The Sun.
London, England, 1852-06-15 00:00:00

T E S UN,

tack— in the other case the officer had, if not a justification,
at least an excuse or palliation in this, that he imagined
Mr. Mather was about to strike him, and that be could
only prevent the dishonour of the insult by striking him
with his sword. Sir, I naturally looked to see what
was the character Lord Malmesbury gave to the transaction
—whether he took the one view or the other. It appears
to me that the one he might have taken, without deciding
the character of the transaction, was to have had the parties
who gave these two contradictory accounts confronted and
in
examined. That ,is the way in which we proceed in this
country in similar cases. It appears, however, thatthis
case no such course was taken. It never seems to have oc-
curred to the Government to ask to have the facts ascer-
tained, although, on the one hand, lair. Mather states
that the young man received the last blow while staggering
under the effect of the second ; while, on the other side, it is
stated as positively that his menacing attitude provoked the
sword-cut. I will read what Marshal Radetzky states, and
the House will observe that he sets aside the decision of the
Tuscan court of inquiry appointed at the solicitation of Mr.
Scarlett. The Marshal says—
" On the 29th of December last, First Lieutenant Forsthu-
ber, marching at the head of his detachment directed to oc-
cupy the post at the Palace, was passing through a narrow
street. At that instant the Englishman Mather placed
himself between the band and the commander of the detach-
ment. The latter, inconvenienced in his advance, intimated
to him to withdraw, first by a slight pressure with the fiat
of his sword, and afterwards with his left hand, the first in-
timation having been ineffectual. In complying with this
injunction Mr. Mather, apparently without intention,
knocked against Lieutenant Baron de Karg, who, not being
on duty, was walking by the side of the detachment. The
latter had the imprudence to strike him a blow in the face
with his fist. The Englishman, irritated, turned round, in a
threatening attitude, and with his fist uplifted after the
manner ot boxers, against First Lieutenant Forsthuber,
towards whom he advanced; when the latter, fearing to
be exposed to a dishonouring insult, from which it neces-
sarily behoved him to secure himself, struck him imme-
diatelya blow on the head with the edge of his sabre. Mr.
Mather, whose wound, moreover, did not seem serious, was
carried to the hospital.
" Although the civilians heard as witnesses by the Tuscan
authorities do not represent the matter exactly as I have
stated it, inasmuch as they pretend not to have remarked,
or at least not to have perceived, the menacing attitude as-
sumed by Mr.. Mather against First Lieutenant Forsthuber,
that circumstance is not the less proved by the depositions
of the soldiers : and there is the less doubt attaching to it,
inasmuch as all the civilian witnesses assert that Mather
was walking between the band and the detachment, and one
of them expressly declares that he had observed that a sharp
dispute had taken place between him and the officer in com-
mand.

" The character and previous conduct of First Lieutenant

Forsthuber not allowing me to suppose that he acted without
sufficient reason, I am of opinion that that officer was per-
fectly in the right, and that he absolutely did nothing but
what he was bound to do to defend himself from an outrage
and its inevitable consequences.
" That being the case, it is my opinion that, saving better
information, the conduct of First Lieutenant Forsthuber is
fully justified."
"Unfortunately, I cannot say so much for Lieut. Baron do
Karg, who, by striking an Englishman in the face, without
cause, necessarily excited in him a degree of passion easily
to be accounted for, and who must consequently be considered
as being the principal cause of the menacing gesture of Mr.
Mather.

"Although in general the previous conduct of Lieut.
