The Sun.
London, England, 1847-06-17 00:00:00

of non.:intervention. You might say, "We have misery,
enough On our own hands; we have distress enough in
the west of Scotlhnd; we will not encumber ourselves
with the responsibility of interfering in Portugal; we
will net interfere." A Government might take that
course; but .1 venture to say, if you had taken that
course other countries would have interfered, and in
their interference they would have carried with them the
sympathies of half of Europe.—(Cheers.) Portugal
has special claims on us. She stood on our side in the
greatest ccnfiilt that ever threatened the repose and
liberties of Europe; she gave us the advantage of mili-
tary positions from which, as at Torres Vedras, that il-
lustrious commander did so much to achieve ultimately
the liberties of Europe.—(Cheers.) It is impossible you can
view with indifference or disregard the position of Por-
tugal. I admit it is not enough that the motive is good;
I must shove-that the acts were calculated to promote
tranquillity. What, then, was the position of Portugal,
its internal position, towards the latter end of March?
I take the accounts which reached the Government at
the moment when the necessity for decision had arrived.
Here is a dispatch from Sir Hamilton Seymour, and
dates are very important. It is dated the 14th of March
—received by the Government on the 22d. lam now
justifying a conclusion to which I come from a reference
to the condition of that country, and its imperative
claims upon some interference on our part in the general
interests of humanity, apart fr)m all obligations of treaty.
Sir Hamilton Seymour, writing on the 14th of_March, in
a dispatch received on the 22d, says, " Eiery day serves
to aggravate the miseries of the country. To present
want and distress future famine will be added if those

other man's opinion ; I know not what may be the
opinion or the vote of any other man ; I undertake
only to give my own honest and conscientious judgment
on this matter, without reference to any extriasiccircum-
stance or consideration. I first ask what was the motive of
her Majesty's Government in interfering in the domestic
concerns of Portugal? I separate the motives and objects
of the Government from their acts and proceedings. I
have read these papers ; arid if I believed, with the Hon.
Gentleman who makes this motion, that there had been
a wanton departure from the principle of non-interference
—if I believed that the object of the Government had
been to range itself on the side of despotic power—and
to crush the struggling liberties of Portugal, I would
have most cordially concurred in a vote of censure. But,
after reading these papers—and speaking now of the mo-
tives of the Government as distinguished from its acts—
I acquit it of any other intention than to support an an-
cir nt monarchy, and at the same time to combine with
the support of that ancient monarc arantees for the
constitutional liberties of the peo e, With respect to
many painful, transactions the Government had given
advice to the Government of Portugal before it com-
mitted itself to any active interference ; was it wise to
give that advice or not ? It would certainly be a plain
and simple course to decline giving any advice even to a
friendly Government, to have said, " We have enough
to do to manage our own affairs, without concerning our-
selves with yours ;" it was possible to take that course,
and it would have relieved the Government of a great
responsibility. But that has not been the course taken
in former times with respect either to the Go-
vernments of Portugal or of Spain. I speak
without prejudice on this subject, for I was no
party to the quadruple treaty; I objected to the obli-
gations you incurred by that treaty; I thought it unwise
to enter into them; better at that time to permit the
people of Spain and Portugal to decide for themselves
between the rival branches of the houses of Bourbon and
Bragansa; I am, therefore, free from any prejudice on
this subject. Bat I cannot enter into the consideration
of what has been recently done without remembering
that the quadruple treaty has been entered into. You
have contracted these special obligations to which the
four powers are parties; you have guaranteed the
thrones-of Spain and Portugal to the present possessors
against the other two brances, and if Don Miguel were
to reappear in Portugal, or a descendant of Dun Carlos
in Spain, then you would be bound by the obligations
of that treaty to interfere, not certainly for the purpose
of establising a particular party in the domestic govern-
ment of either country, but to take part in a civil war
for the maintenance of one branch of the family on the
throne against another. Ire deciding, therefore, on the
recent policy of the Government, either in giving hdviee
to Portugal or interfering actively ,with its affairs, we
must bear in mind, not only our ancient relations with
that country, the importance of _Portugal from its, geo-
graphical position, and the long coainexion between us,
but also the special obligations by which we are bound
in certain cases to a• joint acsionswith other countries.
