The Sun.
London, England, 1831-07-27 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

A very animated and interesting conversation
took place last night in the House of Peers on some
questions addressed by Lord Aberdeen to the Prime
Minister, Lord Grey, to obtain information respect-
ing the allusions to the demolition of the Belgic
fortresses and the presence of a French fleet in the
Tagus, contained in the late Speech of the King of
the French at the opening of the Session, The
Noble Ex-Secretary of Sate for Foreign Affairs,
whose acquaintance with recent negotiations and
treaties cannot be questioned, but who might on
this occasion advantageously have spared his sar-
casms against Lord Grey, begged to he informed,
Ist, by what convention the Belgic fortresses were
to be demolished, and how far the British Govern-
ment was a party to that convention; 2dly, whe-
ther the French squadron had taken possession of
the Portuguese ships of war, and what steps the
British Government had taken, either at the
Court of the Palais Royal or of Lisbon, to pre-
vent such a humiliation of our ancient ally.--
The Noble Earl lamented the result of the in-
activity, or impolicy, of the British Government
in both instances. In the former we had consented
to the demolition of bulwarks raised by the concert,
and at the expense, of the Great Powers of Europe,
guaranteed by the faith of treaties, and deemed
essential for the protection of the Netherlands ;
while we had substituted for them an empty decla-
ration of Belgic neutrality, and the friendship of the
Power most interested in its violation. In the latter
case, we had allowed the capital of an ally to be in-
vaded when our mediation might have prevented
such an evil. We had brought a new naval power
into the Tagus, and might expect to see the influence
formerly exercised by Great Britain henceforward
transferred to our rivals, who might gain, by the
generous use of victory, the ground which we had
lost by an impolitic refusal of protection. The Noble
Earl at the head of the Treasury, though he refused
to enter on a formal discussion of the topics adverted
to without a regular motion, did not decline a short
reply to the questions of the Ex-Secretary. A part of
the statement thus elicited contained information
altogether new to the public. It would appear
from this statement, that so long ago as the middle
of April, the Plenipotentiaries of the great Powers
had taken into consideration the demolition of a
part of the Belgic fortresses on the side of France;
that the French diplomatic agent had absented
himself, as a party interested, from the conferences
which took place on that subject; that the other
four Powers—namely, Great Britain, Russia, Prussia,
and Austria—had consented to the measure, pro-
vided it could obtain the consent of the Ruler of
Belgium ; that Holland, which had contributed so
much to the erection of these strong places, was not
admitted to deliberate on their overthrow; and that
the final resolution of the Congress had only been
communicated to Prince Talleyrand on the 14th in-
stant, in order to be transmitted to Paris as a strik-
ing topic for the King's speech. The Noble Earl
did not enter into the detail of the negotiation, or
state at whose proposal the four Powers were in-
duced to entertain the question. We, how-
ever, feel no difficulty in filling up the hiatus,
and can entertain no doubt that it was France
which made the demand to dismantle the frontier
of her weaker neighbour. Hence the opportune
absence of the French Plenipotentiary from the
Conference during the discussion—hence the letter
of the four Powers announcing the decision—and
hence the theatrical use made of the fact at the
opening of the French Chambers. The inadequacy
of Belgic resources to sustain the expense of so long
a line of garrisons, and the security of the new
kingdom under the guarantee of its neutrality by
the other States of Europe, though they may be
now good arguments for the demolition of the for-
tresses, were not therefore the real motives for con-
senting to so startling a project. The answer given
by the Noble Earl to the questions of Lord Aber-
deen respecting the presence of the French fleet in
the Tagus contained no novel information. His Lord-
ship repeated his former statement, that our treaties
with Portugal, however strict, and our alliances how-
ever intimate, did not bind us to protect its ruler
against a demand for a reparation of wrongs, which
we had enforced in our own case. The Noble Earl
refused to enter on any statement of the steps which
wehad taken to arrange the difference between France
and Portugal, in order to prevent the necessity of
those hostilities which had unhappily occurred. The
Prime Minister was replied to by the Duke of Wel-
lington, who endeavoured to show, Ist, that the
Belgic fortresses were not built with the money of
France, and therefore that she had no right to
interfere for their demolition; 2dly, that they were
never intended as the means of aggression on that
a
power, ands dangerous
therefore
to he
that theyr
security; not3
todi
ybe,
re-
garded
that
Holland ought to have been made a party in the
deliberations for their reduction, as she had contri-
buted to their erection; 4thly, that the French
Government, which, after the revolution of July,
professed to remain under the treaties of 1815, had
no right to demand their violation as respects Bel-
gium ; and sthly, as the state of the Nether-
lands was weakened by the separation between
Holland and Belgium, there was the less jus-
tification of any endeavour on the part of France
to procure a reduction of its frontier strength.—
We leave the reader to collect the purport of
his Grace's observations on the late hostile entry
into the Tagus from the report of his speech. In
reviewing all that was said by their Lordships on
both questions, very little new information, and few
additional grounds of forming a correct opinion, seem
to have been gained. In speaking of the resolution
of the Conferences respecting the Belgic frontier,
both sides appear to have studiously omitted all al-
lusion to the most important—or rather, to the only
important—consideration in the case, namely, the
consent of the Belgians to the demolition of their
fortresses, or the effect which the decision of the
Plenipotentiaries will have on the new arrangemeni
of their Government. If the Great Powers had
designed to destroy the popularity of the new lieh.
gic Sovereign,—to revive extinct jealousies, and
provoke fresh resentments against themselves,--to
give republican agitators a fresh purchase over the
peace of the country, and to throw a lighted torch
infallibletpmightGhiamongooesvai
eo
rrorna, am otherwiseis:ceteonehiltit!
arrangement
hconatdeti
doehooln;n:
vdooaetfpntrbaeioi
right
inflammable liaihtnca
amgetav
to
ftenaaati
make
theirabra ksamekedeenetendnpdaai
without
snsei
ultdr
ciir:aheooul
rneas
upon
rwann mnth
Frenchtoei which
o
e
adoption of a measure at once so useless and so irri-
tating,—so incapable of giving it any additional
security,—and so sure to offend thv pride of its
weaker neighbour. It had no right to disturb the
result of six months' negotiations in order to make
a claptrap in its Kin 's speech. What would it
think of a proposition from the conferentT to destroy
the fortifications of ValenOenner: or Lille ? And are
not Tourney and Mona equally prized in the eyes of
preventingthe Belgian's,
though
hostile they
aggressionms
l equallypermitting tise l useless s it
the
attack of the French on Portuguese shipping, and
the entry of the French fleet into the Tagus, our
Government appears to ua entirely free from blame.
Our treaties with Portugal do not bind us, to ro-:
ect the Portuguese Government api;ls; the conse-
quences of its own i,niostiee or insults towards a
third Power, Wo, who lately had to send a squadron
to the Tagus to vindicate our own honour, and to
redress our own wrongs, had such a specimen of
etsi ofirnraolee:y:ooftt:hoiep
tiPortugueseflu ~the oil a
rdoecst oe
re t f
atudhmletetipemoir
eba.tsti
insensibility to every thing leree,liti might well
' and lei: us approve of those who followed our ex-
scoofulodbt.
thoienßi rigitii.sohstice,
ioakGovernment,eits Nvhicl
had to threaten the bombardment of T isbon as its
diplo-
macy succeed in favour of ifrance, without a similar
exhibition of cannon law ? The alleged insignifi-
cance of the wrongs of which France had to com-
plain gave us no right to interfere. Our neighbours
are the best judges of their own honour or their
own interests ; and, unless by the mutual consent of
the parties, our intervention would be an imperti-

