The Sun.
London, England, 1830-04-29 00:00:00

LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, APRIL 29, 1830

above named the said Queen was residing- in this country,
and had been received by his 'Majesty with the accustomed
honours of her Royal rank.
" That on the said 12th of December the Island of
Terceira, part of the dominions of the Queen of Portugal,
was governed by authorities, civil and military, in allegiance
to her Majesty.

" That on the said 12th of December instructions were
given by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, stating
that a considerable number of Portuguese 'soldiers, and
other foreigners, were about to sail in transports from
Plymouth to Falmouth, and it is supposed they intend
making an attack on Terceira, or other of the Western
Isles; and his Majesty having been pleased to command
that a naval force should be immediately despatched to in-
terrupt any such attempt, you are hereby required and
directed to take the ship and sloop named in the margin
under your command, and to proceed with all practical
expedition to Terceira ; and having ascertained that you
have succeeded in reaching that island before the transports
alluded to, you will remain yourself at Angra or Praia, or
cruising clase to the island in the most advisable position
for intercepting any vessels arriving off it ; and you will
detach the other ships as you shall deem best for preventing
the aforesaid force from reaching any of the other

" That on the arrival of the naval force sent to Ter-
ceira, in pursuance of these instructions, the Commanding
Officer found that island in possession of and governed by
the Authorities above mentioned.

" That in the beginning of January, 1829, a number
of. Portuguese, subjects or soldiers of her said Majesty,
voluntarily left this country with a view of repairing to
the said island, and that their departure and destination
were known to his Majesty's Government; that they ap-
pear to have embarked and sailed in unarmed merchant
ships, to have been unaccompanied by any naval force,
and themselves without any arms or ammunition of war.
" That these unarmed merchant ships and passengers
were prevented by his Majesty's naval forces, sent for the
purpose, from entering the harbour of Porto Praia; and
that after they had been fired into, and blood had been
spilled, they were compelled, under the threat of the fur-
ther use of force, again to proceed to sea, and warned to
quit the neighbourhood of Terceira and the rest of the
Azores, but that they might proceed wherever else they
might think proper.
" That the use of force in intercepting these unarmed
vessels, and preventing them from anchoring and landing
their passengers in the harbour of Porto Praia, was a vio-
lation of the sovereignty of the State to which the Island
of Terceira belonged ; and that the further interference
to compel those merchant ships or transports to quit the
neighbourhood of the Azores,' was an assumption of juris-
diction upon the high seas, neither justified by the neces-
sity of the case, nor sanctioned by the general Law of
Nations."

The Hon. Member then proceeded to observe,
that upon this subject some discussion had taken
place in the last Session on the 'notion for papers
respecting it, which had been made by his Hon:
and Learned Friend, the Member. for Knares-
borough. Ministers had consented to give the pa-
pers, and they were now on the table. But they
by no means afforded all the information which was
necessary. Of that he had a right to complain.
The House had not been fairly dealt with on the
subject. Still, however defective as those papers
were, they afforded sufficient. ground for his resolu-
tions ; and he should therefore proceed to address
the House on the subject. Before, however, he
entered on the main question, he %visited to make
one remark. His Majesty's Government had re-
solved that this country should maintain a strict
neutrality between the two parties in Portugal. On
the wisdom or the expediency of that resolution he
would not enter; he would give no opinion of it,
because he did not wish to draw the attention of the
House from the topic which he was more particularly
desirous of bringing before them. He should there-
fore assume that we were in a strictly neutral posi-
tion between the parties, and on that assumption
his remarks wouid be based. But he begged to ob-
serve that neutrality, as all the great writers on na-
tional law had stated, was of two kinds—voluntary
and stipulated. It might exist with reference to
two belligerents, with one of whom we had, and
with the other of whom we had not, any previous
alliance or friendship. Now, what was our position
in that respect with the two parties in Portugal ?
With Don Miguel we had never had any treaty of
alliance, or any compact whatever. More than that,
we had denounced the cause of Don Miguel
as unjust ;—we had denounced Don Miguel him-
self as an usurper, and as deserving of every
odium. It was clear, therefore, that our neu-
trality, as it respected Don Miguel, was voluntary ;
that it was a neutrality Which we observed for our
own interests, not for those of Don Miguel, with
whom we had no compact or understanding. What
resulted from this ? That if it pleased us to-morrow
to convert our neutrality with reference to Don
Miguel into hostile relations, he would have no right
to complain, and the character of England would be •
untarnished. But how different was the case with
respect to the Queen Donna Maria! She was the
descendant and representative of a long line of
Sovereigns with whom this country had concluded
an ancient treaty, and had long maintained the most
intimate intercourse. We had acknowledged her
cause to be just. We had recognised her as the
lawful Queen of Portugal. To her we were bound
by compact to be at least neutral. 'What resulted
from this ? That if we were to convert our neu-
trality with reference to Queen Donna Maria into
hostile relations, she would have a right to complain,
and the character of England would be tarnished.
Nothing could be more clear. With the Usurper
of Portugal our neutrality was voluntary, and the
maintenance of it was optional; with the lawful
Queen of Portugal our neutrality was the effect of
previous stipulation, and we cou:d not abandon it
without dishonour. To Don Miguel we bad shown
every degree of alienation short of actual war: to the
Queen Donna Maria we had shown every degree of
friendship short of actually espousing her cause. it
followed that, if circumstances should compel us to de-
part from the strict line of neutrality we had prescribed
to ourselves, the departure ought to be in favour oft he
party with whom we had previous engagements of
amity, and not in favour of ►.lie party with whom we
had no such previous engagements. If any doubt
whatever existed on the subject, that doubt ought
to be thrown into the scale of the former. He
would now proceed to consider the course of con-
duct which had been pursued by his Majesty's Go-
vernment; and in so doing he would adhere to the
order of time, as calculated to render the statement
more perspicuous. In the first place, he could not
help thinking it rather ex:raordinary that, although
the Portuguese refugees came to this country in Au-
gust, their presence did not seem to have attracted
the attention of his Majesty's Government until it •
was brought under their notice in the middle of Oc-
tober by the letter of the Marquis Barbacena. The
duty of a neutral is to be passive, not active ; neu-
trals ought to be absent, and not interfere without
their proper jurisdiction. A great writer has said
that neutrals ought not to interfere on the principle
of rendering equal justice to both parties; they ought
not to interfere at all. It is impossible for tiny neu-
tral to know what equal assistance is, for ha atinnot
form so accurate a judgment of the situation of the
parties. If a neutral had a right to interfere, he
must have a right to enforce his interference. A
weak neutral would respect the law of nations, but
a strong neutral will disregard them. The English
Constitution said, that if a slave entered her terri-
tory he was free; but Ministers said, that if the
martyrs to liberality put foot upon her shores they
became slaves, and this was what they termed
the law of nations. But they proceeded fur-
ther, and at every step new principles started
up. The Colonies were to follow the example
of the Mother Country, and the usurper was de

