The Sun.
London, England, 1830-05-25 00:00:00

GREECE.

Sir R. PEEL brought up and laid upon the table, by
command of his Majesty, papers relating to Greece. In
moving (he said) that they do lie upon the table, I feel it
my duty, as the House has had no opportunity of becoming
acquainted with the contents of the papers, not only to ab-
stain from any discussion upon them, but from all refer-
ence to them. It may be convenient, however, to state
shortly what are the transactions to which they refer.
They may be divided under three heads—l. Protocols
from the date of the signature of the Treaty bstween'this
country, France, and Russia, on the 6th of July, 1827,
to the 14th of the present month-2. Protocols of Con-
ferences which took place at Constantinople, between the
Ministers of the Allied Powers and the Porte, from the pe-
riod of the signature of the Treaty to that of the departure
of the Ministers of the Allied Powers from the Turkish
capital—three documents relating to these transactions,
not immediately connected with the execution of the
Treaty, but still growing out of it, and which Parliament
expressed a desire to have an opportunity of inspecting-
Those tbr.-e transactions are—l. The Convention con-
cluded at Alexandria by Sir E. Codriagton, for the evacu-
ation of the Morea ; 2. Papers relating to the blockade
of the Dardanelles by Russia, and to the circumstances
connected with it; 3. Documents regarding the raising
of the Greek blockade at Patras. I feel it my duty also
to state, that the expectations entertained by his Ala-
h signified to his Majesty's
to
jesty's Government that his Royal Highness Prince Leo-
pold would become the Sovereign of Greece, have been
disappointed,nGovernment
his determination m
relinquish the trust he
had undertaken. All the papers connected with the ac-
ceptance of the trust, and with its resignation, will be
presented to the House in the course of a few days. Until
and
tiathe
the House is in possession of the requisite information, it
will be much better for me to abstain from all observation.
—(I-fear, hear.)
Mr. BROUGHAM bad heard without the least sur-
prise what had just fallen from the Right lion. Gentleman,
for, from certain tokens that he had observed, he was pre-
pared to expect it. He would, for the present, abstain
from further observations, as the papers were not in the
hands of Hon. Members. Those documents, as the
House would see, were very voluminous ; but if the short
account which he should read was to be relied on, though
the documents presented large masses, yet, upon exami-
nation, they would be found larger than the question re-

quire& It was Ms opinion that that question would be
found within a narrow compass ; narrow, however, as
it might be, he thought, perhaps, that the most advan-
tageous course was not to raise any discussion, until the
House had time to consider the information laid before
them.

Mr. HUME Wished to inquire of the Right Hon.
Gentleman opposite, if those papers contained any in-
formation relative to the sums which this country might
be engaged for, arising out of those transactions.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL wished to put two questions
relative to the difference between Prince Leopold and the
Allied Powers—it was said, that there were some points
of difference between them on the subject of a loan—some
bartering about money. Now rumours of that nature
must be injurious to the honour and character of the Illus-.
trious Personage in question, and, therefore, it was ma-
terial that the matter should be set right with the world.
It was also said that the proposed territorial limits of
Greece formed matter of dispute. Now, he wished to

know which of these, or whether it was on both, that the
difference arose that brought about the unfortunate termi-
nation of those uegociationl?
Sir ROBERT PEEL said he laid the documents on

the table of the House; that in doing so he thought it his
duty to state what they were, but strictly to avoid any
comments upon them until they should be in the hands
of Hon. Members. He thought he was bound to observe
that course in fairness to the House, and to the parties in-
terested, he being now acquainted with their contents,
and other Hon. Members not having that advantage. As
to the questions which had been asked of him, he should
willingly reply to them, but in doing so he wished to
avoid all discussion. In answer to the question of the
Hon. Member for Aberdeen, he bad to state that full in-
formation would be found in those papers respecting the
pecuniary engagements of this country, as they were set
forth in the detailed account of those negociations now
upon the table of the House. The Noble Lord opposite
inquired if any differences respecting loans, or any points
of disagreement relative to the proposed territorial limits
of Greece, formed any part of the grounds on which the
negociations were broken off. On a former occasion he
stated that all the great points had been settled, which,
up to that time, had been rained between the Allies and
Prince Leopold. He understood since, however, that
points of difference arose which were of a pecuniary na-

ture. As to the second ques:ion, he was unprepared
now to give it an answer, as he was when he last ad--
dressed the House. The House, he repeated, would be
in possession of the papers before four-and-twenty hours,
and then, but not until then, he should consider that they
were in a condition to discuss the question.
. . _ _

Mr. AGAR ELLIS was desirous of knowing whe-
ther it was information recently received from Greece
that decided Prince Leopold in breaking off those nego-
ciations.