nence. Whether French subjects were aggrieved
and outraged through the medium of a judicial sen-
tence, or by an arbitrary act of authority, we had
no mission to inquire ; and France was only follow-
ing our example in procuring, by force of its navy,
the reversal of an infamous judgment, in a coun-
try where the verdict of a court, on political
offences, is generally nothing but the expressed
vengeance of the reign:rig despot. Much has
been said of our ancient alliance with Por-
tugal, and the duties of continued beneficence and
' protection which our treaties with that country im-
pose. The antiquity and utility of that alliance we
are not disposed to deny or to gainsay; but we are
afraid that the words are often employed where
they have no meaning, arid that, in forgetfulness of
history, people apply to one period circumstances
which exist only in another. If our connexion with
Portugal was ancient and close, for what object was
it commenced and maintained ? Why was it so
long? In the first place, it was useful to England
as a counterpoise to the influence of France over
Spain, when the Bourbon reigned on both sides of
the Pyrenees. In the secend place, it gave access
to the markets of Brazil for our commodities, when
Portugal, in the strictness of colonial tyranny, held
the keys of that immense region. In the third place,
when our absurd persecution of the Irish Catholics
inspired just fears of a Catholic rebellion, it was ad-
vantageous to maintain our friendship with a country,
from which a hostile expedition could most easily teach
the Irish shores. For none of these purposes are we
now required to cultivate the alliance of Portugal; and
if we were, we need labour under no apprehension
that the friendship and trade of the Portuguese
people will be transferred from us to the French be-
cause we show no peculiar taste for the attachment
and gratitude of the Portuguese usurper. Our al-
liance did lint continue with the Philips of Spain, so
long as they ruled in Portugal; our alliance would
not have continued with Buonaparte's Generals if
they had come in place of the Braganza family; and
we see no reason to believe that if Donna Maria
were established on the throne to-morrow, our inter-
course with Portugal would be less frequent and
profitable than under her uncle. The visit of the
French fleet to the Tagus cannot in the nature of
things alter our relations with Portugal, which are
independent of the smiles or frowns bestowed by
Don Miguel upon other Powers. France can offer
no commercial advantages to his subjects, whatever
ascendancy a fear of her power might gain over the
silly despot himself. Frenchmen do not drink port
wine, and do not require Portuguese fruit ; and
though they could supply broad cloth in abundance,
they could get nothing else to exchange for the pro-
ducts of their looms. Let us, then, suppress our
fears about being supplanted in the markets of Por-
tugal, even though Don Miguel should, after his se-
vere drubbing, take a fancy for an alliance with the
Citizen King.—Times.
Before going into the Committee on the Reform
Bill, last night, Colonel Evans alluded to the alarm-
ing sensation in the country created by the delay,
and observed that a conference had already been
agreed on between the Birmingham Political Union
and the Unions of Manchester, Glasgow, Liverpool,
and other places, as to the best course to be adopted,
in the event of these proceedings continuing in the
same slow and tardy manner as hitherto ; and he in-
timated, that if a different course was not pursued
that night and the next, he should feel it his duty
to give notice of a motion to examine persons at
the bar of that House who were entitled to credit,
and who understood the public feeling, for the pur-
pose of pointing mit to Members the dangerous
course of their present mode of proceeding. Mr.
John Smith, than whom no Member possesses
more extensive means of knowing what is passing
throughout the country, observed, " that the feel-
ing upon this subject was intense throughout the
country, and especially in Scotland, where the
people's impatience—he might say their anger—
would shortly show itself, unless the House
was to alter its course." Sir R. Peel and
Mr. Croker affected to treat the impatience
of the people and their apprehensions as a very
light matter. As the English are the most patient
people on the face of the earth, they treat the idea
of any insult exceeding the measure of their patience
as little less than visionary. They may, however,
draw too much on their patience. They are rather
too open in their manifestation of contempt for the
people. The Scotsman of Saturday last says that
the Members of the Edinburgh Political Union are
indignant at their Committee for not acting more
decidedly at this crisis. The country will be in
motion from one end of it to the other. At last the
eternal schedule A is gone through, and the AN%
clause agreed to. This day the second clause of the
Bill will be entered on.—ltforning Chronicle.

