The Sun.
London, England, 1837-04-20 00:00:00

General of very great experience. He did not recollect
the exact words, but the substance was this, " that if you
interfered at all, you ought to interfere openly. If you
send an army, let it march under your national colours,
and with all the credit and weight that ought to attach to
a national army.—( Cheers.) Such an army you should
not send unless you had first taken care that it should be
provided with every necessary supply, and that you should
take care that the competent maintenance of that army
should be previously stipulated for."—(Loud cheers.)
That was the advice of an experienced French General—
advice which the Noble Lord opposite had disregarded in
every particular. The Noble Lord had forgotten to do an)
one of those things here pointed out.--( Cheers.) With re-
spect to interference, he would remind the Noble Lord of an
opinion on that subject by one whom no one could accuse of
any favourable leaning towards despotism. The President of
the United States said—" We endeavour to conduct our in-
tercourse with openness and sincerity, promptly avowing our
objects, and seeking to establish that mutual frankness which
is as beneficial in the dealings of nations as of men. We have
no disposition, and we disclaim all right, to meddle in disputes,
whether internal or foreign, that may molest other countries,
regarding them in their actual state as social communities, and
preserving a strict neutrality in all their controversies. Well
knowing the tried valour of our people, and our exhaustless
resources, we neither anticipate nor fear any designed ag-
gression ; and, in the consciousness of our own just conduct,
we feel a security that we shall never be called upon to exert
our determination never to permit an invasion of our rights
without punishment or redress." He wished that the Noble
Lord either had not interfered at all, or that he had inter-
fered with frankness and sincerity.—(Loud cheers.) It had
been loudly asserted on the other side of the House that
Don Carlos was the author of the Durango decree. They
said that Don Carlos was an assassin, and they called on the
House not to affirm a motion which they said would have the
effect of placing such a criminal upon the Spanish throne.
He must confess that that argument, coming from the other
side of the House, perfectly astonished him.--( Cheers.) Now,
it ought to- be recollected that the present Government of
Spain was not the Government that existed there at the time
of the Quadruple Treaty. The present Government of Spain
was of recent origin—it was the Constitutional Government
of Spain. 'Now if that Government was so popular in Spain
as it was represented to be, it perfectly astonished him ( Sir
W. Follett) how any motion in that House could interfere
av'th the stability of that Government. It was stated in the
course of this debate, on a former night, that William 111.
came here with a foreign army, and that the revolution was
effected by foreign interference. Now that was not the fact.
Surely the Noble Lord who had used that argument did not
mean to say that the six or eight thousand Dutchmen brought
over here by King William had any effect in the expulsion
of the Stuarts from the throne of this country. No, that re-
volution had been effected by the people of England them-
selves, and if the Spanish people desired a Constitution, or
were worthy of Constitutional liberty, they ought to be al-
lowed to earn that Constitutional liberty themselves, without
any foreign interference. They had been taunted at the
other side of the House with being the supporters and abet-
tors of Don Carlos. Now, no Hon. Member in that House
felt a greater abhorrence of those decrees and acts than he did.
He ( Sir W. Follett) was neither their abettor, their apologist,
nor their vindicator. He, for his part, felt no interest what-
ever in the success of Don Carlos. He had no sympathy
with his interests, neither did he feel any sympathy with the
existing Government. But when the atrocities of Don Carlos
were talked of, let him bring to the recollection of the House
and of the Noble Lord that his Majesty's Ministers were the
abettors of a Government in Spain which had Mina as one of
its military cernmanders—( Cheers)—and which had continued
him in his command after he had been guilty of conduct much
more atrocious and abominable than the promulgation of the
Durango decree.—( Cheers.) What he was interested in was
this, that we should put a stop to the further effusion of the
blood of our countrymen.—(Cheers.) He had an interest—
the House had-an interest—and the country had an interest—
in withdrawing our countrymen from participating in a brutal
and demoralising contest. In conclusion, he demanded of the
House no longer to permit a country which was historically
connected with England by the proudest and most glorious
recollections to become the scene of the misfortune, the dis-
grace, and dishonour of the Britith name. The Hon. and
Learned Gentleman sat down amidst great cheering.
Viscount l' A L ME RSTON rose amidst cheers from the
Opposition, which were continued for several minutes. When
silence was restored he said—l think the House will suppose
that I was only Tel forming what I conceived to be the duty
which I owe to the situation I hold, and showing that respect
which is becoming from me to the House, if I have delal;ed
till this period of the debate—( Loud cries of " Hear," filial
t! • Opposition)--to rise to address myself to the subject before
it—( Cheers)---became I consider that haring the honour to
fill the situation of Foreign Secretary—the office peculiarly
connected with the subject of the present discussion—it was
my duty to wait to hear the arguments by which the motion
would he supported before I presented myself to the attention
of the House.—( Hear, hear.) I must say that I think the
reproach which has been cast upon us by the lion. and Learned
Member for Bath (Mr. Roebuck) comes very ungraciously
from him, because he, having begin his speech by saying that
he had made up his mind not to vote at all upon the question,
could therefore have no ol,ject in hearing my speech—( Hear)
—with a view to any conduct of his upon the occasion.—
( Hear.) Therefore I think that the reason he gave at the
commencement of his speech at least exempts me from the
necessity of making any explanation to him of the reasons
which have induced me so long to delay my address to the
House upon this question.--( Hear ) I must even now—
even after the speech of the Hon. and Learned Member for
Exeter ( Sir IV. Follett), who, having been moved by a sud-
den thought in the course of the evening—( Laughter and
cheers)—has most opportunely, and I must say not without
necessity, rushed to the rescue—(Cheers)—even after that
speech, able and learned as it was, I must say that, as far
as the vote of to-night is to depend upon the arguments used
on the two sides of the House, I should be perfectly ready
to go to the vote upon the statements and arguments which
have been made by the Hon. Gentlemen who have preceded
me on this side--( Hear, hear)—and should be perfectly con-
tent to rest the judgment of this House, of this country, and
of Europe, upon the powerful aguments which have been
used on my side of the question by my Hon. and Right
Hon. Friends who sit near me, with what I must be allowed
to say, without intending any offence, the lamentable failure
of the Hon. Gentlemen who sit opposite.—(Cheers.) I say
lamentable failure, because when the character and ability
of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who has just addressed
the House has been unable to make an impression upon the
powerful speech of my Hon. and Learned Friend the Mem-
ber for the Tower Hamlets (Dr. Lushington)—(Laughter
and cheers)—l say when that Honourable and Learned
Gentleman has failed, I cannot anticipate that any aid
that may be afforded by his Learned or unlearned Friends
near him will succeed in destroying or impairing the argu-
ment of my Hon. and Learned Friend.—( Hear, hear.) I say,
then, that I think I owe no apology to any one in this House
for not having at an earlier moment addressed myself to the
