The Sun. — London, England, 1850-06-26 00:00:00

, THE SUN, Verary and despotic countries, or to countries re courts of justice are so org anised as to be oi fl kler th e control of the Government; but they have Ply stated that in all countries our subjects are simply sliare that protection which the law of the land past them. 1 - deny that proposition.—(General cheering.) ':"Y that it is a doctrine under w hich no forei g n Minister der yet has acted. It is a doctrine which the people of Er,-,- 4 1will never suffer any Minister to act upon.—( Hear, ,7, 1 %) Do I mean to say that Brit ish sub j ects abroad are a lto above law, or to be exempt from and taker. out of the 'ePe of the laws of the land? I mean no such thing—l fl i tend for no such principle. Where the la w is ap p licable, :lish subjects are bound to have recourse for redress to the 'sans which the law of the land affords them. That is the %ion which our legal advisers have given in innumerable ;slances, and upon that principle we have fou nded our re 'es in cases where our aid and interferenc e have been ap '„sd for. 1 have beard mentioned, with regret, aspersions 4:t upon the character of the legal advisers of the Crown, Jll a quarter from which they ought not to come; those ZPersions were cast by a person who ha s been himself in st office, acid who must have known, not only knowledge, independence of mind, but also the justice of eaement that qualify the individual who holds the office of een's Advocate.—( Rear, hear.) I should have thought i Ed hoped that the knowledge possessed of those qualities a man who had been in the Foreign-office would have Protected the Queen's Advocate from those aspersions.— Rear.) Sir, I may be departing from the strict orders of Se House in what I have just said , but I f elt it due to an uourable public servant, on an occasion like the present, ( J„speak in favour of and in vindication of his character.— 4ear, hear.) If our subjects abroad have complaints i tuinst individuals or Governments who are liable to the proceedings of courts of law, no doubt it is to courts of 1 11 8tice British subjects ought to apply, but there are an Yllinity of cases in which either there is no confidence 41 those tribunals, or the tribunals, from their composition nature, are not of a character to inspire us with any I :'.'Pe or confidence of obtaining just ice.—(Hear, hear.) :",any of those tribunals are so completely u nder the con ;•01 of the Government that justice cannot b e ex p ected. 'here are also nominally constitutional Governments, ,'there the tribunals are not free. But who i s to be the Judge? The British Government or the Government of the state from which you would expect redress?: I will take a ease which occurred not long ago, and one in which I am sure the people of England would not hold that a British subject was to be amenable to the laws of a foreign country. am not now going to talk of the power of sending a man to Siberia, nor of a country the constitution of which vests arbi !sty ower in the Sovereign, but I shall state a case that u,aPpen p ed not long ago in Sicily. There a decree was passed , at any man found with concea l e d arms in his p ossession a could be immediately brought before a court-martial and and, if convicted of the offence, shot upon the spot. there was an innkeeper at Catania brought before a court kartial, and charged by two officers of police with this offence. They stated that they discovered in an open stable 4 1 his yard a knife, and this was considered to be a concealed , weapon. The examination having been ended, the counsel 1 for the prosecution said, " I give up the case. I think it as evident that there is no proof that either this knife be longed to the man accused, or that, if it did, he was aware • that it was in the place where it was found." The counsel 'teethe defendant stated, " Such being the opinion of the counsel for the prosecution, it is unnecessary_ for me to go iatoeany defence. leaver the matter in the • hands-of the .The •Court• pronounced the defendant • guilty of lie O r iferice'Charged against him, and the tiext,anoroing the lean was - shot. Now, I would ask what the people of ,England would say if any of thern were left to seek redress fla stitch a'tribinilil as that?—(Elear, hear): Yet tfilit elan I '(as executed according to law, he 'hiving beeri'ddelared flay &lief 'offefee by one of th - eteihniials dins .country..oee doettine)ielharrediSse eslionld leesoieglit• ihrotighthe 'counts and-laws efethecouittry where thdstr.dourts-were free ?aiisciel hut t thee are AniberleSs tesses 'Where, iteletitiett eube Jests were confined to courts of law 'for I redress;' they would be deprived of that protection which they are entitled to re ceive. —(Hear, hear.) Then the question arises as to hew that rule applies to demands made upon a Government. I ought here to remind the House, and I shall do so in the shortest possible manner, of the nature of our relations with Greece, and the state and condition in which Greece has been, because that state and condition is a material element in the consideration of the propriety of the course ere have taken.—(Hear, hear.) It is well known that the Greeks revolted from Turkey in 1827 or 1628. England, France, and Russia determined to interpose, and they em ployed forcible means to bring Turkey to acknowledge the atdependeuce of Greece. Greece was in 1830 and 1833, by protocols and treaties, erected into a separate and inde pendent state. And whereas, from the year 1820 up to the time when the protocol of 1830, on which the treaty of 1333 was founded, Greece had been a Republic, and governed by Assembly and President, the three powers were deter- Mined that Greece should have a monarchy. But while, on the one hand, the British Government consented to this arrangement—(l do not say consented, because it was its own opinion that Greece should assume that form of Government)—on the other hand it was of opinion that Greece sould have a constitutional Government. The British Government would not consent to place Greece under a more arbitrary form of government tean that from which it had revolted. Consequently, when the three powers, in the exercise of that function devolved upon them by the General Assembly of Greece, chose a Sovereign for Greece, he then being a minor, the three powers, in announcing to the Greek nation the choice they had made, announced, at the same time, that that King would, in concert with the representatives of the people, give them a representative constitution when he became of age. That choice was ratified by a decree made by the King of Bavaria. It was agreed that, during the minority of the King, the question of the constitution should be Suspended, and that, when he became of age, he and his people should arrange the form of the constitution. When, 'however, he became of age, no constitution was given. There was &disinclination on the part of those who advised him to 'fulfil that' engagement.- The Goveinment -of England, in aerioncways .and. through various channels, -expressed its cpinion that that engagement ought to befulfilled.—(liear, rheare) Opinion§ of a different kind reached, the royal year from other quarters.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") Other ,cOuntries naturally—and I say this without any imputation against them—preferred their own form of government. Each Government thinks its own, form the best, and Wishes to see it extended elsewhere ; and, therefore, it is not from any intention to cast reproach on Russia, Prussia, or Aostria that I say that those three Governments being at that time entirely despotic,- their advice was given and influ ence exerted to prevent. the King of Greece from granting a representative constitution. We thought that in France we might have found sympathy with our opinions, and also sup - Port and advice. We were unfortunate in that respect. The „Government of Frauce, though not at all undervaluing con etitutionalinstitutions, thougkt that the time was not yet come whed Greece was ripe for a representative Govern ment. Bavaria leant to the same side, and, therefore, from the time the King of Greece came of age to several years afterviards, the English Government stood alone. We were -anxious for the fulfiment of an engagement to which all the other powers were, either adverse or not, equally edesirous to see fulfilled. That placed us in a situ ation which, to say the least of it, exposed us to dis favour on the part of other Governments. I do not think • the people of this country will be of opinion that we ought, fir the sake of obtaining the good will of the Greek Govern ' ment, t have departed from the principle which we had laid down.—( Hear, hear.) People talked of the antagonistic influence that existed at the Greek Court, and stated that our Minister and the Ministers of foreign Courts differed as to which should have the appointment of nomarchs and minarchs, but that is a mistake entirely at variance with the facts. Our Minister Sir E. Lyons, never, from the time he went to Greece till the time he left it, asked for any favour df the kind, and therefore there could have been no contest of that mean, low, and petty description referred to. The only conflict was about that which I stated, namely, whether Greece should have a representative constitution, while the influences of other powers were exerted the other way. One result of the absence of constitutional institutions was that the whole system of government grew to be full of every kind of abuse. Justice could not be respected while the tribunals were at the mercy of the advisers of the Crown. Finance could not be expected to be in any order when there was no public responsibility on the part of those who either collected, spent, or accounted for the re venue. Every sort of abuse was practised. In later times in Greece, there has prevailed, on account of the daring habits of the people, a system of appropriation —(Laugh ter)—the forcible appropriation by one man of that which belonged to another—a thing very disagreeable to those on khom it is inflicted, and exceedingly injurious to the social condition of the people, and calculated to impede their pros laity. In fact, what a foreigner would call " brigandage" erevailed among them. The police of the Greek Govern ment practised abuses of the grossest description.—(Hear, hear.) And if you wanted any evidence in support of that assertion I should appeal to the Hon. Gentleman who just est down, who, in a pamphlet which most of us have read, has detailed instances of barbarities practised by the police which are most revolting.—(Hear, hear.) I have here the depositions of persons who have been sub jected to the most abominable torture which human inge nuity could devise—torture inflicted on both sexes—(Rear) —torture of the most revolting and disgusting kind.— ( Hear.) Moreover one of the officers of the Government, a man of the nameof Zeno—who was at the head of the pe ;ice, was in the habit of inflicting the most diabolical tor :urea on the unhappy people of Greece, as well as upon Thrks and other foreigners. This man, instead of being punished as he deserved, not only by the laws of nature but also by the laws of Greece, for the perpetration of these atrocities, not only escaped punishment, but was actually held ia great favour. Well, Sir, then this being the state of things, we had in Greece, and have always had, a great number of persons whom we are bound to protect. There are, in almost every town of Greece, a great number of Maltese and lonians there are also a certain number of British subjects. It be came the practice of those Greek authorities to make no dis tinction between these Maltese and lonians and their own ;Greek subjects. We shall be told, I know, by some, "No foreigner has a right to be better treated than the people of the country ; and if the people of the country were liable ;to ,have heavy stones placed on their breasts, and persons dancing upon them—if they are liable to have their heads tied to their knees, and in that position are to be swung like pendulums and bastinadoed as they swing—if they are liable to have every sort of horrible practice inflicted upon them, foreigners have no right to be better treated than the natives—(Hear, hear, and laughter)—and therefore we have rib business to interfere. We may be told that, but that is not my opinion, and I think it. is not the opinion • of any reasonable man. —!