The Sun.
London, England, 1852-04-06 00:00:00

recollect that her Majesty's present Ministers had had me
kind of political connexion or sympathy with Sir Henry
Ward, and that, whatever might have been his conduct, he
had not acted under the direction of the Administration
now in power. - (Hear, hear.) On the other band, he had
no hesitation in saying that party distinctions and feelings
would not for a moment deter the Government from doing
justice, and that, too, in a generous spirit to an absent
servant of the Crown—(Cheers)—to one who, they
conscientiously believed, in the teeth of difficulties
and embarrassments of no ordinary kind, exerted
himself to support the authority of the Queen, and
to put down rebellion against her.—(Cheers.) Ile did not
feel himself called upon to act as the champion of Sir Henry
Ward, nor to weigh in a nice balance every word or act of
his administration, and he was not prepared to say that
under extraordinary difficulties he might not have been led
into indiscretion; but he had no hesitation in saying that
Sir Henry Ward had done hie utmost to uphold the autho-
rity ef the Crown, and that therefore he was entitled to a
just and generous support.- (Cheers.) Considering that the
acts
i o t, complained
seth
the
eH lateo n.
Government,llle mb er for
receivedf ln
the
the speechof
of sanction
he (Sir J. Pakington) thought it would be presumptuous
t had
now to interfere with them, and to attempt to treat them
judicially.—( Hear, hear.) But the matters complained of
bad not only been under the consideration of her Majesty's
late Ministers, and received the approbation of the late
Colonial Minister, but they also formed the subject of Par-
liamentary discussion.—( Hear, hear.) In 1850, the Hon.
Member tor Montrose brought all the circumstances under
the consideration of the house, when he could only get
twelve Members to vote in favour of his motion—(Hear,
hear) - but there were one or two points which, in justice
to Sir H. Ward, and in order that there might be no
misunderstanding on the part of the House or the
country, he (Sir J. Pakington) was anxious to bring
under their attention. One had reference to the execution
of the 21 men in the year 18-19. Now the Hon. Member for
Montrose had omitted to say, that net only were these men
taken with arms in their hands, an act which made them
guilty of treason against the Queen as sovereign protectress
of the lonian Islands, but that every one of them had been
convicted of the greatest crimes in addition to rebellion.—
(Hear, hear.) There was not one of these men so convicted
of rebellion who had not also been guilty of rape, murder,
and other the gravest possible crimes.—(llear.) If ever men
were justly dealt with, these men, upon their own confession
to their priests, were properly dealt with.-(Hear, hear.)
With regard to another point, also, it should be remembered
that it was in Zante that the elections were unfavourable
to the Government. But when the Hon. Member for
Montrose complained of the interference on the part of Sir
li. Ward with the rights of the lonian people—when he
complained that a meddling and mischievous policy
interfered with the enjoyment of those rights which
he (Sir J. Pakington) had no hesitation in saying
had been unhappily conceded to the lonian people
he ought to have remembered the testimony borne by
lonians as to the fitness of the people for self-government.
He would just read to the House the evidence of a distin-
guished lonian as to the fitness of the people in former
years for self-government. From 1800 to 1807, the lonians
had a free or republican form of government ; but having
enjoyed, or rather, be should say, suffered their free go-
vernment for two years, they found the following state of
things prevailing. What said the witness to whom he
referred? Why, that " Fortunately, ample official ma-
terials were extant to prove that before two years had.
elapsed of this golden age, all the Seven Islands bad been
guilty of treason and rebellion against its local Govern-
ment. Horrors, resembling those of the old Corcyrpean
factions, described by Thucydides, were of frequent oc-
currence. In Zante alone assassinations have been so nu-
merous, as one for each day in the year—a fair average
for a population of less than 40,000. Alarmed and dis-
gusted by this situation of their affairs, the lonian Senate
sent, in 1802, a deputation to the Emperor of Russia to
implore his immediate interference, as the only means of
putting an end to such scenes of bloodshed and anarchy, the
sole result of that power which he had left in their hands."