subject of debate.—( Hear.) I must first of all beg to say I
regret the line of argument which the Hon. and Gallant Offi-
cer ( Sir H. Hardinge) who brought this motion forward was
induced to adopt, because it led him into a number of details
with respect to Gen. Evans and the Legion, because I know,
and I speak this really sincerely, that the Honourable and
Gallant Officer, whatever the strength of his political opinions
may be, is at heart an honourable and generous man. I re-
gret, therefore, that the line of argument to which he was
driven to have recourse for the want of any better made it ne-
cessary to string together s number of details which, whatever
the conviction under which the Gallant Officer stated them,
must have the effect of producing a powerful sensation on the
minds of the persons concerned.—( Hear.) The greater part
of the speech of the Hon. and Gallant Officer, and the chief
ground upon which he rested his motion, was the suffer-
ing of the Legion in Spain, in consequence of the defi-
ciency of the Spanish Government in providing them with
those resources which were necessary to their comfort and
well-being.—( Hear, hear.) I must do the Hon. and Gal-
lant officer the justice to say, that there was nothing in his
speech to reflect in the slightest degree upon the character
of General Evans ?—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Gallant
Officer honestly and distinctly did justice to the bravery of
General Evans in the field, and to his anxiety for the welfare
of his men; and I beg leave to say that I can bear my testi-
mony, too, to the same facts, because I have had communica-
tions with General Evans which testify the nobleness of mind
which induced him to undertake a task in which I think he
has done himself great credit.—( Hear, hear.) I can say that
it was no mercenary motive—( Hear, hear)—that it was no
mean desire of obtaining any personal advantage to himself,
beyond that which arises from the performance of an honour-
able duty, and the promotion of those great principles by
which his public conduct has been invariably guided.--( Hear,
hear, hear.) General Evans thought that by taking the
command of the Legion in Spain he should be promoting
the interests of his country, the policy of its Government—
(Loud cheers from the Opposition), and those principles which
he himself had always advocated.—( Continued cheering from
the Opposition.) Surely this could not be a new discovery
on the part of the Hon. Gentlemen opposite.—( Cheers.)
Are they really doubting whether it was the policy of the
Government that the Order in Council should be acted upon,
or do they suppose that the order was intended to be regarded
only as a dead letter, and never to be carried into effect?—
(Hear, hear.) I say, therefore, that the conduct of General
Evans did him honour, and has protected him from any im-
putation from any man or any quarter whatever.—(Hear,
hear.) It is not fitting for me to discuss with the Hon. and
Gallant Officer questions of a military kind; but I must sub-
mit to his higher judgment in these matters, whether the po-
sition in which General Evans was placed was not one of
peculiar military difficulty—( Hear, hear)—and whether ever,
he must not acknowledge that it has seldom happened that an
officer acting under such trying circumstances has conducted
himself in a manner less subject to censure. What has been
General Evans's situation? It has been that of an officer
having the command of 8,000 or 9,000 men, upon a coast
within musket shot of the enemy—of men few of whom had
ever seen each other before, who were not organized, who
had the whole process to go through of being converted
into regular and disciplined troops, and that too upon the
spot where their active and immediate services were re-
quired —(( Hear, hear.) Therefore, when Gentlemen com-
pare the discipline of the conduct of the Legion in its
earlier career with that of the more regular troops in the
King's service, I must call upon them to recollect the distinc-
tion between the cases of the two.—( Hear, hear.) The one
consisted of troops half organized and half disciplined, the
other would take into the field all the qualities that result
from a long course of discipline and control.—( Hear, hear. )
With respect to the sufferings of the Legion, and of the
number of men who fell sick at Vittorio., I must be allowed
to ask the Hon. and Gallant Officer (Sir Henry Hardinge)
whether, in the course of his military experience, particularly

in the Peninsular war, and especially in the neighbourhood
of Badajos, after the battle of Talavera, the sickness which
took place in the British army, far better equipped and pro-
vided for, but consisting in a great degree of men recently ar-
rived in the country, was not quite equal, if not much greater,
than that which took place in the Legion at the period to
which he has alluded ?—( Hear, hear, bear.) So far, then,
from making these circumstances which are the ordinary evils
and inconveniences of war a ground for a specific charge
against the Government, Isay I do not believe, if the facts
were well looked into, that it would appear that the inconve-
niences which the Legion had sustained were greater, if so
great, as those sustained by the regular troops of England
employed in the Peninsular campaign.— (Hear, hear.) But,
then, the Hon. and Gallant Officer dwelt greatly upon the de-
moralizing effect upon troops serving in conjunction with men
guilty of the cruelties practised by the Christiuo troops. In
the first place, I believe that if any cruelties have been prac-
tised in Spain, they have been pretty much confined to the
troops to whom the Legion were opposed, and not the troops
with whom they served. But it is too much for the Gallant
Officer who served during the Peninsular war in co-operation
with the troops of Spain—who saw the arms of England aided
by the co-operation of the guerillas, and who must recollect
the cruelties then committed upon the French, upon all strag-
glers, upon prisoners, and upon the wounded—enormities
which I will not repeat to the House, but which every one who
hears me and recollects that period of war must have present
in his mind—it is too much, I say, for the Hon. and Gallant
Officer, or for the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel), who,
I suppose, will follow me—(Laughter and cheers)—it is too
much for them, who did not think that the army of the Duke
of Wellington ought to be recalled from Spain or Por-
tugal, for fear the morals of the men should be contami-
nated by the co-operation of General Mina—that same Mina
whose continuation in command by the Government of Spain
we are told to-night by the Hon. and Learned Member for
Exeter (Sir William Follett) ought to be a sufficient reason
to induce us to break faith with the Spanish Government—l
say it is too much for these Gentlemen to tell us now that the
reason why the Legion ought to be recalled is because the
morals of the men may become contaminated. I regret these
atrocities, whatever they may be, or by whomsoever committed,
as much as any man in this Honsc can possibly do. But, un-s
fortunately, Sir, history tells us that it is in the character of
the Spanish nation, and has been so in all,time, whether in war
or in peace, to be more cruel and bloodthirsty than any other
nation in Europe.—( Hear, hear.) Look at their conquest of
America 1—( Hear, hear.) Look at all the wars that have
taken place in Spain from the war of the succession down to
the war of 1815, and you will see that in all cases they have
been peculiarly fond of blood. And then I invite you to look
at their civil commotions, when you will see upon all those oc-
casions a greater disregard of those principles of humanity,
which we are so justly proud of, than are to be found in the
annals of any other country in Europe. But I trust and hope
that one of the results, at least, from the regeneration of
Spain, through the medium of a free constitution, will be,
by the creation of public opinion, which such a constitu-
tion must produce, that these defects and vices in the na-
tional character will for the future be corrected.—(Cheers.)
