pursued was calculated to uphold the dignity and honour of England. The Lords, by their vote, had expressed an opinion that the Minister of England had been regardless of England's honour. Every step taken by the Noble and Learned Lord who submitted the proposition in the House of Peers was well known in tbis House; but the Commons of Etegland had not expressed any vote in consideration of that foreign policy, nor were they called upon to express any such opinion. No Member had ventured to ask the . decision of time House of Commons whether England's honour had been tarnished during that Administration which it was contended had brought them into such a humiliating position. If that resolution were correct the Huse of Commons had neglected its duty, and they had announced to the whole of Europe whenever you have a complaint to make you know that you have the House of Lords to complain to. Now, his opinion was directly opposed to that holden in the resolution of the House of Lords. He believed that the policy of the Noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, especially in reference to Greece, was best calculated to uphold the dignity and the honour of England. and to maintain peace with foreign countries. If they took issue on the whole policy of the Noble Lord they could not have a better example than in the case of Greece. .So far from being wanting iu dignity and honour by the course pursued, they should have been wanting in both had they abstained from interfering in sustainment of the rights of British subjects, and in obtaining for them speedy redress for the -wrongs they suffered. The only blame attachable to Lord Palmerston was, that he had not done that in 1848 which he canned to be done in 1850.—(Hear.) A British subject failed to obtain redress from the Greek Government in a just claim for compensation. He appealed to the re presentatives of the British Government on the spot where the injustice had been done him ; and then they were told that this was the case of a canny Scot, who had made a good bargain, and wished to hold it.—(Hear.) Then there was the case of the plunder of property of a British subject—the suns of the Minister of "War being parties to the mischief— who in addition to the tete' demolition of his furniture, had his wife and daughter beaten. The answer given to this case was, that it was the case of a Jew, and that he had put forward very exaggerated claims for com pensation. He (Mr. Wood) telt deeply ashamed that in a place where Don Pacifico haul not an opportunity of being heard, it should be alleged against him that he bore the name of a person who would have been convicted of forgery if he had failed to pat down a certain sum of money. In Pacifico's case the plain broad facts amounted simply to this, that he, a British subject, had been refused redress by the Greek Go vernment for gross insults and injuries which he experi enced; and would it be contended that they upheld the honour and dignity of England if such a state of things were permitted to pass unnoticed? In the third case a man named Zumaika was subjected to the mose cruel torture, after the Turkish fashion, without any evidence in sustain ment of some alleged charge being preferred against him. He (Mr. Wood) could prove, as he would do by and by, that the unfortunate fellow had been cruelly and brutally tor tured. Redress was refused him, and were they to be told that the British Government should tolerate injustice on one who had a right to claim protection from them? A man was to be robbed, according to the morality of those who supported the resulution of the other House, because he happened to be a Scot ; another was to have his furniture destroyed, his house pillaged, and his wife and daughter beaten, because he was a Jew; and a third was violently and indecently tortured, because he was accused of burglary without any evidence being produced against him. In a fourth case a positive and direct insult was offered to the British navy, by the treatment to which the crew of the Fantome was subjected, They were told, lorsopth that they should pass all those cases by. It did seem!rehr:l; tliat tlioie who china to that conclusion must have had rather a singular notion of what was tine to , the honour and dignity Of England. The Learned Gentleman then went into the • details of Mr. Finlay's cars, commentingt on the manifest injustice of refusing convensat ion for the portions of his property which the Greek Government hid appropriated to their own purposes, and showing that in 1A42 Lord Aber deen considered he had a just claim for remuneration. The Greek Government, after various applications on the part of Mr. Finlay, told that gentleman to take his re medy, but the law of Greece did not permit of any recovery against the King. At length they consented to have the matter arbitrated, appointing as an arbitrator the president of the tribunal, jest as it justice in such a reference could be expected from a party so interested, but they held back all the papers connected with the matter in dispute until the legal period of the reference bad expired. In Pacitico's case it was asked why he had not applied to the authorities for redress. He did try the authorities. He went before the police, pointed out certain individuals, including the sons of the Minister of War, as having been implicated in the out rage, but no redress was rendered him. M. Pacifi2o coin plained to the King's advocate of the outrage committed upon him, that a riotous mob broke into his house, headed by the two sons of General Zavellos, one of the King's own Ministers, and President of the Council ; he pointed out the houses where his plundered property was concealed, but they refused to search, and he was unaole to assert for himself the rights of a Greek citizen, because he was a Jew. The Honourable and Learned Member for Abing- don asked, whether during the riots of Lord Geore Gordon in 1780, if a house of a foreign Minister were attacked, beca use he happened to be a Roman Catholic, would it be a case for the Government of that Minister to demand redress? Undoubtedly it would, and the case would be renSered irre sistible if the leader of the mob who committed the outrage was the son of one of the Ministers of then day— (Loud cries of " Hear. hear")—and the foreigner robbed and plundered because he was a Roman Catholic, a circumstance as likely to happen in those miserable times as that of the outrage on the Jew at Athens. That undoubtedly would be a case for foreign intervention, and that was precisely the case of M. Pacitico.