facto Sovereign of Portugal, whilst his brother was
Sovereign of the Colonies de jure. This was the
language of Government. This was an inconsistency
Government could not extricate themselves from.
The only justification of Government was that civil
war was reigning in Terceira ; but the papers before
• the House proVed directly'the reverse. The first proof
of the internal condition of Terceira was the letter
of the Marquis Barbacena. This was on the 15th
of October, and on the 187 h of October this was
answered by the Duke of Wellington. The next
evidence was the letter of the Marquis Palmella,
of 20th December. This stated that Terceira was
perfectly true to her legal Severeign, and had never
swerved from her allegiance. It enclosed an address
from the authorities of the island, professing their
strongest fidelity to their Sovereign. On the 23d
December the Duke of Wellington answered thi,
letter. In that answer nothing was said about
Terceira being in a state of civil war, but it was
written under an impression that that person had
abused his good faith. If the Duke of Wellington
had thought civil war raged in the island, that would
have formed the climax of his assertions ; but the
• letter shewed that Government was not at that
time in a condition to refer to the statement of the
Marquis of Palmella—Captain Walpole's first com-
munication had been after the orders of our Go-
Vernment had been issued. Captain Walpole said
that the garrison was faithful to Don Miguel. Now
the garrison consisted of only 750 men; and if the
people were devoted to Donna Maria, how were
they acquiescent under so small a garrison ? The
Governor of Terceira was one of the creatures of
Don Miguel; he excited a commotion, but he
was able to get but a few persons together to
support him ; and in a moment this parry was
suppressed. The peasantry assisted in putting down
his efforts. It had been urged, that symptoms of
republicanism had manifested themselves in Ter-
ceira, and that money had been coined with repub-
lican inscriptions. This was totally false ; for
nothing of the sort had been done in the island.
It had been urged that arms had been sent from this
country to Terceira, in the first instance; but if
this bad been permitted, he asked would it violate
neutrality to let these persons follow ? It was no-
torious that arms and ammunition had been pur-
chased in this country ; and, if this had been allowed,
was it consistent to stop those persons in their pro-
ceeding to Terceira ? He would now come to the
conduct of Government in enforcing its prohibition;
and here their proceedings were tantamount to war
—to direct and positive war. If that nation had
had the power to defend itself, where would have
been the consequence ? Our Government chose a
victim, well knowing whom the) could insult and
trample upon. They knew they were not dealing
with France, Russia, or the United States, but with
fugitives, and these were the victims on whom our
Government showered their gratuitous neutrality.
Even war itself ought not to be commenced in this
summary manlier; and although we had commenced
war without the usual preliminaries in the attack on
the Spanish frigates in 1804, arid on Copenhagen
in 1807, our acquittal had not yet been pronounced
by the nations of Europe. Two or three of these
vessels had their boats out to land their crews when
the English frigate appeared. Now vothing could
be a more gross outrage of the law of nations than
for a neutral to interfere within the territory of
another country, and within that distance of the
shore all writers considered the territory of a country
to extend. It was a strange thing, as part of the
conduct of the Government in this proceeding,
that they chose, the very moment Donna Maria
was received in the Palace of our ancient Kings,
to turn back her own subjects from the only
spot of earth which acknowledged her controul.
—(Hear.)—He did not impute any blame to
our Gallant Officers upon the occasion ; they
only acted under orders, which were not the
less reprehensible, because they had not been at-
tended with great bloodshed. It might have so
happened that one of them might have been com-
pelled to fire broadsides, instead of small arms, upon
those unfortunate individuals ; arid therefore, al-
though the loss was trifling, no argument in favour
of Ministers could be founded upon it. He next
adverted to the letter written on the 18th of October
by the Duke of Wellington to the Marquis Barba-
cena, and quoted a passage, stating, that if the
Portuguese subjects of Donna Maria desired to make
war upon the Azores instead of Portugal, they were
at liberty to do so, provided they went as indivi-
duals. They did go as individuals, and they were
repulsed.—(Hear, hear.) He contended they did
go as individuals, for they went without arms, and
therefore were as little under the circumstances of a
hostile armament as any body of settlers going to
the Swan River or New South Wales. He con-
tradicted the assertion that one half of this body of
men consisted of Germans. He allowed that two
hundred and sixty of them had touched at Plymouth,
but they received neither arms nor provisions, nor
had they spoken to anybody, except two of the
officers of the depots. These Germans then went
to Madeira, and from thence to Terceira, whence
they, after having been received in the name of a
legal Sovereign, were driven back by the armed
boats of a neutral power.—(Hear, hear.) Many
insinuations had been thrown out, and many charges
had been made against the persons who had
conducted this expedition. They were refugees.
They were unfortunate, and they were now absent ;
and this lie thought might have oecasioned:some little
delicacy in condemning them. But what had they
clone? Did they, in the face of Europe, take oaths
which they forthwith laughed at, steeping themselves
in the guilt of fourfold perjury ? Did' they violate the
majesty of our King by entering into solemn obli-
gations, which they at the earliest opportunity tossed
to the winds? Did they go to Portugal and take oaths
innumerable, which they subsequently trampled under
foot, in the presence of a betrayed, insulted, and
oppressed people ? Did they desecrate thrones by •
the commission of the basest and most revolting'
crimes ? No ; and yet he had heard of such things
having been done, which had not excited any great
feeling.—(Loud and continued cheering.) A charge
Of falsehood and treachery had been brought against
these unfortunate men. He had looked into the pa-
pers, arid could not see anything in the least sus-
picious, except the change of destination. On the
15th October, Marquis Barbacena proposed to
le
v
r
eneepeaeiddi
ndrdiabte,tiieolii Refugees
n licilitahat cti::Ngbovu,lenalledisssne to
kigispiatiel 'Terceira;
ler
Palmella
nle
amid
,1
leyfeirrai
eoCeiattrflinipt erimlraoeppo; on
pir.toeoeiisms.
ttneilletidlthe 2
presumption
tttit:nititrthilaoteal of
bath
No-
,n it iriaaAsasttzmstisitell—xlc,itt
Terceira, which was a sort of dependence on Ma-
deira, had also fallen into Don Miguel's hands; but
then, on the 20th of December, it was ascertained
ppiro.roiNipp,ceoisree7tgohtlialoi
continued
directnfHuo eredtheitelooi
suNic(oati•nii.souetis
that Terceira was still safe, and what could be more
towards
mtleilelamtioly again
acknowledge
acknowledge tilswaye
that a oft
any his
treachery had been used; but supposing there bad
of
been some disingenuousness, it was, after all, but
the struggle of.patriotism against power; and cer-
tainly the charge of ill-faith came with a very bad
grace from those who had themselves forced the
parties thus accused into it. There was another ar-
gument which was now much insisted upon, although
formerly it had never been urged. It was, that if
they were by fraud betrayed into a violation of the
neutrality they professed,. they might follow the
guilty parties into any foreign port. Now if this