It has not been usual to abstain from friendly inter-
vention, either with respect to_ Spain. or Portugal.,
When Mr. Canning was Secretary for Foreign Affairs,
the Duke of Wellington being a member of the Cabinet,
Lord Fitzroy Somerset was expressly dispatched in 1823
to give-advice to the Spanish Government, end dispatched
too to advise it to modify the too liberal constitution, to
give increased power to the _sovereign, and to alter the
terinaof the constitution, that were supposed to be too
fevourablecto theedenadcratic power. Lord Fitzroy So-
merset was the.bearer of a letter addressed by the Duke
of Wellington to the leading men in Spain; the object of
that letter came under discussion in 1823, and when
Parliament, at the instance of Mr. Canning, rejected the
motion made by Sir James Macdonald, and affirmed the
policy of Mr. Canning, the fact was before the House of
Commons that we had attempted, no doubt from the
most friendly feelings, to avert from Spain the danger
of threatenedinvasion froth France, by advising the mo-
dification of her constitution. Therefore, I say the pric-
tice of advising the Governments both of Spain and Por-
tugal has not met,- in. former times, with the censure of
thii flOUSet. There Sir, if I look at the nature of the ad-
vice given to Portugal as in the dispatches 'of the Noble
Lord. the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, I see not
a word in that advice of which a British Minister has
reason tci -be ashamed. I am speaking now of the ad-
vice given before we had committed ourselves to forcible
intervention. What was that advice ? When it was in-
tended to commit-that act which we cannot hear without
shame at this period of civilisation—(Cheers)—when it
watt intended to transport men who had engaged in a
civiLcontest, but who had capitulated on the assurance
than they should be treated as prisoners of Vial.—
(Cheers)—when it was attempted to transport these
men, gallant soldiers, though they may have been' mis-
takeyi in the c mstruetion of their duty—when it was
ant napted, in violation of good faith, to transport these
men to an unhealthy climate, I find the British Govern-
ment remonstrating against that act, and earnestly ad-
vising that, both with reference to the interests of huma-
nity, and an enlarged and comprehensive view of the in-
terests of the Portuguese monarchy, such an atrocity
should not be perpetrated.--(Cheers.) Sir, I think that
the Government was justified in making that remon-
strance and giving that advice.—(Cheers.) Then, again
I find the British Government remonstrating against'
the shameful decree that all prisoners taken in arms
should be instantly shot—(Cheers)—wisely and properly
leaving the Portuguese Government to draw the inference
that it was _impossible for us to countenance or support
them, or show them any sympathy, if acts of that kind
were committed, endangering the throne in the estimS:
tioa of its own subjects, an bringing upon the Go-
vernment the indignation of every civilised eountry.
In every instance in which advice was given I find it to
be in favour of forbearance—in favour of lenity and mo-
deration—(Cheers)—and, inferring the motives from the
advice, I cannot think it consistent with justice to visit
the Government with the condemnation which this
motion implies.—(Cheers.) Then, Sir, I come to the
acts of the Government, and I am perfectly willing to
admit that it is not sufficient that the motives and inten-
tions should have been good if the acts were in them-
selves unwise. You may acquit the Government of
intentional misconduct, but if their acts be at variance
with. justice or sound policy you are perfectly at liberty,
if Dot to censure the Government, at least to compel the.