—(Cheers.) The Greek Minister, however, when informed of the transaction, said it was a mere frolic of a parcel of idle schoolboys, and unquestionably in his (Mr. P. Wood's) view of the entire transaction, that House and the country ought to feel grateful' to the Noble Lord at the head of the. Foreign-office for taking such care of the interests of British subjects abroad, and securing them from a repetition of such horrible and flagrant outrages as were committed in the present case. But then it was said that the money taken from him was not his own ; and how did that affect the case? The money, no doubt, was trust money—two hundred and thirty pounds of it were given him to build a synagogue, and 801. of his own money. It was also alleged that he had no jewels in his house, but witnesses deposed to their having seen them, as well as to the costly character of the furniture destroyed, and the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Buckinghamshire, who delighted them in other respects by graphic descriptions, as well as in his speeches in that House, knew well that it was the custom of the Jews in the East to have their riches and most valuable property secluded altogether from the public gaze. As to the statement made that his claim on the Por tuguese Government was a mere pretence, he (Mr. Wood) knew that he made his demand for that claim so early as 1845, and Sir Edmund Lyons, their former Minister at Athens, distinctly states, in one of his dispatches, that he remem bered well speaking to him on the subject, and it could not therefore be trumped up for the occasion. If they looked at Baron Gros's statement, and, without wishing to say anything offensive to that gentleman, he should say M. Pacifico fell into bad hands, they would find it the most extraordinary for one in his position that could be imagined. Ile was sent out as a mediator, and the first thing he did in tnat capacity was to refuse the Portuguese claim on the evidence of the debtor.—(Loud cheers.) The most extra ordinary circumstance in that extraordinary case was, that there was a gentleman sent out by the French Government to act impartially. He refused to admit the claim on the Portuguese Government, because he received two dispatches from that Government denying the claim.— (Cheers and laughter.) Next came the case which was not discussed at all—namely, that of a poor man named Zumaika, an lonian subject. He was at Patras, working as a blacksmith, and being charged with committing burglary, on mere suspicions, he was, on denying the offence, pat to the torture. They put a heavy stone on his chest, on which two men sat, and then the unfortunate creature had to undergo another process of suffering of too horrible and indecent a description to detail to the House. He made a complaint the day after, and a mock investigation was ordered by the Government, and a parson with the pompous name of Chricento Fulue, a doctor, was the person who conducted it. He inspected the man, and what was his report? That he had suffered no external injury—that no organic change had taken place in him, and that his injuries were the result of an attack of rheumatism - (A laugh) —or of his trade as a tinker. —(Laughter.) He contended that the case, up to the present moment, had been treated of, and discussed like a nisi pries case, and not on broad or general principles. The case of that man underwent a secret exami nation, and when the British Vice-Consul remonstrated with the physician for sending in such a report, his answer was that he could net help it, for that the police compelled him to do so. (Cheers.) Sir Edward Lyons stated the same thing in one cf his dispatches, and asserted that the physi cian told him so. That was the state of things described elsewhere with so much levity; and when the words " brutal treatment" was so much cavilled at, could any man doubt but that he was " brutally treated ?" (Hear, hear, and cheers.) And in addition to the outrages to which he had already called the attention of the House, he was kept three months in prison, without any charge ivhatever being sustained, or brought against him. And after the refusal to do justice on the part of the Greek Government, was it not the bounden duty of the Foreign Mi nister to see that these things should not be repeated? But that was not all ; for continued insults had been offered. lonians were imprisoned without cause—flogged at the plea sure of those in power— and a poor man for putting up a few flag's was brought through the streets as a malefactor.— (Hear, hear.) Indeed, so great were the sufferings they en dured, that a memorial was presented to the Consul (signed by forty lonians in Patras) praying for redress and proiec tion, or they would be compelled to leave the country alto gether. „Then came the plunder of the lonian boats, valued at 1,2001., and which were enticed into the Greek custom hrinse. fly ' brigands; and the last, the most flagrant of all, committed on one of their owe boats belonging to the Fantome ship, commanded by Captain Le Hardy. The whole of these outrages were set forth in De cember, 1818, and the Greek Government urged not to mistake the forbearance of England, for ample , satisfac tion should be given in the end. Mr. Wyse's letter again recapitulated them, and used almost the same language in his letter to Mr. Londos. What could be done under such circumstances, but to demand reparation.