The Sun.
London, England, 1837-06-17 00:00:00

because he considered after five or six years resi-
dence in a foreign country (particularly in a despotic one) it
would lie highly desirable that they should refresh their Eng-
lish feelin!..--( A laugh.) Lord Pensonby had been five years
at Constantinople. He had discharged his duties with zeal
Enq ability, and after so long an absence be (11. l not think it
unreasonable that he should return, it he thought ft, to thy;
country on his private business.—( Hear.) It was right al7o
to observe that half the salary of an Ambassador was suspen-
ded during the period of his absence. Sir Charles Vaughan
was not an Ambassador, but on a special mission, w nit the
title of Extraordinary Ambassador. lie received no salary,
but merely his experices, on account rendered, and fern tee
state of their relations he (Lord Palmerston) thought this out-
lay highly necessary.
Mr. FUME said, the Noble Lord was certainly to blame
for selecting persons to fill these offices from the ranki• ~f the
Tories.---( Hear.) Sir Charles Vaughan, it was welt known,
held opinions directly at variance with the Government he
represented.
Lord PALMERSTON defended Sir Charles Vaughan
from the imputatia, of the Hon. Member for Middlesex. 'll.e
truth wa. Sir Charles was no politician.—( A laugh. )
Sir R. I'E EL said it appeare,:iwit evetyane had a defender
except Mr. Urquhart ; but, perhaps, the Kel)le rd
rose again he would undertake his defence.—,‘Laught2...,
This gentleman had been appointed on account of his ea:flier:
cial ability; but when the period arrived to try if be could
sw-ire. another person was sent out to supersede him. Nothing
could Lave been more convenient for the Noble Lord to carry
into effect his doctrine than the opportunity afforded by Lord
Ponsonby's asking leave of absence, particularly after five or
six years' residence in a despotic country, for, according to the
views of the Noble Lord, it was highly necessary that their
Ambassadors should, after such absence, return home, to be
impregnated with constitutional principles.—( Laughter.) I
would furce them, said the Noble Lord, to come home after
five or six years absence, because they might get so rusty that
it would be desirable to refresh their old English feelings.—
( Renewed laughter.) The Noble Lord then sends out a co-
adjutor, who never arrived at his destination.—( Hear, hear.)
The Noble Lord had taken the precaution to provide against
the well-known tempestuous nature of the region, and the
dangers with which the place abounds, to have a second Am-
bassador on the spot, lest any accident should befal the first—
( Laughter.) It was to be presumed that past experience
prompted this wise precaution.—( Renewed laughter.) The
Noble Lord had misconceived what his Right Hon. Friend had
said in respect to that part of his speech in which his Right
Hun. Friend spoke of Sir Charles Vaughan. His Right Hon.
Friend merely contended that on a simple application being
made for leave of absence it was not usual to appoint another
to the place ; and that when the application for leave was
withdrawn incurring the expense of a substitute, was hardly
justifiable. But it was said that Sir Charles Vaughan was
sent on a special mission, after an application having been
made for leave of absence. But Sir Charles Vaughan bad
the advantage of being sent out after having had close com-
munication with the Government. What were the circum-
stances ? First, there was the application for leave on the part
of Lord Ponsonby ; then the desire that the Noble Lord should
re-imbue himself with constitutional principles at home—
( Cheers and laughter)—and then the wish to have some one
appointed as his successor who had been in immediate com-
munication with Ministers at home.—( Hear, hear.) It was
not his wish to press too hardly on the Noble Lord, but he
must say that the second explanation was not much clearer or
more satisfactory than the first—( Hear, and laughter)—for it
appeared that tile special mission did not reach further into the
figean than Malta.
Lord PALMERSTON, in explanation, said the Right
Hon. Baronet had misunderstood him. When he spoke of
communication, he meant that it was desirable Sir Charles
Vaughan should meet Lord Ponsonby at Malta, and from a
communication with him learn the state of things at Constan-
tinople, preparatory to his arrival there. What did the Right
Hon. Baronet argue ? An Ambassador, a long time away
from his own country, wished for leave to come home, and it
was granted. The Ambassador then changed his mind, amid
what di& the Right Hon. Baronet call upon Government to
do ? He called upon them to say to the Ambassador, " You
shall come home.—( Loud laughter.) As a reward for the
good services you rendered, we gave you leave of absence—
you change your mind, and express a wish to stay, but we
compel you to come home."—(Renewed laughter.) Surely
such conduct as this would be most ungracious.—( Laughter.)
Sir R. PEEL—That's the Noble Lord's doctrine, and not
mine. The Noble Lord said that if an Ambassador who had
-been five years absent did not ask for leave to come home, he
would compel him to come.—(Hear, hear, cheers, and
laughter.) I think this is the only construction to be put
upon the Noble Lord's speech—this is the constitutional doc-
trine which he has laid down, that after a five years' ab-
sence, especially in a despotic country, an Ambassador
should, whether he wished it or not, be made to•return, for
the purpose of having him re-imbued with British principles
and feelings.—(Cheers and laughter.)
Sir S. CANNING denied any intention of detracting
from the merits of Sir C. Vaughan.
Colonel SIBTHORP wished that Hon. Members on his
side of the House would be more attentive in preventing the
multiplication of commission after commission, and embassy
after embassy.

.a.• • ..,• y••• ..,,.......,
On the Order of the Day being read for going into Com-
mittee of Supply,
Mr. HARVEY presented a petition from Sheffield (as we
understood) against the New Poor Law Act, signed by fifteen
thousand persons.
Mr. BAINES presented a number of similar petitions
from Suffolk, complaining that the Bill separating husbands
and wives, parer.ts and children, and allowed no out of
door relief.