revocation of the acts. In reviewing the acts of the
Government, the sth of April is a day of the utmost
importance.---(Hear, hear.) Up to the sth of April we
had limited ourselves to friendly advice, to warnings,
sad to remonstrances, and up to the sth of April I think
there can be few persons disposed to censure Govern-
ment onaaccount of any step they had then taken, or any
advice they had given. Ia viewing the subsequent acts
of the Government, I -certainly should attach consider-
able weight to the motives and intentions by which they
were dictated—not that good motives and intentions
would justify acts which are impolitic, but in consider-
ing the acts I should have material regard to the motives
and intentions which influenced them. The question is,
whether en the sth of April, when it is clear that the
Government departed from its former course and under-
toote TrotTanriy-ta--give.ativiee, laut 4.0...m4k0 pralasikia
whit* in certain contingencies. :involved
,theuecessityd
atenedeinterventien, tberesialt Vindfcation-foi"
thisechangetaft policy? - N- 9w - first.pf qb="
aertekitliat,wo whe:vare in the posi.tima, pi': judges off 0'
thea evenuitave,a gneatcadmantage.oTer thole who I:4d,to-
sii
azelecision,-pebladiug Jagainsryer,y-cOmpfieit_ted,Stt'
untseetninabontingenvie.s.—sCCheera.) whOl
theseeibscerenis now as ilight,,as„, day. Trpoti' thn 'R
comb:Meal:am whiolleheA atien_toshe censidere4- 4d-or
which ethe 'issue appeared -very slaiutultil, 'the :tighta.of
history- hash:been stied, elteis now cos .to see theisiisf
takes that; maae haver been committed. Thajudge,:,beini
iinnoseessimatif _all the factsshasing ailtnewledge of: .
'O7
the events which have taken place, is in a very dififent
situation from those who had to decide under uncertain
And . doubtful circumstances.—(Cheers.) Sir, I. plac6
myaelf in the position of a Government which, on receiv-
ing the representations of the Portuguese Government,
had to-decide what course they would pursue; and, to
sit) justice to their case, it is absolutely necessary to at-
tempt to forget all we now know, and consider what we
would have done with the information before us which
they had in the early part of April.—e(Cheers.) Sir, I
cannot conceive a decision more difficult to be arrived at.
On the one, hand there was a Government which had
done acts that merited disapprobation—(Cheers)—there
was every argument against forcible intervention-in the
domestic concerns of Portugal; there was the danger,
also, that, by intervention, we might set the precedent
for other and future interventions, from which very
serious embarrassments might arise; and no doubt these
were considerations that ought to be maturely weighed. •
—(Cheers.) There is no man in this House who feels
more strongly than I do the grave objections that apply
to a wanton and unnecessary intervention in the affairs
of other countries. The danger is, that by that inter-
vention you are not propping up the throne in favour of
which yott interfere—you may be sowing the seeds of
weakness, instead of strengthening the cause you espouse.
But, on the other hand, it becomes a Government
responsible for, the administration of public affairs to
consider also what course it was fitting to pursue with
reference to the general interests of humanity, and the
restoration of domestic peace in a country in the internal
peace of which we were entitled to take a deep interest.
Was there a prospect of an early termination of these
quarrels ? Were not parties so equally balanced, that
this conflict having continued from the 7th of October,
there was every probability that, it we and other poWers
also
You
stood aloof,—if we had said to the Portuguese,
u_shall fight it out," we must have been witnesses of
a terrible
struggle, impeding -industry, engendering per-
- manent discord between members of the same nation,
almost members of the same family, without a prospect
of any termination, through
_ the superiority of one party
or the other.--(cheel
wishrs to,wish to take nothing what-
ever l
for granted.state to the House. what is
the evidence which has brought me the conclusion
that, had I been a member ibe Government,i: having to
act in the latter days of INlarch, I am
taken the
means pre-
pared to say that I would not have I.c-11 the course
eolith, under great -diffi.?ulties, her atalesaes
to take —(c• " "e' 'ev`r2l"
went finally determineti • aeerss. After the
free end unrestricted eornmunlcation of every letter writ-
ten at an early period, it were easy, from the pens_ of
those who wrote dispatches and the mouths of those who
uttered opinions, to convict Government apparently on
their own evidence. Up to the sth of April you de-
' .preeated intervention. You though t it unwise ; you wish( d
to prevent France and Spain from intervention ;
of course you used every argument against. it; but when
necessity forced on you interyention, then, no doubt, the
• arguments you used against intervention appsared ap-
plicable to your own course; and -it would be, easy in
this way to convict you of inconsistency and condemn
you on that account. Bute admitting the, policy of ab-
staining from intervention ourselves, and discouraging
intervention on the part ofdiscouragingat d Spain, the simple
. question is,- whether, towards the latter.,nd_ofilarch, a
change
question,! of policy wee not rendered nem--ar y by the state
of the case?—(Cheere.) I look to the first, as.