There Is one point of which I wish in the first place to dis-
encumber this question. We have been told that it is a great
crime on our part to have allied ourselves with any parties in
an endeavour to rob the Basques of their privileges. We
have been told that we have been endeavouring to oppress,
to subjugate, to subvert a free and independent people, who
are fighting for their liberties and their privileges; and, to
hear the honourable gentlemen opposite, one would suppose
that the question was, not whether despetisin is to be im-
posed upon the people of Spain, but whether the inhabitants
of the Basque provinces are to be deprived of free institutions
and be reduced to arbitrary sway.—( Loud cheers.) Now I say
Sir, that is not the question ; but that the reverse of that is
the question. The war in the B ;slue proVinces, the insur-
rection, as the Hon. and Learned Gentleman calls it—and
I thank him for the word, for he talks of the insurgents,
although the Hon. Member for Sandwich calls them, I
presume, the royal forces—(Much laughter)—but that war,
what was it ? Why did the imurgelits, as the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman designated them, take tip arms? Was
it because their privileges were invaded? No such thing.
They took up arms for Carlos and despotism against Isabella
and constitutional government.—( Hear, hear.) And what is
the present state of war in those provinces? Why, if I am
not very much misinformed, the Basques aro as tired of the
war as any people can be of any great infliction from which
they arc unable to escape. The army of Carlos, I believe, is
mainly composed of persons not belonging to those pro-
vinces. The councillors of 'Carlos, General Moreno and his
other generals, are not persons belonging to the Basque pro-
vinces ; and although a portion of his army is composed of
the Basque people, it consists in a great degree of men who
cannot quit his service, because thei: 1 repsrty, their rela-
tions, and their families arc in the country occupied by the
troops of that ferocious man.—(Cheers.) They know—they
are told, and more that told, because the threat has been
executed—that if they desert his service their families will
pay the forfeiture of their offence ; these men are therefore
compelled, whether willing or not, to continue in the service
of Don Carlos.—( Hear, hear.) One honourable gentleman,
I forget which it was, but after all I think it was the noble
lord the member for South Lancashire (Lord E. Egerton),
said, that he believed it would be a greater advantage to the
Basques to get rid of those privileges for which they were
fighting than to retain them. I concur with that noble lord
in that opinion. Those privileges were great and valuable
so long as the rest of Spain was sulject to arbitrary govern-
ment and a despotic king. So long as neither justice nor law
were to be had, then their exceptions gave them an approach
to constitutional freedom. But when the whole of Spain is to
be governed, as I trust it will be, by a free Government, with
independent and impartial tribunals, with laws properly admi-
nis:e-ed, and with a Government responsible to public opinion,
then, I sly, the Basques will find it far more to their advantage
to be incorporated pith the rest of the Spanish nation, than to
be excluded, is a corner of the land, from those benefits which
the rest of their countrymen enjoy. What were the privileges
of the Basques ? No man will pretend that exemption from
cus:om ses is a real advantage to them, because they them-
selves have frequently petitioned to be relieved from that privi-
lege, and to be allowed to be placed on the same footing with
the rest of their countrymen. The great privilege which they
enjoyed was the possession of local self-government—( Hear,
hear)—those municipalities by which they governed their own
affairs. And what are we to think of the consistency of
those gentlemen—(Tremendous cheers)—who, while, on the
one hand, they are endeavouring to deprive their own coun-
trymen—( Cheering)—of those corporations to which they are
attached, on the other hand, stand up and entreat us not to
interfere with the municipal corporations of the Basques—
( Renewed cheers)—that invaluable legacy, bequeathed to them
from their remotest ancestry ?—(Cheers.) I beg, Sir, that we
may hear none of this affecting compassion for these Basques
fighting for their privileges.—( Cheers.) The poor Basques are
made the victims of persons who have other views, and by whom
arbitrary power is sought to be supported.--( Hear, hear.) The
war which is carried on in the Basque provinces is not a war
between the institutions of Spain and the institutions of Biscay.
—( Cheers.) It is there, upon that contracted scene, that is
to be decided by the issue of battle that great contest between
the opposing and conflicting principles of government—arbi-
trary government on the one head, and constitutional govern-
ment on the other—that contest which is going on all over
Europe, only fortunately for mankind, in other countries it is
waged by argument instead of by arms, and the peaceful opera-
tions of the people are not disturbed by it.--( Cheers.) I trust
that in all countries ere long, that contest will be carried on„in
the same manner that I am now describing.—(Cheers.) I
trust that no violence of party, either on the one side or the
other, may disturb the peaceful character by which that con-
test is carried on in almost every country in Europe. But that
is the contest—that is the question at issue ; and those who
endeavour to limit us to the question of the privileges of the
Basques, give an unfair representation of the real nature of the
contest now going on. I am glad that the Right Hon. Gentle-
man has at last brought this question fairly to an issue to be de-
cided by a vote of this House. I think that mode of deal-
ing with it fairer to the question, and, I must say, more
worthy of the party by whom it is adopted, than the course
they have hitherto pursued. For, whatever has been or may
be the strength of their opinions, I do not think that the
course the) have hitherto pursued has been much calculated
to impress other people with a notion that their convictions
were very strong indeed upon the subject.—( Hear, hear.)
Their courage upon this question seems to have ebbed and
flowed according to the fluctuations of the tide of war.—
(Loud cheers ) When things went a little favourably for
Don Carlos there was to be observed a great movement on
the other side of the House—(Hear, hear), but when bis
affairs went ill there was a silence in their ranks.—(Cheers.)
Last autumn it was thought that Bilboa would be taken, and
great was the song of triumph which was raised by the
friends of Don Carlos. Parliament not then being sitting
we could not have those rejoicings here; but great was the
triumph that resounded from all their acknowledged organs of
public opinion.—(Cheers.) But Bilboa was relieved, and
relieved by that naval co-operation—( Hear, hcar)_which,
according to the Honourable Gentleman opposite, has been of
no use to the cause, which has done no good to the interests of
England, though it relieved a town in which there were many
English merchants, and in which there was much Eng-
lish capital, from a fate which I fear, if that town had fallen
would have embarrassed it in a most unfortunate man-
ner.—(Cheers.) In spite of shat has been said to-night by
one Hon. Member, namely, that Don Carlos abstained from
taking Bilboa because he did not wish to do the people any
harm—(Laughter)—and that the people had nothing to eat,
although they invited Don Carlos to come into the town and
dine with them—the contrary of all which I most firmly be-
lieve—but in spite of this I am persuaded that the army of
Carlos had the most blood-thirsty intentions, and that, if 1311-
boa had fallen, a scene of massacre and devastation would have
succeeded its fall, exceeding any of those horrors which the
Hon. Gentleman on the other side have referred to.—
(Cheers.) Well, Bilboa was relieved ; Parliament met ; did
we shrink from discussion ?--( Cheers.) We put foreign
affairs in the first paragraph of the King's speech—( Cheers.)