—(Cheers.) Should they have gone to Russia and France and say, that if they were in their unhappy position, they would demand reparation. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then read the celebrated letter of Count Nesselrode, the Russian Minister, complaining of what the Government, in pro ceeding with hostilities against Greece, a kingdom indebted to Russia and France for large sums of money advanced to her, and proceeded. They might talk of dignity, and assert that this letter humbled England, but it only amonnted in his mind to this, ithat if England insisted on having the claims of her subjects compensated, there would not be enough left to pay their demand. We had broken that delusion, he trusted, for ever, and shown that England could be at once just and firm. The course adopted towards Greece—that of stopping her trade for a short time—was the only ono open, looking at the relative strength of the two countries. Surely Hon. Members did not wish that we should have a " little war" with Greece. But, after having waited for so many years, after having so repeatedly remonstrated with the Government, it was n-cessary to show that there was a limit to forbearance, and he thought the step taken at last by the Noble Lord was the only one that could maintain the interests, the honour, and the dignity of England, and also at the same time maintain an honourable general peace. He had felt it to be his duty to present this view of the case, because he believed the public were not acquainted with it.—(Hear, hear.) Few, indeed, could submit to the drudge' yof going through the mass of papers in which the facts were cotla, tained. But if any one would do so, they would find eve statement he had made borne out by these documents. It was one thing to make a statement having reference to a few small details, for the purpose of making out a case of hardship, and another to look through papers extending over the long period of eight years, during the whole of which period every species of evasion and of idle trifling was re sorted to. He had done this himself, and lie came to the deliberate conclusion that the Noble Lord had taken the only step that was open to him in the matter. He came to this conclusion from no personal feeling, because, though for many years he had watched the course of the Noble Lord, he did not know him personally, nor did he know that he had ever exchanged a word with him. But this be did say, that looking to the year 1848, when the peace of Europe was menaced to so alarming an extent, and to the adroitness with which the Noble Lord maintained the position and influence of England, and at the same time conduced to the preservation of peace iu Europe—(Cheers)—looking at that, and seeing that at all events peace had been maintained, he could not believe but that the Noble Lord was entitled to the admiration and the support of the country.—(Cheers.) It was true that the Noble Lord had been engaged in negotiations with France and other countries, arising out of those events. But those who deprecated the interference of the Noble Lord, spoke as though there had been no interference elsewhere, as if France bad not interfered at Rome ( Ministerial cheers)—Russia in Hungary— (Cheers)—and Prussia with Denmark.—(Hear, hear.) These were armed interferences, whereas the inter ference of the Noble Lord had in all cases been first solicited, and had always been. confined to friendly meditation, with the view of maintaining peace.—(Great laughter on the Opposition benches.) He could understand why that state ment was leliculed by those who were for maintaining peace by at all times ranging themselves on the side of absolutism —(Ministerial cheers)—who were, as the Hon. and Learned Member for Abingdon had said, "the party of order and not of change." His Hon. and Learned Friend, no doubt, thought he had made an antithesis when he used that ex pression, but there was little philosophy in it. He believed that change was the only mode of maintaining order. — (Hear.) He would ask any one who had observed the pre sent state of European nations, if they believed that order could be long maintained if it was not for change. It was not for us to stimulate that change.. Our desire was that every nation in Furope should be as free and as happy as ourselves. But it was well known that our power and influence were limited to friendly advice. Whenever that was asked it was given freely. We did not interfere against existing autho rities in any country , an d those who o pp osed them knew well that they would not receive assistance either in arms oe money from the British Government. He must say that ae he te re s H ho u u n ld garia h n aN : ,e deputatitnt m trusted more gthreisttedcotthinattrywhtehn the they to the declarations made at public meet ingsc by persons who had no power of realising their statements, or of giving efficient assistance, than to the exposition of the Noble Lord's views in that House, in which he frankly expressed his deep sympathy with that unfortunate people, but at the same time frankly stated that they could have no assistance from the Government. If these gentlemen had been deceived it had not been by the Noble Lord, or the Ministry with which he was connected, which had strictly acted on the avowed policy of non-inter ference with the internal affairs of Foreign States. He well remembered that when the Hon. Member for 13uckingliam shire ventured to raise a debate with regard to Italy, he was not able to point to any act of interference which was not just!