(Hear, hear.) Well, Sir, then I say, considering the case of these lonians -for whom we have demanded reparation, the House and the country must look to the stateof things in Greece, and to the 'practices which are going on there, before they can come to a ;right conclusion as to the step which we took in demanding compensation, though, indeed, it was scarcely more than a nominal compensation, something in the nature of a compen elation, which would be an acknowledgment that such things should not be done in future.— (Hear, hear.) Sir, I am sorry to say that these cases have been discussed elsewhere in a spirit and in a tone which I think was not befitting the per sons concerning whom the discussion teek place, nor thos e e i n whose n w h os e presence it took place.—(Hear, hear.) We h grave matters treated with no little ridicule in a grave as sembly. We have had these claims dealt with lightly, jocosely, and grave men have been kept in roars of laughter for hours together, because of the poverty of some of the persons concerned—because of the misery religion of another.— (Hear, hear.) As if, because men were poor, • they might be bastinadoed and tortured with impunity 1— (Lond cheers.) As if, because men happened to be born in Scotland, they might be injured without redress—(Hear, hear)—or, because their religion happened to be that of the Jewish persuasion, they were fair game for any torture that a foreign power might choose to inflict upon them ! (Cheers.) Sir, it is an old saying, it is one that has been often repeated, that a very moderate share of human wisdom is sufficient for the guidance of human affairs. But there is another truth, which is, that men who aspire to govern man kind ought to bring to that task generous sentiments,' com passionatieesympaehies, and .noble and elevating F lews. — (Cheers). Now, Sir, with regard to the case, I will first take that which I think would first present itself to the mind of an Englishman—l mean the insult on the part of the Greek authorities to one of her Majesty's officers.--(Hear, hear.) Time has been when men who aspired to public station would have thought it their duty at least to vindicate the honour of the British navy. Times are changed.—(Loud cheers) It is slid, " What is that? They were only taken out of their boat; a set of armed men were taken up to the guard house, but they were soon let out agaea ; why should you trouble your heads about that ?" Why, Sir, did we ask anything extraordinary or unreasonable for that? What we asked was an apology.—(Cheers.) I really thought I should not live to see the day when public men in England would think that a demand of an apology for an arbitrary and unjust arrest of a British officer and of -British seamen in the performance of their duty was a demand " doubtful in its nature and exaggerated in its amount."—(Cheers.) Now, Sir, is that the case ? Circumstances have been alluded to with regard to that case which were connected with it, but which do not form part of the statement of the case itself. The case itself is well known. A son of the British vice-consul, being on board the Fantome, was taken ashore by a coxswain in a boat; he was landed on the beach, and escorted to his father's house. The coxswain, on his return, was taken up by the guard. The guard r ent down to the boat, and, finding men with arms, the guard wcunded one of them with a bayonet, and they took them prisoners and carried them to prison. After a certain time, by the interposition of the vice-consul, they were then released, and returned to their ship. The excuses were altogether misstatements.—( Hear, bear.) But the gist of the excuse was this, that the guard thought that this boat belonged to the Spitfire, and that they had been seen landing rebels, one of whom escaped. Well, Sir, the fact to which all that referred was this :—lt was the practice, and has been and still is the practice, of the Government of Greece, instead of punishing the brigands by which that country is infested, to amnesty and pardon them from time to time.—(Hear, hear.) It is even supposed that the officers of the police frequently get shares of the plunder.— ( Hear, hear.) But that is a matter of opinion. The fact of their being never punished and always pardoned is matter of notoriety. This has given so much encouragement to this system of plunder that they go about in armed bands, and sometimes they actually occupy towns. Well, of these bands there was a leader of the name of Mereditti, aho came with a band of armed men to take Patras. But in hitras there was a governor and an armed force to a certain extent. The governor and the armed force, either thinking that they ought to follow the example of their governor, decided not to resist the banditti —perhaps con sidering discretion the better part of valour, they fled, leav ing the town in the hands of the banditti. The people of Patras, however, did not at all like that result. They found themselves deserted by their natural protectors, and threw themselves on the foreign consuls. They begged and en treated the consuls to intercede and make some arrangement which would save the town from pillage. It was finally agreed that Mereditti should forego his contemplated pillage of the town on payment of a certain sum—l forget the amount. The money was collected and deposited in the hands of the vice-consul. Mereditti and his band march down to the sea-shore, for the purpose of embarkation in a British man-of-war. When the governor, who bad retired in the manner I have mentioned, thought that the band was prepared to embark, he bethought him that it woule be a fortunate thing if he could attack the rear guard of Mere ditti. And it was intended to induce the commander of the vessel to betray the band to the governor. But the officer said, "No ; there is not only honour among thieves, but there is honour to thieves."—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) You have asked us to make this arrangement, and we gave 'von a guarantee that 'we should protect , these men." The people of the town .agreed tor give Mereditti about half - the sttm which he originally asked. Well, this was the circumstance which M. Rondopulos al luded to- when he said that it was not known whether ornot,, it was the vessel containing this armed 'bead that was about;, to be landed—that was the excuse offered for arresting a British officer and British seamenin the performance of their duties. This was an, insult to.the:etritesh navy, which the Government of .any other country would probably have re-: garded in a different way.e—(Hear.) Well, Sir, then we-boners' to these lonians. And fflst I take the 'case of those who were plundered ,in the Custom-house. These men in their boats pass near to this Custom-house. They see a person habited in the garments of a Custom-house officer. They naturally obey his orders. But when they enter they are told that they are in the hands of a bandit. They were plundered in the Castom-house, and not only plun dered but stripped of their clothes and beat. Well then, Sir, I say, do not tell me that this is a case to be com pared with British subjects travelling through Terra cina, for instance, and insulted by banditti ; and that in such cases the Government of this country did not think of asking for compensation from the Italian Governments. I say that if a Government do not protect its own Custom-house — (Hear, hear)—if a Government permits an armed band of robbers—robbers they were, for they were banditti—and allows foreigners to be robbed and beaten in that Custom house—l say thatesueh a Government should be called up n for redress.—(Loud cheers.) Well, 1 think our demand was a moderate demand. We asked for nothing but an indem nity against the injuries that had been sustained by British subjects. We simply asked for that of which they had been deprived. Then we come to the case of the other lonians. It appeared that, on a festive day, they, according to the fashion of the country, had exhibited flags iu front of their houses. But the police came and said they must be re moved. But the removal of the flags would not satisfy the Greek authorities. These lonians were arrested, manacled, and thumb-screwed—(Hear, hear)—and in that state they were marched off to prison. It had been said, " How could they take a person to prison by any other " manner except by conducting him through t he streets. Why, it is true ; but then there was no necessity for taking them through the streets which did not lie in their way. For the purpose of parading them before the gaze of the in habitants they were taken through all the streets of Patras. Then it is said, " 06, you say they were thumb-screwed ; but what of that? They were not maimed for life—hew could you call for Ivey compensation for them ? If they were maimed for life you might complain, but as long as they were not so maimed—the mere fact of being thumb screwed and being compelled to take a pleasant evening walk—(Langhter)—why, for that surely, no claim for compensation can be made." Sir, I am of a different opinion.-(Cheers.) I do not think that thumbscrews! are like gloves, to be put on and taken off at any time one pleases. Sir, the facts that I have stated, namely, the torture by the Greek authorities of British subjects—l think it is necessary we should put our hand upon this case, and require that a moderate compensation should be pro vided for it, and which has not yet been provided. These lonians had committed no offence ; they were dismissed, no charge being piov"ed against them. As to the two men who had been whipped by the Greek authorities in the pre sence of persons who had deposed to their treatment, there was . ' ample -evidence that they had committed no act of infringement whatever of the laws of Greece. Com pensation was duly demanded in this case, not merely be cause of the injury which they had received, but as a token that we should have protection for British subjects.—(Hear, hear.) Well, then, we come to the case of the Fantome. It is said that Mr. Finlay was a " canny Scotchman," who speculated in land, as it is said—who bought his land in the cheapest and sold it in the dearest market.—(Hear, hear.) It was clearly a case demanding i n q uir y , and a guarantee that the same case should not occur in future. Now, Sir, we undoubtedly by our law, and by the law of .dl countries, if it is thought necessary to take land for public purposes, for a line of public communication, for any great national work—why public utility overrides private rights to this ex tent, that the owner is compelled to give up his property; but then he is entitled to have his property fairly valued, and to receive what may be the true and proper amount of that value.—(Hear.) He is not compelled to take that which the person who in such case desires to have possession of his land chooses to give him, but he is allowed such an amount as is adjudged to be due by him by an authorised valuer. But this land was not taken for any public purpose. It was taken for .the private enjoyment of the King of Greece.. Well, Sir, I am sure nobody who wishes well to Greece, or who takes an interest in the welfare, of the youthful Sove reign of a young state, would say that it was not fitting that there should be a residence proper for royalty in Greece, and that those who happened to have land near the site which was chosen for the palace ought not to give up the property but upon being paid.the value of that which was taken from them. Mr. Finlay never had any objection upon that ground. Mr. Finlay was perfectly ready to give up his land upon being pain the proper value of his land. Well, then, is there any reason in saying that because some years before he had bought this land at a cheaper rate than that at which he offered it. he was not entitled to have a price given him proportioned to the increased value which a difference of circumstances had occasioned ?—(Hear, hear.) Why, Sir, the commonest principles of justice between man and man would necessarily lead you to this— that you shall not inquire what was the value of his land when he bought it. It might have fallen in value. The only question that had to be considered was, what was the value of the property at the time it was taken from hini.