The Sun.
London, England, 1830-11-03 00:00:00

country is a party ; I cannot understand that we are an
beund. As for those Treaties themselves, Ido not think
that they have contributed to the happineva or tiamptillity
of Corope ; nor that actin' on them now would contri
Bute to its trangeillity. Instead of acting on the twin-
ciple of the balance of Europe, which would protect the
weak against the strong, We, have departed from that prin•
ciple, and formed' alliances upon principles of confis-
cation and division, in accordance' with Whlkh, we
have transferred one kingdom to *wither, without regard
to the sentiments or to the interests of those who were
transferred. From the first moment, those transfers have
never allowed to Europe nn hour's security. No man can
more regret than I do the separation of Flanders from
Holland : and in this view I cannot disapprove of the in-
timatiott conveyed in his Majesty's Speech, if the media-
tion alluded' to he conducted 'in a proper manner, in con-
cert with France, so as to effect the new settlement of the
country. But I imagine that, after the' excitement of the
animosities which now actuate the inhabitants of the two
countries, they cannot again be united but by means the
moat vicious anti unjust, and by an utter disregard of the
principle on which it is the duty of every country to aet—
that is, the principle of non-interference. There are my
view's; and they are eitforeed with a reasoning more
powerful than I am capable of advancing, in a letter from
a Noble Fs iend of mine, dated 19th May, .18b3, from
which I shall, with your Lordships' permission, read
an extract

" Nicrunatasisos...The only change of importance which
Lord Castlereagh made in the project sketched by Mr. Pitt in
ISOS, was to give the Netherlands to Holland instead of Prussia.
Whether the original plan was a good one, may be doubted ;
hot the merit of the alteration is still more equivocal. A pro.
position of joining the Netherlands to Holland was made to
William 111., but he rejected it, says Burnet, on account of the
difference of religious opinions; and he seems to have acted
witti his, usual knowledge and judgment. The Belgians require
their GOvernment to be strictly Roman Catholic and intolerant;
the Dutch wish no less for a Protestant King and general tole.
ration. Nor's this the only difibrence—the Belgians wish Outland
to be free from taxes, the Dutch will hear of no duties upon
commerce. The Belgians are accustomed to the use of the
French language; the Dutch will not be governed except In
Dutch. The naglana despise the Dutch as it covetous, unpu.
limbed, unfeeling people; the Dutch despise the Belgians as an
ignorant, stupid, and Manual race. The Belgians, in fact, wish
to return to the French Government, and in the scramble for
the patronage of the combined crown, they are not able to con.
tend with the superior ability and InfOrlitatlOn of their neigh.
hours, In MS, of eight Ministers of Statetonly one was a Bel.
glen I of US diplousatie agents, one; °lna Generals, Id, are.l so
that of lUD of the first employments of Government, the Bel.
glans had only 00. Add to this that the Belgians are obliged to
pay taxes for the interest of the Dutch debt and the repairs of
the Dutch dykes. It may easily be believed, that amongst the
discontents which this arrangement has occasioned, the Govern-
ment cannot hold a very steady course. The sovereign autho.
pity is exercised neither with the youthful vigour of a new, nor
the prescriptive majesty of an old Government, And.what shall
we say to this limited monarchy, in which the King by his first
act abolished trial by jury, and named his own Chamber 'of De-
poles ? Or to a Parliament, of which the Members rail at one
another in different languages V Where *Belgian Deputy, who
proposes a financial question,' is completely foiled by the nide.
tangible repl yof a Dutch Chancellor of the Exchequer? Where
one half of the 'Howe do not understand the other half till they
see their speeches translated in the newspaper of the follow.
ing day ?
" If the internel government of this country wants stability,
its external situation Is not more secure. Flanders, said Sir
William Temple, is not of a site to support a large army, nor of
a figure to be defended by a stnell one. The union with Holland
has not added much to its military strength. The Dutch force
Is chiefly navel, and the Colonies require a large number of
troops. The present army of the kingdom consists of 40,000
regulars, soul tio,ooo militia, Even with the additions which may
he made in time of war, they will not be more than sufficient to
garrisoi the tbrtresset 'if the French were to invade Belgium,
it would be utterly impossible for the King of the Netherlands to
meet thesis with an army in the field. Austria and Spain would
no longer empty their treasures to support Flanders. The only
power from which money and men could be expected would be
Englatul. So that, atter paying to build the fortresses we should
have to pay for defending them—perhaps, too, against the
inhabitants,
" We hare here an Instance of two nations possessing no ne-
Oral attraction, but rather a very great repulsion, to each other,
pounded together In the great morter of the cumulus or Vienna. ,
Whiff is to result from the mixture of two equal parts of Catholic
bigotry and Protestant freetiomssof land and tvimmerce-sed
French anti Dutch—of polished stupidity and vulgar talent—of
natural servility and ancient love of freedom, no men can pen,.
It may be sup Knell, however, that one of the parts will fly Was
soon as it can join any foreign matter. And this is the kingdom
which Is coils derail by all the foreigners as raised out of deft'.
ranee to Eng and, at the special demand of Lout Castlereagh 1"
My Lords, from the coneideratione expressed in that
extract, I object to the manner in which the alluvion en
Belgium is introduced in the Address. If it went no
further than Sc lament the unhappy occurrence in this
country, I should not offer any objection to its adoption in
our answer to his Majestyrs Speech. But it makes us go
farther. We are made to decide between tine two parties,
and to pronounce a direct censure on the conduct of the
people of the Low Countries towards this enlightened
flovernMent. This is an interference directly opposed to
the principle of non.interference. We speak of the Bel-
gimes as " revolted subjects." But sic revolted subjects
they would be considered to deserve punishment, Is the
Noble Duke, then, prepared to bring metiers to this issue ?