Sir R. PEEL said, that in the communications

tween Prince Leopold and his Majesty's Government, his
Royal Highness stated, that in despatches received from
Greece, he certainly had received information which had

decided his conduct on the matter of his resignation.
Mr. BROUGHAM adverted to what fell from his
Noble Friend behind him, in which the resignation of
Prince Leopold was spoken of as unfortunate, now he con-
fessed lie considered it as anything but unfortunate. He
should rejoice in anything calculuted to promote the ho-
nour and glory of that Illustrious Personage, but he could
not held considering it as an excellent thing, that by that
resignation this country was enabled to avoid the entangle-
ment which the acceptance of that Sovereignty might
eventually have brought about.
Sir R. PEEL recommended the postponement of any
further discussion until Hon. Members were in possession
of the papers.
Lord J. RUSSELL explained—he wed the term unfor-
tunate in the usual way in which that' term was applied to
negociations terminating unsuccessfully.
THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE.

Lord MILTON rose to present a petition from British
settlers and others resident at the Cape of Good Hope,
praying for a Representative Government.—(At the mo-
ment his Lordship rose the House was pretty full, owing
to the interest excited by the topics previously under con-
sideration, and when the conversation respecting Greece
was at an end, so many Members left the House, that the
confusion and noise which prevailed prevented his Lord-
ship from being audible for a considerable time.)—After
calling the attention of the House to the importance of the
question which the petition raised, the respectability of the
parties petitioning, and the obligation there lay upon the
Legislature to protect the inhabitants of that colony from
the effects of arbitrary power ; he proceeded to say that
he considered the arbitrary imposition of taxes as one of
the most objectionable exertions of arbitrary power. The

petition which he held in his hand was from British set-

tiers, who desired to carry with them to the colonies
where they settled the privileges which they left behind
them in their native country, and which they were accus-
tomed to enjoy before they left it. He did not call upon
the House to institute any proceedings immediately for the
purpose of complying with the prayer of the petitioners,
but he hoped that they would, at some future time, and
not very distant, take it into their serious consideration.

Sir GEORGE MURRAY said the petition, the House
would perceive, came from only a portion of the colony,
and from that portion, too, in which slavery did not exist
—And that made a material difference—indeed there was
no country where slavery existed in which the expediency
of introducing a Representative Legislature might not
most seriously be doubted. The state of that colony,
likewise, with reference to population and civilization,
ought also to be taken into account. The extent of the
colony was nearly equal to that of the United Kingdom—
about 600 suites long and 300 wide. The colonists
amounted to only 119,996 souls. A population so scat-
tered, and in all respects circumstanced as they were,
could but poorly exercise theprivileges and powers of re.
presentation. Again, they were made up of Dutch and
British, and if they had a Legislature, that body would
be divided into two parties—the Dutch party and the Bri •
tish party—and thus one of the most important benefits
of representation would be counteracted. Another objec-
tion t• the introduction of the representative system was,

that were it once established, all the power would speedily
centre in the hands of those who resided in and near Cape
Town, for those who resided at a distance would never
think public affairs worth such a journey.
After a few words from Mr. Wilmot Horton, Mr. Mar-
ry.at, Mr. Wna. Smith, and Mr. Labouchere,
Mr. HUME said he was sorry to hear the Secretary
for the Colonies say that there was no hope of a Represen-
tative Government at the Cape until slavery was abolished
—when did he expect that slavery would be abolished—
what had he done towards forwarding that object? He
resisted representation on the ground that the population of
the Cape was scattered ; but did he remember the colony
of Upper Canada, where the population was scattered,
where the system existed, and where it worked well ? No
objection could be less valid than that. Further, he was
at a loss to see upon what just principle they could tax the
people at the Cape without representation. There was no
check arising from public opinion in that colony—the only
check of that nature was to be found in the influence of
public Opinion in this country. If they wished the colony
to be no expence to England, they ought to give it a local
Legislature—an advantage to which it was justly entitled
in every sense of the word.