—(Hear, hear.) I must say that, in my opinion, all who feel an interest in royalty must have read with extreme pain the proceedings on this subject. I cannot help recol lecting how different was the conduct of Frederick the Great is a similar case. An humble individual happened to pos sess a plot of land included in the site which Frederick the Great had chosen for the comp letion of a magnificent place for the residence of monarchy. The owner of this small plot of land, on which he had a windmill, refused to part with it, and the windmill and the plot in question were ulti mately included within the confines of the palace grounds. Frederick the Great pointed with pride to the windmill, and rejoiced that he had the happiness to rule over people who knew and were determined to maintain their rights. — (Cheers.). • Well, Sir, what was the conduct pursued by the King of Greece on this subject? For fourteen long years Mr. Finlay was driven front pillar to post, and put off by every sort of shuffling and evasive excuses, and de prived of all compensation for his land, unless lie chose to take a turn totally inadequate to its value. Well, in 1843 came the revolution. Up to 1843 the Government of Greece had continued arbitrary. The king declined, under the cir cumstances which I have mentioned, to grant a representa tive constitution. In 1843 the patience of Greece was ex hausted. They rose in Athens, and extorted by force that which had not been granted to reason. When that revolution came courts of justice were esta blished, which were not in dependent, because the judges are not only liable to be dis missed at the will of the sovereign, but to be removed from court to court, so that anycour t ma y be, and often is, packed for trying the case which i s to be brou g ht before it.—(Hear, hear.) In 18 t 3 there wer e courts to which Mr. Finlay might have appealed. In these courts he had no confidence with regard to transactions which ha happened before the volution. Mr. Mr. Finlay, therefo d re, reaped no benefit front the change of government. - But then . I heaasserted rd it most triumphantly , dist inctl y , and positively that when • Mr. Wyse made his demand the Greek Government the claim of Mr. Finlay was abeolutely finally, and conclusively settled. (Hear, hear.) Sir, that was by no means the case. There had been, indeed, an agreement made for arbitration, and a most curious sample it was of the manner in which thin g s are carried on in Greece. Mr: Finlay said, "I will refer this to arbitration." "It is a subject," they said, "for arbi tration; name an arbitrator yourself, and we shall name another... Mr. Finlay, who has been stated to be a " canny Scot," looking well into the future, foresaw the possibility—which might, indeed, have - struck even a man not so far north as he—(Laughter)—that the two arbitrators might possibly differ; he therefore hum bly suggested that an umpire should be appointed. (Heate) The Greek Government said, "You are quite tight; we see exactly how it is;. we will appoint an umpire."—(Laughter.) But Mr. Finlay, being a very sensible man, did not like to commit his case to the keeping of three men, two of whom were to be appointed by the Greek Government. And if that arbitration had been gone into, no doubt Mr. Fin lay's claim would have been finally settled. But by the law of Greece an arbitration so appointed must pronounce its award within three months; or if it did not, the matter dropped to the ground, The Commissioners could not make their award without the production of certain documents, which could only be furnished by the officers of the Greek Government ; but by some unfortunate circumstance they did not furnish them—(Hear, hear)—and the arbitration, as a necessary consequence, fell to the ground ; and, therefore, at the time when Baron Gros came to examine into the mat ter, he found matters perfectly in the same state that they were when Mr. Finlay first complained. Baron Gros was. at first astonished, and he said to Mr. Finlay, "Whyyetis'claims- beet been' subjected to.arbitretion, the ma tter is settled , why have y ou not received your money?" Mr. Finlay replied, " I did not know that it was so, or that even a sum was fixed as the amount of compensation I am to receive." On further examination, it appeared that the matter was really in the same position in which it s before it was referred to arbitration.—( Hear, hear.) N wa ow, that was a case in which we made no specific demand.—(Hear, hear.) We only asked that Mr. Fiulay should receive the value of what the land might turn out to be worth; and the sum ultimately agreed upon was that which the two arbi trators had fixed between th e m, splitting the differences of amount which one thought was only adequate and the other sufficient for satisfaction of the demand. One of these arbitrators had been appointed by Mr. Finlay, and the other by the Greek Government. (Hear, hear.) I do not think in this case, taking these circumstances into consideration, that the claim was unfounded in justice.— (Cheers.) Well, then, we come to the claim of M. Pacifico, which has been the subject of so much unworthy comment. Stories have been told involving the honour, and imputa tions have been cast out against the character of M. Paci fico. All I know is this, that after the time to which these stories relate, the Portuguese Government had appointed M. Pacifico their consul in Morocco, and subsequently at Athens; and I do not know that it is likely that the Por tuguese Government would have selected a man to have filled these offices upon whom there rested such grievous imputations as is now alleged. F or my part, Ido not believe them ; but I say, as has been said by those who have taken part in this debate , that I do not care what his character may have been or what it is.—( Hear.) I can never admit that because he may have done wrong at some former period, he is for all eternit y to be injured with out the right to obtain redress. The rights of man turn upon the case in question, and it is nonsense to say you will not give him redress for any injury inflicted upon him, because on some other occasion he may have done something not in accordance with the principles of justice.—(Hear.) Now, what happened to M. Pacifico? Why , in the middle of the town of Athens, his house—which, I must be allowed to say, was not that wretched house which some persons have de scribed it—but no matter what it was—if it was a cabin or a palace, it had a right to be safe from injury, and should be protected—(Cheers)—that house which in early days had been the residence of Count Ormsturm, the chief of the re gency, and which was situated in the middle of Athens, within forty yards of the great street of the capital, and a few minutes' walk from the guard-house, was entered by a mob. They send for protection to the British legation; ap plication is made for that protection to the Greek Govern ment; but no protection is afforded. This mob, in which were found soldiers and gendarmes, who, if their officers were absent, were, nevertheless, bound to preserve peace and order —this mob, headed by the sons of the Minister of War, not children, but young men of eight and twenty years of age, enjoyed themselves for two hours in gutting the house of an unoffending man, and destroying and carrying away every single thing which it contained, leaving it a perfect wreck. Is that a case in which a subject was entitled to redress? I humbly think it was.—(Loud and continued cheering.) I think that there is no civilised country in the world where a man has sustained such a grievous wrong, not to say any thing of the personal insults offered to his family, that he would not expect and seek redress from some uarter or other.—(Hear, hear.) M- here was Pacifico to q seek that redress? The Greek Government neglected its duty—it did not pursue those judicial inquiries which it might have done for the sake of finding out and punishing the aggressors. The sons of the Minister of War were pointed at —they were told, "Search that house, and you will find part of the jewels of M. Pacifico ;" but no, they refused to take any such steps; they told M. Pacifico that he must appeal to theepurte_of,justice. What was he to do? Was he to prosecate aniob of 500 persons ciiminally Where were his witnesses? His family were hiding e anallyieg, hi order tp ayojd the outrages with, which they' were threatened.' M. pieifico,st afee that he cisfid to ( theltattirptaiiiion of 'an pnglish• friend.' 'lt- vrai' Only to ftivr eef the leaders 'that he &mid apply evidinee suffiaittet - to eonYiet them - before' it tourf aof Justice; `b whet latitfaction ::coaid 'it have been to him to have prosecutedetriminally Ike The Wrong had been committed. -Re ' , did not yittnt.reyenge, he Wanted redress. Criminal prosecution was therefore oat of the question. To say nothingsof thwebanees _against, him under a Government where the tribunes were at the mercy of the judges, who were themselves liable to be removed at the pleasure of the Government, if he were to prosecute for damages, what were his hopes of snccess? If he had chosen a particular individual for prosecution, see his difficulty. No one man had taken all that was destroyed; and suppose he was able to point out some particular article which had been taken ; after the trouble of an expensive lawsuit, his legal a d v i se rs informed him that if the party were a rich man he would be sure of an acquittal, and if he was a poor man, from whom was he to look for payment ?—( Cheers.) Well, then, this is a case In which the Greek Government have neglected to give that protection which they had it in their power to afford, and who will say that this was not a case in which we were entitled to call on them to make some compensation?—(Cheers.) I think the claim was founded in justice—the amount we did not pre tend to fix.—(Hear, hear.) If the Greek Government thought the sum demanded was exorbitant, and that a far less sum would have been sufficient, that would have been a question open to discussion. But the Greek Government denied the principle of redress. When Mr. Wyse made his demand, all he reouired was that it should be settled or put in the way of settlement , and when the.periodewas limited to the space of four and twenty hours for the Greek Govern ment to decide, nothing more was desired, and no particular amount of money was sought. All he wished was, that a claim fairly and justly due sho uld be treated i n a fair and equitable manner. Well, then, after these claims had been treated by the Greek Government with subterfuge—in a manner wholly unsatisfactory or with pertinacious silence —it was at last forced upon u s that we were either to abandon these claims altogether, or, in pursuance of a notice which we had given two years before, we were to insist upon them by force. It has been said, Sir, " Oh, what an ungenerous proceeding 'to employ so large a force against so small a territory."—(Hear, hear.) Does the smallness of the country justify im munit y for its guilty acts ?—(Hear, hear.) Is it to he held that because a country is small and weak we cannot apply for redress for the injuries it inflicts upon us?—(Hear, hear.) Why the small ness and weakness of the country make our generosity the snore apparent in employing a force which would render re sistance impossible; or is it seriously, to be supposed that our subjects shall suffer - without redress because we have Such ample means of obtaining it for them ?—(Cheers and laughter.) Well, then, was there anything so ungenerous in sending this imposing fleet, which would make it palpable to all the world that resistance was out of the question ? On the contrary, it was mere consistent with the honour and dignity of the Government on whom we made the demand to send an armament which.would show the vanity of resist ance. It would have been an indignity if we had sent a frigate and a sloop of war, or any force which they might have thought it ,possible to have measured their force with, 'or to which they would not have felt it dignified to yield. Therefore, so far from being pen to blame for sending the force which happened to be on the spot, I think that circumstance ought to be matter of satis faction to the Greek Government, as it removed the hiuni liation they would otherwise have experienced in being obliged to give that which they had so long refused. Well, , then, did we in the application of that force either depart from established usage, or do anything which pressed harshly upon an innocent unoffending nation? I say innocent and unoffending nation, because it was against the Government, and not the nation, we made the claim. The course pur sued by Government in cases like the present, where an in. jury has been inflicted for which redress is refused, are either of the three following :—The first is commonly called re prisal—that :is, seizing something of value and holding it by way of deposit ; or, if necessary , applying it by way of compensation for the wrong. The second is a modi fied operation of war, such as a blockade, a measure very frequently adopted by all states and governments. The third course is the commencement of actual hostilities and the adoption of such measures as have been pointed out by some other countries—for instance , by France, when o ut e demanded redress for injuries sustaine d. By the bye, who Hon. Gentlemen complain of the peremptory manner in which the demand was made, I merely wish to call the ant tention of the Heine to a case in which the French nation were involved, which happened no later than the year 1848. There was an insurrection at Naples. The great street of the town was filled with barricades, and the troops had to force them. -To do so they had to occupy the houses upon the right and left as they forced one house after another. They forgot or neglected to fasten the doors after them, and they were followed' by the lazzaron , w ho com menced to plunder all before them. Some of these houses were the property of Frenchmen, and they complained to the French Minister, who immediately put himself in communi cation with the French Admiral Godat, who happened to be lying with his fleet at Naples. What does he do? He lays his ship broadside opposite the Palace, and writes a note to say that he has been called upon for protection by. the French inhabitants. This letter is dated " half-past one o'clock," and states, unless he receives a satisfactory answer that the Neapolitan Government will, guarantee them full protection by three o'clock, he will proceed to enf orce it.