were so, the Law of Nations had lost that inflexible
character it formerly possessed; it was no longer the
protection of the strong against the weak—that would
he regulated by expediency alone. The Law of Nations
in short, would be altogether uprooted, and society.
would be driven back to that state of confusion and
violence from which it had been rescued by this inter-
national compact. But ho wouhl ask was this case
of neutrality a new one ? Certainly not. He would,
however, only allude to the case of 1819, which
was the latest. The Foreign Enlistment Bill was
!hen passed, and yet, notwithstanding, vessels daily
left our ports under false pretences ; and it never
occurred to Spain, or even Turkey, to demand that
we should follow the ships to a foreign port.—(Hear,
hear.)—At this period, too, it was decided by Mr_
Canning, respecting the municipal law, that it did
not extend beyond our own ports; and doubtless,
this was much wore true of the international law.
And truly the world had expressed its opinion of
our conduct, and the nature of it was proved by the
satisfaction of all the enemies of freedom, and by
the sorrow of all its friends —(Wear, hear.)—The
practical question was, why we had not stopped
those persons in our own ports ? But the defence
was, that they had left this under false pretences,
and had sailed for Terceira before we could stop
them, or knew anything about it. Was this so, or
was sufficient time allowed Government to be aware
of their intentions ? If there was anything of cor-
rectness in the dates, Government had ample time ;
for on the 20th of December the Marquis of Barba-
cena gave notice to the Duke of Wellington that it
wa• their intention to proceed to Terceira, and a
correspondence of a fortnight took place, the one
urging his right to go to that place, the other deny-
ing it.—(Hear, hear.)—The course of Go-
vernment, he contended, had been to endeavour
to induce the Emperor of Brazil to sacrifice
Donna Maria to the Usurper of her rights,
and the enemy of her branch of the family.
He did not envy France and the Netherlsnds the
glory they had acquired by their conduct to those
individuals; but he regretted that England had been
found wanting in those qualities which were consi-
dered peculiarly her own. Unbend England could
never be more than a secondary power.—(Cheers.)
—She never could maintain her ascendancy—and
he spoke not of the vain ascendancy secured by
conquests and bloodshed, but of that secured by the
buoyancy of her principles—unless she placed her-
self in the vau of liberal opinions. Then would
she rise to her native seat, which was in the front of
the enlightened portion of Europe. Great hopes
had been formerly entertained that, by the influence
of England, nations already in the career of freedom
might have been assisted, and others might be led
into the same glorious course. It had been hoped
that Austria, with its vassal Thrones, and Spain
might have been set free, and that the great crime
by which Poland had been blotted from the map of
Europe might be retrieved ; but now the friends of
freedom throughout the vt orld were dismayed, and
its enemies exulted. . It was in the power of the
House to check the one, and extinguish the other
feeling; and he now called upon them to record
their opinion in agreeing to Resolutions which
touched upon a transaction which had inflicted a
greater stain upon the English character than any
he was aware of, and which every lover of his
country would wish to see wiped away.—(Loud
cheers.)— -The Right Hon. Gentleman then moved
his first Resolution.

'Cord L. GOWER feared he might be charged
with presumption in rising to address the House
immediately after the eloquent appeal which had
been made to it by the Right Hon.Genileman, but he
trusted his usual disinclination to trouble them ex-
cept in concerns connected with his office, and the
zeal which he felt for the honour of the country,
might be considered a sufficient excuse. He had
for some time looked with considerable anxiety upon
the laconic notice which had been so long on the
paper, and this was more from a conviction of his
Right Hon. Friend's talents in advocating any
question, than from apprehension of any conclusions
he might be able to draw from the papers in ques-
tion. The Right Hon. Gentleman had entered
into a subtle discussion respecting the difference be-
tween stipulated and voluntary neutrality. In this
it was unnecessary to follow him, as neutrality had
been, by his own confession, agreed upon as the
policy of the State. It had also been remarked,
that it was singular those Portuguese remained so
long in this country without having attracted the
notice of Government; but the fact was, there was
a disinclination to enter upon any obnoxious course
of proceeding respecting those unfortunate occur-
rences. He wished to supply an omission of his
Right Hon. Friend's, and to observe that the good
offices of England had been used with Spain in
favour of her refugees, and the result was that
greater time was allowed to them in the Spanish
territory. He denied that Government had dictated
to those persons where they should go. 'I hey had
only declared where they should not go. The
Right Hon. Gentleman was mistaken in stating that
Terceira was at the time under the actual govern-
ment of Donna Maria. There was a party in her
favour, and probably her adherents were much
stronger than their opponents ; but still there was a
division in the place. The Right Hon. Gentleman
bad been at great pains, but, as it seemed to him,
very unsuccessfully, to divest the persons who went
out to Terceira of a military character. The gar-
rison there had effected a military revolution, and
arms were provided for the use of these persons on
their arrival. The Right Hon. Gentleman had
spoken as if these persons were perfectly guiltless of
drawing these proceedings on themselves; and as if,
when they had once quitted the ports of England,
they were fully entitled to all the benefits of neutrality.
Did the Right Hon. Gentleman forget the three-fold
warnings of the Duke of Wellington ; and did not
their disobedience of those warnings take from the
force of the Right Hon. Gentleman's assumption ?
In the letter of the Duke of Wellington, giving the
permission to depart, the expression, " as indivi-
duals," had been employed, and the Noble Duke
much regretted the misconstruction which these
persons had put upon that expression—a miscon-
struction which the Right Hon Gentleman had also
unfortunately attached to it. He thought that in
this discussion the merits or demerits of the parties
concerned ought not to be considered. His Right.
Hon. Friend had, however, introduced them; end
the cheers given to that part of the speech convinced
him, that if the parties had been reversed—if
Donna Maria had been in possession of the Throne,
and Don Miguel had gone from this country to gain
over Terceira to his party—and if he had-been sunk
in the port of Praia, nothing- would have been said
of the matter in that House.—(Hear, hear.) He
knew it was said, both in and out of that House,
that this country had been lowered in public opinion
in Europe, by her conduct towards Portugal. The
credit -of this country was divided into a credit re-
sulting from its fluctuating internal prosperity and
power, and into one which might be called its cre-
dit abroad, depending entirely on the disposition of
this Government to make use of its reoii, ces v, hat-
ever they might be. With respect to the first he
laid nothing to do ;
and
with
i o respectseihigho he
second,
he confessed, he entertained
its worth—knowing, as he did, how much it was in-
fluenced - estimate o
by erroneous notions as to the nature of our
and
people
dillicult i‘lulac.idc,Ca as called the Liberal ourfound it to prevent, on
institutions, lie knew how greatly
the nne
that which
party from entertaining unfounded expectations,