- fled by the Noble Lord, by showing that his advice, so far from being volunteered, had in every instance been asked. It was requested by the Sovereigns of Rome, the Court of Austria, and the Cabinet of Prussia. In the case of the mediation at the instance of Austria, there could be no doubt the Noble Lord had aided in preventing French armies being sent to the plains of Lombardy.—(Hear, hear.) With respect to the affair at Athens, much had been said in depreciation of the claims of one of the parties, because he was a Jew ; but Hon. Mem o bers were aware that the term Greek Thad a similar signifi cation for the French people. The fact was, that the Greeks and the Jews had been trampled upon, oppressed, and precluded from the exercise of constitutional rights, and in such cases the moral feelings were naturally weakened But the Jews were gradually, under an enlighted being admitted te the participation of those rights, and the conserveerica- wee e that they were rapidly recovering from the position in whichthey had been places by passed oppression an rteniegovereiment. -le lees time teem that ' _wheu. Grcece teas liberated from the thraldom ite..witiqlt! it had been for merly held —when it wee placed . under the rule of a prince of the Frank-Gel men 'race—that it would _have risen to its pristine glory. Instead of thet. howeyer,• the independence of Greece had been threateeed by being placed under Rue. elan protection. In taking the course he had done the Noble Lord had shown that, whether the claims of her sub jects Were great•or small, .England would spread the. broad wgis of her protection over them.—(Cheers.) e. Sir J. GRAHAM—Let us, Sir, before the eveningaosere at all events get out of nisi pries. —(Loud cheers and laughter from the Protectionists.) We • have now. . been discussing this question for six hours. I have had the advantage of listening to three gentlemen of the long robe; and, except at the close of the speech of the Honourable and Learned. Gentleman who has just sat' down, we have not yet travelled out of Greece. The Honourable and Learned Gentleman made an observation at the commencement of his speech in which I concur, namely, that it is hardly possible to exaggerate the gravity of the question under discussion, coupled with the attendant cir cumstances of the time when we are discussing it. It affects the dignity, the honour, and the interests of this country.—(Hear. hear.) lam dragged into this discussion most reluctantly and unwittingly, but, at the same time, my absence would be construed into cowardice, and silence, coupled with the opinion I am about to express, is equally impossible. Yet, before I proceed to discuss this important question, would you pardon me if I shortly revert to my owieposition.—(Hear, hear..) I have given to the Govern ment which now presides over the destinies of this country, for the last four years au independent and honest support, because, in the state of parties, and with reference to the general position of the ceuntry, I thought it, my duty so to do; and in giving • that support I have not carped at trifles, nor have I disparaged any portions of their conduct from which may have differed, but• I have exercised for bearance.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Gentle man (blr, Wood) says he is not, personally acquainted with; the Noble Viscount whcenow administers the foreign affairs of this country. My position with respect to him is entirely different. I have known him for many years. It was my fortdne for four years to be his colleague ' and during) that period I can truly say I never acted with any person whose conduct appeared more honourable, trustworthy, or faithful, or for whom I entertained a more sincere or a more' cordial friendship.—(Cheers.) It was not because of any difference on foreign affairs that I parted from that Govern meat with which we evere both connected. On the contrary; he and I, from the offices we held in the Government of Lord Grey, were forced into intimate and perpetual communica•J, don ; and though since I left that Government, now many years ago, I have been thrown into opposition to that Noble Lord, in public I have received from him every courtesy, and in private all that kindness which he extends to his friends without reference to party.—(Hear. and cheers.) I there 4 fore feel me hostility to the Government or to the Noble Lord', but I feel that we are here to-night deliberately eo discuss, not the narrow question of Greece, but the more enlarged questioli of our foreign policy generally. Yon have- here propounded a vote contrary to that to which the House of Lords have arrived. •You say that the claims are just, not exaggerated, and that the course pursued has not tended to endanger our relations with foreign powers. You recollect what was done when the Duke of Wellington carried a resolution in the House of Lords recom mending that the neutrality which his Majesty suggested with regard to Portugal should be observed. That was car ried by a majority of 10 against Lord Grey's Government. The question was asked, "Is it your intention' to change your policy with regard' to Portugal?" "Not at all" was the reply. Colonel Davis then traversed the conduct of the' Duke of Wellington in the House of Commons, showing. that success had not attended the army of Don Pedro in Portugal; and his resolution was • carried by a majority in this House of 150. That was a course quite intelligibl. But now, the lion. Member for Sheffield, nut acting in con cert with the Government, but exercising his own discretion, has enlarged the subject and brought a much greater ques tion than that of Greece before the House. What we ate now debating is not confined to Greece. The question is I- Do you upon the whole approve of the policy pursued by her Majesty's Government with reference to foreign rela tions since their last accession to office?—(Hear, hear.) I understand from her Majesty's Government that in the present circumstances it is their desire that the issue should join upon that ground, and that the opinion of the House should be taken upon it. It is, therefore, to this larger question that I mean to address myself, if you indulge me; and I will go very rapidly and frankly over some of the most prominent points.