The negotiation was entrusted to Mr. Neransi, and he was
" directed to impress on the mind of his Imperial Majesty
that,' in a word, the inhabitants of the Seven Islands, who
have thus attempted to establish a republican constitution,
are neither born free, nor are they instructed in any arts of
government, nor are they possessed of moderation so as to
live peaceably under any political system framed by their ,
own countrymen. " Another witness, Count Salamos, a .
gentleman of the highest possible character, thus spoke of
the present fitness of the people of the lonian Islands to •
govern themselves. In an official communication he says:,,
My Lord,—The present state of the lonian Islands is,
indeed, most lamentable. It was not the will of Heaven
that the reforms effected-in- the constitution should be
granted by such gradual steps as would have enabled the •
people to receive them in a proper spirit—(Hear, hear,
from Mr. Hume) - and to make a wise use of them. Intro-
duced too suddenly, and at a most inopportune time, the
result was such as might have been anticipated. They
awakened the most extravagant:expectations, inflamed minds
by nature too easily inflammable, offered to the British
natioq, by which they were conceded, instead of thanks,'
proofs of the most flagrant ingratitude, and plunged these:•
islands into a- state of the greatest confusion and disorder..
Your Excellency's well-known abilities and paternal care
were unable to provide a remedy for these evils ; nor have
the good intentions and the remonstrances of the executive
power proved more successful. The present system takes
from every man, however well-intentioned, the power of
promoting in any way the good of his country, and conse-
quently renders unavailing my labours as President of the
Senate." Such was the testimony borne to the aptitude of
the lonian Government for self-government at the present
time. In reference to the charge made against Sir H. Ward
of having transported and imprisoned certain editors and
conductors of public papers, he (Sir J. Pakington) felt that
he would be doing that gentleman a great injustice if he
allowed these observations to be made without offering some
explanation. One of the first and most ill-advised of the
unhappy concessions was made by Lord Seaton before he
left the lonian Islands. That Noble Lord proposed a new
law giving freedom to the public press under certain precau-
tions, namely—that any offence committed against property
on the part of these papers should be submitted to a trial by
jury. Common offences were not so triable at all. Now,
viewing the peculiar opinions of the inhabitants of the lonian
Islands, he thought that such offences as these ought to be
the last that should be submitted to these tribunals. This
law had not been in operation three months when Lord
Seaton had himself, without resorting to trial by jury, re.
solved by what was called the high police power to imprison
two editors for a scandalous libel. What followed in Sir H.
Ward's time? He had no hesitation in saying that Sir 11.
Ward had acted most properly in punishing those gross,
t been
offenders
fr
expect
nx resortdpeercst
jttolatt
iheee trialhighfrobmy police
jsuu r
such
yh,
flagrant, and disgusting libels in the way he had done.
These were libels against all who were most revered, re-
spected, and honoured in this country. Sir H. Ward did not
and
power, before he sent the authors of them to be tried by a
jury.take LNorod, .hSeeatitrosnt
itouetuterrlyesovratiend troightl_
'ssubcjeuctrjede'
utrnibtiultilaiels.foulnide
properly to that
high police power with which he wasinvested,
:in order to
punish those men whose offences were not accessible by any
other means. Sir H. Ward, however, offered to abandon
to those high police powers if the assembly
wouldernment
a fair and a just law that would enable theonly pass
Government
deal with these libels in the usual manner. The to
e Assembly
refused to pass this law, and a nobleman who had forwarded
a petition to this country against Sir H. Ward was actually
one of the majority who would not allow him
the high police power. Sir H also . Ward was blamed to abandon
Hon. Member for Montrose for dissolving by the
Now, the Parliament was not dissolved, the Parliament.
prorogued, because he had not th but only
He prorogued it because he found it epower to dissolve.
utterly
conduct the government of the
country with impossible to . •
As-
sembly. That was in the summer such an •
of December in the same year th of 1850. In the month ,
was again prorogued. But why?e House
again
met,
and it so t
to pass a vote to annex the lonian Because they were about 4
ignore the auth • ority of the Queen.