awl on the other to defend himielf from the charge
of unwillingness to support them. That Right Hen.
Gentleman had been praised for planting the
standard of the Constitution in Portugal, and
blamed for not planting it in Spaia ; and he bad
been accused, with reference to the latter country,
of tarnishing the national honour by truckling to
France. Opinions thus unsteady and inconsistent
deserved little notice, and he cared little for that of
men who, when not able to maintain their own Go-
vernment, quarrelled with us for not expending Eng-
lish blood and treasure in its support. He must
say, that he had often heard promises of national
gratitude, but had never been happy enough to see
them paid. They might last through the brief in-
toxication of a pageant or a review, but they were
soon forgotten in the actual business of political life.
Ile believed, too, that much of the national affec-
tion, of which so much had been said, would, upon
examination, be found to smell rather strongly of
the wine casks of Oporto. The Noble Lord here
read a letter from Lord Aberdeen to the Admiralty,
dated Jan. 24, 1829, and directing that a quick
sailing vessel might be despatched to prevent the
vessels of Don Miguel from sinking or destroying
those of the emigrants.—(Hear, hear.)—His Lord-
ship added, that, in fact, additional instructions had
been sent out to the Commanders of our ships to
supply them with whatever they might want, ant
that those instructions had been fully obeyed. He
contended that these facts showed the liberal dispo-
sition of this Government in its conduct towards

them, and he asserted that, considering there was
nothing to call for the passing of the resolutions
of the Right Hon. Gentleman, helelt there was no
other course open to him but to give them a de-
cided negative. He therefore moved the previous
question.

Dr. PHILLIMORE, after paying the utmost
attention to what had fallen from the Noble Lord,
could not but feel convinced that he had declined
the real argument in the case, and had confined his
defense of the Government to the merely petty
technical parts of the subject. The Noble Lord
had misapprehended the question, which was, whe-
ther, on the papers now before the House, there was
not enough to show that this country had been
guilty of a gross violation of the laws of nations
On all the principles of those laws he feared he
must answer that question in the affirmative. Since
the reign of Charles 11. up to this time, there had
been no imputation on the public conduct of this Go-
vernment so strong as was conveyed in these papers.
Those who argued on the same side with him might
be deemed pedants in their desire to conform to the
established rules of the laws of nations; but he must
say that these laws were too strong to be shaken
with impunity. All the great writers on those laws
—all the eminent Judges who had administered
them, had agreed upon these great propositions
which he would now state. The first was—that in

time of peace it was not allowed to any State what-
ever to search, stop, or chase any vessel on the high
seas, unless that vessel had proceeded beyond these
limits which common convenience had assigned ss
the boundaries of each country. The second was,
that the above principle was to be applied in the
spirit of the strictest equality. All States
were, with reference to its operation, equal—the
smallest and the greatest were entitled to the same
protection from it. The same learned authorities
had unanimously determined the third proposition—
namely, that the ports of each country were the
same as the body of the land itself, and that in fact
they were an integral part of the country. To these
three propositions he begged to direct the attention►
of the House. There was a remarkable instance of
the adherence of this country to these principles in
the course of the last war. Every one knew how
earnest this country had been with respect to the
slave trade. During the last war an American vessel
had been detained on the coast of Africa by one of
the King's cruisers. That vessel was brought in for
adjudication, and the two countries having both pro-
hibited the trade, and the search being justified by
the fact that the two countries were at war, the
Privy Council ordered the vessel to be confiscated.
But let the House mark the difference in a time of
peace. France had agreed with us as to the pro-
priety of abolishing the slave trade, and on the coast
of Africa one of our ships found a French vessel en-
gaged in the trade. The slave ship was brought in
for adjudication; but the Court said that searching
another vessel was all very well in a state of hosti-
lity, and that this trade was undoubtedly as contrary
to humanity and justice, as it was to the laws of the
two countries; but that in a time of peace there was
no right of search existing on the high seas, and the
French ship was ordered to be restored to its owners.
The Honourable and Learned Member then quoted
from the laws of the Belgians the provision inflicting
the punishment of death on such as interfered with
the free passage of any vessel, subject or enemy, on

the high seas and cited the very distinct confirma-
tion of that rule, by the practice of all the authorities
on national laws, as stated by Bynkershoeck. The
rule of non-interference in times of peace had been
strongly laid down by Lord Stowell, who said, that
on the sea, out of the reach of cannon shot from the
shore, an universal and uninterrupted use was pre-
sumed. His Lordship had repeatedly acted on that
rule, defining the boundaries of each country to ex-
tend, as they had been settled since the introduction
of fire arms, to three miles from the shore. All the

three great principles stated by him (Dr. Phil-
limore) had received the sanction of Lord
Stowell, who had ;lain and again recognised them
in his judicial decisions, and had distinctly de-
clared that no one state had authority to search
the vessels of another if out of its own boundaries,
except in the exercise of the rights of one belli-
gerent towards another. Such being the law, he
should now briefly advert to the facts of the case.
in the first place, it was impossible not to be struck
with the want of sympathy manifested by the
Duke of Wellington with the persons to whom his