—( Hear, bear.) I have already referred to my connexion in office, during the Government of Lord Grey, with the Noble Lord. Now, it cannot be . supposed for a moment by those who recollect the transactions of that period that I am disposed to limit within very strict rules the interference of England with reference to foreign. nations. The Hon. Member for Sheffield referred to thesup port given. to Belgium, when she threw off the yoke of Hol nand. I was a party to the blockade of Holland, to the siege of Antwerp, and to all the measures taken to ensure the sepa ration of Belgium from Holland, which was a direct departure from the treaty of Vienna.— (Hear, hear.) But I call on you to recollect how Lord Grey acted, and how those critical affairs were conducted. They eveze conducted with Prince Talleyrand in France, and every step was taken deliberately, with the full and entire concurrence of all the representa tives of the great powers of Europe.—(Cheers.) We in terferred also with respect to Portugal very decisively, and to the extent of not only blockading the ports of Portugal, but of landing our troops, and we confirmed the dynasty of Don Pedro and expelled Don Miguel ; but these transactions 'were so conducted as not to interrupt our intercourse with all the great powers of Europe.—(Cheers.) I would just ob t serve that my view of the danger of the interference which after Lord Grey ceased to'be at the head of the Government and Lord Melbourne came into office, the .Noble Lord (Palnaer ston) exercised, is pointed out with great perspicuity by the present Earl Grey, in a debate which took place in this House when the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) was at the head of affairs. The words are so pointed, so prophetic, they con tain such a forecasting of the future danger of that interfer ence in which the Noble Lord is so prone to indulge, that I will read an extract or two. Lord Howick is speaking on the address on the let of Feb. 1844, he says: "Like the Right Ilea. Baronet (Sir R. Peel), he thought there was no greater curse to the world at large, and to the interests of civilization and humanity, than the carrying on in every court in Europe, and in every country in the world, a party struggle between what was called the English party and the French party. He abominated the whole system of such interference, and he would say that the more they ab stained from giving advice to other countries as to the ma nagement of their internal affairs the better The ministers of France and of England might take opposite views of what was most conducive to the interests of Mexico or of Portugal, and little 'by little, totally contrary to the wishes of their respective Governments, ,a sort of French and English party was created. A struggle for ascendancy be tween those parties resulted, and the unfortunate system was carried on, became the prey of factions which were oc casioned, and of animosities which were embittered by this kind of interference." Further on Lord Howick says : " He bad heard with much regret the expressions of his. Noble Friend (Lord Palmerston), who, adverting to the pre sent condition of Spain, had said that, under that union of interests and that good understanding to which the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) bad referred, and that union of interests which existed between France and England, the late Regent of Spain, to whom he paid a high and well merited compliment, had fallen from power, and that a state of military despotism, if not anarchy, had succeeded. He joined in lamenting the unfortunate state of things now existing in Spain,' but, while he did so, he rejoiced that the Right Hon. Baronet and the Government of the French King had abstained from taking any active part in prevent. ing its continuance. He imputed blame to neither Govern ment for what had occurred, arid he 'only hoped they might abstain in like manner from all interference for the future, and that they would leave the Spaniards to settle their own affairs for themselves, as the most likely means of restoring that country to the state of constitutional government, and security of person and property, which all must equally desire." I contend that the principles there laid down by Lord Howick are sound and most prudent.—(Cheers.) But, let me contrast this advice, so given, with the conduct of the Noble Lord (Palmerston) almost immediately after his ac cession to power in 1837. Recollect that the advice is pointed by Lord Howick with respect to Spain. Almost the first dispatch written by the Noble Lord (Palmerston) to Sir H. Bulwer in 1846, violates, in my opinion, all the advice given by Lord Grey. It strongly interferes with the government of Spain, and affords a specimen of the spirit in which the Nobls Lord began a system of interference in all the affairs of Spain. He came into office in Julie, and this is dated the 19th of July. This is the way in which he talks of a great nation like Spain. He says—" She has a parlia ment by law, but all freedom of election has beeh overborne by force or by other means."--(Cheers from the Minis terialists.) This is perfectly true, but is this the mode in which the Government of Spain should be spoken of by the Miniiter of an ally in a time of pro found peace? (Cheers from the Protectionists.) The Noble Lord proceeded to • say that violence and power had survived the fall of Narvaez, and then he ex pressed a hope that the Ministers of Spain would return to the ways of the constitution and obedience to the laws. All this is excellent advice, but then it ought to have been practically impossible to administer it to the Government of an independent ally.