If lie lie so, 1 trust this House will not sanction such ins
terference. What, then, straddle+ do, were he compelled
to leave them as they are? If, lifter this judgment upon
the conduct of the two parties, he should herniae a me-
diator, ean-he expect to be considered inipartial? Would
• he not naturally be looked upon as the enemy of one of
the parties to whom he should offer himself in impartial
judge? But should • the transactions in Belgium come to
the issue, which' think not only the most likely, but also
the most desirable, at present, for the interests of this
cauntry.—should Belgium, I say, be formed into an inde-
pendent State, in what 'relation shall we stand to that
country, to which we, this night, in the language of the
Address, express our hostility? Against that expression
I feel hound, my' Lords, to protest, as impolitic and unjust;
and I believe that if the I)nke'apply to France for beret,.
operation in interference on the principles implied in that
part of the Address, he will And France soon falling off
from the negotiation, and his measure leading to the result
which it is his wish to avoid. My Lords, it was aim,
With regret that I heard the allusion made to tint rieog••
nition of Don Miguel. Ido not wish to speak here of
the private character of that Prince, but I do not think
the proposed recognition of his authority in Portugal
consistent with a Statismanlike view of our relations
with that country. 'Our original situation, certainly, With
respect to l)on Miguel, was by no means the same as
it at present Is. We have lately recognised a new Go-
vernment in France, And es there seems to be in the other
country (Portugal) also a Grivernment ' existing now for
some time with the apparent concurrence of the people, 1
am not prepared when it may be proper to recognise it,
• But in the passage of the Speech front the Throne, allud-
ing to *Help recognition, there is something whieh I do not
understand. The recognition is made to depend oil the
passing of an amnesty. I underitood the Noble Duke at
the head of his Malesty's Government to lay, on a fernier
occasion, when he whaled to justify a manna° which was
complained of in `this Vale, that non-ititerference
was the priviciple, and intervention the exceptiun." Now
I will ask hire how he ran reconcile that principle of
non-interferenee with hilt making this monody the coudi.
thin of the proposed recognition of Dort Miguel? If he
do so, is he prepared to enforce the fulfilment of that cone
(titian? For my part, my Lords, I ebould certainly re-
joice to tee the Marquis of Admen* and his virtuous fel,
low-sufferers restored to their country and to their mates;
but I must ask the Noble Duke, if this amnesty be made
the condition on whieh we recognise Don Miguel, and tin
• the faith of that condition bis (the Noble Duke's) corn-
. •,
pamons in arms, who are now engaged attempting;
to establieh the liberty 'of Spain, should retnrn to
their Mon country, would thie promise of Don
Milted be faithfully'ohserved ? If faith be not kept
with the returned Palmella and the others
be seized on their return., what then will follow? Are
we hoop, to IWriatAill the amnesty, to the promise of
which we are toads a party? Are we bound to go
to war for the purpose c,C thforelng it ? Such inferrer.
mice is opposed to all the principles which natioes have
ever regarded, As yet we have cents nothing to encourage
On the ea teary, the lest
the expectation of this anmeity,
that we have heard of tins proovediop ordolt P,,:we (Doe
,
Miguel), was hie seizure of the wives arid coilthen of
• Adhereittit of-Donua Marie who weirs not aecompenied iu
smile by their heneliee• Before I conclude. I should
with your Lerdehipa' indulgence, to reetipitu!ate by statim,!
that in respect to what Las happened in France, I rejoice
in the successful .reeistance of the people 'to the ufijoetie
liable measures of the family WWI they' have expelled ;
trust that, into whatever negotiations bit Mileety's Go.
vernment may resolve to engage for the new asettiement of
Belgium, the principle of turn•imerference will he eiriotiy.
-adhered to. I regret the distrece.•the existence of which I
In this country cannot he denied, aed. j am satiefied that
tbl House is disposed -to COrishler the bsist means. 'of re..
4itrving it. With respect to Ireland, I concur kttagether
'in the sentiments expreseed by the. Noble Duke Whet sae
,rwar use; and although, under ell eireurnstener, I cannot'
04W my sanction to the Address,. I coeceive that I fulfil
soy duty in offerieg it no oppoeition.
Toe Deske of WELLINOTON—Witat lute fallen frosts
the Noble Lord opposite (Berl Grey) does honour to bite.
NA and shows the rank which-be ought to hold, *I a
iitittemnitn, ill the COrtOCilfr of his country. I sincerely con-
gretteuto the ilouee anti the nation on polowesieg such
Ottoman .; bet I am *oily that I (mullet concur his mime
of the opinion% which he hits now explained to yew
tie has emichstled; with referring to diet part
'of. dot Speerh from the Throne in which altuaiin is made
ter the Afaire of Portugal anti with that part of the
Noble Lortre i .1,411 Wein, I would beg you c
Lordships to retnetiii,er huse freqnently his taus itisiesty
kaki tee inconvenience to which this entiorry line is is sub.
jetted by.the uncertainty of our iliploinatic seditious wish
the Government of, that country. "Your Lordships swill
remember how insides: his Majesty was to put an caul to
the diffieultio occoioned by that attOrtaiaty, ant ty at'