etters were addressed—he called there routed and

dispirited troops, who fled at the first sight of the
enemy. Surely the Noble Duke ought to have
recollected the ancient Treaties of Alliance which
bound the two countries together, and the recipro-
city of feeling and interest which had long existed
between them. An insult to the Sovereign had
always been esteemed an insult to the State, and,
therefore, he was justified in asserting, the usurper
of the Throne of Portugal had offered an insult to
the people of England, which it was inconsistent
with their dignity and character as a nation to bear,
In reviewing the correspondence thrown upon the
table of the [louse, he could not but consider it as
peculiarly devoid of that sympathy for the suffering
portion of the Portuguese nation, which they had a
right to expect, and which it reflected but little
credit upon the writers of those letters to refuse
them. There was to be found, however, one excep-
tion to that general tone—it was to be-found in the
letters of a Right Hon. Gentleman, who within two
years had filled the office of Prime Minister of this
country ; it reminded the reader of aneecurrenee

in the heroic ages, when a female searching for the
most splendid garments in which to adorn her per-
son for an approaching festival, found, on opening
a chest for that purpose, that one shot forth rays of
light, surpassing all the others in brilliancy—so of
the letters of Mr. Canning, he appeared to have
written as if his mind had never been accustomed
to entertain any but the just principles . of
public law—imbued with every right prin.
ciple for which the nicest Casuists and the
most subtle publicists had obtained celebrity—not a
single position contended for in the letters of that
Right Hon. Gentleman would, upon the strictest
examination, be found inconsistent with the acknow-
ledged and recognised law of Europe. Again, he
thought that the letters of the Marquis of Palmella
were likewise deserving the most actions attention,
f:rr he appeared to be fully master of the subject ;
but though he was so, he had not availed himself
of the advantages which that mastery inrested him
with to misrepresent or sophisticate—he must say
that the Marquis Pahnells rrither understated than
overstated the matter in dispute. Ile took the law
of nations to be most clear and distinct upon A.,
present question--the principle hail never been cut,

troverted, and could not he misunderstood ; it was
this—that during the war a neutral could not supply
either belligerent with arms or with other means of
carrying on hostilities ; but there was nothing in the
law of nations to prevent belligerents from purchas-
ing in the territories of neutrals arms, or whatever
else they might require. Great stress had been laid
upon the alleged fraud and secresy practised by those
Portuguese in their expedition to Terceira. On that
point he begged to challenge inquiry—he begged
that Hon. Members would look into the correspond-
ence of the Marquis Palmella, and if, after that, they
imputed to him, or to the Portuguese, the secrecy in
question, he would abandon the argument altogether.
The Marquis Palmella made no secret of the intended
expedition at all—on the contrary, throughout the
correspondence, he gave frequent and distinct notice
that such an expedition was contemplated. The
British Government had been, from the beginning,
perfectly aware of the proposed expedition, and
when it did sail it could not cause us any matter of
surprise; but then the false clearances were ad-
verted to as affording the strongest grounds of accu-
sation against the Portuguese—false clearances were
a matter of every day practice—they were amongst
the most common transactions—then the question
comes, had we a right to follow them upon the high
seas ? Lord Stowell had laid it down that a country
had a right to enforce its own navigation laws,
but that no State had a right to visit and search
the vessels of other countries on the high seas, for
the purpose of ascertaining whether or not they had
committed any violation of those laws. It was
quite clear that vessels belonging to the Portuguese
nation, thentt peace with us, had been pursued
upon tile high seas, and diverted from the purpose
upon which they had sailed. The instructions given
t the British officer upon that occasion were well-
deserving an attentive perusal he did not imagine
that the annals of civilized Europe afforded a paral-
lel to those instructions given to a commander in
time of peace. He was instructed to pursue the
vessels, to attack them, if necessary, and to prevent
those on board from effecting the purposes with
which they sailed. These instructions bore the sig-
nature of the Lords of the Admiralty—they certainly
were not responsible for the act—the Government
alone was responsible for that most gross violation
of public law—a violation of its first principles, fur-
tiler aggravated by subsequent circumstances—ii
could only find a parallel in the attempted seizure
of the Smyrna fleet belonging to the Dutch, in the
reign of Charles II.; that act of a profligate Sove-
reign, however to be condemned, was at least com-
mitted against a power with which he was in open
and avowed hostility, whereas this recent act of ours
was the act of a neutral and an ally. It was a pain-
ful consideration connected with this matter, that
the same individual should now be at the head of
the civil government of this country, who, by a
series of the most brilliant achievements, had set
Portugal free from the tyranny of the ruler of France.
It was, he repeated, much to be regretted, that his-
tory should have to record that that same individual li
who had emancipated Portugal from that tyranny
should, when at the head of the civil government of
England, do an act of cruel injustice to the people
of Portugal. 'I he transaction would be for ever a
blot upon the fair fame of this country. For these
reasons, then, he should most certainly support the
Right Hon. Gentleman, for he thought snch a case
had been made out as entitled him to support.
Mr. HARRISON BAT TLEY would oppose the
motion, for he thought the conduct of Government
was in perfect accordance with the law of nations.
Mr. T. P. COURTENAY rose amidst loud cries
of" Question !" He contended that the principle of
neutrality was not new in the present Government ;
the Government of Mr. Canning had acted upon it ;
and the present Administration had only copied it
from his. In support of that assertion he could quote
from numberless speeches of that Right Hon. Gen-
tleman to show that such had been the principle
upon which his Government had acted. There
could be no doubt that this country was in a state of
the most perfect neutrality ; and lie put it to the
House whether it would not be the grossest breach
of that neutrality, and of the law of nations, as re-
spected the conduct of neutrals, for this country to
allow any one of the belligerents to fit out here an
expedition, for the purpose of carrying on hostiliries
—if that were riot a breach of neutrality, he con-
fessed he was incapable of understanding wherein
that breach could consist. The forces were in this
country ; they were about to embark, for the pur-
poses of attack or relief, or the invasion of some part
of the disputed territory ; were they then at liberty
to make this country a port from which to embark
that which could not be called otherwise than a war-
like expedition ? It had been his lot to see, as indi-
viduale, many of the persons composing that expedi-
tion; he had likewise seen them as a Lo ly, and a
more complete body of men he had never seen. It
wee justly
and naturally that the Marquis Palmella
attached importance to their remaining at Plymouth
in a collected form, as calculated to give encourage-
ment to the party of Donna Maria; while, on the
other hand, he regarded their dispersion as likely to
bring despair and dismay among the friends of the
Princess. But the Government of this countri
was perfectly warranted in requiring that body of
men to disperse throughout the country; and it was
also perfectly warranted, on finding that they went li
to Teiceira, in resisting the wrong at tempted on
that occaeion. He was perfectly \tilling to admit
that what had happened at Terceira was an untoward
event—(A laugh)—but, on the whole, Govern-
ment could riot avoid taking the course which it had
alone. England had maintained the position which
her honour and her interests required, arid through-
out these transactions it was indisputable that the
Duke of Wellington was but following the footsteps
of Mr. Canning.
The gallery was then cleared for a division, and
strangers were for a considerable time excluded. On
its being re-opened, we found
Mr. If. TWISS addressing the House, and con-
tending that it was impossible this country could
allow itself to be made an arsenal for enabling one
portion of the subjects of a state with which it was
at peace to carry on war against another ; and still
less could it allow the British Navy to be made in-
strumental to such purposes. The Marquis Pal-
mella was a most skilful diplomatist, and had in the
course of the negotiations exerted that skill with
considerable effect. The Hon. Member then went
through the correspondence between Barbacena,
Palmella, and the Earl of Aberdeen, commenting
ass each sentence as he proceeded, and contending,
that it was impossible for the Government to act
otherwise than it had done at the time the expedi-
tion sailed for Terceira. If a different course had
seen taken with respect to the expedition, we
should have laid ourselves open, in his opinion, to be
charged with connivance in the transaction.
Lord J. RUSSELL spoke to order. The Hon.
Gentleman appeared to him to have been reading a
speech. He did riot know whether that was the
case—but if so it was certainly against the rules of
the House.—(Hear.)
Mr. TWISS certainly had not been reading his
speech. It was true that in the coufee of the day
he had turned the matter over in his mind, and had
made rather copious notes on the subject—(Cheers)
—at the same time he begged to state, that he never
was aware that he should have occasion to address
the House without adopting a similar course.
Lord SANDON would defy any lawyer to stand
up in that House and say this country was justified
in the attack it made upon rite Portuguese on their
way to Terceira. It seemed tc he contended, that
because we gave a triple warning, we had a right to
interfere; but what business had we to make use of
the term " allow ;" we did not say so with respect
to Russia or France; indeed very little was this
Government in the habit of ug such term,. to
Powers that were able to defend themselves-.
(Hear, hear.)—lt was only to an unprotected in 1.
vidual, like the Marquis of Palmella, that- such
course was adopted. If the Portuguese hads
aisted in lauding, and our ships had sunk them, what
would have been the cry then ?—(Hear hear.)—
ae must confess that he felt that a blot had been