far as the-general interests of humanity are concerned.'
- You cannot doubt that, with respect to this
400
yeasrseouynoturym, with
- whichYoWbalvd had _treaties for
most rigid
04144 n front all interference on the principle

Would you then have had to interpose to prevent her
reaping the fruits of the victory? My conviction is that,
if you had held aloof and the Queen had triumphed, the
same motives which led to those decrees with respect to
arresting persons taken in arms and the transportation
of prisoners would have again operated, and would have
given you no security whatever, either for the return of
constitutional liberty, or even for the exhibition of decent
forbearance or generosity towards the vanquished...-.
(Hear, hear.) There were, too, many motives that in-
fluenced your decision. You saw all the objections to
intervention. You feared all the dangers of having to
make use of a Spanish force; and, on the other-hand,
you calculated the danger of a victory of one cause over
the other, and all the consequences which, as we know
from experience, generally tollow such triumphs; and I
cannot, in justice, join in the condemnation of a Govern-
went which, balancing these conflicting considerations,
came to the conclusion that it was, on the whole, better
to make proposals which, as I admit, if rejected, led to
the necessity of a further intervention.—(Hear.) There
was every probability that the proposals you made would
have been accepted, and that no after-intervention
would have arisen. - You took that chance, and it
was impossible for any one or any Government to pro-
ceed otherwise than on probabilities. Having prevailed
on the Queen's Government to offer those conditions, You
had no alternative, if they were rejected, but to assist
her in enforcing obedience from her revolted subjects.
There was again another danger to be guarded against;
there was the danger of France and Spam interfering if
you remained neutral. I have already said that I think
the conduct, both of France and Spain, in these negotia-
tions, proves a disposition to show every confidence in
this Government.—(Hear, hear.) They have through-
out evinced no . inclination to obtain any advantage to
themselves by an interference separate from this coun-
try ; and I am glad that the Noble Lord withdrew the
imputation which had been cast upon M. Guizot and the
French Government, in respect to a supposed desire to
have an independent intervendon. I saw it with the
greatest satisfaction, and Ido believe that, even after
those unfortunate differences which had prevailed be-
tween this country and France, in respect to which I
think France in the wrong, there was yet every wish on
the part of France to take an early opportunity of ex-
pressing a desire to act in unison with us in any inter-
ference in the affairs of Portugal. Ido not think
that M. Guizot ever wished, or that he -ever con-
templated, a separate intervention, and I can hardly
believe that the Minister of Louis Philippe, considering
what is the foundation of his throne—(Hear, hear)—
would have advised a wanton or unnecessary inter-
ference in the internal affairs of another nation.—(Hear,
hear.) Remember, howeVer, that the Minister of France,
disposed to show confidence in this Government, did,
nevertheless, declare his opinion to be that the Portu-
guese Government was entitled to receive aid from the
Spanish Government. M. Guizot entertained an opi-
nion, and I think a sincere one, that under the quadruple
treaty, the three Governments might have jusnfied in-
terference. Even if
ea cases fcederis had not arisen, M.