— (Cheers and laughter.) Sir W. Parker acted with the . greatest moderation. He began with reprisals — h e did not begin with a blockade—he wished to avoid all interference with the commerce of other countries; and he made these reprisals in a manner in which they had not often been effected. The Government was the offending party, and he took possession of the vessels of the Government. The reason that other nations pre fer to seize vessels belonging to the country are very obvious. Vessels belonging to the Government are gene rally armed, and vessels which are so may feel it their duty to use them—this involves the possibility of bloodshed, so reprisals are generally effected upon commercial vessels, which are not ammunitioned, and where the probability of resistance is not so great. In this instance we began by seizing the armed vessels. As this was found not suffi ciently to answer, he laid an embargo on all vessels, which implied that he had • a lien upon them, and ordered that they should not quit their ports. As these means were still unsuccessful to obtain his end, he was obliged to make reprisals and seize soma merchant vessels, which he did to a limited number, avoiding as much as possible, or than it was absolutely necessary, in flicting injury on the commerce of the people or of other nations. They had been told that he had seized a number of fishing-boats belonging to the poor. He knew nothing of the circumstance, and did not believe it.— (Cheers.) The embargo did • not extend to fishing-boats or vessels of small tonnage employed in the coasting trade.—(Hear, hear.) In that state of things the French Government offered their good offices. We readily and cheerfully accepted them, and by a note, dated the 12th of February, we stated the grounds, the conditions, and the extent to which they were to be ac cepted. There could be no mistake about the matter, as we took as a precedent the course- which- had been pursued on the sulphur question when Mr. Thiers was in office.—(Hear, hear.) In that case it was arranged that all hostilities were to be suspended the moment the French Minister was autho rised to negotiate. In this case the moment the offer was sufficiently made and sufficiently accepted instructions to the same effect were to be issued. In both cases we could not release the ships that had been captured, because, if we had done so, we should have given up the position in which we stood. It has been stated that some misunder standing arose between the Governments of France and England in the course of the mediation and good offices. I cannot say that there was any misunderstanding between Drouyn de l'Huys and myself, because it will be seen by his statements in the French Assembly that he clearly under stood the grounds on which these good offices were accepted, and he repeatedly states, " England gives up none of her de mands, none of the principles of her demands, and the only questions our negotiator is allowed to discuss are questions which do not involve the negation of the principle of the de mand." What were the questions? Why the amount of money to be received by M. Pacifico and Mr. Finlay ; not the question whether he was to receive anything or nothing.— (Cheers.) A question arose, What were the circumstances on which the good offices were to cease ? It was distinctly understood upon my part, and that of M. Drouyn de l'Huys, that Mr. Wyse was not to take it upon himself to say when this mission had failed, but when Baron Gros announced it himself:—( Hear, hear.) It was further agreed, specially, on the 9th of April, if a difference arose between Baron Gros and Mr. Wyse on those points which Baron Gros was com petent to discuss, that lie was not to stand out on his differ ence, and if he did not think it possible to give way, in that case he, was to refer home for instructions. • And it is now said that it was very wrong of me not to . bave'sent out to Mr. Wyse information of the understanding to which I had come with M. Dratlyn de l'Huys. In the first place, I had sent, on the 25th of March, instructions which, if acted upon, would have rendered further reference unne cessary, for at last, when Baron Gros and Mr. Wyse came to - t 3 ' t C. ,r~ ~ ; LONDON, n 1850. and agreed to mediate ; that I purposely delayed the media tion, with a view to defeat ; and that whilst I was sending to Switzerland to urge meo;ation, I was at the same time ezfeiting the circumstances that were bringing on the war, in order that the mediation might come to an end. Now, Sir, to the first part of the charge I plead guilty, viz., that when the mediation 'first arose it - did not seem to be a case with regard to which this country should interfere.—(Hear, hear.) The dispute arose between different portions of Swit zerland. The seven cantons that were peculiarly Catholic entered into a separate league, or t 4 onderbund, as it was called, and the other cantons were ranged under a different aggregation—the. difference between the two portions being that the states forming the majority called upon those that constituted the minority, viz., the seven Catholic cantons, to expel the Jesuits from their territories. This the minority refused to do, and the consequence was a likelihood of this d ffer- • ence of opinion leading to an appeal to arms. The majority contended that this separate band was inconsiStant with the Act of Confederation, and that they Were entitled to put it down by force of arms. On the '29th of October, 1847, I wrote a dispatch to Mr. Peel, then our Chargé d'Affaires in Switzerland, and that dis"patch I will 'read to the House to Show what was the opinion of the Government as to the civil war then on the point of breaking out in that country —what was their opinion but a very few days before it did , break out—and in ord to ask the House hOw that opision would, be consistent,, those opinions hiving been tints ex-' pressed to Mr. Peel, and which he was instructed to express to the Fresident of the Diet, with the report of M. d'Hausson ville, as to what he bad understoOd was fhe • opinion Mr. Peel was to communicate the President. The dispatch is as follows: • (Copy.) " VISCOUNT PALSIZILSTON' TO MIL MEL. • " Foreign-office, Oct. - 29. 1847; " Sir,— With reference to your dispatch of the 18th hist., announcing the assembling of an extraordinary Diet to decide upon ulterior , measures for carrying into execution the decrees already passed respecting the separate league existing within the Swise Confederation, I have to desire that you will state to M:Ochsenbein that her'Majesty's Go vernment, animated by the sincerest wish for the welfare of Switzerland, most earnestly recommend the Vorort to pause and well consider all the possible consequences of the step be fore they actually commence civil war against the seven smaller cantons. Her Majesty's Government concur with the ,majority of cantons in thinking the Sonderbund at 'variance with the federal compact; but at the same time"it must be remembered that this union has not any active or aggeessive -measure for its object, and the're does not seem to be' any practicable evil that mnst necessarily flow from the abstinence of the Diet from any measures of coercion for the purpose of enforcing its demand, that the Sonderbund should be dissolved. On the other band, evils of great magnitude seem likely to be produced by a recourse to such measures. The first and im mediate consequence will be a civil war between the differ ing sections of the'Swiss nation; and as civil war is one of the greatest calamities which can befall a people, heavy must be the responsibility which 'will weigh upon those who,' with out an overruling necessity, shall take the first steps in sutili a conflict. The next evil will be the too probable inter ference of foreign powers, as allies of one of the parties en gaged in that civil conflict, and thus to the bloodshed and devastation which attend civil war, and the lasting bitterness and resentments which survive such conflicts, maybe added the permanent establishment of foreign influences in the in ternal affairs of Switzerland, essentially impairirig the politi cal independence of the country. " Tile majority ought, moreover, well to weigh their chances of success or failure in the conflict in which they are preparing to embark. In .order to succeed they must • conquer the wen cantons; are they likely to be able to do so even if none but Swiss were to be engaged in the war ? Considering the nature of the country of some of these cantons; and the character of the people, it May well be doubted whether even in that case the Diet would he able to do all. But • is. it .not probable that these neighbouring power's, who ,have alreadysupplied the seven cantons wi'h .atrnse anti ammunition,, ande,rathee warlike sieyes, Would, if the seven cantons were reduced to extremity, 'aficl"sv'et'O' to call for succour, afford them effectual assistance of a still more decided kind? - and in that caee is it 'not certain that the attack of the Diet would fail, and if . that attack should fail, either by the unaided resistance of the seven cantons, or by the interposition of stronger powers, would the attacking cantons remain in the same relative situation in which they now stand towards the other party ? Most assuredly not. On the contrary, they would be the beaten party in a war begun by themselves; and the experience of all times shoW that defeats of such a kind are attended with inevitable 'evils to the defeated party. Her Majesty's Government entreat the Vorort to take these reflections into their most serious consideration, and truly 're joiced would her Majesty's Government be, if the Direc tory were, upon mature reflection, to abstain from a course so replete with hazard, and so pregnant with danger to Swit zerland. "I have to desire that you will read this dispatch 'confi dentially to M. Ochsenbein, and that' you will say that 'the communication is prompted solely by the frier dly interests which her Majesty's Government take in the welfare of the Swiss nation. • " I am, &c. (Signed) " PALMERSTON." (Hear, bear.) Oa the 4th of November, Mr. Peel writes a dispatch, reporting the 'conversation he had had with- M. Ochsenbein, when he read to him the dispatch of the 29th of October, and gives the reasons ,why 31. Oehsenbein could not abstaie from following the course on' which the Vorort had already determined. Well, on the 6th 'of November, after this conversation between Mr. Peel and M. Ocheenbein, in which every motive was urged which he thought likely to induce bins to abstain from ,war, the Duke de 1-..raglie cum municated to me a dispatch' from M. Guizot, proposing a measure to be adopted by the five great powers, with a' view to put an end to the civil war in Switzerland. Now, I have been, much blamed for not at once accepting the proposal, and for having delayed until the 16th before making a counter one. But what was the propos - al of the French' Go vernMent? That the five powers should make 5a collec tive dcclaration, first, that they would apPrOe and support the arbitration of the Pope as to The beeligious questions, viz., the expulsion of the Jesuits ' 'then *ding in Switzerland; and secondly, that we sheruldoffer to the States of. he Confederation a mediation of t h e powers as to all politiCal,questions. The Noble . Lord here stated 'various other provisions exinnectedwith this proposal—namely, that a conference