thrown on the character of England by the course
that had been adopted.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL—The Govern-
ment of this country was not only justified, but was
called on by every principle of the law of nations, to
prevent armed troops going from this country to
Terceira. The Portuguese Minister always treated
them as troops; and this was also shown by Gene-
ral Stubbs going to Plymouth, and addressing them
as such. If we had not interfered Don Miguel
would have bad a right to say that we were pre-
paring an armed force on the shores of this country
for the purpose of attacking his territories. The
question simply was, whether the circumstances
were such as to justify us sending the force off Ter-
ceira ? The law of nations required them to pre-
vent an armament going from their shores, and
therefore they were justified in preventing the thing
being accomplished by fraud. The troops not
choosing to disperse, it was agreed that they should
go to the Brazils, and the clearances were for Rio.
In the course of the affair the conduct of this Go-
vernment had nothing in it ambiguous or doubtful;
and he wished he could say that the same course
had been pursued by the Marquis of Palmella. No-
tice was sent to the Marquis of Palmella to say that
any attempt to reach Terceira would be resisted;
and, therefore, it was quite evident that the Portu-
guese were made acquainted with what the inten-
tions of this Government were. The Marquis,
therefore, wantonly placed himself in a situation of
danger—either expecting that he would escape our
ships altogether, or that they would not venture to in-
terrupt the progress of his followers. If these troops
, had been permitted to reach Terceira, would this
country stand as it now (lid in the face of Europe ?
He contended that it would have been quite impos-
sible for this country to have justified itself to Eu-
rope at large ; while now the conduct of this country
was irreproachable, and its neutrality undeniable.
Sir JAMES MACINTOSH had naturally ex-
pected that the Solicitor-General would have fa-
voured them with some precedent, treaty, or axiom,
to justify what he (Sir J. Macietosli) could call
nothing less than an act of lawless violence.—(Hear,
hear.)—The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had
stated that it was justified because a fraud had been
committed. This seemed to him to be the only
ground of justification that was worthy of a moment's
attention. But the weight of this argument, if it
had any, was that, when once fraud had been com-
mitted, every violence and aggression was justifiable.
—(Hear.)—Was this true in International Law ?
Was it true in Municipal Law ? Was it adjudged
by any decided cases ? He defied any lawyer,
however subtle or acute, to cite any one instance
that could bear out so monstrous a proposition.—
(Hear.)—The general rule on this subject, the
maxim that was always relied on, was, not only that
you are not to make war on a friendly territory, but
you are not to make war in neutral territory, or in
that high sea which is the common road of nations,
and is a neutral territory to all. You were excluded
from a friendly and a neutral territory, and could
only make 'war on an enemy's territory. This was
the doctrine laid down by Bynkershoeck. This did
not justify any act of hostility committed in the
waters of a neutral Power; on the contrary, it ex-
pressly forbade any such act. It was a maxim of
the law of nations, that one belligerent was not even
to attack another within gun-shot of a neutral terri-
tory. Every page of the Law of Nations expressly
forbade any such acts of hostility. These maxims
had on that occasion only been opposed by some
general reasoning, and general reason not employed
to diminish the horrors of war, not to set bounds to
extermination, but to justify extending it further than
it has ever before been extended. To such general
reason he would give an answer from the highest
authority, not from any reasoning of his own, but
from the very highest authority England possessed
on such subjects, and he need hardly add, that he
meant the authority of Lord Stowel. The Right
Honourable Gentleman quoted the opinion of
Lord Stowel, as delivered in the case of the
rladoyenn, to be found in the 2d vol. of Sir Chri-
stopher Robinson's Reports, to show that general
reasoning could not justify any act that fell within
the law of nations, but that it must be also justified
by the received practices of nations, to which it must
conform. The law of nations had, in fact, no other
foundation than the practices of nations, and no act
that did not conform to those practices could be
valid. Ile would not, on that occasion, run a race
for the prize of paradox with the Hon. Member for
Wootten Basset, he would rely upo❑ the authority
of Bynkershoeck, that these laws were not deter-
mined by reason alone, but by rationa et usa. He
contended that the laws of nations were determined
by the usages of the civilised nations of Europe.
The Right Hon. Gentleman illustrated this view by
i eferring to a case in which some of the powers of
India were surprised to find their property protected
by the laws of European nations, contrary to their
own usages. It was necessary to adhere to those
rules and practices, and not make others. By a pro-
cess of reasoning they must be adopted as they had
been practised, though they might sometimes be re-
strictions on ourselves. The argument of his Right
Hon. Friend the Vice-President of the Board of
Trade was, that we had a right of war against Por-
tugal ; and having that right of war, his Right Hon.
Friend had contended that we had a right to carry
it into execution as we had done at Terceira. But
had we ever demanded reparation of the Sovereign
who was said to have injured us ? If that demand
had been made, and reparation refused, then we
might go to war. In this case the insult was
offered by a Minister; and what a state would the
world be in if every error of a Minister were made
a ground of war, without first asking for reparation
from the Sovereign. He would not vindicate the
Marquis of Palmella from any of those accusations
which had driven that Nobleman to the frontier of
propriety ; but he would say, that the conduct of
those parties in England had nothing to do with the
conduct of the English Government at Terceira. The
Right Hon. Gentleman then observed, that for two
months all the exertions of the Marquis of Palmella
and Count hayabana were employed to prevent those
troops going to Terceira. With reference to our re-
lations with Don Miguel, he would remind the
House that there was a Revolution in Portugal in
1668, arid that then Don Pedro dethroned his
brother, Don Alphonzo, and Charles 11. refused to
acknowledge the Usurper for upwards of twelve
years. There was a better extract, written by Sir
Leonine Jenkins, in 1680, which stated the reasons
why the Sovereign of England would not recognise
Don Pedro, and those reasons were that the King
had not yet received sufficient information as to the
legality of his possession of the Throne, and that
there were certain circumstances in his family his-
tory, which were not so well explained as to au-
thorise Charles 11. to acknowledge him ; and that
his Majesty of England must be satisfied on all those
points before he could recognise the regal authority
of Don Pedro. Charles 11. was, perhaps, too
scrupulous, for Don Pedro did not appear to be a
person who was admitted into the club of Monarchs,
and who would be blackballed by every club of
gentlemen in Europe. He could conceive nothing
worse for legitimate Monarchy than that those who
exercise its high functions should be of so bad a
private character that 110 gentlemen of Europe
would associate with them. Don Pedro was not
accused of being a tyrant. There was no Marquis
Louie, and no story of the floor of a palace stained
with Noble blood. It was never charged against
Don Pedro the Second that he had been engaged
in a parricide rebellion, and had accepted a pardon
for a parricide in the face of all Europe. Great
Britain, too, had not engaged herself to give any
support to the party of Don Alphonso. She
had not promised them assistance; nor envou-
, raged them to make an attack on Don Pedro. Don
Alphonso had never been taught to look to
her for support. There was another difference
also. It was not charged against the Usurper of
the seventeenth century, that lie had insinuated
himself into the confidence of the King of Great
Britain, and had practised the foulest frauds on him,
riot in the character of a diplomatist, for that might