Guizot said that the principle which had dictated the
signatures to that treaty still remained, and I recollect
particularly that he dwells on this fact—that General
Povoas, the Miguelite General, had been admitted to
great influence at Oporto, and he considered that circum-
stance most material in justifying the Portuguese Go-
vernment in asking aid from Spain. Therefore I give
entire credit to the Governments of France and Spain
for the confidence they displayed. I believe that the
object of M. Pacheco was to act cordially with us, and
I acquit M. Guizot and the French Government of any
intention to obtain particular advantages for themselves.
But, in the state of thine's which would have ensued, if
such acts as those to which I have referred had been
perpetrated—if Lisbon had been fired, if the malefactors
had been turned loose, then France and Spain would
have been fully justified in interfering, even had you
refused; and I again say, that if these events had oc-
curred, I doubt if France and Spain would not have • found
support and approval in the public opinion of Europe.—
(Hear, hear.) It may be to us and to our interests a
matter of indifference what takes place in Pcrtugal ;
but, consider Spain. The dynasty of Spain holds its
authority by nearly the same tenure with the dynasty of
Portugal. Spain could not depart from all coiesideration
of the quadruple treaty. Placing ourselves, however,
in the position of Spain, seeing the identity f interests
which prevailed between the dynasty in the possession
of the throne of Spain, and the dynasty in the possession
of the throne of Portugal, apart from the quadruple
treaty, and every other consideration, I think a common
interest and the necessity of preventing anarchy in Por-
tugal constitute a case which, itself, would justify, on
all grounds, Spanish interference, if such a calamity as
that of which I have made mention had occurred.—
(Hear, hear.) And, turning to the other alternative,
supposing, instead of the Queen's forces, the insurgent
troops had been successful, I see no evidence' whatever
that a greater degree of moderation would have been
exercised in that case. I see nothing in the pro-
portion 'of the Junta forces, nothing in the course
they took, to assure me that justice or generosity would
have prevailed had they been victorious. Why, the
proposal that there should be no Commander-in-
Chief, that there should be different corps acting
under different generals, and, considering that the
Queen's army was in possession of Lisbon, the proposi-
tion that the Government should be handed over to the
insurgents, for them to accept any terms of accommo-
dation, convince me that in the hour ot. victory little
reliance could be placed on either their moderation or
their sense of right.— (Hear, hear.) And, therefore, I
leave you to choose either alternative, the triumph of
the Queen's cause, or the triumph of_tho-insurgents; it
is ponible„ you inight haVe gained an'advantage in the
termination of a harassing civil conflict; but you would
have found in either ease no guarantee for the restora-
tion of constitutional liberty—that accommodation, that
oblivion of past crimes, that mutual generosity, on which
alone can the hopes of future peace be founded.—(Hear,
hear.) Then upon these three considerations, seeing
the probability that this strife would have long continued
if not suppressed
.by your means—remembering that it
was for the interests of humanity that you should inter-
fere, looking to the great likelihood that, if you had not
interposed, France and Spain would not only have de-
sired, but have been compelled to interfere—knowing
the further probability that in either issue; whether the
result were a triumph to the Queen or to the insurgents,
moderation and justice would not have been maintained
—in the midst of these conflicting considerations, all of
which had to be weighed by the Government, again I
say I will not consent to visit with condemnation those
who, under such' circumstances, deemed it.expedient to
decide' upon offering British intervention.-s-(Cheers.)
And it is upon these grounds that I shall:give My vote
against the motion of the Hon. Gentleman. I think it
inconsistent with justice to visit the Government with
censure. I think they have done nothing in the conclu-
sion to which they came which disentitles them to the
confidence of this House so far as their conduct in these
affairs is concerned.—(Cheers). Well, now, as to the
question of public policy, which is a far more im-
portant,,,subject fei our deliberation,—is „it , , wise, while..,
all thesi transaStionParit peffsling, and -whillethe plins:i
are Tieing curried into-exeention, to-eentrol„ by....a -decie_
Sion'of the Hauser -of -Corntdons; the >executive Governs
men t, and to say that-this-policy- must- be abandoned. 2.