It would appear from what took place in the
House of Lords last night, that the King of the
French was hardly borne out by facts, when he de-
clared in his speech that " the places erected to
menace France, and not to protect Belgium, shall
be demolished."

" A protocol, or resolution (said Earl Grey) relative to
this subject, of date the 17th of April, had been agreed
upon by four of the Powers engaged in the conferences re-
lative to the settlement of Belgium. The four Powers to
which be alluded were, Russia, Austria, Prussia, and this
country—France being, for obvious reasons, exc.luded. The
protocol in question, stated, that tip,: Plenipotentiaries of
the four Powers having tnat, and their attention having
been called to the subject of the fortresses which bad been
erected on the frontier., of the Netherlands, they were una-
nimously of opinion, that as soon as the separation between
Holland and Belgium should be effected, a oeve arrange-
ment should take place in regard tq ;Lase fortresses, and
that the independence of Belgiwia should be provided for
and guaranteed upoa a new principle, and under a new
system. They were of opinion, that a part of these for-
tresses might be razed ; and it was agreed, that when the
fitting time and opportunity should arrive, the representa-
tives of the four Powers should meet, and settle which of
the fortresses should be demolished. This was tha Diplo-
matic Act by which it bad beer; agreed that some of the
fortresses should be demolished 9 but which of them should
be demolished be could not tell, since that matter had not
been finally arranged." s