—(Cheers.) Sir Henry Bulwer shortly after wrote home that the French Government had inter preted these dispatches as declarations of hostility against the Spanish Ministry.—(Hear, hear.) I will now pass on to 1843. After the great revolution which overthrew the French monarchy, the Noble Lord again addressed an admo nition to the Government of Spain. At that time Narvaez had returned to power. The admonition was, therefore, ad dressed to Narvaez himself, and Sir Henry Bulwer was, in fact, ordered to communicate the substance of the message to the Queen -Mother and to the Minister. This subject has been already discussed in this House. The dispatch was dated the 16th of March, and contained this declaration : that Narvaez should enlarge the basis of his administra tion, and take some Liberal into office. Narvaez re ceived this communication with extraordinary would diff make compla cency, and told Sir Henry Bulwer that he to a way for the Progreasista. He, however, m d e termination, for, like the Noble Lord opp os i te , h e did not give way to his political rival. As regarded the reconcilia tion between the Courts of Spain and St. James's, he wished to observe, that a sort of amends having been made for the abrupt exp'ilsion of Sir H. Bul wer , the Noble Lord, while he consented to the reconciliation, inserted in is patch, a most uncalled-fir and extrao r dinary passage, h fo disc to the effect that if Sir H. Bulwer was not already across the Atlantic he would advise his Sovereign select no othe r 1 - 1 person than Sir A. Bulwer for to select 00 other person than Sir 11. Bulwer for her re presefltsti her representative at the court of Madrid. W as t h at t h e way to keep this coun try on the most amicable re l at i ons w i t h t h e great powers of Europe ? (Cheers.) The selection of Sir H. Bulwer in that way could have produced uo other effect than the renewal of the most bitter enmity b e tween the two co untries.—( Hear, hear.) Well, then, we had frequently interfered with Por tugal ; the object ot the Noble Lord being, far as wa e s consistent with our friendly relations, to promote th cause of civil liberty. But , h ad the Noble Lord been successful in that respect, either in Spain or Portugal ? Had be been successful in placing in power the men who were most likely to effect that object ? He had rivetted Narvaez iu Spain.—(Hear.) While in Portugal he had endeavoured almost by the force of arms to sustain his objection against placing the supreme power in the hands of one particular man, that man being Costa Cabral. And yet ever since Costa Ca bral had been the Prime Ministerin Por tugal, and `vas likely to continue to be their Minister. In the autumn of 1847 there was a heaving which indicated the great earthquake of 1848, and the overthrow of the dy nasty of Louis Philippe. No where was that more strongly indicated than in Switzerland. The Right Hon. Baronet here took occasion to explain how anxiously he had desired to speak before the Noble Lord, in order that if he should ma k e any misstatement or mistake, the Noble Lord might correct him. He then went into the history of the fatal schism which took place in the autumn of 1847 between the . ~- -...! or) different states composing the Republic of Stylize . !. ‘.. •y ~. one haqd the Sonderbund, on the other the ultra -i'. : ;.•:,-. cans—and of the part acted in reference thereto • ra :,4', ..aw...._ and England. Guizot was in favour of the So bunr(VA S' ( - 2 : or moderate Repubiicans. and for checking the So er1.1114..--- - g. (---, I At that time M. Morier Was wi!hdrawn, end Mr e -• 4 ~..4 I , , Pointect out z jiiii -- gCil'afraires. It was proposed by 'e, , ...,: r ati.A ~,s 4 i. . 4 railer .IfAneri t'h'at a ridte Should be signed by th'e tilt., itoi:t7o.-- ‘ 4 i,.;, 1 end a ,dean or the note was prepared by the puke-delft 1124:-.1.' ' 7 ......2...e,.' / On the 6EII of November the note WAS tendered by the \ 44,/ kite de Bi,iglie . to the Noble Lord, Who kept it till the 16th, with:" .--. "' 1 out any communication relating thereto. On the 16th he sent it. suggesting stlerations, to Paris,' and -from the:lGth i to the 26th of November was consumed in agreeing to and signing the note. On the 22d of November MrPeel wrote to flie Noble Lord from Basle, stating that General Dufour bad advanc don Latrianne, where the-Sonderhund was col-. lected/ - His letter was' received on the 26th, the day the note was signed; and on the 27th the NobleiLord aldresied bitii instructions to the effect, that Von arriving at litsle, he found the Sonderbund dissolved after a complete victory, in that case he must net present the note. Mr. Peel, in conse quence of private instructions - from the Noble Lord, sent to General Dufour, directing him to lose no time, but to make haste in his operations. Lord PALMERSTON—That is not tru e . L. , (Cheers.) Sir J. GRAHAM—The confidence of the Government was not, loWeVer,' withdrawn from Mr. Peel.. -He remained Chargé d'affaires, and was, he believed, still in the employ ment.of the Government. , Lord PALMERSTON—I - sent no such message._ (Cheers and a laugh.) ' - Sir J. GRAllAlf—Then the. Noble Lord meant to convey that the ,Ministers of France and Spain in so stating were guilty of Saying what was not borne out by fact. (We un derstood Lord Palmbrston to assent.) The misunderetand ing that arose between M. Guizot and the Noble Lord in re ference to that transaction led to a degree of animosity on the part of the Noble Lord which pursued M. Guizot to his fall. —(Oh, oh.)' He evai compelled, however; to charge upon the Noble Lord 'a mtech heavier responsibility— the over throw of a Monarchy and the establishment of a Republic, which the authors of it now desired to modify. .He eves sure it would be to the end of the Noble Lord's life a source of regret to him that, whereas he only intended to overthrow M. Guizot, in his efforts to do so he effected a 'change the results of which it was impossible to calculate.e-e(Ceies