Dr. LUSHINGTON agreed with the Secretary for the
Colonies that at the present moment it would not be at all
convenient to attempt a Representative Government at the
Cape. He begged to offer his thanks to the Secretary for
the Colonies, for the wise, humane, and 'statesmanlike
measure, which placed the Hottentots upon the same foot-
ing as British subjects.

Sir G. MURRAY, in justice to his predecessors, was
bound to state, that though the full completion of the
measure for improving the condition of the Hottentots
took place while he held the seals of office, yet that the
first steps had been taken during the Government of Lord
Caledon, and the work was advanced under Gen. Burke.
Mr. ROBINSON was decidedly of opinion that free in-
stitutions ought to be given to the settlers at the Cape, and
to all other colonists, as soon as they were fit to receive
them, and capable of appreciating their value. He by no
means understood the Noble Lord as recommending the
immediate adoption of a measure such as the petitioners
prayed for—all he urged upon the consideration of the
House was, the necessity of speedily turning their attention
to the subject, and taking such preliminary steps as might
forward the object in view.

Mr. WILMOT HORTON explained.
The petition was then brought up and read. It ap-
rated to he from the Btitish settlers, agriculturists, and
others, resident at the Cape of Good Hope.
Lord MILTON, in moving that it be printed, was
sorry to learn that an improved system of Government at
the Cape was to be postponed until slavery should be
abolished.

Sir G. MURRAY wished the House to analyse the com-
position of society at the Cape. The number of females
was 55,000, males 64,000; from those deduct the slaves,
the Dutch, the Hottentots, and the persons under age;
and the number of British colonists capable of exercising
the elective franchise would be found exceedingly small.
Mr. lIUME observed, that persons of Dutch descent
resident at the Cape were as much British subjects as any
men c,mld he.

The petition Was ordered to be printed. •
Mr. J. RUSSELL presented a petition from Kinsale,

against the further increase of Stamp Duties in Ireland.
To lie on the table.

FORGERY.