The ground for the demolition of the fortresses
is the altered circumstances of lie And ;he ar-
rangement with respect to the fortresses to be demo.
lished " has not yet (said Lord Grey) been finally
settled, tint is still under discussion.' All the for-
tresses Are not to be demolished, and it would have
been more correct in the King of the Freryth to have
said, " Part of the places erected te w,eartce France,
and not to protect Belgiutr, shall be demolished."
If, however, some c. tie fortresses menace France,
and some 4o not, how does King
Philip liTtQw that
the representatives of the Four Pciwers, who are
to meet and settle which tit; fortresses are to be
demolished, will 4-4 Go thoae fortresses in particular
which meuttce Prance, and do not protect Belgiut;-4?,
k much for gasconading. But it is euric,va enough,
that while the Duke of Wellirig;on's friends are
complaining of the tlemclitio:d of fortresses erected
at the expence of ais country, the Opposition in
France Eire exclaiming against the demolitio.r. We
refer our readers to our Correspondeat 0. P. Q.'s
letter, in this day's Chr:enif,,*, forinformation on this
subject. The. Cclurrier Francais says, " Since two
Revol,Atioas, almost simultaneous, have cocifotitnded
the ...interests of France and Belgimb, hate con.
nected, by a common cause:, ;In.ip,d,epelidence of
each, those places erecte4 4g,al,nat France had be-
come a bulwark fo; Ler, If, in place of making Bel-
gium a Pegtrgii country, we had left it what it via,
an 41:14ed country, these places, in the hods Of our
Allies, would Cover our frontipzs"; there are even
some of these fortresseq !yZieh are indispensable to
our system of de.feK,e, and which we ought to re-
construct if we ever extricate ourselves from the
state of servility to which we are condemned, Bel-
gium, it ie said, is a neutral state, We know what
is meant by the neutrality of the weak beside the
strong, when that neutrality is an obstacle in the
way : Switzerland .showed us that io December,
1813. These results, then, prove this admirable
combination, that whenever a great Power shall wish
to violate the Belgian neutrality, it will not have
to encounter a single barrier before reaching us.
The Belgian revolution was for France the most