being held; the twenty-teen cantons should be invited to' send deputies to examine and detern - iiiin-L first, the means of conciliation, 'and next the alterations to be made in the federal compact. Ie went•on to propose that we should Invite the cantons to cease from' the civil war, and that if they eefased we should consider the confederation as not existereg, eaul i afeers - vards that, to use 'a dipternatic nous nous y aviserimth ; that is, that' we Should take counsel as to our future course. Now, in the first plane, we 'could not bat feel that to propose the arbitration of the Pope would heeejepted, arddhat with respect to the' second' proposition it would not *ef)ted. We' could not; 'agree, therefore, to decree that the cantons refused 'our terms' we should consider the confederacy as no longer existing, and ranch less that we shbulcl consider our engagements with it as having ceased, 'one of those er o gagentents being that Switzer land should be considered as neutral . ferritory. In short, the m-e was this, that - if' they refused our proposal, it should be enforced by force of arms. Well, it ' required time to consider a counter proposal. But, on the 16th we did make one, namely,' an offer, the basis of which was that the Jesuits should be withdrawn, either by an act of the'Swiss Government or by' consent to be obtained from the Pope; and that the minority should be reassured by the majority that they had no hostile intentions against them, and that each should disarm. The minority, being thus as sured, were at once to dissolve the Sonderbund. I think that was apropoiral in accordance with those principles' which ought to cheracterise the foreign policy of the Geverriment. With respect to the French Government the details of the proposal required consideration, and it was•not until the 26th that the Due de Broglie and I agreed upon a note, which each party was to have presented to 'the Vorort, 'through its agent in Switzerland. But on the lath of'November I received ,a communication from the Consul-General of Swit zerland here, founded on a resolution of the Voiort, adopted on the 6th of that month, whith gave but little hope of suc cess. in our mediation, for it refused to admit of any foreign interference with respect to their dispute with the Sonder bund. The note was not sent to Mr. Peel to present, but to Sir S. Canning, who was then going on to Switzerland, which was one of the places to which he had instructions to repair. But he was told to go through Paris in his way, and com municate with the French Government, in order that we might be perfectly agreed as to all the details. He was told that if, on his arrival,'he found the civil war at an end, there would be no use in presenting the note, and he was accord ingly to keep it back. In the fueittrlme, while these com munications were g oing on, the French Government had commu nicated their first note to the Courts 'of Vienna, sad St. Peteraburgh, and it met with their approval. A doubt arose when we came to one of the agreements, whether the, representatives of those countries would feel themselves authorised to present an altered note, and Sir S. Canning wrote from Paris to say he doubted whether they had any authority to present such a note. lam quite at a loss to understand that Mr. Peel could have said to M. Bois le Comte, the/ et if this note, which we had agreed upon with the French Government should be sent to him, he would rather resign than present it, because it was 'totally at variance with all his termer instructions." Our note offered mediation, to be accepted or rejected as the parties might choose—it offered no alternative of force— it went on the basis of the settlement of the dispute respecting the Jesuits, according to, the wish of the majority—it went on the basis of the settlement of the threatened hos tilities to the satisfaction of the Sonderbund and complete reconciliation between-the two parties—and how Mr. Peel could say such a note was at variance with the dispatch of the 29th of October passes my comprehension to understand —(Loud cheers)—and I therefinte wholly disbelieved that staternent. 7 -(Loud and long-continued cheering.) The only explanation can possibly give of it is this note a b l y noteAr. Peel which \ o h! strekoernigoinfhad sent to E. 1 .• Bois ene hl eComteGovernmentniightbave been the other Courts, and which Mr. Peel might therefore be expecting to receive, and then he Would be quite eight in saying that such a note was at variance with his former in structions.—(Cheers.) As to the assertion that Mr. Peel sent ward to General Dufour to make baste end finish the war for fear this mediation should coma, all I can say is, that I never wrote him a single syllable, private or public.; which could justify such a course.-- (Cheers.) Neither have I had ) I have been told of, the kind.-r -any intimation, written oe v erhal c , b t e h e a rs t . he ever did anything (Hear., on hear, and lied a conversation' with Mr. by,,Sir E. Lyons tia ,Timperley, the person said to be sent, and Mr. Tins perley admitted thet he did go to head-quarters to See what w „ ping on, communication of the sort or kind from Mr. Peel.— any dcontinued cheers.) I must say 'the manner in is said to have beau extracted from Peel does not inspire me with any great contidende in it. Mr. would rather be the object than the worker of 'such a Peel.-- (Loud which thisan admission wou• m anoeu vre.—(Loud and tong - continued cheer in g . ) That two Ministers representing two great 'powers should take ad vantage of private intercourse, and, like two greyhounds turning a nare, set themselves to extract, by artifice and stratagem, from the representative of a third power some thing they thought he had done, is most discreditable.— (Loud cheers.) After all, I can suppose that Mr. Peel, see ing through the artifice, may, in order to mystify them, have feigned to fall into their trap.—(Loud cheers and laughter.) But Mr. Peel had no authority to take any such step—l do not believe that he did take it—l have no grounds for think ing that he took it—and the evidence of Sir E. Lyons 'goes di rectly to negatire such an assumption.—(Cheers.) We should have been glad if that mediation 'had succeeded; because it would have restored peace to Switzerland, and have left the minority on better terms with regard to the majority; but circumstances over which we had no control ren dered it impossible, without the oppertunity of its being effected by any studied delay on our part. It has been' said, however, that Switzerland is 'an instance of the bad effects of our interference. I think, on the con trary, that it might be quoted as an instance when the prin ciples we have advocated have led to good results because, while all the rest of Europe has been more or less 4:mulsed, the Swiss, who had effected, by our recommendation;changes in their internal organisation, wholly escaped. (Loud cheers.) NON., Sir, I will travel over the Alps to the stalling plains of Lombardy.--(Cheers.) I have been ac cused of great injustice; to Austria, in' 'withholding a certain dispat'c'h 4om Prince ' MitterritOi Count 0611oredo. The simple facts are these : — The Austrian Governm ent sent dispatches to their Minister to be communicated to us, in- . , WEDNESDAY the question of the amount of money which ought to -be paid, Baron Gros said he would counsel the Greek Govern ment to pay 150100 drachm-is. Mr. Wyse said be was willing to accept of 180,000 drachmas, and that being the difference existing between them, Mr. Wyse at last, acting in a much more prudent manner than 4 he referred the point to the Foreigre.office, and so exposed Gieek commerce to restraint by the continuance of the state quo for a whole month, stated, " If other things are agreed to, 1 will come down to that amount, and accept of the sum which you say you are disposed to recommend the Greek Government to pay."— (Hear, hear.) Therefore, practiCally, and in the result, that case did not arise to which those instructions could apply. If these instructions had reached Mr. Wyse, they would not have applied to the differences which had arisen between him and Baron Gros, for the difference was this :—lt turned on the 'claim of Don Pacific:o. Baron Gros on the 16th of April was willing to recommend' to the Greek Government to undertake an engagement for the investiga tion of Don Pacifico's claims, arising out of , the destruction of those documents which constituted his demand on the Portuguese Government, and that they should deposit—l mean the Greek Government-150,000 drachmas as a pledge of their good faith in the execution of that engagement. The only difference between Mr. Wyse and Baron Gros on that day was this—that Baron Groa proposed that the deposit should be lodged in shares of Athens in that bank—that is to say, in the custody of the Greek Government—and Mr. Wyse insisted that the deposit of the money s h o uld, be made in the Bank of England, or, if Baron Gros ltequired it, in the Bank of France.—(Hear, hear.) Now that seemed to be a difference of opinion that could easily have been adjusted. But on the 22d of April Baron Gros altered his mind. He retracted his opinion on that point. He said that later in formation had convinced him that Don Pacifico's claims on the Government of that nation were ill founded, and that be would not consent, therefore, to recommend the Greek Government to enter into any engagement to pay Den Pa cifico anything on that ground ; that- investigation might be entered into, but if there was a claim at all on the part of this individual, it was on the Portuguese anti not on the Greek Government; and, in short, that Pacifico's claim was undergoing a further consideration. Now. Sir, that was not a point which it was competent for Baron Gros to act upon, much less to decide.—(Hear, hear.) It was in clear violation of the very terms upon which we accepted the proffered good offices of France, nor would Mr. Wyse have been authorised in departing from the instructions which he had received on the 25th March, those instructions being clear and positive for the guidance of his conduct. Then Baron Gros withdrew from the negotiation. On the 23d, Baron Gros not only ceased to act, but wrote a formal letter to Mr. Wyse, and another to the Greek Government, an nouncing finally his withdrawal.—(Hear, hear.) On the 24th it seems that Baron :hos receives a dispatch from Ge neral de la Hitte, which dispatch purports to give an acs ' count of a conversation which passed between M. Drouyn de l'Huys and myself Oa the 9th. That account is not correct, and it dwells upon generals instead of p a rticulars. It is there said that I agreed to the arrangement proposed by Baron Gros; but it is not stated in what re spect I had limited that consent. It is not, therefore, a correct description of the arrangement which had been come to between M. Drouyn de l'Huys and myself. M. Gros, however, on the 24th, wrote to Mr. Wyse, express ing his willingness, in consequence of the note of General de la Hitte, received on the 24th, to retract or correct his note of the 23d, and to make a reference to France and England. The impression has gone abroad that, on the 24th, Baron Gros received, and communicated to Mr. Wyse, not merely an account of the conversation , between's-myself and M. Drouyn de l'Huys, but also an account yf the obasie, anti of the nearly approaching arrival, of' a draft of the conven tion iitlsielVivis * for l the first tittle iiropoged to rd on' the ltths Which was. discusied t inoternas on the 16th,-.Which was „agrees' t? en, the 18th, and sent off ,on the : l9th. Mr. Wylie has ` been dreafly blamed by many perking" both -belle and in.'Ffanee, 'Upon the assumption that-whereas Baron,Qree. , iinfornaed him, on the 24th,of April, that the English' arid French Governments had come to an agree ment l as tO . ther - diseritial 'basis 'of the donventien that had been signed between the two powers, and that Mr. Wyse, being in actual possession of that information, and knowing of the existence of that convention, had nevertheless, with a full knowledge of that fact, renewed coercive measures, by which he compelled the Greek Government to agree to his proposal. That assertion, Sir, is, as far as he (Mr. Wyse) is concerned, utterly and positively untrue.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. Wyse received no communication from Baron Gros on the 24th, or at any time earlier (I believe) than the 2d of May, realative to the draft of a convention of any sort or kind.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.) Whether Baron Gros re ceived the communication or not is to be settled between him and his Government.