be excused, but in the character of a gentleman ;
lie had not inveigled himself into the confidence of
the King of Great Britain, and, by promises that
he never meant to perform, so been permitted to
return to Portugal ; he had not abused that con-
fidence; he had not vouched for his awn good con-
duct, and obtained the support of pecuniary credit
to establish himself in Portugal. The Don Pedro
of the 17th century had been guilty of none of these
frauds, worthy only of a man of the most despicable
character. Don Miguel had insulted the King of
Great Britain, and he was perfectly convinced that
the King of Great Britain would have found him-
self called on personally to resent it, had he not
been prevented by his high station. His Majesty
not being allowed the privileges of private life, his
subjects were bound to revenge the insults offered
to him. He did not say that the character of D.)n
Miguel could give us any reason to interfere, but it
was a great aggravation of the usurpation that the
usurper was a monster. It was an old saying of a
pithy English writer—who was not, however, very
popular—that no man declared against reason, till
reason had declared against him. This was the
case with many of his opponents. They could find
in all the laws of nations not one precedent to justify
the affair of Terceira, and now they turned round
and decried the laws of nations. An able writer
who had treated this subject with a view to justify
the conduct of Government, had said that he would
not refer to the laws of nations, which meant that
they all condemned the proceeding. So (lid he.
He considered that the conduct of the British Go-
vernment off Terceira was a most flagrant breach of
the law of nations.

Mr. CROKER said that the Right Hon. Gentle.
man had censured his Hon. and Learned Friend for
treating this subject with levity, but he thought the
Right lion. Gentleman had not observed a becom-
ing and serious gravity. He said too, that he would
treat it with legal ratiocination, but he had conjured
up a bloody usurper, and robed him in the most
odious colours, to enlist the sympathies of the House,
and make reason be disregarded. There was, how-
ever, the highest authority for saying that the cha-
racter of one of two belligerents ought not to in-
fluence the conduct of a neutral. The Hon. Member
read a passage from Bynkershoeck, stating this fact.
The supporters of the motion contended that there
was nothing in the history of the Law of Nations
which justified the course pursued by his Majesty's
Government. The Portuguese refugees were re-
ceived in this country from motives of humanity ;
but when they began to organize and arm them-
selves, they were not only dangerous to our own
peace, but it would have been an infraction of our
neutrality to Don Miguel to have allowed them to
proceed. All that they were asked to do was, to
divest themselves of their military character and to
disperse ; but this the Count Palmella refused, on
the ground that he should then lose the hold he had
upon the apprehensions of the usurper. He had a
perfect right to say so—but we had also a perfect
right to say, " Then you must go away." We should
not have been justified, however, in permitting them
to go away otherwise as they came. They came as
individuals, and as individuals alone could they be
allowed to depart. From the first moment it was
evident that their object was to make an attack
on the island of Terceira. He said an attack—
for the citadel at Angra was the only spot on the
island that was at that time loyal to Donna
Maria. To Angra, therefore, they sent the arms,
and the men were to follow. The supporters of the
motion had said they should be glad to hear a
defence of the act of following those unfortunate
persons over the seas. Who first proposed to send
our ships to sea for the purpose of taking any part in
the proceeding ? The Marquis Barbacena. He pro-
osed that we should send a cormy with the Portu-
guese,- which would have been as great a violation of
neutrality as could be imagined. This proposition was
rejected by the Duke of Wellington. By whom
was an extraordinary interference on the part of
England again proposed ? By the Marquis Pal-
mella. He asked for a guarantee. The Duke of
Wellington agreed to give a convoy, but on condi-
tion that they went to Rio Janeiro. Subsequently,
however, the Marquis Palmella was led to exchange
a convoy for a guarantee. Now as a guarantee was
ranch the less efficient protection, he (Mr. Croker)
would have been at a loss to understand why the
Marquis Palmella preferred it, but for the following
circumstance :—ln a daily paper published in Lon-
don, and called the Times, there was inserted on
the 10th of December, 1829, an article which let
him (Mr. Croker) into the whole secret. Whether
it had been suggested by the Marquis Palmella to
the Editor of the Times, or whether it was the sug-
gestion of that ingenious gentleman's own mind, he
did not know, but the article was as follows :
" But there is a current report that the English Go-
vernment insist upon escorting the transports with
a squadron, in order to prevent them from attacking
the island of Terceira." This was on the 10th of
December; and a few days after the Marquis Pal-
mella refused the convoy, and asked for the gua-
rantee. The impression on the Duke of Welling.
ton's mind, however, had been, that the object from
the first was Terceira; and he was determined that
what they could not do honestly, they should not
do by trick or fraud. This was no hardship. De-
parting from what might be called strict neutrality,
his Grace, with statesman-like humanity, had per-
mitted those unfortunate persons to fluid an asylum
on our shores; but was he therefore to permit them,
under the semblance of a peaceful return home, to
carry bloodshed into an island in which civil war
prevailed ? As it was, one life had been lost : if a
contrary course had been pursued, the consequence
might have been the loss of hundreds and thousands
of lives, in Portugal as well at Terceira.
Mr. CHARLES WOOD rose amidst cries of
" Question." The Hon. Member briefly supported
the motion.