Baron de Karg i 3 equally altogether blameless, and although
the proceiding of that officer, who is moreover well-con-
ducted, cannot assuredly be attributed to anything but hasti-
ness, I have nevertheless caused him to be put under arrest
fora week?' „

Sir, this seems to me rather a peremptory declaration upon
the part of Marshal Radetzky.—(" Hear, hear," from the
Literals.) He is a person whom all Europe respects for his
gallantry and his character—(Loud cheers)—but he
seems to set at naught anything like civil testimony,
and to 'conclude that nothing but the evidence of
soldiers is worth having—(Hear, hear.) Not a word
do we bear, . except as to the testimony of the
soldiers; and at the same time no pains are taken to have
that testimony; it is all to be taken on the word of the
Marshal himself, who ordered a separate military inquiry;
and there are no means of ascertaining whether the testi-
mony of the soldiers was entitled to credit, or whether it
were shaken or contradicted. But the Government having
taken no means to ascertain the truth, one would think that
at least they would have decided themselves which wits the
story to be believed, and that they would have said either
" here is a most unprovoked assault (as Mr. Mather says);
or, " it was a mere accident," occasioned by Mr. Mather
having placed himself in a provoking position, and a menac-
ing attitude, towards an Austrian officer at the head of his
detachment"- (Hear, hear.) Now, sir, I find on looking
through these pages that Lord Malmesbury actually adopts
both these stories !—(Hear. hear, from the Liberals ; ironical
cheers front the Ministerialists.) He speaks of it sometimes
as an " unprovoked outrage ;" and at other times as an. " ac-
cident, purely fortuitous."—(Opposition cheers). The
Noble Lord, writing to Mr. Scarlett, calls it an unprovoked
outrage, and says:—
" Although it would unquestionably have been more satis-
factory to her Majesty's Government, and in their opinion
more conducive to the ends of justice, if the party aggrieved
had been allowed to be present, either in person or by his
advocate, during the examination of the various witneses,
yet as it is stated that such a course would have been incon-
sistent with the practice observed in Tuscany in regard to
such metters, her Majesty's Government are content to take
the evidence as it has been communicated to them, and they
readily admit that as far as they can judge by the documents
the Tuscan authorities engaged in the inquiry appear to have
been actuated by a sincere desire to elicit the truth.
" Now the evideece which has thus been obtained con-
clusively establishes that a most unprovoked outrage was
committed on an unharmed and unoffending British subject
by an cfficer in command of a military party acting for Tus-
can purposes in the Tuscan dominions.
" But her Majesty's Government have such entire confi-
dence in the honourable and just sentiments by which the
Grand Duke of Tuscany is distinguished, that they are satis-
fied that the Governinent of Tuscany must be anxious to
mark their abhorrence of this outrage inflicted upon an in-
nocent individual by a becoming reparation.
"And even if her Majesty's Government could take a
lenient view of the conduct of the Austrian officer, and con-
sider the blow inflicted by :him as the result of a misappre-
hension on his part, still it would be impossible for her Ma-
jesty's Government to release the Tuscan Government from
the performance of an international duty by making repara-
tion to Mr. Mather for the personal insult and bodily suffer-
ing which he has sustained."
But when the Noble Lord writes to Lord Westmoreland he
speaks of it as a " fortuitous accident
" liar Majesty's Government entirely agree with his High-
ness that there is no reason to believe that any national
feeling of animosity to Englishmen moved the Austrian
officer on duty to repel so hastily and with such violence an
anticipated affront from an unarmed man. It is equally cer-
tain that no object of private 'or personal malice provoked
the act.
"Assuming, therefore, with his Highness that it was
caused by a ' concourse of fortuitous and unfortunate cir-
cumstances' (contours de eirconstances fortuites et molheu-
reuses), it is nevertheless the duty of the Tuscan Govern-
ment, on whose territories these occurred, to present the suf-
ferer with such pecuniary compensation as he would have
obtained in his own country if his life had been endangered
either by a premeditated or an accidental injury. With the
conviction that such a demand is consonant with those prin-
ciples of justice and humanity which are equally binding to
nations and individuals, her Majesty's Government has re-
quired of the Tuscan Government this reparation for the
severe sufferings and great peril which Mr. Mather has ex-
perienced."
Upon this Count Buol, very naturally (although the con-
duct of the Austrian Government has been most considerate
and respectful. so far as the British Government demanded
redress from them)—Count Buol, very naturally, writes thus
to the Noble Lord : -
" Count Buol also stated that during the occupation of the
Bnorthern
epdur
,onvtdhienarctte
the
ss
eo
tfehiveFrancequestion
u etribunalst the.bieyn at allied armies, the soldiers
presentof that
stood,coun trhyn.
did Count
nnot
see
et ha
na
yt he
toc could
idnoe
tmh
ao rt eGtehvaenr
nwraaei tn
tfor
dinformationue
nfrtohnea
reply they had received from your Lordship; and in the
meantime he would recommend an arrangement upon the
principle of compensation, not for an insult (for, according to
your Lordship's correspondence, that was not the ground
upon which you placed this question), but for an unfortunate
accident in which no nationality was concerned; and he
would at the same time state the disposition of the Emperor
(upon such an understanding) to come forward himself with
the proposition I have already mentioned for the arrangement
of this question."