Mr. BROUGHAM presented petitions against the
punishment of death for the crime of Forgery, from New-
port, in the Isle of Wight, Stockton-upon-Tees, Wake-
field, and a district in the West Riding of Yorkshire.—
To lie on the table.
Mr. BROUGHAM had next a petition to present,
which, as he considered it of peculiar importance, he would
solicit the attention of the House to circumstances which,
in his opinion, imparted considerable weight to that peti-
tion. The petition was signed by bankers, and none but
bankers ; they were residents of 214 cities and towns within
Great Britain; there were '735 individual signatures of
• persons who were either bankers themselves or Directors
of Joint Stock Banking Companies. At an average of
three and a half partners to each firm, there were 233
firms consenting to that petition ; if the names, then, were
added of those whose consent might be implied from the
fact of their partners having signed it, it might be asserted
that upwards of 1,000 bankers had signed the petition.
The total number of bankers had been estimated at from
twenty to four and twenty hundred, therefore they had
actually the names of one half of the bankers ; that they
had not more was not owing to a majorityof the body being
favourable to a continuance of the punishment of death.—
Of those who refused their signatures, several gave some
such reason as this—that they had signed other petitions
in another capacity ; some of them declined on the
ground of their being junior members of firms, and
that from considerations of delicacy towards their
seniors, they were unwilling to give expression to
their own opinions ; others declined from other mo-
tives, which had nothing to do with a desire to continue
the punishment of death ; and here he would observe,
that amidst all the petitions against that punishment they
had not one in its favour. With the present petition the
bankers of London had nothing to do. The Bank of Eng-
land declined to support the petition, and some who took
a lead amongst the London bankers, also declined to sup-
port ; it but he believed, if the sense of that body could be
ascertained, it would be found that the majority was in
favour of abolishing the punishment. He anderstood that
his Hon. Friend the Member for Limerick would that
night present a petitionto the same effect from the bankers
of Ireland. Having now called their attention to the
grounds upon which he thought the petition entitled to
great consideration, he should (remembering that a discus-
sion upon the question generally was to take place that
evening) not trouble them further than to move that the
petition be brought up.
The petition was then brought up and read. It was
as follows
To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Ireland in Parliament assembled,
" The petition of the undersigned bankers, established in the
cities and towns of Edinburgh, Dublin, Glasgow, Manchester,
Liverpool, Chester, Belfast, Birmingham, Lichfield, Wednes-
bury, Bilston, Dudley, Wolverhampton, Bristol, Bath, Leith,
Huddersfield, Midfield, Wakefield, Dewsbury, Leeds, Ply.
mouth, Devonport, Tavistock, Portsmouth, Norwich, Shef-
field, Rotherham, Nottingham, Sunderland, Newcastle-on-
Tyne, Durham, Darlington, Stockton, Richmond, Leyburn,
Ripon, Knaresborough, I3oroughbridge, Thirsk, Aberdeen,
Paisley, Tiverton, Collumpton, Honiton, Barnstaple, Ilfra-
combe, Bideford, Torrington, Totness, Newton-Abbott, Exeter,
York, Yarmouth, Beccles, Stockport, Wigan, Worcester, Eves-
ham, Ipswich, Needharn-Market, Woodbridge, Hadleigh, Man-
ningtree, Banbury, Shipston, Leicester, Oxford, Carlisle, Brigh-
ton, Lewes, Reading, Maidenhead, Henley, Windsor, Lyme-Re-
gis, Canterbury, Lancaster, Chelmsford, Winchester, Southamp-
ton, Bury St. Edmund's, Guildford, Kendal, Chippenham, Salis-
bury, Ringwood, Poole, Bradford, Halifax, Wakefield, Ponte-
fract, Doncaster, Barnsley, Derby, Inverness, Burton-on-Trent,
Leighton-Buzzard, Newport-Pagnel, Burslem, Hitchi n, Bedford,
Newbury, Abingdon, Wallingford, Uxbridge, Wisbeach, Truro,
Falmouth, Penzance, llelston, Penrith, Kirkby Sluice, Work-
ington, Chesterfield, Teignmouth, Kingsbridge, Darmouth,
Bridport, Yeovil, Dorchester, Blandford, Harwich, Saffron
Walden, Tewkesbury, Cheltenham, Cirencester, Tetbury,
Farringdon, Burford, Dursley, Romsey, Basingstoke, Odi-
ham, Hereford, Ross, Duckenfield, Leominster, Ledbury,
Royston, Hemel Hempstead, Gloucester, Stroud, Dart.
mouth, Ramsgate, Margate, Deal, Boston, Spalding, South
Spilsby, Horncastle, Staines, Newport onmoutlishire),
Monmouth, Chepstow, Diss, Northampton, Towcester, Wel-
lingborough, Daventry, Vellington (Shropshire), Shill:
nall, Colebrookdale, Bridgenorth, Wenlock, Trowbridge.
Wells, Frome, Wiveliscombe, Wellington (Somersetshire),
Taunton, Leek Congleton, Halesworth, Sudbury, Stowmarket,
Reigpte, Croydon, Dorking, Rye, Hastings, Kirby Lonsdale,
Swindon, Malmesbury, Marlborough, Melksham, Devizes,
Stourbridge, Skipton, Settle, Selby, Howden, Scarborough,
Malton, Whitby, Pontipool, Abergavenny, Brecon, Carmar-
then, Swansea, Neath, Haverfordwest, Annan, Cupar, Auch-
termuchty, Dumbarton, Elgin, Forfar, Galashiels, edburg,
Kirkcaldy, Wigton (Scotland.)
Showeth,—That your petitioners, as bankers, are deeply in-
terested in the protection of property from forgery, and in the
conviction and punishment of persons guilty of that crime.
" That your petitioners find by experience that the infliction
of death, or even the probability of the infliction of death, pre-
vents the prosecution, conviction, and punishment of the cri-
minal, and thus endangers the property which it is intended to
protect.
"That your petitioners therefore pray that your Honourable
House will not withhold from them that protection which they
would derive from a more lenient law."

Sir ROBERT PEEL requested the House to suspend
its judgment till the facts were fairly before them.
The petition was ordered to be printed. -
_ .....

Dr. LUSHINGTON presented petitions to the same
effret from Stockton, Macclesfield, Bristol, Spalding,
Holstein, Wooburn, Reading, Farringdon, Haverly, and
a place in Kent.—Ordered to lie on the table.