Yerhaps-ienitisrt-notlaoahrdoned, -perhaps it must he.
continued: By'whom 3 Issay the hand hr pajsicd that.
diai- te eXece te. it if struck- by a resolution of: the House..
Of COMmons adverse` to it,-. What--do you. mean toil°.
affer "having adopted-- this , resolution ?--(Hcar.), It -
seeriss to me- to be tinvvarrantabje in principle, and likely.
. to- lead -taLsericus- and-most mischievous consequences..
' Whatavould he-the-conseilueobe to the public policyor
ilae pOititi, if you paissuelr sodeolaration ? ..Will you
vlelise Das Antas,and• tile- insurgentlar.ces or will -.
you.
`'
rsrattnier.tn-::g2l7twr 1r ne4);:lirti e":l27:Beir huific'a vtliongg
efteoohnuu;srioueskthtie 1 PdwiGii: Govern-
ment, lyt-
as best they may ?" Will you replace Das Antes and
his 2,500 men in the British steamers, take them back
to Oporto, and say, " Gentlemen, we have been in the
wrong ; it is right we. should make you compensation,
and so we return You exactly to the position which
originally you occupied ; any damage we have done to
you or your cause we are willing to repair ; we there•
fore bring you back to Oporto, and will let you fight
it out 1" Is that the course you would now take ? If
you have done wrong and you do not wish to inflict in-
justice, you have no means of -repairing the mischief ;
it will not be enough merely to release -Das Antes.—
(Hear;hear.) Will you then retain him in custody, will
you still hold him tind' his followers as prisoners of war ?
I know not, indeed; what course the Executive is to take
in the midst' of -these proceedings, when so soon as to-
morrow night it may be necessary to give instructions
or answer some dispatch they may receive, if there is
not a distinct explanation on the part of the House of
Commons of the motive by which it is guided in coming
to this conclusidn.—(Cheers.) Is it to be left to the Mi-
nister of the Crown to say, " I have entered into this en-
gagement,l must 'creep out' of it as well as I can ; I must
avoid the fulfilment of the conditions I accepted?"
And what language will you hold to the other
parties to the convention ? You declared to them
that the necessity for interference had occurred. You
knew that no separate interference was desired, and,
although you denied the obligations of the quadruple
treaty, and although you did not think a cdsus fcederis
had arisen, yet, in deference to the principle of that
treaty, by the advice of her Ministers, the Queen of Eng-
land invited France and Spain to be parties to the inter-
vention. When, then, you have told them that the Queen
of England can no longer fulfil her engagements, you d
not intend to prohibit them from-- pursuing the
policy which with you they commenced ?;--(Hear, hear.)
After having crept out of your obligations, you do not
expect that France and Spain who entered into the agree-
ment at your suggestion, will now withdraw? You do not
think that the French Government will say to the Cham-
bers, " We interfered at the solicitation of the Queen of
England; we were willing to give our aid; but she says
ehe ma% fulfil her part in the convention,• end she tells
ne also, that it is not possible we can fulfil ours?"—
(Hear, hear.) Is it at all probable that the French
Government till Le guided by your rL.solutiost? No;
the consequence will be, that Spain and France will alone
carry out the intervention. How is the Queen of Eng-
land to remonstrate? The very danger, therefore, that
you have apprehended, viz., the exclusion of your own
influence, and the establishment of the authority of
France and Spain in Portugal, will inevitably take place
under yout eyes; and I defy you, in accordance with the
principle of any international law, to make any remou-
strance.—(Hear, hear.) I say it is infinitely better we
should continue to act in concurrence with the other
Governments, bringing to bear upon the question the
moral influence of the three great powers who established
the throne of Donna Maria and of the Queen of Spain.