—( Hear, hear ) I declined, from the statements of General de la Hitte, to believe that he did not receive that intimation. "Our own correspondent" of the Times—(A laugh)—stated that Mr. Wyse had received this intimation from Baron Gros, and was a most valuable auxiliary to some who had spoken and written on these matters; but the information was not correct, as the blue book established. The correspondent of the Times distinctly stated—and, no doubt, public opinion in this country was much formed upon those statements—that the British Go vernment did inform Mr. Wyse on the 24th of this conven tion, and that he did receive by the ship Vauban information of the convention. and yet that, in spite of this, Mr. Wyse proceeded with his coercive measures. I understand the French Government now to say that they were, in the first instance, under a mistake, and to acknowledge that Baron Gros did not receive by the Vauban information of the con vention, and therefore, no such communication having tuken place, Baron Gros could not communicate, and Mr. Wyse could not receive it. —( Hear, hear.) Therefore, Sir, the complaint against Mr. Wyse, come from what quarter it may, is now disavowed and is no longer perse vered in.— (Loud cheers.) As to the next complaint, that I did not write on account of what passed on the 9th of April, my answer is, that Mr. Wyse was already in posses sion of instructions which were tantamount to a communie cation, and that, had those instructions been agreed to in spirit and substance, the arrangement would have been carried out on the spot, and reference to home would have been out of the question. But, said those objectors, why not send out instructions by the Vauban, as the French Government did? Why, I was 'in London, and General de la Hitte was in' Paris. The steamboat was at Tou lon, and to send a steamboat from London the journey would not have been performed in so short a time as by the ordinary route by Marseilles and Trieste.— (Hear, hear.) When it is said that those demands of ours are so much repudiated by the Governments of Russia and France that our putting them forward would cause the 'risk of involvingns in .a war with thes6 powers, I must be per mitted to say that, with regard to Russia, the dispatch of Count Nesseirode to Baron Brunnow, of the 19th of February', totally negatives any such assertion as regards R us sis.......(eiear, hear.) In that note the idea of our finally resorting to coercive measures is distinctly admitted—that two years ago, in October 1847, he was of opinion that the time was coming .when he should think it necessay to have recourse to coercion, and that at the moment when we should have recourse to these measures, we ought to ask those powers for their assistance, so that they might use their efforts .in order to obtain that which it was clear we could not post pone indefinitely in deference to their wishes.—(Hear, hear.) So far as to Russia. Then as to France. What was the basis of the convention of the 19th of February ? It was a convention acknowledging all the principles of our demands and even the amount which France thought we had a just right to demand.—(Hear.) I am sorry that that convention did not arrive before another , settlement took place. But that was not the fault of our negotiator. It was not Mr. Wyse who put an end to Baron Gros's interference. Why, Sir, it was Baron Groh himself.—(Hear, hear.) He formally and officially, by a written communication, withdrew from the negotiation. Baron Gros addressed his letter of with drawal, not merely to Mr. Wyse, but to the Greek Govern ment. I repeat he withdrew voluntarily and formally. —(" Hear, hear," and cries of " No.") I say he withdrew formally.—(No, no.) Yes, he was willing to retract his letter,' anti on the 24th he sent back the note of Mr. Wyse, saying " I cannot do that, but I have another proposal to make—a proposal which I have made before and which I om authorised to make. You ask me to refer to England. I will do -so, but in the meantime to keep those Greek vessels in custody for a whole month, whilst the reference is being made, would be rather hard—it would inflict a great hard ship on the Greeks and subject them to apprehensions of fur ther violence. I propose, therefore, that if the Greek Go vernment will send me 180,000 drachmas, which is the sum I require, with a letter stating that that amount is in satisfaction of all our claims, except that claim of Don Pacifico with regard to Portugal, I will"—do what? Con tinue the status quo?—No, but said Mr. Wyse, "I will at once release all the Greek merchant vessels—l will only de tain two or three Government vessels as a pledge that some settlement will be made of Pacifico's claims." The effect of that arrangement would be that the discussion and adjustment of Pacifico's claims would be left to the future, the points 'upon which Mr. Wyse and Baron Gros dif fered would be allowed to stand over, the convention would have arrived in time, and the only final difference would be that whereas the convention fixed upon 220,000 drachmas, Mr. Wyse was content with 180,000 drachmas. —(Loud cheers.) But what was Baron Gros's answer to that ? Why it was this :—" I have withdrawn from the negotiation.' So that, not merely did Baron Gros announce his withdrawal on the 22d or 23d, but he repeated that state ment, and he refused to act officially, or, as the organ of France, to make any representation to the Greek Govern. ment. Baron Gros would, had he done so, have kept matters open for investigation and for convention. But Baron Gros, although he said he had officially withdrawn, and therefore could not assent to the proposal of Mr. Wyse, in a private letter, intimated that he had made • Wyse's offer to the Government of known Gre ee and r that by five on the following after noon he h a d recommended that the money and the letter asked for by Mr. Wyse should be sent by the Greek Government. But was Mr. Wyse in a great hurry to resume aggressive meamres? Did lie seize upon the first moment, as he might have done, after non-compliance with the demand, to direct Sir W. Parker to renew his opera tions? Far from it; he waited from the 23d to the 24th, from the °4th to the 25th, and did not in any way manifest the slightest impatience, but, on the contrary, the greatest reluctance to act upon the offensive.—(hear, hear.) Why, Sir, after Baron Gros had withdrawn, Mr. Wyse still offered to accept of the same terms as before, and to acquiesce in the private suggestions of Baron Gros. The negotiations which have since then taken place between the Governments of England and France have at length brought those mat -ters to a satisfactory conclusi(Cheers.) We are, and were, perfectly ready to accept of such parts of the proposed convention as were applicable to the matters which as yet remain unadjusted—to accept of the arrangement proposed by the convention instead of the corresponding arrangement of the 27th of April, which was drawn up on the spot. We do not of course, having received 190,000 drachmas and distri buted them, insist on the difference between that sum and that proposed in the convention. The arrangement made in Athens will not be carried into execution as regards the claims of Don Pacifico on Portugal and the destruction of such papers cf his as refer to that claim. A pledge has been given that the matters will be adjusted. Of course, as M. Londos has written a letter pledging the Greek Government to a certain course, it would be preposterous to ask him to take back that letter and sign instead a much better one, written bp M. Drouyn de l'Huys, written here for his signa ture.—(Cheers.) Among the questions which remain to be settled is this one regarding Pacifico. , Baron Gros's ar rangement was the exchange of notes, but the exchange of notes binds only the Minister by whom the notes were ex changed, and might be disowned by his successor. Mr. Wyse, therefore, required substantial security, to consist of the lodgment of a deposit of a certain sum of money, and the investigation was to be made by the Governments of France and England. The convention of which I drew up the de tails in concert with M. Drouyn de Lhuys contained a di plomatic guarantee, because the convention was concluded by plenipotentiaries, and was to be ratified by the two So vereigns, who were to provide commissioners of arbitratian— those commissioners to be named by the two Governments, for the purpose of investigating those claims. We are perfectly ready to substitute that of the Greek Go vernment if they wish that we should do so, and we have prepared, and are sending out, the draft of a convention which substitutes an arrangement respecting those claims. Of course, if we get a diplomatic guarantee, a substantial guarantee is no longer necessary. Mr. Wyse acted, I think, judiciously, having heard that the Greek. Government was collecting and beating up for claims against the English Government for damages occasioned by our interference in providing against the concession or preferment of any such ~.. EVENING, TJ JUNE 26, claim. I can attach no value whatever to a claim preferred under such circumstances, by whomseevar put forward or supported. Such a claim has no foundation whatever -it has no foundation upon right or order, and must be entirely and everly rejected. The value of the provision of Me. Wyse lies in effectually closing the door against such a de mand, and so preventing a renewal of the discusaion, and causing, perhaps, the interruption of our ,friendly relations with Greece after the whole matter had been settled.- ( Hear.) But her Majesty's Government are, instead of that provision in the convention, willing to accept of the good offices of the Government of France, which, from the posi tion in which France now stands in towards Greece, are sure to prove successful. France therefore will advise the King of Greece not to make such claims, and with that advice we will remain satisfied. Thus has terminated all our differ ences with Greece in respect to those matters. -(Loud cheers.) I believe, if it had not been for the discussion which was coming on in the French Chamber of peculiar importance, it was the intention of the represen tative of France to be present at this debate. Now, Sir, haV ing said so much on the affairs of Greece, which I have taken first in order, there still remains the question of the far-Ulric-a islands of Sapienza and Cervi.- (Hear, hear.) As regards these islands, my opinion is most clear and definite-(Cheers) -and lam supported in that opinion-as has been stated in the course of this deb ite-by my predecessor in office, Lord Aberdeen. - (Cheers.) The case is simply this. There are certain islands on the coast of Greece, opposite the coasts of the Mores and Albania, which originally belonged to Venice, but according to the terms of treaty entered into between Austria and the Porte, some of these islands were erected into a separate state, and placed under the suzerain of the Porte, and under the protection of Russia. In 1800 the constitution was formed, and in 1804, in ex ecution of the terms of this constitution, the Wands were formed into municipal districts; the smaller islands were then allotted to the larger islands, and accord ing to the terms of a public decree, which I- cannot but believe was made known fo Russia and the Porte, Sapienza was annexed to Zante and Cervi to the island of Cerigo. These islands have been considered by the British as belonging 'to England, and it is well known that. British officers, on taking in water at Cerigo, are in the habit of going to Cervi. Be this as it may, however, the limits of Greece were specifiCally laid down by the protocol 'of 1830. With the exception of some differences about the northern frontier, the whole frontier of Greece was settlet by the protocol of 1830. The limits of the frontier were specified by a line drawn on the map, but the islands were desig nated by name in the protocol, and it was well known: and arranged that in these islands were not included Cervi-still less Sapienza, and therefore it was impossible to suppose that either was included in the kingdom of Greece. If the Greek Government have taken possession of the lonian State, it was not the British Government who took possession. -(Hear, hear.) That question, however, is not settled by cur demand, but still remains to be settled with the other powers. A boat conveying ;convicts from Cerigo was driven on shore on the island of Cervi, where the prisoners were liberated by officers of the Greek Go vernment, who acted as if it were their own territory. It was necessary to call for answer to this outrage, and if no answer were given, then it was necessary to take possession of the island, which was effected by a boat's crew, and was not a matter in which the employment of any great force was rendered necessary.