- 141
Olt's.' ' '
~....--ci -......-. ',.
4. ..-- ,s -;.' 1 e- f.ei--iims
'srtenate event that s.t'qiuld,liiile,ft.se; rconse-
quences might haveirieo,ifiirtarisi 'F.01;:„ our strength
and our preponderant e 1 that
thin almostgs arc most as yogi Ale fer „ukaf afore;
it was impossible to 4 es,o4(iiiiniirdsit: the beim-
tits of fortune." The*Dukedfe,ltilvet.admitted
that it was reasonable, ltikier; the circumstances,
that a separation should be effected between Hol-
land and Belgium, and that a separate arrangement
should be made for Belgium; but he exceedingly
regretted that the King of Holland was not called
upon to assi.t at the Conference, considering
how very materially that Conference concerned him
And the interests of his country. "It was true,"
said his Grace, " that the Powers had agreed N._
guarantee the independence and neutrality of Bel-
gium ; but it was not sufficient mere'y to guarantee
the independence and neutrality of Belgium. They
ought to have given that country sufficient strength
to protect itself and to preserve its own indepen-
dence; and, therefore, the guarantee did not, by
any mean: supersede the use of the fortresses."—
They ought to have given Belgium sufficient
strength to protect itself! But how ? It is easy
to say strength ought to be given. Belgium is
either to be independent or not. If Belgium is to
be independent, it can have no other strength than
what is derived from its own resources; and surely
his Grace does not mean that for the sake of keep-
ing up the fortresses Belgium should be transferred
to Prussia. As Belgium, then, is to be independent
and neutral, the simple question to be asked is, can
Belgium maintain the fortresses ? Belgium will
not be a bit more strong because his Grace
thinks it ought to be more strong; and, there-
fore, as its resources are unequal to the main-
tenance of the fortresses, they cannot be kept
up. His Grace cannot patch up again the king-
dom of the Netherlands. France would not allow
a union between Prussia and Belgium, even if
the Belgians were disposed to the union, which
they are not; and Prussia would not like Bel-
gium to be transferred to France, merely for the
sake of keeping up the fortresses. A great deal of
money has been thrown away on the fortresses;
but this is only another proof of the justice of the
maxim, that it is foolish to build on other people's
land. His Grace animadverted on the boasting
manner in which King Louis Philip alluded to these
fortresses. " The King of France," he said, "bad
contributed nothing towards the expence of erect-
ing and maintaining the fortifications, and therefore
the Government of that country had nothing to do
with them. He admitted that the other Powers
who had been at the expence of erecting and up-
holding the fortresses had a right to see that some
of them should be demolished if they thought
proper; and he was glad to find, from the informa-
tion given this night by the Noble Earl, that the
subject was taken up by the four .Powers to the
exclusion of France." An attempt was made to
excite a feeling of commisseration for Don Miguel.
Lord Aberdeen, in his usual offensive manner, ob-
served " that it was, perhaps, considered by the
Noble Earl and his friends as a matter of congratu-
lation that the French fleet had entered the Tagus,
and made itself master of the capital of our ancient
ally." Earl Grey said " he repelled the imputation
with the disdain which it merited, whether coming
from the Noble Earl or any one else." The Duke of
Wellington thought that " the influence of this
country ought to have been exerted with the Por-
tuguese Government to make reparation for the in-
justice, if injustice there was, and that the same in-
fluence ought to have been exerted with the French
Government to prevent any serious aggression by
France on Portugal for a cause so very trifling." A
mighty deal of influence this country possessed with
the Government of Don Miguel, when we were
obliged, shortly before the French expedition, to
send one ourselves to extort from him reparation for
repeated acts of injustice to British subjects, which
had been refused to our solicitations. Don Miguel
is King de lack of Portugal, and it is not for us to
interfere with the internal affairs of that country to
dethrone him ; but it is asking, surely, a little too
much from us that we should throw our protecting
shield over a Sovereign excommunicated for his bad
faith and misconduct by all the Powers of Europe.
'The Earl of Aberdeen himself spoke of Don Miguel
as a monster, and the Duke of Wellington refused
to acknowledge him. Don Miguel did not claim
our interference in his behalf, nor would he have
thanked us for it. We do not see why our protec-
tion should be forced on the Portuguese, even
though the fields of Portugal had been the scene of
the highest glory of this country.—Morn. Chronicle.
In the House of Lords, last night, there was a
very full attendance of Peers, as well as of Com-
moners, near the Throne, and of strangers below the
bar, to hear the questions promised to be put by the
Earl of Aberdeen on the subject of foreign affairs,
and the answers that might be given thereto. The
Earl of Aberdeen asked, first, whether there would
be any objection to submit to the House all commu-
nications relative to the actual state of our relations
with Portugal ? Secondly, whether the Govern-
ment would lay before them the diplomatic acts
sanctioning the demolition of certain fortresses—
fortresses raised not only for the protection of the
Netherlands, but particularly to prevent aggressions
on the part of France ? Earl Grey replied that he
should be fully prepared, when the proper time ar-
rived, to defend the conduct of his Majesty's Go-
vernment on the subject of our foreign affairs. With
respect to Portugal, he denied that existing treaties re-
quired this country to defend Portugal. When fur-
ther information could be given on the point,it should
be submitted to the House; at present it could not
be done with propriety. He was bound to declare,
however, his Lordship added, that the position of
this country, as regarded Portugal, was not owing to
the present Ministry. With respect to Belgium,
'Earl Grey said that any one acquainted with foreign
affairs might reasonably doubt that a separation of
Belgium from Holland could be satisfactorily com-
pleted without the demolition of various fortresses,
His Lordship then read the Protocol of April 17, to
show that the four Great Powers were unanimously
of opinion that the separation of the two countries
rendered this demolition necessary. That Protocol
was forwatded to the French Government July 14.
Whet; tlt proper time arrived to give further in-
for:4446On he should be prepared to impart it; at
present it could not he clone. The Duke of Welling-
ton obserVed that the fortresses in question be-
longed to the the Great Powers including Holland,
acting in conjunction with England; and that
Prance had nothing to do with them, and had never
contributed towards their construction. He admitted
the reasonahlweas of sanctioning the appointment
of a Sovereign to Belgium, but declared that France
ought to have been the last Power to require, or
sanction, the demolition of the bulwarks in ques-
tion. He ownsa; that he had felt deeply con-
cerned when he read that part of the French King's
Spelt which referred to this subject ; and grieved
that England had not made greater efforts to afford
means to Belainio to maintain its independence.
His Gra also declared that England ought to have
prevented the French aggressions on Portugal. He
. considered that there was Iva country in Europe,
Whose friendship was of se much consequence to this
country as was that, t Portugal: the aggressions
committed by the. french Seta in the Tagus were a
disgrace so ttiia country, his Grace, in conclusion,
rep4atiede and with great earnestnoas, that he was
more concerned at what had teanspired within the
last two or three days than at any thing that had
occurred to him for some time. Earl Grey depre-
cated the extension of these discussions, as nego-
tiatiotes on the points discussed were still pending;
but said he must express his belief that the country
The
demanded n c fho r
fleet
Alt
injury by no means coincided in opinion with the Noble
Duke respecting what had taken place in the
Tagarutys o. inflicted.ti
the Tagus to enforce it, and eventually the
demand was complied with. Earl Grey added, re-
specting the Belgian fortresses, that there were.
circumstances which rendered it not very desirable
wtSasfattn was had
refused,been
that these fortresses should remain ; and he certaittly
did not think that their demolition would weaken

