The Sun.
London, England, 1853-03-04 00:00:00

move by inserting the names of the granters ; and it was true
that some inconvenience might occasionally arise from the
fact that a number of persons sometimes bore the same name.
The commission set about obviating the objections enter-
tained to the index of names by means of maps. A majority
of the commission were in favour of the latter system.
However, upon examining into that portion of the subject
there were two of the commissioners who dissented from
the majority, and the consequence had been that they had
returned to the index of names, having effectiid certain
alterations and modifications in that system. The plan
which had been recommended by Mr. Bellenden Ker and
others—namely, to divide the districts of names into
various small districts, so as to render it probable that
there should not be many persons of the same • name
within those districts, was adopted. That plan had, in
a great measure, overcome the objections to the system of
Mr. Duval, and all the members had concurred in approv-
ing of it. With reference to the other observations which
had fallen from his noble and learned friend (Lord St.
Leonard's), he should only remark, that though he had
listened to those observations, as being opposed to the bill,
with pain, yet that they had been a source of pleasure to
him on one account, because he felt that they embraced
everything that could be urged against the bill. His noble
and learned friend had not denied the statements which
had been made by the noble lord upon the woolsack with
respect to the inconveniences of the existing system of
registration ; he had not denied the insecurity of the title
and the thousand other difficulties connected with the sub-
ject. He trusted that when they went into committee
these matters would be discussed fully, and that they
would have the advantage of his noble and learned friend's
guidance on points upon which he was so eminently en-
titled to give an opinion.
Lord BROUGHAM begged to express his unqualified
approval of the principle of the bill ; and he believed he
was fully authorised to add that such were also the senti-
ments with respect to it of his noble and learned friend
Lord Lyndhurst.
The bill was then read a second time.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-(YESTERDAY.)

TURKEY, RUSSIA, AND AUSTRIA.

Lord D. STUART, who had given notice to call the
attention of the house to the affairs of Turkey, as affected
by the contest now proceeding in Montenegro, said he rose
to bring forward this subject because he believed that by
the present position of affairs in the eastern part of Europe
those objects which had been always considered by English
statesmen as of paramount importance with reference to
Turkey were endangered. (Hear.) Large armies of Aus-
trians were approaching the Turkish frontier on one side,
and large armies of Russians on the other. Language of
the most peremptory character had been held towards the
Sublime Porte, and ultimatums of an extraordinary nature
delivered in with very short notice. These proceedings
related to the territory of llontenegro—a territory ex-
tremely small in extent (not above 60 miles in length by
30 or 35 in breadth), and containing only about 100,000
inhabitants, who had always been noted for their lawless
and predatory character, and who clearly had always been
deemed to be under the sovereignty of Turkey. In 1699
and 1718 treaties between Austria and Turkey, laying
down the boundaries between the two countries, including
the territory of Montenegro within the dominions of the
latter power. And so with all treaties down to the treaty
of Vienna in 1815. Of late the Montenegrins had en-
deavoured to become independent of the Turks, and they
had done so under peculiar circumstances. The Montene-
grins were governed by a bishop, whose authority was
hereditary ' • for as the Greek bishops were not allowed to
marry, and consequently not to have children—(laughter)
—the right to rifle over the country depcended, not from
father to son, but from uncle to nephew. One of these
bishops having died in the course of the last year, his
nephew succeeded him. This nephew was called Prince
Daniel, and was about thirty years of age. Having no
desire to assume the functions of bishop (the nob episcopari
being more sincere with him than was the case in some
Protestant countries), this individual wished to act simply
as a temporal prince. Prince Daniel accordingly proceeded
to St. Petersburgh, in order to procure the assent of the
Czar ; not, however, as the head of the Greek Church, as
a late Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs had supposed.
The Emperor of Russia had jurisdiction over those persons
professing the Greek religion residing within his own
dominions ; but Greek religionists belonging to Turkey
looked up to the patriarchs of Constantinople as their
spiritual superiors. It was stated that when this
Prince arrived at St. Petersburgh, he received
advice from the highest quarters to adopt a
rebellious course towards the Sultan. Whether that a,sser-
..