-(Hear, hear.) And now, Sir, having disposed of matters relating to Greece, I have now to enter on the wider range-(Cheers)-taken last night by the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Ripon (Sir J. Gra hain),.e-es(Cheers.) I think the Right Hon. Baronet took a proper:view or, the question before the House, for the resolu '•tiordbes•hof Yon'fille 'itself to any one act of the Government in relation to its foreign policy, but opens a consideration of all the topics to which the Right Hon. Ilareleat eljuded. I agree with some of those Hon. Members who have spoken?the:cotirie of- ihis"aibitFe, l ttrif tfie:regriiiireil , aou ma- tn volve the expressiotebfestn entire- - approval of all we have done, ter it could, hardly be a*peOqd tnat ..men, .acting 'dibrent ftifoerii'ation, hardly ldieg differeni View' s, itri4 not knowing the grounds::oseevehiclt , heeacted, should be 'AIM , 1 and expected to approve of every particular act, but I agree that the Right Hon. Baronet took the right view of the larger I question. The Right Hun. Baronet must allow me to set him light on the first point with which he started. He stated that, when we were both members of Earl Grey's Admini stration, he concurred in the foreign policy which I, as its organ, adopted, and instanced this concurrence by a refe rence to the separation of Belgium from Holland. In doing so, the Right Honourable Baronet did full justice to the views which actuated the Government in the part they took for the purpose of effecting this separation, which di rectly infringed the treaty of Vienna. But, he said, this was a very different case, for every step throughout the negotia tion was taken with the concurrence of the five powers. He said he had also concurred in some other things which were done, and which were beyond the sphere of negotiation -the siege of Antwerp and our embargo on the Dutch ships, were these measures taken with the concurrence of the five other powers-(Cheers)-were they of that description which would render our friendly relations with other coun tries less disturbed?-(Cheers) He must recollect that Austria, Prussia, and Russia dissented from our views, and for a time withdrew from the conference.-(Cheers.) He must recollect that the presence of the Prussian army ren dered it necessary to the French to send a large force to Antwerp. The Eight Hon. Baronet has, therefore, made a mistake. I know that when persons are out of office their memories are not always tenacious on matters which oc curred when they were in power-(Cheers and laughter)- but a mistake there was, and one, too, of some importance, as bearing on the particular questiOn. I think with the Right Honourable Baronet that this was a wise determina tion on the part of the Government -I, think that the beneficial arrangement of 1815, by which a power of some consideration was formed in Europe to interpose between France on one side and Germany on the other, was rendered by the course of events of a contrary nature. the two people of Germany and Holland could not coalesce, and if their union had been forced upon them, it doubtless could not have been effected without a war, and even if effected, would not have lasted, but would have laid the foundation of future inevitable destruction.-(Loud cheers.) We, how. ever, carried our opinion on this point. It is needless to deny, at this time of day, that it was not with the will of the three powers to which I have alluded, who would have been glad to have seen the union enferced. These nations committed no breach of faith-they acted in perfect faith, .but still • they entertained • an opinion which differed from the opinion of France and England. Our opinion prevailed, and was this an' Arrangement which de served the censure of the'Right lion. .13aronet ?-;(;.,oud cheers.) I have been told of our little experiments in eats , blishiag monarchies e but if-ever-there-was a--successful ex periment, the erection- sef' Belgium into a successful state was that successful ex perirnentee- (Cheers.) When convul sion was rife 'throughout Europe,' Belgium remained tran quil--(Cheers)-her people entertained- a Jove and affection fur tbeir.Sovereigu, and the. Sovereign for- his‘people ;;they bad madferapid advances in-the -sciences and the arts-thus reflecting great honour on thenrelves-end had, moreover, acquired the sentiments of nationality which 'entitled them to respect. I think,„ Sir, this is a case to which we may refer with pride-(Cheers)-and on which we can claim the approbation of Parliament.-(Cheers.) It was not without difficulty we could carry our negotiations to so successful an issue. The Right Honourable Baronet says be was also a party to another operation as regards Portugal. We have been accused of interfering here and there in the affairs of other countries, and I presume it is on this that the Right Hon. Baronet founds his disapprobation of our foreign affairs under my management as,their organ. A question arose in Portugal between Donna Anna Maria, her father Dom Miguel, and her uncle Dons Pedro. Was it of any import ance to England whether Donna Maria or' Dom Miguel reigned in Portugal? but we regarded absolute Government on the one hand, and constitutional Government on the other. -(Loud cheers.) You may ask what interest had we in that either? Prized fade, we might have preferred the former, for if a nation wishes to use her influence she can more easily do so where the Government resides in a Court and a Cabinet than where it exists in the representative assembly of the people. We, however, spurned this advan tage-we knew there were other advantages which would countervail it-we knew that the best chance of remedying the evils which existed in Portugal, and of developing her resources, would be by securing the inestimable advan tages of a free constitution.-(Loud cheers.) Thinking there was right on the side of the party, we espoused the cause, and concluded a treaty with Spain, France, and Por tugal, by which Dom Miguel was expelled by force, and Donna Maria placed on the throne. Sir, I think that in this instance the Government acted well; and I think also that the Right Hon. Baronet is entitled to share with me the credit-(Cheers) -above all, as he concurred with me in resorting to force.-(Cheers.) I shall be told we were not successful, and that another insurrection broke out in Por tugal when our interference lay in an opposite direction. Now, no, man can suppose that, when you plant free institu tions in a soil-in which it has not hitherto grown, the tree will all at once reach maturity and bear fruit.-(Hear, hear.) It takes time to educate men for representative government -it takes time to teach governors to submit to the control of representative government.-( Hear, hear.) The whole his tory of the world, and of this country more than any other, will furnish instances exemplifying the truth of this state ment; but can any man compare the present condition of Portugal with what it was? Evils may exist, but her present condition is as different from her pest as light from darkness.-(Cheers.) In 1847 our conduct was approved of by the Right Honourable Gentleman, but disapproved of by my Honorable and Gallant Friend (Mr. Osborne), who has, however, given us his support on this question. The throne of Portugal was in danger, and the Government applied to us under the treaty into which we had entered with France and Spain . We did not acknowledge the treaty was in force, but we had to con sider the case on its merits. I know that many men think the more prudent course would have been to let the contest eo on, whatever might be its results between the parties; but I thought then, as I do now, that the course we adopted was the right one, and am convinced that, though for the time we disarmed the Liberal party, we saved that Liberal I party, which would otherwise have been involved in the most 1 imminent danger. My conviction is that, if England had not adopted the course she did, the object would have been accomplished by foreign interference, but not with the condi tions which England attached. These conditions were ample and complete amnesty for all those engaged in the civil war, the revocation of all illegal edicts, an immediate convocation of Parliament as soon as an election could take place, and the formation of a Government consisting neither of- the Cabral party--the High Tory party I may call them - (Laughter)-or of the members of the Junta of Oporto. Oh ! it is said you have got . back Costa Cabral, and your object was to get quit of him. The fault I find with those who attack me elsewhere-(Laughter)-in that House mid ' in other countries, is that they try to b rin g ever y q ueetion to a personal bearing.-(Cheers.) If the object be to op pose the policy of England, then the cry is-Let us get rid I o li f ka th k e n o o r c g k a ia n g o d f otwhantappoolilcieye.m-a(nC.heAerson s. g Why as t t h h e at a s glish people are actuated by t he s p irit and opinions which slow c h arac t er ise them, you may knoc k down twenty Foreign Ministers, but no Minister can keep his place who -does not act in accordance with the national sentiments. — (Cheers.) It is said again-You interfered in Portugal, in 1847, not for the benefit of that country, but you wanted to get rid of Costa Cabral. Nor did it signify to England whether Costa Cabral was Minister of Portugal or not? We felt and knew that if, at that moment of popular excitement, a member of the Cabral faction was made Minister, it would inevitably lead to a renewal of the civil war which we meant to terminate, and I therefore we made the exclusion, not for ever, but till such ' time as the Cortes should determine in whom their confi• deuce was to be placed, and, till that should be done, mem bers of both parties were to be excluded. Then come we to Spain. In regard to that country, as the Honourable Baro net stated, he was not in office when the independent article of 1e35 was added to the treaty of 1834. But what was the treaty of 1834, or the treaty of Quadruple Alliance, as it is called ? Its object was to expel, not only Dom Miguel, but Don Carlos, who was at that time at the head of a body of troops, and therefore, as far as the spirit of the treaty is concerned, the Right Hon. Baronet Could not ride off upon the plea that he did not consent td the additional article. At that time Don Carlos was in Portugal, and ready to give battle to Spain. He subsequently evacuated the Peninsula, came to this country, and then returned to Spain, where a civil war was incited. 'lt was then that the additional treaty of 1835 was agreed to ; and its object was to give to the Queen of Spain such assistance as was required to enable her to main tain her ground. In one point of view, it was of no consequence to England who should fill the throne of kiain—whether tile female branch or Don Carlos. Questions of succession have been matters with which other countries have concerned them selves, but only where distinct interests were involed. But it was in Spain as in Portugal—it was a question between arbitrary and constitutional Government; and we thought the interest of • England, in every point of view, commercial and political, would be benefited by the esta blishment of,constitutional government in Spain.—(Cheers,) If England , has an interest in regard to Spain, it is, that Spain may be independent—that she should be Spanish, and that she should be for the • Spaniards.—(Cheers.) It was deemed of advantage to this country that Spain should not be placed under the dictation •of other powers. It was deemed for the • interest of this country that, should she have the misfortune to have a dispute, or to be at war with other countries, she should not be at war with Spain also—(Cheers)—and we thought that that inde pendent course of action was more likely to be pursued by a Government controlled; by a National Assembly. than .by a Government purely arbitrary.—(Cheers..) The policy suc ceeded ; and although Narvaez, as Om Right Hon. Baronet stated, is Minister of Spain, I cannot see any defeat of the policy of England in that circumstance. ,Narvaez is Minister; but the constitution is in force—(Cheers)—and that constitution has, of late been much more strictly ob served than at the period to which the HOP. )3aronet, al luded. The Hon. Baronet found fault with a certain commu nication of mine, written in 1848 to Sir Henry Bulwer, and he stated that it was objecLionable, noe. only on the ground of interference, but in manner and in tone. Now, with re spect to manner and tone, there have been certain communi cations made to other Governments by persons in whom the Right Honourable Baronet has confidence ( Laughter)— couched in' language that might possibly admit of, the ap plicability of some of the criticisms which have been applied to miee.