of " Oh.") Then', with' regard to Austria. , In February o 1848, the Noble Lord laid on the table a short correspondetelf, con taining a dispatch' to Lord Ponsonby, which impl eerne Abet Austria was engaged in designs inconsistent with the - ince,. pendence of Piedmont, and in which the Noble Lord.said diatinctly that the execution of any such purpose wouldenot be regarded with indifference by her Majesty's Government. It was a fact beyond all doubt, that the Noble Lord.received in answer to that dispatch a note from Prince Metternich at Vienna, containing a solemn denial of any such, intention, and stating that the policy of Austrialtowards Italy was purely defensive, that least ot all did she entertain theallegai intention towards Piedmont, 'and that so far from it she was ready to enter into an arrangement'to maintain herindepen dence. That correspondence took place in August-and Sep tember, 1847, and in February, 1848, the Noble Lord pre sented a paper to that House containing the letter-of-accusa tion, but not accompanying it with the letter of Prince Met ternich in reply. It was not until the month of Angust, when Lord Brougham moved for a copy of it, that the dis patch was produced. Such was the transaction with Austria which had been so loudly complained of, and which he must say redounded little - to the honour of this country. The very fact of that dispatch was a cause of excitement. Piedmont became the assailant, and then the question arose—did her Majesty's Government do all in their power to restrain her attacks ? Their exertions, he regretted to say, amounted to a simple suggestion that Austria was strong and Piedmont was weak. Austria applied to the Noble Lord for his media tion, and the Noble Lord refused it unless Austria consented to the surrender of Venice as well as Lombardy. It was impos sible to divine the amount of mischief which had flowed from that refusal. Well, Rome was in the occupation of the. French army.; Lombardy was again occupied by the abselute power of Russia ; Venice had been reconquered ; so that, in point of fact, there - was not to be seen a vestige of that liberty which the Noble Lord said lie was so anxious to preserve. With regard to Sicily, it was open to bet Ma jesty's Government to give any advice; and „Sicily had, moreover, ' peculiar claims upon our intervention. But the interference that took place was in terms not very complimentary to his Neapolitan Majesty; and not only in the shape of advice, but the British fleet was actually em ployed on the coast ot Sicily. _ The SiCilian insurgents thought for a moment of tendering the crown to the Duke of Genoa, and they sent a messenger on board a British man of-war, and assurances were given that if the Duke of Genoa would accept the crown he would be recognised by . En gland. 'The King of Naples asserted his power.' The insur gents had been encouraged by us;' they relied on our assist ance; they prolonged their resistance, relying on our assist ance ; they were overcome ; we left them, to their fate ; and when a large body of these Sicilian refugees fled to Malta they were refused admission by our Governor. These matters he was' anxious to have explained by the Noble Lord. With regard to the Hungarian refugees, he admitted distinctly in terms as strong as could be used b y any gentle man, that the message sent by the Emperor of Russia, through an aide-de-camp, demanding either the expulsion cr the surrender of the Hungarian refugees, was a harsh measure, and one- which it became England to prevent. The course taken by her Majesty's Government in the first instance was not only unexceptionable, but right and highly honourable; they appealed to the' generosity and good faith of the Emperor, in a dispatch firm in its tone, and yet conciliatory in its character while doing this. But it was not wise to take any step which could be construed into menace. To send a fleet toehe Dardanelles before an answer was given to that message was imprudent in the highest degree. By the treaty of Unkiar Skelessi, it was provided that the. Dardanelles and the Bosphorous should not, under any pretext, be passed without a special firman from the Sultan. Tee E ng li s h fleet, however, not only proceeded to the mouth of the Dar danelles, but Sir Stratford Carmen etelled on the fleet to go up to Constantinople.; ansieliflA W r ite hbt mistaken, the fleet went part of the , way •, but, TeTtbat as it may, it went inside the Dardanelles. ' When' the gmperor of Russia heard that this hostile demenetreieen dierl' - been Made •at the mouth of the Darclimelles, e ,he was naturally very indignant, and an _ excuse was made by the British Government.—(Opposition cheers.) Now, this was a question' which touched the bonofir of Ahe English nation. Was the excuse which was made consistent with the facts or nut? The excuse was that the fleet was driven within the Dardanelles . by stress of weather,.. Now there was a living witness, a Member of the House of Peers, who stated in his place in Parliament, that, so far from' being drives in by stress of 'weather, Sir William Parker weighed anchor on a fine day, and entered the Dardanelles in smooth water.