The House cannot but observe that when the Noble Lord
writes to Florence it is an" unprovoked assault ;" but when
he writes to Vienna it is " an unfortunate occurrence."—
(Cheers from the Opposition.) When the Noble Lord is•
writing to Florence, however, there is a curious passage in
one of his dispatches which it is difficult to understand.
He says :
" You will thank Count Buol for his amicable offer re-
specting the Mather case, and state that I consider it as an
earnest of his friendly feelings towards this country and its
Government. :You will, however, explain that as her Ma-
jesty's Government have always:insisted on the independence
of Tuscany, azik its responsibility either to open her civil
courts to foreign plaintiffs, or, if she closes them, to enter-
tain the complaint through the executive, there would be
considerable awkwardness in our receiving compensation
from Austria, with whom we have had no official correspon-
dence in the matter. If Count Buol wishes to serve us in
this dispute he can best do so by giving his advice to Tus-
cany to refer the amount to an arbitration which Mr. Scar-
lett is instructed to propose at Florence. My determination
is that Mr. Mather should get what he .would have ob-
tained from an English court had he been cut down at a
review in Hyde Park by accidently hustling a violent
soldier.

" I have before stated that there is no reason whatever to
sti PPose that malice or any anti-English feeling stimulated
the act ; but certainly ninety-nine out of a hundred would,
under the circumstances, have only struck the supposed
roteree•via.bi_rne tet act,
offender with
the hilt or flat of their sword. It was, there-
although unpremeditated ; and as I under-
hustlin°g Er
opaiega.skull of the sufferer is injured, and he is not in
aquit4:rcumstances, a pecuniary compensation is both an
/ cane t and a legal demand on his part."
understand how F. man could be "cut down by
man down
" htletling,l4-
c Howe," that a (Laughter from the Liberals.) The
, baton
perhaps, provoke the soldier to cut the
one can hardly speak of its being an " ac-
or all, Mr. Addington •
" violent soldier" should cut a man down.
ver, aft
writes to Mr. Mather
thus—
I—have the satisfaction
tious negotiations
tion of the Eari e
Scar-
lett has succeeded
atonement for the tin
at Florence, by th m
terill aie
sytoyu,
8, bGyotvheerndmireenc-t
wittinlesburY, that after long and vexa-
practical
it, the Tuscan Government, Mr- Scar-
e. pe.......etaado,rtbiztaGlotvreeroatmmeenntt hofe rtehcoeisvoeml.
reeriotebrniniigitoefor your son a
eisalwesasrd4oh'ur.
of 1,000 francescom. '"'' y
Althoabn
do not consider that this Sum
which Mr. Mather suffered,
Court • 1m tied
demand, qtuhiavtalwenhtiotho
atoheEningjluisryh
Scarlett was instructed to
that Mr. Scarlett acted to the
concluding the centroversy,e ',.`t
and al twhooti.-I.gdhhiatv
best of
reason to believe
his judgment in thus
3 the ide
This quite contradict a
of
an
~
brutal outrage" accident." "An
unprovoked and .
l t brit 'f • cannot be an •
accident.: An
accident may be vio en , ,It be en,
accident, that takes away its .. brii,..admitted to bean
,g unprovoked ontrage.,Crgy and it cannot
have been an
with respect to the Pe (bear,) Thus, then,
it appears that
uhether it was - first question—the
nature of the injury--•--ether it an 4teid
Noble ord hasent, or an un-
provoked outrage, the b• mi d , not d 'd a eci ee Lc-
never been able tomake up is n ...._ft,
(Cheers —"
'n then from the
Opposition.) It is not sure risi g, . , that the G
to ascertain the truth, overn-
ment having taken no stern
hal Rad t k and whe-
ther Mr. Mather's account or Illars e z y2B
..e
wondered at that they "
all
ure the
right one—it is not to be ld not
he reparation °
have acted very consistently as to t
._.. f.,
-s• be ob-
tained. My Noble Friend Earl Granville had asked ample
reparation, and, though the Government of Tammy were
responsible, my Noble /Friend paid if the inquiries instituted

L m
4, 4

were not fairly conducted, or resulted in no redress, he should
hold Austria bound to give reparation. That is the true
way to state the case—treating both Governments as re-
sponsible. Mr. blather, in the first instance, placed the ques-
tion in the hands of Earl Granville and his successor. He
had an objection against taking the course of going before the
Turcan Court, but he says—
" We are, however, entirely in the hands of your Lordship
and the British Legation here. If it be deemed best, for
reasons of State, which I do not understand, to take such a
course, or any other, by our receiving official authority and
instructions bow to act, as far as we are concerned, they shall
be promptly and willingly obeyed. What may be fitting for
the honour and satisfaction of our country, of which your
Lordship, in such a case, is the guardian and judge, cannot
but be so for us."