_,~..;

13,,Igium'or,vant of defence. In the event of war,
he doubted-not that every one of these fortresses
would have been immediately takes 'possession of by
France—of course to the manifest injury of Bel-
gium. His Lordship having again requested Noble
Lords to suspend their judgments on these affairs
till information could be laid before them, the ex-
tended conversation dropped.—llforning Herald.

SECOND EDITION.

SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock.

I MPERI A L PARLIAMENT

OF TIIIS EVENING.

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Earl SHAFTESBURY took his seat on the Woolsack at
ten minutes before Five o'clock, the Lord Chancellor not

being present. " -
The Margiis WELLESLEY appeared in the full
4 Household uniform, with an answer to an address of
the House to his Majesty, stating that he had ordered
some papers to be laid on their table.
The several Bills on the table were then advanced a
stage, among others, the Oaths befure the Lord Steward's
Bill was passed.
The House then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

At about Three o'clock the SPEAKER took his seat.
Sir R. BATESON presented a petition from Belfast,
signed by 3,500 persons in favour of the grant to the
Kildare-sheet Society ; also, a petition from Lisburn, in
Ireland, to the same purport.
Mr. H. ROSS presented a petition from Dundee, against
the use of molasses in distilleries, which was ordered to lie
upon the table.
The same Hon. Member also presented a petition from the
principal woollen mauufacturers in and near Aberdeen,
against extending to Scotland the operation of the Bill to
limit the hours of the labours of children employed in
manufactoriem.
Mr. HOBHOUSE said, that having been the individual
who introduced the Bill in question, he could only say
that if necessary it could he passed without including
Scotland, and made applicable only to England. He was
however enabled to add, that he had several petitions from
Scotland intrusted to him, praying that the Bill might in-
elude that country ; but he was not yet decided whether
he should propose that the Bill include that country or not.
An HON. MEMBER. thought it a very dangerous prac-
tice to interfere between the masters and those they em-
ployed.
Mr. HUNT said he could state that from his own ob-
servation children of five, six, and seven years of age,
were in manufacturing districts, Lancashire and Cheshire
in particular, treated with great cruelty, being compelled
to stand several hours at a time in such a position as made
many of them cripples for the remainder of their lives.—
He hoped, therefore, the Hon. Member for Westminster
would persevere in his Bill.
Sir JAMES JOHNSTONE said that be knew the
manufacturers of Yorkshire were generally most humane ;
but if the Bill were to pass, he did not see why it should not
be equally applicable to Scotland as to England.
Mr. HOB HOUSE had no intention whatever of aban-
doning the Bill as respected England, and if he left out
Scotland it should only be for the sake of having its good
effects produced in England—it was only to secure
the passing of the Bill for England. lie had never
yet heatd of any opposition to the Bill, except from some
parts of Scotland.
Mr. E. PEEL said if Hem Members supposed that this
Bill would afford more time far the recreation or education
of children they were much mistaken.
The petition was read and ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. A. DAWSON presented a petition from Carrickma-
crosa for a Reform in Parliament, anti also a petition from
several pro-collectors of Excise in Ireland, for an inquiry
into the small amount of their superannuated allowances.
Mr. HUNT presented a petition from those of the in-
habitants of Macclesfield employed in the silk trat for a
repeal of the corn laws ; also a petition from John
Mitchell, of Bolton, praying that all notices to country
insolvent debtors, examined before the Insolvent Court
in London might be allowed to be transmitted free of
postage.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT presented a petition from Wa-
terford, praying for an inquiry into the state of the poor
in Ireland, with a view to a provision for their support.
Several Hon. Members spoke in favour of the esta-
hrshment of a system of poor laws in Ireland, and also
captaining the ill effects derived by that country from the
conduct of absentees.