tion was true or not, it was notorious that, immediately
upon his return from St. Petersburgh, those disturbances
commenced which had led to the present uneasy state of
the East, and which had called for the active interference
of Turkey. It was said, however, that, notwithstanding
this advice to Prince Daniel, the Emperor had given dia-
metrically opposite advice to the Sultan, recommending the
subjugation of the Montenegrins. Thus, Russia would ap-
pear to have been true to her old policy of exciting discord
and animosity between other countries, in order that, to
suit her own ends, she might ultimately be called in as
mediator. In taking this course she had only followed the
precedent she had set herself inthe case of Poland, Turkey,
and ultimately in Hungary. But the Montenegrins, hav-
ing received this advice from Russia, proceeded to act upon
it, commencing incursions upon the neighbouring territory
of Turkey, and committing acts of robbery, pillage, and
murder. With the commencement of hostilities came the
interference of Austria, who addressed very extraordinary
and peremptory demands to Turkey, couched in a manner
wholly incompatable with the position of that country as
an independent state. The Austrians complained that a
large army should have been assembled by Turkey, with-
out previous intimation; they demanded the removal of
certain Hungarian refugees engaged near the Austrian ter-
ritories, and the cession of certain portions of the Turkish
territory. So peremptory wero these demands, that the
ambassador threatened to withdraw if within five days his
ultimatum were not assented to. Now, undoubtedly, the
raising of an army might require explanation, but that ex-
polanation a
threats.natiorr o u
If t
Austriat ob e so sought courteously,taken tha that
e andn
rse, toiti 0 b
Ty
ke
snhs
Government would have been quite ready to give an assur-
ance that the army was not intended as a threat to Austria,
but to suppress disturbance, and re-establish a peaceable
state of things in k Montenegro. The idea of Turkey enter-
' taining any hostile intentions towards Austria was prepos-
terous, as the slightest consideration of the force of the two
Countries would prove. The Montenegrins were a brave and
generous people, with whom the Turks had had several
encounters, who found great difficulty in subduing them.
Montenegro was not an independent state, but as all maps,
official or otherwise, would show, a part of Turkey. With
what grace, however, could Austria contend for the inde-
pendence of the Montenegrins ?—that country which only a
short time ago had called another independent state a
" geographical atom "—that country which,pe in defiance of
all treaties, had annexed to it the republic of Cracow, an
act which had called forth the protest of England and
France. To make the matter worse, the person whom
Austria had sent as ambassador to defend the independence
of the Montenegrins was no otlier than Count Leinengen,
the Military Governor of Cracow. Then came the demand
for the removal of the Hungarian refugees. No doubt
some of them had embraced the Mahometan faith, but by
doing so they acquired all the privileges of Turks. Instead
of demanding the extradition of such persons, theirl re-
moval to some other part of Turkey not on the frontier
would have been sufficient. Austria had also put forward
the singular claim of being the protector of all Roman Ca-
tholics within the Turkish dominions. The Turks might
with justice say that such an assumed protectorate was un-
necessary, as in no country were the'Roma,n Catholics per-
mitted' so free an exercise of their religion and religious
rites as in Turkey. No country was more tolerant of all
religions than in Turkey. Religious processions were per-
mitted to passthrough Constantinople without the slightest
interference on the part of the Government ; while Pro-
testants could point to their English bishop at Jerusalem
in proof of the toleration extended to Protestantism. In-
deed, under the Mussulman government, Protestants, Ro-
man Catholics, and Greeks enjoyed the most perfect
in the exercise of their religious rites. He wished

the same could be said of some Christian countries which
he could name. (Hear.) Austria, who made these de-
mands, had been the most intolerant state which the
world had seen for ages. ' 'lt had persecuted Protestants,
it had decimated millions, and, but for the assistance of
Turkey, Bohemia would have been exterminated. He
feared there was something lurking behind the specious
pretences of Austria. If Austria had any quarrel with
Turkey she could state ther grievance openly. A few
years back had we not seen Austria demanding foreign
refugees upon whom to slake her vengeance, and was it
not owing to Turkey that they remained in security ?
It was plain to every thinking man that under this
pretended solicitude for religious freedom and inde-
pendence lay a vindictive 'spirit against Turkey for the
share that power had taken on behalf of Hungary and
Kossuth. Turkey, however, had never found fault with
Austria for having a large force in Hungary, although that
force marched to the confines of the Austrian territory,
retreating before the irresistable banner of brave old Bem.
The cause of Austria was, in fact, the cause of might against
right—illegality against justice. Under such circumstances,
he wished to know what would be the policy of the present
Government with regard to those transactions—whether
they held the same opinions and convictions as to the ne-
cessity of preserving Turkish independence which had been
expressed and felt by former Governments, whether they
were Tory, Liberal, or Peelite ? We were bound to sup-
port Turkey by treaty, and if we did not, the equilibrium
of Europe would be destroyed. He did not join in the
contempt which some persons felt for the maintenance of
this equilibrium, for if Russia and Austria took possession
of European Turkey they would acquire such power that
it would be difficult for us to interpose, and serious danger
would threaten the liberties of Europe. But in a commer-
cial point of view, it was of the utmost importance to
maintain the rule of the Sultan in Turkey. Our commerce
with that state had increased in a most prodigious ratio ;
for our exports to Turkey for the last 20 years had nearly
quadrupled, whilst our exports to Russia had not doubled,
and our exports to Austria had absolutely diminished. If
Turkey fell under the dominion of Russia or Austria, our
trade would suffer most materially. In such an event,
how much longer, he would ask, would religion be free in
Turkey, or an English bishop be found at Jerusalem ?
Austria instead of being our ancient" ally, as she was
called, was one of the most modern of empires. The alli-
ance formed by Marlborough was not with Austria, but
with the Emperor of Germany, and a very small portion of
the Austrian dominions was German. But look at what
was occurring in Italy under Austrian rule, where the
people were kept down by large armies, where executions
were frequent, and where, owing to the barbarous system
of Government pursued, the unfortunate Italians, like
crushed worms, were almost turning upon their oppressors.
Now it had been very much the fashion to attribute the
bad feeling manifested by Austria towards Turkey to the
conduct pursued by his noble friend who now filled the
office of Secretary for the Home Department. But it was
a very remarkable thing that all the proceedings to which
ho had been calling the attention of the house took place
subsequently to that noble lord's retirement from the
Foreign-office of this country. On the other hand, while
there was a Government in power which had been always
most profuse in its declarations of amity towards Austria,
an insult which never could have been expected was per-
petrated by the Imperial Government against the people
of this country ; for Austria was the only state in Europe
that refused to send over a field marshal to honour the
funeral of our illustrious hero, by whose victories it was
no exaggeration to say the Austrian empire had been
preserved. (Hear.) He hoped that this question would
not be regarded as a party question, for the independ-
ence of Turkey was a matter that interested all. Were
hon. gentlemen Protestants, then he could show theme
that Protestants might expect better treatment from
Turkish Government than at the hands either of Arausttrihea
'hae utterance
or Russia. Did hon. gentleman belong to t
he could-show them that their party had
to declarations of the importance of this
their leader On the only occasion of his matter, and that
house this session stated, in terms for whicadh, heare addressing the
tbhe.