--(llear, hear.) Now, this brought him to the affairs of Greece. , He had already said that the tone as umed by 'the Noble Lord to foreign Ministers was sometimes so offen sive that he was not surprised that hostile feelings should be generated even where it was desirable that the relations should be most amicable. He held in his hand a letter pur porting to be written by the i Noble,Lord to M. Pelararchi, dated October, 1847, and' which had appeared in a Greel paper. The French party was at that tithe' in . power at Athens, and this letter was published there, and had not been contradicted. (The Right Hon. Baronet then read the letter in question, which stated that M. Delararchi woulddo well to abstain from unfounded accusations againstqiieMejesty's Government, and he ought not to forget that these were not the means by which the relations of the British and Grecian Governments could be placed on a more satisfactory footing. Her 'Majesty's Government had heard with great 'regret the declaration that M. Delararchi had resolved on 1 ur suing the same course which had been pursued by M. Co letti ; that system had been i'system of illegality, of cor ruption, of violence; injustice, and tyranny, oppressive and disgusting to the Greek nation. Her ]Majesty's Government had hoped that this iniquitous iystem• would have ;ceased with the life of a Minister who was considered as its author, but as M. Delararchi declared that he meant to • continue the same systems it was evident that he was acting under an influence' equally -.hostile to the welfare of Greece and to this country.) Was it not quite natural that there should be some difficulty in preserving amicable arrangements after a letter so addressed? The Noble Lord took great credit to himself for furthering free institutions. It so hap pened that after the demise of Mr. Canning, the question of the independence of Greece was unsettled. It was net until 1829, when the Earl of Aberdeen was Secretary for Foreign Affairs, that the independence of Greece was established, and it was not until 1845, he thought, that there was any constitutional government, and it was when his Right Hon. Friend (Sir Robert .Peel) was in power, and Lord Aberdeen was at the head of the Foreign department, and very much in' consequence of representations from our Government, that the constitutional government was established. Well now, ho imagined that, after all, truth and plain dealing were the best. Well now, he had every reason to be lieve t h at Greece was not innocent of cJvert inter ference and fomentiag insurrection in the lonian Islands. Had 'there been any evidence to sustain the charge, there was no length to which we might not have pushed our hostility. Now Sir Henry Ward, in 'a speech addressed to his senate, preferred the charge in direct terms. It was met indignantly by King Otho ; S;!' Henry .Ward then retracted it, but in the peers presented to the French Chambers in a dispatch dated the 14th of March, by M. Drouyn de I'lluys, that complaint was again referred to by the Minister of Fo reign Affairs. Now with respect to these Grecian claims, the claims of M. Pacifico and of Mr. Finlay, and more espe cially in respect of an English boat's crew that bad been seized, much had been said in vindication of them, but he must say these appeared to him to be the least important part ot this matter. The Honourable and Learncl- Mem berfor Sheffiele, who, he hoped, wou ld excuse • h i m f ur saying so, had with great address taken the part of an able advocate, but passed entirely over the claims; of the themtwo iwslasandisu.dispSuitrabille.enrNyuNwV,arhde said that our. ,a claim to more difficult arie doubtful c ase did not exist.—(Hear, hear.) It depended, in fact, whether these islands belonged to Venice, when Venice was conquered by F r ance, and as to whether they had been transferred to Venice by a previous treaty. Now it was by the merest accident that these islands were not seized in October last, according to an order from the Foreign-office to the Admiralty, and an order from the Admiralty to Sir William Parker. Neither of these documents was given in these papers, but there was a g answ e ri pg the . was receipt dated of A m letter u f a r t e r u m u ti u r sWilliams e P p a t r e k m e r b ew a l ! i k a n n o d w ..h l e is d October. hasty and i ll-advised order as never given, and b ee n executed it was quite plain that F ranc e and had ß it been would, from a casus federis, have had a casus bell!. By the prudence of Sir William Parker, in hesi tilting to execute that order, this complication of Affitirs with 1, and Russia had been avoided. This hronglat him to th'rreceduct earlis country towards France e again he said he deeply regretted the et-00-u-Grsroeenetaceke;n by her Majesty's Government. Some Gentle men bad expressed an opinion that it was right to refuse the mediation of France, and also her goad offices. Perhaps he might agree in the prudence of re fusing mediation because the affair had advanced so far, and we had asserted our rights with so high a hated, th at to have accepted the mediation of France .might have been hardly consistent with an independent position; but be must say, France having tendered her mediation, to 'accept her good offices appeared to him to be the surest course to lead to a misunderstanding. But when the conven ion in London had been signed, the natural course would have been, when from some misunderstanding another arrangement had been extorted by force of arms, the natural course, and the wise course, would have been that the convention in London should , have been accepted, and he thought it a great misfortune that that course was not taken. 01 course it would . have been said tha we attempted to obtain conditions less derogatory to the dignity of England ; but the transaction had ended ex actly in our accepting the worst of the conditions that could have been obtained from -use Well now, consequent upon that some negotiation had taken place, and perhaps to make a point in the House of Lords, some portions of a correspon dence had been published charging Baron Gros with a breach of faith. Then another dispatch of Lord Normanby's was in troduced explaining how the mistake had arisen. Then at last, he was surd to the joy of that House and of the country, notwithstanding all these charges and the jeopardiof a good understanding with France, the negotiations had terminated favourably, the convention of London had been accepted, and that which was likely to end with such fatal consequences had terminated in' peace. Something had been said with regard to Denmark, and its relations with Prussia. maw