Nothing could be more fitting or becoming than the tone
taken by Mr. Mather on the occasion. His son had suf-
fered a great injury; he had gone out to Italy in great
anxiety, and found his son still weak from the effects of the
injury ; and he says to the Foreign Minister, " You will pre-
scribe the course to be pursued, and though it may not be
according to my judgment, it will be the judgment of my
own Government, and a decision to which I shall bow."
W ell, Sir, Lord Malmesbury has so contrived that Mr.
Mather, who was the object of the injury, and Mr. Scarlett,
who was the person endeavouring to obtain reparation,
should be the only persons insulted, and that the officer who
inflicted the injury should be the only person to get off with
applause—( Hear, hear)—for Mr. Mather's character is in-
jured, and Mr. nicarlett has a very cruel censure passed upon
him by his Government. Mr. Slather is invited to a con-
ference with Lord Malmesbury, and is told that the Noble
Lord has demanded pecuniary reparation. Mr. Mather
states—
" Lord Malmesbury having been pleased to indicate that
he thcugbt personal reparation should be obtained for Mr.
Erskine Mather,and to desire Mr. blather's opinion on this
point, he begs to state that it is with the utmost pain that
he addresses himself to it, and that nothing but the official
commands of his Lordship should have made him deviate
from the uniform course which he and his unfortunate son
have invariably taken in this matter, of refusing to make it
a personal question, but one of a higher and more important
nature.
" Mr. Mather, taking into consideration the grievous in-
jury inflicted; the risk of his son's life; his sufferings; the
continued injury to his health; the eventual uncertainty of
future results; the party that inflicted being the officer
of a Government which has been implicated in his act;
and the probability that an appeal for reparation to an im-
partial court, and on the principles universally recognised,
would have produced a large amount of reparation in such a
case; Mr. Mather names to his Lordship 5,0001. as what
seems to him, under all these circumstances, just and proper,
and is not overvaluing the injury and its probable consequences
to his son.
"Mr. Slather again begs to repeat to his Lordship that
this is the most painful part of the duty imposed upon him
in all the trying circumstances with which this unfortunate
affair has been attended, and that respect for the views and
wishes of Lord Malmesbvry have alone induced him to ex-
press an opinion upon this point of the question."
Nothing could be clearer than that Mr. Mather did not desire
it to be made a question of pecuniary reparation, but showed
a due deference to the opinion of Lord Malmesbury, and
was, induced to name a sum to be demanded. He named
5,000/.—(Laughter)—at the same time stating that this was
the sum he deemed due, not only to himself for his anxiety
and his son for the injury, but to the honour of his country
for,the breach of international law.—'(An ironical Hear, hear.)
But, whether the sum he named were right or not, Mr.
Mather had no business to fix the sum due for the breach of
international law— (Hear, hear)—that was a question en-
tirely for the Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear.) He named 5,000/. ;
he might have named 5001. All he meant was, that the sum
to be demanded for such an injury should be considerable,
but it was for the Noble Lord to fix the sum.—(Hear,
hear.) The Noble Lord might have directed the Queen's
Advocate to state the proper sum to be demanded.