Yes, foreign affairs were put forward in the speech. The
Hon. Gentleman opposite contented themselves with some
slight allusions to it, but the objections which are now made
it did not suit them at that moment to bring forward.--( Hear.)
Then came the unfortunate affair of Fuentarabia ; and then
the courage of the Carlists in Spain, and the courage of
the Carlists here, was once more aroused—(Loud cheers)
—whereas before that, and when the success of Bilboa had
not been followed up with that degree of activity which
had been expected, the Noble Lord the Member for Hert-
ford went so far as to call the attention of the House to this
subject, which he did after the House had gone into a Com-
mittee of Supple. The Noble Lord on that occasion very
candidly stated, that he waited till the Speaker left the Chair,
lest, if he had made his speech at an earlier period, some
other Hon. Member might have moved a resolution against it,
and have carried it by a large majority, Well, whereas beg

fore this last encounter—this last misfortune—they bad got
so far as a speech in a Committee of Supply, whea the defeat
at Fuentarabia took place, and they were induced to think that ,
things were going much worse for the Queen, they became
encouraged, and hence the present debate.—( Hear, hear.)
They now come forward not merely upon the Speaker's
leaving the Chair, but with a formal motion, in order to per-
suade this House to pass a vote which is intended to be, and .
would be, if adopted by the House, a censure upon the Govern-
ment of this country, and a call upon that Government by this
House to break faith with the Queen of Spain—( Hear)—
to abandon their engagements—(No, no, hear, hear)—to tear
their treaty in pieces-4 No, no, hear, hear)—and to desert—
( Energetic cries of " No, no," from the Opposition, responded
to by loud cries of " Hear," from the Ministerial benches)
their ally, because some temporary disaster had befallen their I
arms.—(Cheers.) What is the motion, then, before the
House ? It is true that the motion of the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman does not in words go to the extent I have just de-
scribed.—( Hear, hear.) Quite the contrary.—( Cheers and
laughter.) Oh dear, no ; he knows too well—( Cheers)—he
and his friends all know that there is a feeling of honour in
this House—that there is a regard for national faith—that
there is a spirit, too, of good wishes towards a nation strug-
gling for its freedom ; and if they had acted in a manly way,
and had come boldly forward and put in words which they
meant to be the object of their motion, they know that they
would have a most inconsiderable minority, and that there
would be no chance for them whatever of success.—( Hear.)
That is the meaning—no, I will not say the meaning—but
at all events that must be the effect of the motion of the
Right Hon. Gentleman if that motion should be adopted by
the House. Because, will any man tell me that if this
House were to say that the Order in Council was improper, 1
and were to affirm by implication that the naval co-operation
which has been afforded was not justifiable on the part of the
Government, the effect of that, both in this country and in
Spain, would not be—that England was to abandon the
cause of the Queen of Spain, and that our engagements and
our mode of executing them had been specifically condemned
by the House of Commons ? Now, what is the fault which
the Gentlemen opposite find with the Quadruple Treaty ?
They say that it has been detrimental to the interests of Eng-
land, and injurious to her honour. Is that really the case ?
—(Hear, hear, hear.) If it be, why have not these Gentle-
men come forward sooner ?—( Loud cheers ) Why have they
not stretched forth their saving hand to rescue the interests of
this country from detriment, and to save it from dishonour ?
Have they, during the many years that the treaty has been be-
fore this House, proposed a resolution of censure on the Go-
vernment for concluding that treaty ? Censure 1 Why, they
have acted upon it themselves—(Great cheering)—they have
applied it themselves. Is it, then, that treaty which they call
upon us to disavow ? Is it that treaty which they would have
us abstain from executing ? No, it is the Order in Council.—
Why, it is two years since the Order in Council was issued.—
( Hear, hear.) Then there is the co-operation, also, equally
denounced. Why, that co-operation has been going on for a
twelvemonth. It has been known during tpat period to all the
world, and has been avowed from its commencement in this
House.—(Cheers.) What, then, I ask, is the reason of this
tardy interposition ?—( Loud cheers.) Hon. Gentlemen may
talk of " postliminious" prefaces ; but what is the reason
of their not rescuing this country from the injuries al-
ready inflicted on it when they had it in their power
to state their views, and when there was a time, if those views
were correct, for some good to have arisen to the country by
it ?—( Hear, hear.) Has the secret been let out by accident,
by anything which has been stated in this House in the course
of the last week ?—( Hear, hear.) Is it that there is any
where any prophetic spirit of things which may occur ?
( Hear, hear.) Do " coming events cast their shadows be-
fore ?"—( Hear, hear.) Is it thought by anybody that it
might be tor certain persons in certain contingencies conve-
nient to have a Parliamentary sanction for abandoning a
Treaty which in certain quarters was not much approved of,
and for receding from engagements which it was felt so
grievous to execute ?—Haar, hear.) I have upon other oc-
casions complimented the Right Hon. Baronet for the faithful
and honourable execution of the Treaty when in office. I
should be sorry if there were any reason fur any man to think
that the Right Hon. Gentleman was not prepared under any
circumstances, and let what might befal him, to continue to act
in the same honourable manner in which he did before ; or
that it would be agreeable to him to have any pretence fur
breaking the engagements sad altering the policy of this coun-
try—a policy which has for its object the freedom of
Spain.—(Cheers.) There are three subjects involved, then,
in this discussion. There is the Quadruple Treaty, there is
the Order in Council, and there is the naval co-operation.
The Right Hon. and Gallant Officer did not in his speech al-
lude to the treaty, but other gentlemen have done so. It has
been discussed before, when the question was before the House,
with regard to the policy upon which it is founded, and in re-
gard to the manner in which it has been executed. I will take
leave to trait of these three subjects separately and distinctly.
There are those on the other side of the House who know as
well as I do under what circumstances, and for what objects,
that treaty was concluded.—( Hear.) Every man—even the
most superficial observer—must have perceived that the change
which was made in the succession to the Spanish Crown,
though it was made by the will of the Sovereign, carrying
into effect also the recorded will of a predecessor, though it
was sanctioned by the constitutional authorities of the country,
though it was adopted by the people at large, and though,
therefore, it was accompanied by every circumstance of legality
and regularity, yet that that change in the succession laid the
foundation for a great revolution in Spain. It was not
merely the substitution of a grown man for an infant female.