Sir FRANCIS BURDETT rose, and was some
time before he could be heard, for the cries of
" Question." The Hon. Baronet strongly compli-
mented his Hon. Friend opposite (MCI R. Grant)
for his motion, and contended that the Secretary of
the Admiralty had argued the question upon a very
narrow foundation. The question was not only
whether this country had a right to act as she had
dome, but whether it was just and magnanimous to
use that right. The use of a right sometimes in-
flicted a great wrong. England owed her liberties
to the Dutch having behaved more liberally to her
patriots formerly than the English have now behaved
to the Portuguese lovers of freedom. In conclu-
sion, he hoped the Government would express, by
the vote of that night, their indignation of the con-
duct which had been pursued towards these unfor-
tunate individuals.

Mr. Secretary PEEL said it had been decided
that a strict neutrality should he observed, and con-
tended that it had never been infringed. Whenever
Don Miguel, who was Governor of Portugal de
facto, displayed a disposition to violate the engage-
ments subsisting between England and that country,
even so far as regarded the rights of an individual,
he had been threatened with force; and consequently
when they enforced the strict performance of trea-
ties on the one hand, they were bound to maintain
a perfect neutrality on the other. When the Mar-
quis Barhacena requested permission to send out
arms and ammunition, he distinctly declared, in an-
swer to the Foreign Secretary, that they were
intended for Brazil. After the declaration thus
made, the arms and ammunition were taken to
Terceira ; arid would any one, after such a positive
breach of a solemn declaration, which, indeed, lie
might call a positive protnise or engagement, affect
to say that this Government should have suffered
itself to be deceived by the empty pretence of send-
lug out these men as private and unarmed individuals,
the arms and ammunition being already provided
for them in the stores at Terceira, The opinions of
Jurists had been referred to, and the judgments of
Lord Stowell had been cited with a triumphant but
useless display of learning on this question. Surely
the Hon. and Learned Member who had referred to
that Noble Lord's opinion ought to have recollected
that, in one of the very cases mentioned, that Noble

Lord had distinctly declared that any persons who
made use of a neutral country for. the purpose of fit-
ting out a warlike armament, to be directed against
a country with which that neutral was at peace,
were guilty of a breach of neutrality which subjected
them to be followed and stopped on the high seas.
Besides this, all men were agreed that the commis-
sion of any fraud upon a Government by strangers re-
siding in the country, and practising that fraud with
a view to prepare a military armament, was an act
that entitled the Government against which it was
committed to adopt a course of war against the
offenders, and to treat them as enemies, by practising
the right of chasing and searching the vessels in
which their warlike stores were contained. In this
instance the whole conduct of these persons had
been such as justly to subject them to such treat-
ment. They had made representations that were
untrue—they had entered into engagements which
they had not kept ; and in short they had attempted
to practise a fraud on the Government of the
country where they had received the rites of
hospitality. On their heads, therefore, and not
on the head of any one of his Majesty's Ministers,
ought the consequences of these transactions to be
visited. He denied altogether that Mr. Canning's
authority was in support of the principle for which
Hon. Gentlemen opposite contended. They had
now been for fifteen years at peace, and before
many years more should pass away, they would pro-
bably find themselves engaged in hostilities with
every Power in Europe successively, if they allowed
other doctrines to govern their conduct than those
which his Majesty's advisers had adopted on the
occasion then under discussion. He therefore hoped
the House would join him in rejecting the proposi-
tion of the Right Hon. Gentleman.
Mr. STANLEY supported the motion; as did
Mr. HUSKISSON, who accused the Right
Hon. Gentleman who spoke last but one, of aban-
doning his legal case, having no ground upon which
to stand; for he was compelled most unequivocally
to admit, that in the present case they were com-
pelled to make a law, as no precedent could be
found in that law of nations which it was so much
the pride and glory of England to uphold, and of
which her navigation laws forming a part, or at least
being closely connected with it, she was so much
interested in preserving in all its purity and excel-
lence. The Right Hon. Gentleman had imagined
that the authority of Mr. Canning might be brought
in support of the views which he felt convenient
to lay before the House on the present occasion.
On a memorable debate, respecting the Alien Act,
in which Mr. Canning took a leading and remark-
able part—when the Right Hon. Gentleman was
the colleague of Mr. Canning, and by adopting his
language, made himself responsible for it equally
with the rest of his colleagues—on that occasion,
Mr. Canning had said that yachts might sail from
this country—that steam vessels might sail from any
destination they thought proper, and that arms
might be exported as a matter of merchandize—
that the whole of this might proceed so long as it
proceeded separately. It was in the combination
that that offence lay, which brought it within the
purview of the law. Surely in the case of the
Portuguese refugees, there could have been no
combination of arms and of men, for the purpose
of an attack upon any part of the dominions of
Portugal. The Right Hon. Gentleman then pro-
ceeded to reply to some of the observations of the
Under Secretary for the Colonial Department, and
concluded by expressing his readiness to support the
Motion.

Mr. C. GRANT replied, and the House divided;
when there appeared—

For the Motion 7S
Against it l9l
Majority —ll3
The other Orders of the Day were then dis-
posed of, and the House adjourned at Four o'clock.