I remember the case of a South American merchant who
had been imprisoned, in which the Noble Lord the Member
for Tiverton called on the Queen's Advocate to state the
amount of compensation which was due. The Queen's Ad-
vocate said that 20/. a day was the sum which ought to be
asked, and the Noble Lord immediately wrote and demanded
it. I believe that the merchant was not satisfied, and
thought that his reparation should have been greater; but
the Noble Lord, who understood the business of his depart-
ment—( Hear. hear, and cheers)—never thought of listening
to the complaints of a private merchant.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord Malmesbury having committed this, what I think a
very great mistake, had it in hispower to repair it, and if be
had said to Mr. Mather, " I think that 5001. is the money
due by way of reparation," Mr. Mather would have said
that he would have been satisfied with anything that the
Government of his own country approved of. But what does
Lord Malmesbury do? He does not fix the sum—he does
not tell Mr. Slather what he thinks it ought to be, but he
writes a general direction to Mr. Scarlett to obtain a
sum of money, and he says that Mr. Slather has asked a sum
of 5 000/., which he considers to be exorbitant. Now look
at the injury which is thus done to Mr. Slather. Mr. Ma-
ther stands in the position of a man who says, " My son has
suffered a cruel injury; I have suffered a cruel injury; I put
my case in the hands of my country and in the Government
of my country, to do what they think fit." But the Secre-
tary of State for Foreign Affairs has no better means of ob-
taining that redress than by asking him what reparation he
ought to obtain, and then proclaiming to the Government at
Florence that Mr. Mather is a man who asks an exorbitant
sum.—(Hear, hear.) Accordingly we have soon afterwards
a dispatch from Mr. Scarlett, saying that the Tuscan Go-
vernment thinks that sum is exorbitant; it becomes well
known that an exorbitant sum has been asked for, and con-
sequently the sympathy which had been felt for Mr. Mather
is very much diminished.—(Hear, hear.) And this is the
way in which a Secretary of State obtains redress for a man
who is evidently and undoubtedly an injured man, by put-
ting him in the light of a person who is greedy for money
and anxious to obtain an excessive sum from the Tuscan
Government. Thus the character of Mr. Mather is very
much injured, and injured, too. by that very person
who ought to have undertaken his defence. One would
have thought that on hearing this, at least, Lord Malmes-
bury would have written to Florence to state that no blame
was due to Mr. blather, and that he had never asked for
money until he had been desired to do so ; but no such
course is taken.—(Hear, hear.) Well, then, what directions
aro given to Mr. Scarlett as to the sum which he should
demand, since it had been determined that moral reparation,
which would have been far better, was not to be given?
Lord Malmesbury does not lay down any sum whatever.
Now, suppoeing HU to have been a fair sum, the
only clear course was to say, "We have estimated :the
injury at 5001. and that sum we will take, and no less."
However, nothing specific is asked, but Lord Malmesbury
expresses an expectation that a sum proportioned to
the injury received by Mr. Mather should be. paid by
way of compensation, and according l'Ar. Scarlett
made a demand to that effect on the Tuscan Go-
vernment. Ia one of his dispatches Lintel Malmesbury
directs that a sum of money should -De demanded, and
he says, "If the principle be admit'aed, we shall not be
very long in agreeing about the arneant." Again, on the
9th- of April, Lord Malmesburyye. rites •"You must get Mr.
Mather 500/., or such a sum MS would purchase him an an-
nuity." Well, Mr. Scarlett that he cannot get 5001,
but he at length comes te an agreement with the Tuscan
Government, which, I Intent say, is not a very satisfactory
agreement, and which,, it appears to me, he ought never to
have consented to without referring home for instructions
from the Government. But be it observed that up to that
moment Lord Malmesbury had never told Mr. Scarlett
what it was precisely that he was to ask for, and his words
to Mr. Scarlett, which I have just quoted, gave a discre-
tionary power to the latter. Well, Mr. Scarlett, being in
great uncertainty and anxiety, makes, I think, a very un-
becoming agreement, and agrees to take 2201., and very
strangely says he will be satisfied with that sum, provided
the Messrs. Stratfords are released from custody.—(Hear,
hear, and laughter.) No doubt Mr. Scarlett was to blame
for making such an agreement, but it is a great palliation
of Mr. Scarlett's conduct that he had never received any
specific instructions as to what he was to ask.—( Hear,
hear.) Well, when this agreement is made, Lord Malmes-
bury turns round on Mr. Scarlett and writes to him in these
terms:—" Her Majesty's Government are ready to admit
that in this last transaction Mr. Scarlett has acted to the
best of his judgment, but I should not be strictly ex-
pressing my feelings if I did not state that the Govern-
ment regret that Mr. Scarlett should have taken a view of
what was expedient as much at variance with his in-
structions as with sound reason."—(Hear, hear and a
laugh.) Now the result of all this is, I think, a very
disagreeable one for this country, namely, that when the-
object is to obtain a sum in reparation for Mr. Slather, the
only persons who are found to suffer in the end are Mr.