Islands to Greece, and to .ei
.
ne
left it to the House to say He (Sir J. Pakington) nr. i
any blame attached to Sir wllietvivier,under the circumstances, e;,‘
recent events that had occurred ard. In reference to the 'ne •
Hon. Member for Mont in the lonian Islands, the
seem to understand the
osein alluding to them, did not
Hon. Member said that Sr
constitutionil of these islands. The
alterations in the electoral lawVard had made certain
which required confirmation from the next meeting of the Assembly, and that not having '
received such, these elections
were illegal, and the present ,
Assembly
was
unduly constituted. Ile believed that this
was a misconception of the constitution
of the lonian 's
Islands. Those alterations in the electoral law were made •- ..,
under a peculiar power that was given b
which authorised, during the recess of by the constitution,
passing of certain laws that were consideredthe Assembly, the 'T
neces-
sity. Now, although such acts might b •
of urgent •
reversed at the next m • ge
either
confirmed
or
eeting of the must be understood that all thi Assembly, yet it
rity of such acts were ngs done under the autho- •
stitution, and consequent l held valid by the con-
electoral law were valid, and thereforethe alterations in the ;
Montrose had not the slightest the Hon. Member for
assembly was not duly constituted.'right to say that the present
tures in the present One of the main fea- ,
assembling of the new Constitution was, that upon the
Lord High Parliament it devolved upon the •
at least five Members Commissioner to constitute a senate, by taking. ••;
assembly. In
the 011 t of the Members elected for the 0
most valuable Membersfirst assembly of a new Parliament the , ,
the upper. Chambe were thus taken away to constitute -
tem, but still •r. This, no doubt, was a defective sys- ,
Ward took fia it was no fault of Sir H. Ward. Sir H.
e 11Iembers out of this assembly, and the :
others, from . a spirit of disloyalty, refused to take the neces- i
sary oaths
be prescribed. It was necessary that there should
twenty-two
Gentl present to constitute a House. The Hon.
eman must be ware that one of the great difficul •
with which Sir IL Ward had to contend arose from ttihees
proposition of a loyal address being moved to her Majesty
on the opening of the SEBBiOll, and in answer to her Ma- .- '
Asty's speech. The very gentleman who drew np the draft
.f the address was one of the factious . minority who ob-
jetted to the supremacy of the British Crown. They
were only summoned on two successive days, .but by
absenting themselves they prevented the assembly being
made, and they thereby rendered it impossible to have the
loyal address to the Crown voted after the speech of the '
Lord High Commissioner. Under such circumstances the
Lord High Commissioner baying
considered the course
which he ought to take, felt it to be his duty
is duty to prorogue
the session in the face of such
ifactions opposition. The
t
Hon. Member for Montrose said
was the duty of the
Government to recal Sir H. Ward. Such, however, was
not the opinion of her Majesty's Government.*
It was their belief that, under —(Hear, hear.)
these circumstances of ex- traordinary difficulty,H
Sir Ward had honestly and
anxiously endeavoured to support the authority of the •
Crown, and at the same time had offered to make any con- -
cessions to popular rights which he could with reasonable
prudence assent to. Ile, therefore, thought that Sir H. Ward was entitled to a fjesty's Ministers, and
they air and frank support from her Ma- -
will be prepared to meet the
motion of the Honourable Member for Montrose in such
a way as they think the ' •
were of opinion that Sir H.
of the case demanded. They
Ward had endeavoured ho-
nestly and fearlessly to do his
his country. and that he duty to his Sovereign and
was, therefore, entitled to their
support.—(Hear.)
Mr. F. PEEL said,
the Right Hon. although he differed in opinion with
that had been made within Baronet
in regard to the political chanes
itution of the J e within the last few years in the con-
shad fully and onian Islands, yet he must say that he •
the Hon. Member
satisfactory replied to the observations of
from the Speech of
for elontrose. He was glad to collect
Majesty's G . of the Right Hon. Gentleman that her
Government would not support the motion for
appointment of a Commission to inquire into the causes
of insurrection in Cephalonia in 1849, and in the present
situationof
the
the lonian Islands. Having given his attention
to
subject, it was certainly• his opinion—although Sic
H. W i
ard
mght have erred in some things—that he is
lonian entitled to the gratitude of the I •
an people themselves,
as well as of that House ; for lie was persuaded, that
to the ability and energy which characterised his
administration was owing the petservation of peace and
order in Cephalonia in 1849, and the continuance of these
islands under the protectorate of this country. The Hon.
Member for Montrose had dwelt • •
principally upon two
documents in advancing his charges against Sir H. Ward,
whom he accused of great excesses in the insurrection in
Cephalonia. The 11911. Gentleman said that Sir H. Ward

,i' }