—(Laughter.) There was a certain dispatch ad dressed by the Earl of Aberdeen to Sir Edmund Lyons, and which was read elsewhere— (Laughter, the Noble. Lord pro ceeding leisurely to search for paper on the table)—and of which I have a copyhere.—(Continued laughter.) It may be taken as a specimen of a mild mode of interfering with the internal arrrangements of other countries. Everyone knew who Sir Richard Church was. 'He was, a distinguised soldier who fought for. Greek independence, and was, long, deserved honoured•and trusted by the Greek Government; but, Sir Richard being supposed to sympathise with thatj party who had extorted the constitution from the King, in' 1844, he was removed from. the appointment he held, of Inspector-General of the Army, and was succeeded by a cer- ' tain General Grivas, whose former conduct had not been' altogether free' from some imputation as to. loyalty to the existing Government. The following is Lord Aberdeen's letter of instruction to Sir Edmund Lyons " Foreign-office,Dec. 2, 1814. " Sir,—Her Majesty's Government have learnt, with deed concern, the dismissal of General Sir Richard Church, by his Majesty King Otho, from the post of Inspector-General of the Greek Army, which post he had so honourably and so usefully filled for many years. ' Their regret is increased by finding that General Grivas, who was so recently engaged in open rebellion against the. Throne, has been appointed to succeed him. " Her Majeety's Government do not propose to interfere in this matter, since, however unjust the deprivation of Ge neral Church, and however injudicious the elevation of. Ge neral Grivas may have been, those acts were certainly within the competence of the Greek Government. " But although her Majesty's Government abstain from interference, they deem it an imperative duty on their part, considering the position in which Great Britain stands with regard to Greece, as a creating and a guaranteeing power, to express in the strongest terms their sense of the injus tice done to Sir Richard Church, one of the best, most dis interested, and most . efficient supporters of Greek bade pentience;' by an abrupt and ungracious dismissal, unaccom 'panted by ohe word 'of commendation or acknowledgment of his gmat„servicee Greece; . and4 also- their , . sew .of : the extiess , of imprudence and 'irapoliqv exhibited Alae., -ap pointment to one of the most responsible .offices ;under Ole Crown of a man whoseree,errVeeriduct has shown him to be, an enemy to the throne and a deliberate perverter of order and discipline. " Her Majesty's Government consider themselves to be fully warranted by the overt acts of General Grivas himself to instruct you to make known these sentiments distinctly, in their name, to the Greek. Minister. for Foreign Affairs, as well as to the King himself, should a favourable opportunity present itself ; and, at the same time, to warn his Majesty seriously and solemnly of the danger to which .he will ex pose his country and his throne by a perseverance in so fatal a line of policy as he has recently pursued. . " I am, &c., " ADERDEZN. (Signed) " Sir E. Lyons, Bart., G.C.8." [This letter was read with much gusto by the Noble Lord, who took care to point out the mere prominent points as he went along. The House was kept literally in " a roar" during the reading.] It is the writer of that dispatch who condemns me fur my letter of July 19, 1846, to Sir Henry Bulwer. My letter, be it remarked, was not a communica tion to a Sovereign—( Cheers) and the closing paragraph I think the Right Hon. Baronet might have read , as well as the other parts, because it explains the use I intended shonld be made of my communication.. It.is as follows " It was certainly not for the • purpose of subjecting the Spanish nation to a grinding tyranny, that Great Britain entered into the engagements of the Quadruple Alliance of i 835, and gave, in pursuance of the stipulations of that treaty, that active assistance which contribtited so materially to the expulsion of Don Carlos from Spain. But her Ma jesty's Government are so sensible of the inconvenience of in terfering, even by friendly advice, in the internal affairs of independent states, that I have to abstain from giving you in structions to make any representations whatever to the Spanish Ministers on these matters; but though you will of course take care to express on no occasion on these subjects senti ments different from those which I have thus explained to you, and although you will be careful not lo express those sentiments in any manner or upon, any occasion so as to be likely to create, increase, or encourage discontent, yet you need not conceal from any of those persons who may have the power of remedying the existing evils, the fact that such epi nions are entertained by the British Government."--(Cheers.) Looking at the two communications-. 1 -that of the Earl of Aberdeen to Sir' Edmund Lyoni, and my dispatch to I Sir Henry Bulwer, I. really do think tat it is not from the for mer quarter that any condemnation should come.—(Cbeers,) If I am nut worthy of condemnation, at all events my de tractors, are not worthy to condemn.— (Cheers.) It was Said that the rudeness of my communication to the Spanish Go vernment was calculated to lead to a rupture, .and, that my mention .of. Sir Henry. Bulwer as the person I would *ye preferred sending to Madrid, bad his services_ been available, was enough to disgust the Spanish Goveinment. I remem ber when .the question which arose out of previous transac tions was discussed, that no man spoke more handsomely of the character, ability, and services of Sir Henry Bulwer, than the Right Hon. :Baronet the Memberfor•Tainworth.— (Cheers , ) , And.. a eimilar feeling seemed to wrvade the House. Well, it is not always that one is at liberty, to,tell diplomatic secrets ; but.' am obliged, in self-defence, no take the House into official confidence.—(Laughter.) Well, these two notes—the one of apology, and the other of answer—were mutually communicated to and approved by each Govern ment—(lmmense cheering)—they were communicated con fidentially from the one Government to the other, before they were officially prOmulgated.—(Continued cheering.) But, said the Right Hon. Baronet, this affair of Spain was of long duration, and disastrous consequences arose because it was followed by events involving matters ,connected with another country, namely, France. The Right Hon. Baronet stated that out of the Spanish marriages question a difference arose bet Ween England and France, which even led to no thing. slighter than the overthrow of, a dynasty. There ' again comes in that fancy for narrowing great questions down to the smallness of personal considerations, of which I have already complained.—(Cheers:) The Right Hon. Ba ronet asserted, that it was my dislike which overthrew M. Guizot,' and with it the reigning dynasty. What will the people of France say.- a people of high spirit, and full of a sense of their own dignity--when' they hear 'it stated by a Member of the English Par liament, that it was in the power of an English Minister to overthrow their form of government ?—(Cheers.) Why, Sir, the French are a brave, a generous, and a noble minded people, and it they thought that there was a foreign conspiracy formed against one of their Ministers—(Pro longed and general cheers) - I say, Sir, that if they had reason to suppose that a knot of foreign conspirators were caballing against one of their Ministers, whether directly or indirectly, and for no other reason than that he had a special regard to the interests of his own cosintry—(Cheers)—and if, moreover, they had cause for suspecting that suck knot of conspirators had coadjutors in their own country—l know that the French, a brave and noble-spirited people, would cling the closer to, and protect the more, the man against whoin they thought the attack was directed.— (Cheers.) If, then,, the French Government had thought that I had wanted to overthrow M. Gnizot, the bare suspicion of any such design on my part would only have had the effect of Making him stronger.—(Hear, hear.) Sir. M. Guizot was overthrown for very different reasons--(Hear, hear)---and his overthrow was the more to be regretted, since there was scarcely ever a man who alight have been better, had he better read the lessons which history and experi ence afforded hiin —( Hear, hear.), Sir, I will not refer at any length to the question .of the Spanish marriages. Ido not wish to re-open questions gone by, or to remind this House or the country . of the grounds of complaint that we may have had against thosa no longer in power. But as this question forms one 'count „of the long' indictment that has been preferred against me, I must say, in my own defence, that the dissatisfaction we felt on the subject of then Spa com nish ma rriages was not groundle ss, and that, judging m mu nications that were 'made to me by the noble individual .(I s ocd A.berdeen) who preceded me in the, office I have the hone& to liold 7 jiidging, I say, from the statements I had front his mouth in that interview which always takes place between the Minister going out and the Minister coming in, promises were broken in the matter of these marriages ( Hear, hear t— promises, too, which had been made, not only •between , the Minsters themselves, but between higher personages ( Ilear, hear)—and such as have never yet been broken in the history of Eirope. —(Hear,,heer.) If, then, we • did feel dissatisfaction with regard to thee mar riages, I ,think that • feeling ,was a just one 7 - (Cheers) —and that, -on every ground of national interest and national honour, we were entitled, nay, bound, ,to express it. (Cheers.) And, moreover. with respect to France, I think that the ‘ policy, we have pursued towards that nation is a policy consistent with the interest of the country, and characterised by ,tose principles which , the Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite thinks ought to cha racterise the policy of this kingdom,• and calculated to pre serve the peace of the world.—(Hear, hear.) I think that the relationi we have maintained with , th e French nation, and. with the many, chiefs , under whom its government has been placed, are enough to show that we are animated by friendly feelings towards that nation, and that we consider the' maintenance of those friendly relations not only consis tent. with, but conducive to, the best interests of both coun ,tries,i and that they form the firmest foundation for the peace of Europe.—(Cheers.) But, Sir, the Right Honourable Gentleman (Sir James Graham) insinuated last : night Lord Normanby, at the period i mme diately prec ing the that tevolution of 1848, was in too intimate connexion with some of those by whom the throne of France was after- Wards overthrown. Sir, I know not who the Right Ho nourable Gentleman means, but this I do the person with whom Lord Normsuby lived in the most in know, that in timate connexion was Count Mole.—( Hear.) I have yet to learn that Count Mold was likely to have had rela u t t ions with those who overthrew.the monarchy of which has been made can , assure this House that if the statementt a that Lord Nor made was meant to convey . any this House that mimby was holding any intercoinutrisme Inconsistent with his daiy in the position he held --I can assure the plains of Castile and any such statement is altogether unfounded. Rear, bear.) And now, Sir, lefte tn nowtaken to the the fertile fertile soil of Franclre,egT t which I ani to ren tains of Switzerland, as being t a e p (Hear, hear, and des a stricter account of m u y d s er • 14 this he - ad — is founded on a laughter.) The charge book by af. d'Haussonst lle the contents of which chiefly conversation of individuals consist,of rec i ta l ' of t" co b th were who little • thought that w t saying ey wou ld form the • t h e contents of a book, an still. less - that they ' would . be - brought under the notice •OfParliament. Now, as far as I can gather from the Hon. Gentleman %Op peceded me, the charge was this '— that in July, 1847; I deained a proposal of the Duke de Broglie t o mediate between the tw o p arties then contendin g in Switzerland; that 1 changed my opinions in November, rn the e it 7 of ive ►rts n 250 and e of eco, the Dien to a him - Jord his ,t to n of he every the night ,ffairs Mon and were