It was evident that out of that change must grow an entire
change in the internal institutions of Spain, and that with
such a change in its internal institutions there would also
arise a change in the tendencies of its external policy. Upon
this subject I will take the liberty of saying a few wordy to
my Right Hon. Friend who has seconded the present motion,
(Sir Stratford Canning) and who, not deliberately I am sure,
but in a moment which would perfectly excuse any thing he
might have done under the circumstances, adverted to the in-
structions--( Loud cries of " Hear")—under which he acted
when he went on his mission to Spain. I can assure my
Right Hon. Friend it is the last thing I could do towards any
person to whom I gave the name of friend, to say any thing
with an intention for it to be at all painful to the feelings of
the individual.—( Hear.) Therefore, it is not with any
view to himself that I advert to what he did. He must, I
am sure, in his cooler moments consider that he was not at
liberty to advert to instructions given to him upon a mis-
sion which had not been fulfilled.--( Hear, hear, hear.) I
wish to call to his mind what then took place, and when
he stated a portion of the instructions I then received, I
must be allowed to follow his example, and allude to what
occurred. I wish to suggest to him, as bearing on this sub-
ject, the object for which he was sent to the Peninsula, and
the purpose which he was employed to carry into effect. Does
my Right Hon. Friend forget the purpose which rendered it
necessary to send a legation to Spain, and to take the steps
which followed ? My Right Hon. Friend left this coun-
try in December, 1832, and arrived at Madrid at the com-
mencement of 1833, and he went, as he stated, at a moment
when the death of the King was apprehended. The direct
object of the proposition to make to the Spanish nation was
this :—The King ( Ferdinand) had resolved that his daughter
Isabella, and not his brother Carlos, should succeed him on
the Throne of Spain. It then appeared that Donna Isabella
was placed in a situation analogous to that of Donna Maria
in Portugal. Under these circumstances, my Right Hon.
Friend went out to urge the course of policy that was deemed
desirable for the interests of both countries in the Peninsula.
He had, in conformity with his instructions, to represent to
Ferdinand that if that Monarch was anxious that his daughter,
and not his brother, should succeed him on the Throne of
Spain, his policy should be directed to the establishment of
Donna Maria, and that Don Miguel should not be allowed to
succeed in placing himself on the Throne of Portugal, whose
cause, however, that Monarch had hitherto supported. This was
certainly in harmony with the treaty which had been described,
and in conformity with the policy that had been pursued, be-
cause the treaty was founded on the assumption that the will
of Ferdinand would be carried into effect, and that his views
would be to enforce the object of it. The treaty which had
been entered upon would bear out their views, and was in
conformity with the instructions which my Right Lion. Friend
then advocated. Those interests which he then advanced were
adverse to those which he now promulgated.—(Hear, hear.)
Now, I say that the change that took place in the policy of
the Government of Spain was the natural consequence of the
change in the order of succession that was established. It so
happened that up to the death of Ferdinand, Spain had inva-
riably exhibited the greatest hostility to the Government of
Donna Maria in Portugal, and had supported Don Miguel by
every possible indirect manner, and even it had proceeded to
the extent of offering the assistance of troops. From the
time that Ferdinand died, a change took place in the conduct
of the Spanish Government towards Portugal. This coun-
try had hitherto remained neutral in the contest that was go-
ing on in Portugal as to the succession to the Government
of that country, as my Right Hon. Friend well knows.
What was then the language of my Right Hon. Friend
to Spain, with reference to the policy of Ferdinand to-
wards the Government of Portugal ? He said to the Spanish
authories, " If you send armed men across the frontier
of Portugal to assist Miguel, the British fleet in the Ta-
gus will instantly co-operate in every possible way with the
forces of Donna Maria. If, however, you do not send troops,
or otherwise interfere, we will not take part in the contest."
What was the result ? Spain remained neutral, and so far the
object in view was accomplished.—(Hear, hear.) What hap-
pened on the death of Ferdinand? So far from their taking
part in the cause of Don Miguel against the cause of Donna
Maria, a change of policy instantly occurred. A Spanish Mi-
nister came to London to ask the English Government to send
a force to assist in expelling Don Miguel from Portugal, and
also to co-operate with the establishment of Donna Maria.--
( Hear, hear.) Nothing was more natural than this, because
Don Carlos at this time was in Portugal organising an army
for the invasion of Spain. What was the answer of the Eng-
lish Government? " We will not comply with your request;
we will not give the assistance you desire to the cause of
Donna Maria ; we have taken our line of policy, and we
do not intend to depart from it. We will, however, give
you something which will be of advantage to you—we will
not give you an army, but we will give you a Treaty."—
( A laugh from the Opposition and cheers from the Ministerial
benches.) This offer was accepted ; and now let us see
what this Treaty was. One of the objects of the Spanish
Government was, that part of the Spanish army should be
allowed to pass the frontier and enter Portugal, with the
view of taking steps to put down the army of Carlos ; and
for the attainment of this object it was necessary to enter into
a convention between the Spanish and Portuguese Govern-
ments.—( Hear, hear.) This afforded an opportunity for the
attainment of a greater object. The English Goverment said,
We will embrace the circumstance of this treaty to join the
, four great powers of the west of Europe, namely, France,
' England, Spain, and Portugal, in one alliance-.,.we will unite

them for the attainment of one common and general object."
—(Hear, hear.) England and France had for ages been ene-
mies. Spain and Portugal for a long period of years had !
been accustomed to regard each other with feelings of jealousy,
and, without going into all its bearings and contingent possi-
bilities, he could not help feeling that it could not fail to be of
material assistance for preserving the peace of Europe thus
uniting the four great powers, when there were so many great
points of contest and difference constantly arising between
them.—( Cheers.) He proposed this alliance to the French
Government, and that great power joyfully acceded to it. I
need not say that the offer of this treaty was thankfully re-
ceived by the Spanish Government, and the Queen of Spain
jumped at tht opportunity of adopting it.—(Hear, hear, and a
laugh.) The Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite laughed when
I mentioned that we had given a treaty ; but I am not sur-
prised at this, as they have been so much accustomed to laugh
at treaties and protocols—( Hear, hear, hear, and laughter)—
and no doubt they think they are justified in doing so, as
they have paid so much attention and listened so much study
on the subject ; they may therefore suppose that this treaty
was of no weight or importance; they may think that it was a
mere mockery to Spain and Portugal.—( Hear, hear.) The
treaty was concluded in April, 1834, and was ratified in Lon-
don, I believe, on the 31st of May, and was then sent to
Portugal to be signed and sent back to England. This was
in conformity with the stipulations of diplomacy, for the gen-
tlemen opposite are aware that a treaty is not in force until the
ratifications are exchanged. But such was the effect of this
treaty, that before the ratifications were exchanged, Don Mi-
guel, although with an army of 12,000 men, found it necessary
to abandon Portugal without further resistance. Thus the pre-
tenders to the two thrones of the Peninsula abandoned Por-
tugal. If, instead of a treaty, the English Government had
offered the assistance of an army of 20,000 men, the same re-
sult would not have been produced in the same time. But this
treaty consisted of two parts. In the first place there was the
general principle and object of it, which was stated in the
preamble; and the second part, there were the general acts
of executive which were to grow out of it. Now, the pre-
amble to which I wish to call the attention of the House states
the views of the parties, and the objects which they had in view.