Mr. DAWSON said the more he saw of the system of
Government iu Ireland, the inure he saw the necessity of a
system of poor laws : the rich must in such a case consent
to be taxed to a small extent for the benefit of their suffer-
ing fellow countrymeu,—(llear, hear.) Their present
distress arose from the very great want of employment.
He was aware of the good and honest intentions of
Government in favour of the Irish poor ; but the
grant of 500,0001. in Exchequer-bills would not relieve
the evil. If a system of Poor Laws were established, he
was sure that many of the present absentees would re-
side there and see that those funds were properly adtninis-
tared. Ile hoped the Government would look at the
question, and adopt wine measure that would satisfy not
only the English Gentlemen but the Irish also.—(Hear.)
Mr. LEADER complained that notwithstanding the
number of hours the House was occupied at night, and
the Members beiut kept from their homes ten months in
the year, no time was allowed fur discussing important
Irish questions.—(hear.) In the present condition of
Ireland it was imperative on Government to produce some
inea.sure for the relief of that country.
Mr. S. RICE said as two notices of motions bad b2en
given upon this subject, it was irrelevant to discuss it
upon the presentation of a petition. Assuming that all
the benefits that had been stated would arise from the in-
troduction of poor laws into Ireland, it was a very great
question how they could be effectually applied, Ile was
free to confess that something ought to be done, but it re-
quired great consideration as to the adoption of any parti-
cular measure.
Mr. HUME strongly contended that a proposition for
the benefit of the poor of Ireland should emanate, not
from individual Members, who by doing so laboured un-
der very disadvantageous circumstances but from the Go-
vermnent. —(lfear. )
Mr. SHELL was surprised that although the Committee
appointed in IS3O to enquire into the state of Ireland
had reported upon almost every subject, they had stupidly
avoided this question. The sooner this subject was brought
before the House the better, but not in the shape of a de-
sultory conversation ; for it was not a matter for Parlia-
mentary dialogue, but for Parliamentary legislation. The
petition was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed.
POOR LAWS. _ .

Mr. SADLER trusted that the Chancellor of the Est-
chequer would not throw any objections in the way of his
bringing forward his measure on this subject on the day
appointed for it, namely, the 2d of August.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would
not pledge himself to any particular day, in consequence of
the business before the House, but previous to the close of
the session the Hon. Member would have plenty of time
to bring forward this important discussion.
Mr. SADLER did not intend to enter into a lone dis-
cussion, but would only take the opinion of the Iliuse
upon the necessity of the institution of measures for the
relief of Ireland.
Mr. HUME wislityl to know whether there would he
any objection to lay the papers respecting the settlemeat of
Belgium before the House ?
Lord PALMERSTON said the transactions were not
completely concluded, as soon as they were, the House
should have every information on the subject.
Sir ROBERT PEEL wished to ask whether there was
any objection to produce the convention under which the
tor tresses of Belgium were to be demolished, and who were
the
parties who were to determine the numbers or descrip-
tion of the fortresses to destroyed,i.i whether France
was to be a party? slid
char
wish to ask
any question that would diminish
peace, and only ;on ainta of maintain-
ing an honourable information in
consequence of the announeerounte madeg in
the King of France. He regrette4. the tteiremued Speech
of
that Speech. The fortresses had not beet; :d furin
the purpose of menacing France. He LI
for information on that part of the peach, which stated
that the French fleet had entered the Tabun, and that
the
16- eol,surtd flag had floated under the wails ;of Lisbon.
The Right llon. Baronet did not wish to provoke discus-
sion, but thought he was justified in putting the question
regarding these fortresses. lie also wished to put a ques-
tion to the Noble Lord relative to another part of the French
King's Speech,. in which it was stated that the French
fleet had forced the enti.ance of the Tagus, and captured the
Partug"ese vessels, and that the tii-colour floated under
the walls of Lisbon, thereby announcing that the Por-
tuguese navy was actually in the power of France?
This amounted to a state of war between the two rountiirs.
such'a warfare existed it) any other country, lie ,Sir