Mather and the agent to whom you entrusted your nego-
tiations.—(Fear, hear.) And do not tell me that Mr.
Scarlett was not capable of carrying out his instructions.
hlr. Scarlett has bad considerable experience, and, if pro-
perly instructed, I have no doubt would have efficiently
obeyed those instructions.—(Hear, hear.) And be it ob-
nerved that all this time the Austrian Government, which
professes the most conciliatory diepositien, which shows
every wish to gratify her Majesty's Government in every
reasonable demand, are not asked to take any steps on the
subject, and this after the communication made by the Tule.
can Government to the Government of this country.--
(Hear, hear.) I have said already that I think that the
Tuscan Government, being an independent Government, the
first demand for reparation should have been made to them ;
but when they said, " This is an Austrian army; and, by
the convention we have signed, no Austrian officer can be
brought to trial by us, or punished for offences com-
mitted against clviliaua, and it is beyond our power to
arrest or to punish an Austrian officer;" I think, in
that case the Austrian Government became responsible for
the conduct of its officers, and that a proper demand should
have been made for reparation, if with no other object
than this—that the Austrian military should not any more
indulge in the wanton habit of cutting down' men merely
because they conceived that some insult was offered.— (Hear,
hear.) That would be some satisfaction and security ; but as
it is, every Englishman who goes into Italy, where, unfor-
tunately, Austrian troops are stationed in countries which
h
ought to be independent—l mean the States of the Church
and the Tuscan States—every Englishman, I say, is
to suffer anything which an Austrian officer may think
proper to inflict upon him, and there is no chance of redress.
—(Hear, hear.) Nor is Mr. Mather's the only case of f i
kind. I understand that a non-commissioned officer of
Marines has been lately severely punished according tothe
Austrian code.—(Hear, hear.) Then I say again, that al-
though this case was in itself simple enough, and although
neither the Austrian Government and the Tuscan Govern-
ment seem to have been ready to resist any reasonable de-
mand, yet such was the mode in which Lord Malmesbury
has conducted this transaction, that it can but lead to ridi-
cule and contempt on the part of the foreign Governments.
I shall only say a few words on the last part of the trans-
action, as far as we knew it. On the 24th of May, Lord.
Malmesbury said, that though her Majesty's Government
did not approve of this settlement, yet that, under the.9,!re-
cumstances, they could not refuse to recognise it. The
dispatch containing that decision was signed and sent off on
the 2lth of May ; but it appears that on the 22d of May
there arrived at the Foreign-office a dispatch from Florence,
which totally changed Lord Malmesbury's views of the trans-
action • but that dispatch was not read by Lord Malmes-
bury till after the other dispatch had been sent off on the
24th. It does seem extraordinary, considering the regn.
larity with which business is transacted in the Foreign-office,
especially considering the regularity with which Mr. Ad-
dington, the Under-Secretary of State, is sure to transmit all
Lora
Malmesbury of importance—it does seem strange that
Malmesbury should not have read that dispatch of the 22d
till after the 24th. But as he did not see it till after the 24th
it would have been bettor that he should have remained sa-
tisfied with what had been done, and not have disturbed the
decision. But after having stated to Mr. Mather, and pro-
claimed to the Tuscan G,overnment that her Majesty's Go-
vernment would not refuse to recognise the settlement, there
comes another dispatch opening up the whole question, and
desiring Sir Henry Bulwer to leave Florence ..
to break off
all diplomatic intercourse with the Tuscan Government un •
less they should consent to make some further reparation.
What may be the consequence of this last dispatch I know
not. All I shall say is, that if Sir Henry Bulwer be ordered
to leave Florence, I de not see how the character of.the transac-
tion will be at all unproved. The onlyconsequence will be that
British subjects residing there will not have the assistance of