Hon. Gentlemen opposite said that it merely applies to the in-
vasion of Portugal by the army of General Rodil, and to the
object then immediately in view, namely, the putting down the
forces of the two pretenders. The preamble, however, says
no such thing ; but it states the object when the parties entered
into the treaty. It said that " her Majesty the Queen Regent
of Spain, during the minority of her daughter Donna Isabella
the Second, Queen of Spain, and his Imperial Majesty the Duke
of Branganza, regent of the kingdom of Portugal and of the Al-
garves, in the name of the Queen Donna Maria 11., being
impressed with a deep conviction that the interests of the
two crowns"—the object, then, was not merely securing
the inheritance of the crown of Portugal, but of both king-
doms—" being impressed with a deep conviction that the inte-
rests of the two crowns and the security of their respective
dominions require the immediate and vigorous exertions of
their joint efforts to put an end to hostilities, which, though
directed in the first instance against the throne of his most
Faithful Majesty, now afford shelter and support to dis-
affected and rebellious subjects of the crown of Spain." It is
here obvious that the interests of both nations were in-
♦olved. The preamble proceeds, "and their majesties being
desirous at the same time to provide the necessay means for
restoring to the subjects of each the blessings of internal
peace, and to confirm by mutual good offices the friendship
which they are desirous of establishing and cementing
between their respective states, they have come to the
determination of uniting their forces, in order to com-
pel the Infant Don Carlos of Spain, and the Infant
Don Miguel of Portugal, to withdraw from the Portu-
guese dominions."—(Cheers.) The obvious purpose of this
was not merely to compel Don Carlos to withdraw from a
place where he was not. Such a treaty would have been
well worthy of the merriment of honourable gentleman op-
posite. In consequence of this agreement to provide for
the security of the two countries, and to secure the internal
peace of the two kingdoms, these two powers addressed
themselves to the King of England and the King of the
French. What were the answers of the King of England and
the King of the French ? Was the answer of the King of
England to the effect—" although I am bound by treaty to
Portugal to afford her aid and assistance under certain circum-
stances, I have no interest in Spain : I will therefore abstain
from being a party to the treaty ?" No ; the King of England
and the King of the French considered the first objects they
had in view—the interest which they must always take in the
security of the Spanish monarchy.—( Hear, hear.) This was
the first object in view in joining in tl.is treaty. They were
further anxiously desirous to establish peace, not merely in
Portugal, but in the Peninsula.—( Cheers.) Was this all ?
No ; they were anxious as well to establish peace in every part
of Europe.—( Cheers.) Her enemies think that the peace of
the Peninsula has no connection with the peace of the rest of
Europe.—( Hear, hear, hear.) I will tell Honourable Gen-
tlemen that if Don Carlos could succeed in establishing his
power in Spain, certainly peace might exist there—for the
iron tyranny that would be established might secure a
species of tranquillity; but if this tranquillity of death
were procured in Spain, peace, I am satisfied, would be
destroyed in the rest of Europe.—( Cheers.) Look to the
condition of France if Don Carlos should succeed.—( Hear,
hear.) What would be the condition of the Government of
France if this should happen ; and instead of there being on
the other side of the Pyrenees a friendly power, and a com-
mon understanding and common interest existing between the
two nations, there should be established a Government in
Spain similar to that which existed when Ferdinand ruled ?
( Hear, hear.) I believe the statement I am about to make
is correct, but I am not able to state it officially, that when the
Revolution of France in 1830 took place, and when it was a
doubtful matter whether or not the great military powers of
Europe would not unite, and endeavour to put down the
French Government there established by force, a message was
sent from a great Northern Power to Ferdinand, as I have
heard, and as I believe, to the effect, that as such a Govern-
ment had been established in France, you must send an army
of 40,000 men to the foot of the Pyrenees to control the
energies and embarrass the operations of the French Govern-
ment.—( Loud cheers.) I am sure that the Government of
Ferdinand would ha►e willingly done this but for the circum-
stances that then occurred ; for the Spanish Government was
not then an independent Government, but swayed and con-
trolled by great foreign powers and influenced by the Czar. I
say, then, that the establishment of Don Carlos on the throne
of Spain would be incompatible with the independence and the
security and tranquillity of France. I am sure if the
French Government thought that the cause of Carlos was
likely to be successful, and the government of Isabella and
a free Constitution was likely to be followed by the rule of
that Prince, that it would not be able to withhold the exercise
of such a direct influence and interference as would secure the
independence of the Government of Isabella, and the expul-
sion of Don Carlos from Spain.—(Loud cheers.) Therefore
it was thought desirable to procure by treaty the fulfilment of
these great objects.—( Hear, hear.) I have before said that
the present Government in Spain was established by a revolu-
tion, and I say so now. 1 am aware on this point that there
is a fundamental difference of opinion—I know that there is a
party who believe that nations, like a private estate, should not
depart from the heir in succession without his consent, while
another party believe that a government should be made for
the benefit of the nation and the happiness of a people—( Loud
cheers)--and that it is necessary that there should exist, in
every community, the power of changing, if necessary, the head
of the government.—( Cheers.) This was the painciple on
which our own Government was founded in 1688.—( Cheers.)
This was the principle on which the present Government of
France was founded by the revolution of 1830. The Govern-
ment of Isabella was on the same principle, and was as much a
revolution, although a peaceable revolution, as that of July in
France.—( Hear, hear, hear.) It was brought about by the
legitimate organs of the nation ; and I will not dispute that
one of the consequences which had followed from it are the
calamities which now afflict parts of Spain.—( Hear.) Now,
as I have before said, this treaty is founded on the bounden
obligations under which we are with respect to Portugal, and
in the view of the interest of this country, as connected with
Spain, and also as connected with the peace of Europe. I
think that it was a wise and honourable measure, but I am
sure, at all events, that it will not be considered by my Right
Hon. Friend opposite, as opposed to the first object in view.