R. Peel) would not require explanations. He did rot wish
to enforce the treaties with Portugal, so far as to say that
however wrong Portugal might be, we were bound to
support her; but it should be 4reoril!ected we were still
under engagements with her to :eepel any foreign aggres-
sion. lie would ask whether there were any objections on
the part of Government to lay before the House a copy of
the communication., if any, relative to this subject, in order
that the House might see whether we were justified in
withholding our interference, and whether a caws jlederis
had arisen to justify France in what she hail done?
Lord PAL3IERSTON said nothing was fairer than his
Right lion. Friend's questions. But he would not enter
into detail. Ile had laid before the House the protocol be-
tween the four Powers, Great Britain, Russia, Austria,
and Prussia, stating that as soon as there was a Govern-
ment in Belgium recognised by those Powers, they would
enter into a negociation, to consider whether the for-
tresses, or any part of them, should be razed, under
the circumstances in which Belgium was situated. He
could inform his Right lion. Friend that to that future ne
gociation France would not be a party, but only the Four
Powers he had alluded to. If he were to enter
on the grounds on which the four Powers had agreed to
diminish the number of those fortresses, it would imme-
diately occur to every one that the small resources of
Belgium rendered it impossible for them to be supported.
With regard to that part of the King of France's Speech
relative to the conduct of France towards Portugal he
could confidently state that Government was not
insensible to the obligations under which the treaties
bound this country to Portugal.—(Hear.) And which
guaranteed to that country the succour of England. And
if it }ingteen the opinion of the Government that the late
occurW.olew4en those two countries required either the
military aid or the mediation of this country with France,
the mere non-recognition of the present Government
of Portugal by this country would not have prevented such
a course. His Right Hon. Friend wished to know
whether Ministers would lay those papers before Parlia-
ment, stating what had come to their knowledge,
and which had led to the French expedition. In reply, he
could state that whenever the time should arrive at which,
in the opinion of Ministers, that information could be
communicated to Parliament, they would be ready to do
so, and assign motives for their conduct, if it should be
impugned. At present it was not expedient to produce
that information, not as respected themselves, but because
it bore on transactions at present incomplete.
Sir R. PEEL felt some satisfaction that the question as
to what number and description of fortresses in Belgium
should be destroyed was to be decided by the four Powers
without France. They were intended for the defence, not of
the united provinces of Europe, but more especially
of Holland. A country in the maintenance of whose
independence England was most deeply interested. He
would just state to the Noble Lord now, when it was not
toe late, the peculiar claims of that country. The Noble
Lord would recollect the convention in 1804, British money
was applied to the erection of those for tresses for the purpose
first of defending Holland, but secondly for the purpose
of consulting British interests. Two millions was advanced
to the King of Holland for the purpose of effecting
and maintaining those fortresses, and in consideration
thereof the people of Rolland had ceded to tide country the
colonies of Demerara, Cape of Good Hope, Berbice, and
Essequibo. He would ask if the King of Holland was to
be considered as a party in any degree interested in the
matter, and what recompense he would by the demolition
of these fortresses have received in the cession of these
colonies by England.
Lord PALMERSTON would assure the House that
his Majesty's Government had not been forgetful of the
ancient and long subsisting alliances between Holland and
England, and that they were quite aware of the extreme
importance to England of maintaining the indepen-
dent and cultivated friendship of Holland. With regard
to the connection which had been referred to, the
Right Hon. Baronet opposite had alluded to one of the
equivalents which Holland had received from a cession of
the Colonies, Demerara, Cape of Good Hope, Bsrbiee,
and Essequibo ; but the full equivalent was; he payMift of
Sweden a million which Holland would hive ad to paythe
Ili
advancement of the two millions which had teen referred
to, and charging ourselves with that portio f the Rus-
sian loan to which also reference had been m e. In an-
swer to a question put by an Hon Member, whose name we
could not learn, the Noble Lord said that within a very
short period after he undertook the duties with which he
was now charged, it occurred to the Plenipotentiaries of the
Four Powers in conference that it would become necessary
as soon as Belgium was separated ftorn Holland to make
sonic arrangements. These Powers had no object in
calling their attention to these matters except to take
care that those arrangements which had been made
some time ago for opposing a barrier against any possible
aggression on the part of France, should not by an altera-
tion of circumstances serve a purpose very different from
the original one. The fortresses undoubtedly were not
constructed with any intention to menace France,
but on the defensive systems for the purpose of protecting
other countries from those aggressions which in the then
state of things might be attempted by en the part of Franee.
On the motion that the papers be laid on the table,
Mr. BARING observed that be considered the payment
of the debt of Russia, due to individuals in Holland, which
was undertaken by the King of the Netherlands and this
country, would be terminated by the separation.
Lord PALMERSTON observed, that the question was
not'aa to new engagements, but to settle what was the force
of old ones.