When a wise Government enters into an engagement, it is apt
to limit its engagements to the circumstances of the case, as
they then stand—therefore the obligation on our part to afford
a naval and military co-operation in Portugal. But will any
man contend that we were merely bound to compel Don Carlos
to retire from Portugal, and then to allow him to depart and
land in Spain ? Would this be honourable, or in conformity
with good faith, when we interfered to give him a free passage
to England, when Rodil was within two hours' march of him,
and would hare known how to -have dealt with him ; and
surely this was not done with the view of giving him an oppor-
tunity of going to invade the country elsewhere. I am sure
that no man would get up and say that when this treaty was
signed this could have been contemplated. If we were
bound to adhere to the strictest letter of our engagements
with Spain, would this be done by the interference that took
place to protect Don Carlos, and by which he was able to
put himself at the head of the insurrection in the north of
Spain, and then refusing to take any further steps. If, un-
der these circumstances, we shrink from our engagements,
we should be justly exposed to the charge of the grossest
treachery towards Spain.—( Hear, hear.) That power might
justly say you pretend to be anxious for the tranquillity of the
Spanish monarchy, yet you have taken from our arms the in-
vader and usurper of our territory ; you took away the Pre-
tender to the crown of this Kingdom in a man-of-war ; you
secured him and entertained him hospitably in your country,
and you then allowed him to proceed through France to invade
the northern provinces of Spain.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Now
you quibble with us as to the meaning of words, you shrink
from your engagements, you shuffle as to the interpretation of
the treaty, you set up a distinction between men firing off guns
from a ship and men firing off guns on shore, you set up
a distinction between naval co-operation with our own
army and naval co-operation with the army of an ally.—
( Hear, hear, hear.) Sir, I say that Spain would have had a
strong cause for proving England guilty of the grossest bad faith
had not the Government acted as it has done, and I should
have been unable stand up in my place and defend the
Administration of which I am a member, had we deserted
Spain. I am justified in stating, and my Hon. Friend who
has spoken with so much ability on the subject is fully. justified
in arguing, that we must take the treaty and the additional
articles together and in connection, and that we must construe
the one by reference to the text of the other.—( Hear.) But
then, Sir, came the escape of Don Carlos, and his placing him..
self at the head of the insurgents in the Basque provinces.
Did the four contracting parties then consider that the treaty
was no longer applicable—that the object of the treaty having
elided by its complete execution, a new engagement was ne-
cessary for anything else they might have to do ? No ; quite
the contrary ; they considered the treaty to be quite in force,

and that all that was necessary to be done was to prepare
new articles, in order to provide for the altered circum-
stancesift
and localities of the case ; and therefore, instead of
entering into a new treaty respecting Spain, they deemed _
sufficient to draw up these additional articles, which enabled
them to adopt all such measures as might become necessary
to the full attainment of the object which it was the purpose
of the treaty to accomplish. These additional articles, in
other words, are complementary of the treaty. Anioeg
these articles was the one by which an engagement was en-.
tered into by this Government to give, if necessary, the aid of
a naval force. Sir, some Hon. Gentlemen have been good
enough to expound for us the meaning of this treaty, and they
state that the only manner in which this naval force was to act
was by a strict blockade of the northern coast of Spain. But
I, Sir, take leave to say, that so far from this being the our
manner in which the article should be carried out, it is pre:
cisely the only manner in which it is utterly impossible that
the article could be carried into effect.—( Hear.) Sir, I have
not to tell Hon. Gentlemen that the right of blockade is el°.
gether a belligerent right, a right which can only be exer-
cised by the principals in a war, and not by those who olilY
act as assistants • and I have already over and over agars'
until I thought I had fairly tired the House by repeating. it,
stated to the House that in this war we are only auxiliaries,
and not principals.--( Hear, hear.) Sir, under such circuill'
stances, the law of nations prevents us from instituting !
blockade ; the law of England forbids it.—(Hear, bear.)
Were we to stop a neutral vessel we should have to ,an-
swer it to the country to which the vessel belongeri'd
Were we to seize a merchant vessel, its owner sr"!
have a clear ground of action at law against the captain
t
of the seizing vessel.—( Hear.) It is, indeed, somewhat
curious that the only true and real way in which some kW'
Members say we could carry out this treaty does in fact hap-
pen to be precisely the only thing which, in virtue of that
,
article, it was absolutely impossible for us to do.—( Hear;l_
In our interpretation of the article, and in our reply to the
Spanish Government, to have taken a different course from
that which we had adopted would have been disgraceful to
the Government of England.—( Cheers.) The only question
to be considered on this point is, what has been the manner in
which our navy, our seamen, and our Marines, have coseP.e:
rated with our army when both were employed in conjoin'
operations—(Hear, hear, hear)—when co-operating, I say'
either with our own army or with the army of an allied power
Sir, Hon. Members appear to think that they destroy the
force of the instances quoted by my Hon. Friend the Secrete,'
to the Admiralty, by saying, " Oh, but these are only cases
which occurred when we were at war ;" but this seems to ale
to confirm my Hon. Friend's argument. The argument lie'
on this foundation. I would ask, do these Hon. Gentlemen
call on us to show them instances of naval co-operation ill,
time of peace ? Do they wish us to show them instances of
of our naval force acting on shore when there was no enemy
to meet, no place to take, no operations to be carried on ?
this sort of thing is on a par with their calling on us t°
sign articles to expel Don Carlos from Spain at a tiale
when Don Carlos happened to be in Portugal.—( Hear'
hear, hear.) Sir, my Honourable Friend has quoted cases
enough—be had more ready had he not thought that to ad
duce them would weary the patience of the House. Nay, 111/
has quoted cases enough to prove that it has been the invariable
practice of our navy at all times and in all quarters of the
globe, when in co-operation with our own or an allied anal,
not to limit their operations simply to acting on shipboard.---
( Hear, hear.) Our marines have been marched across de-
serts, have raised batteries, have stormed and taken towns'
Sir, my Honourable Friend has quoted sufficient instances to
make out the position laid down. There are, however, two
cases which I shall beg leave to mention, in addition to those
already adduced, and I quote them the rather that they refert
to the country now under discussion. The question is, Villa
our naval force ought to do in connection with an army acting
in Spain. The cases I shall mention are certainly not of recent
occurrence, but they are not the less well known, and not the
less important in the annals of this country. The instances I
shall mention are both in connection with transactions occur*
ring in what were Spanish territories—the first relating to
the capture of Gibraltar ; the second to the taking of Minorca i
in both which events our naval force acted on shore.—(Hem
hear, hear.) What is the history of the taking of Gibraltar
as related in an excellent work ? It is this :—" Sir George
Rooke, the English Admiral, and the Prince of Hessil
Darmstadt, the Spanish General, with five or six thou'
sand land troops, returning from an unsuccessful at-
tempt on Barcelona, in 1704, determined to attack Gibraltar.
They summoned the place ; but the governor, Diego de Sa'
lines, refused to surrender. On receiving his answer, the
Prince of Darmstadt immediately landed with 1,300 searineg
on the isthmus, while Sir G. Rooke opened his batteries Id
sea. The bombardment began on the 2d of August, and cow'
tinued till the 3d, when part of the garrison went to prayers*
it being a saint's day. While they were thus employed the
eastern quarter of the rock was left unguarded, and a part):
of English sailors seized this opportunity to scale the alrees`
inaccessible precipice, thus threatening the fortress from the
heights which overhang it. Captain Whittaker manned hi°
boats, stormed the molehead, and carried the town ; and the
garrison having capitulated, Sir G. Rooke took possession at
the place in the name of the Queen of England, and it ha
continued in our possession ever since." What, Sir, is the
history of the taking of Minorca ? It is this :—" In 170
General Stanhope and part of the fleet of Admiral Leake
reached Minorca on the 14th of September. The whole force,
including the marines who served on shore, did not exceed
2,600 men, about one-half of them being English ; and the artil-
lery from the ships consisted of 42 great guns and 13 mortars.,
On the 30th of Sept. the place surrendered. Among the kale
was General Stanhope's brother, the captain of the Milford,
who had determined to head his own marines on shore.'
Now Sir, we have been found fault with for employing 1118';
rine artillery on shore. There is attached to the corps °`
marines a train of field artillery, as a part of the regular
equipment of the marine force. In the case quoted this er'
tillery was used with good effect, and I should like to krlo'
where the marines are to use this field artillery except 00
shore ? To insist that they were not to use it on shore, Wi.B%
making them out horse-marines indeed.—( A laugh.) The
very motto of the marine force, per mare, per terram, sh°,ll:
""
that their operations are not intended to be limited to the sea'
The Hon. Gentlemen opposite are desirous of making it PP'
pear that it is contrary to the practice of war to land the sr'
tillery from the ships, but it seems to me that the contrail
position has been clearly proved in the course of the statemer''
which have been made, proceeding from men of great We,:
rience and knowledge of the subject. The book I quote ft°'"
is the work of a man who writes in a spirit well worthy of thee
nation to which lie belongs ; and the House will fully bear al
out in saying so when I have read another short extract from
the work, an extract also somewhat applicable to the preset
discussion. In speaking of the abolition of the Catalonia
l;
Fueros, in 1707, by a decree of Philip the Olt,'
he says, " And thus disputed succession and contend
ing parties, which to most nations have given a tlswe
of liberty, in this ill-fated country only added to 't,e"
darkness ; and instead of augmenting and confirming tmg
popular power, overthrew the frail remnants of its past
tu
thority." ( Hear, hear.) Sir, if the motion of Hon.
_ie*-1
bers opposite be 'carried—if their object be effected---ann,lf
this country shall declare to Europe that it withdraws its
from the alliance with Spain—that it abandons its solemaie";
gagements—it is very possible that the present disputed sem
cession and contention of parties in Spain may lead to t
result which the author of this book so warmly deprecatell
( Hear.) The book from which I have quoted, a book *hi%
does such high honour to the author's character and talents, is
the " History of the War of the Succession, by Lord Mabeeto.
--( Cheers.) I repeat, then, that it is a mockery to trio
draw a distinction between men waging war on shipboard, are
the same men waging war on shore.--( Hear, hear.)
are told that we had no right to send marines to Su° ig
the Basques two miles in shore ; but there is no harm' is
seems, in the marines shooting them from the ships- tt
is said, " If you let the marines kill men on shore, 1-o 0
commit an outrage, you violate the law of nations ; but
your marines kill men from the ships it is all very proee.,.r,
you are fulfilling your engagements, and we hold you Ptle
fectly harmless." Now, Sir, I will put this question
attack on the lines of San Sebastian the Phenix fired its the
with such admirable precision and effect, that though aide
distance of two or three miles from the walls, the shot Ina'ar,
breach in the walls, through which the troops entered.--(Het if
hear.) Now, Sir, can it be asserted that this was allowable
it it be forbidden us to land cur men on shore in order that to,
may do precisely the same thing? Is an assembly of 111,tetian
gent and practical men to be gravely told that the diatle-mile
between right and wrong depends on whether men act 11ode
one way or a mile the other? Sir, this seems to •me ria
of reasoning altogether unworthy to be addressed to a liePtae
lative Assembly like this. But supposing it admitted that
voa
employment of the Marines at a distance within shore oe.
somewhat exceeding what the treaty called upon or etty;
ered us to do, I will beg to ask who is th• complaining P Islo•
who states himself aggrieved ? Does Don Carlos ? sib's
There are only two parties who could have any float
ground of complaint.—( Hear, hear.) The Queen al
ibit,
and the Spanish Government might complain, neacrosi;l
that we were exercising an interference in the affairs 01
a mile or so more inland, than we were called urn- t?„, ?•••:
but has such a complaint been made by these Par"' bete
( Hear, hear.) Sir, I will undertake to answer Ortsee•
these parties. I will undertake to assure Honourable be
tlemen opposite that no complaint has been made, or f_et'v'esid
made, by the Spanish Government of our having gone Via
their wishes in the assistance we have afforded them. Id hd
complaint were made by these parties, I imagine it vgluld aol
of a very different character—l doubt whether it. WeatcAire'
be a complaint that we had not yielded to their rePeo tt
quest to give them more active and steady aid. Are
we baud
rines the complaining party ? lam well assured thrat , 0001:
no forgiveness to ask at their hands. The Marines 00_0 for
of England have never complained of any Governal_heegeo
sending them upon distinguished services—for putting,_:,, fro°
the field of honour.—( Cheers and cries of " Oh,
the Opposition benches.) Sir, the Marines here have
the pot
been sent on distinguielsed service, and been put O 0
.44 of
of honour, but they have been put under the coall orefes'
distinguished officer—distinguished not more by has jtadC,
sional talents, than by his prudence and consunarn"cb.aerre/
ment, arid by the utmost gallantry in the field.
s 'ar o
Sir, Lord John Hay's natural bias and connection
rood
favourable to the present Ministers, but alli,_Pee sue_
express my feeling that his conduct has iecaotintry--
as to earn for him the applause of hied to ref:
the warm approbation of his Sovereign, and /ee
der him a distinguished object of admiration to all Aispat
( Loud cheers.) What says Lord John Hay in th:a
aunner 17
which has been laid before the House as to 42;01 °vas force,
which the marines acted, as to how far or nea. as a naLad bee./
—for I am ready to concede that if f. 1,50 battalion hand
marched into the interior, and plis'aed under the co.t!c"-en eel;
Spanish or other military offieers, this would have "aritioa).
as exceedins, the meaning of' the term " naval coliere
but I contend' thAt TO long al they were under the
°Pilot oil
of