—(Hear, hear.) In deference to motives of public
policy it is infinitely better we should not attempt to
control the Executive Government, acting under consi-
derable difficulties by any resolution which would in-
volve a course undignified and impracticable.—(Cheers.)
It is infinitely better that we should leave the Govern-
ment to decide unencumbered and unembarrassed by our
advice.—(Hear;) Au amendment has -been moved; I

who ought to be employed in cultivating are to be en
gaged in laying waste the land."—(Cheers.) But this
state of things had continued from October to March.
There was no sufficient superiority in either party, ap-
parently, to terminate the state of things. We were
suffering from famine at home; and here was a country,
our immediate neighbour—for in such a case the sea
constitutes neighbourhood—were we to permit Portugal,
on account of intestine feuds, to be laid waste, and an
additional strain to be laid on her more happily circum-
stanced neighbours?—(Cheers.) Then again, on the
19th of March, Sir H. Seymour writes, in a dispatch
received on the 28th, " The financial condition ot the
country is daily becoming worse ; before this reaches
your Lordship the discount of notes will probably be 50
per cent. Extensive importations of corn have been
lately made, the most considerable from Liverpool."
Well, just consider what was the demand .in the Liver-
pool market; what was the price of corn there; the ne-
cessity we had ourselves for preserving as much of
Liverpool corn as we could for the maintenance of our
own people.—(Hear, hear.) What must have been the
condition of that people when it is said, "Of the scar-
city and dearness of bread you will form some idea by
the fact, that the last cargoes from Liverpool were sold
at a profit to the importer of 30 per cent?"—(Cheers.)
That corn was sold at a profit of 30 per cent. The people
who ought to have been cultivating the soil, were engaged
in cutting each other's throats, without the prospect of
bringing that to a conclusion.—(Hear, hear.) What
was to be the prospect of that country, with reference to
the sustenance of the people, if that state of things was,
to go on; and we, relying on the principle of rigid non-
intervention, had refused to interfere by any act by
which that state of affairs might be put an end to?—
(Cheers.) The Englrsh Consul, Mr. Johnson. in a letter
received by the Government on the 15th of March,
states, "In Vitale the authorities have seized corn;
they broke open the stores of Mr. Russell, an English-
man. The state: otaffairs on the Douro is very,vexa-
tious to our merchants; the merchants can neither bring
down theit wines nor send pipes or staves to Regoa."
Hero there" was a proof that the continuance of these
civil commotions materially interfered with the security
of British property, and by interrupting commerce di-
rectly affected the interests of British subjects. Now the
testimony lam about to quote is very important, It is
'written at a subsequent date, but such was the disposi-
tion of the people in the very neighbourhood of Lisbon
that Sir 11. Seymour thus describes the plans of what he
calls " the anarchists ":
" The plan of the anarchists was to set fire to some old
houses in various parts of the town, to force the pri-
son doors, and let loose some 1,200 or 1,400 prisoners.
When a populous town is to be fired at various points,
and when the confusion which ensues is to be increased
by the presence of all the vilest malefactors in the hands
of justice, it is idle to inquire what precise political ole•
jects are sought for, or at what exact points conflagration
and excesses are to cease."
Well, -you had the British fleet in the Tagus ; you
heard from your Minister that the plan of the anarchists
was to set fire to Lisbon in different parts of the town,
to discharge the vilest malefactors to the number of
-1,400. I ask you if, having that fleet in the Tagus, we
could remain perfectly passive, and permit Lisbon to be.
destroyed by the malefactors turned out of the gaols?—
(Cheers.) I say nothing of the manifest intention .of
France and Spain to interfere. I think that the conduct
of France and Spain manifested a confidence in this
country. I think that the Government cannot found
their vindication on any assurance that•rnoce or _Spain
, would interfere separately. But then I say the force of
circumstancos would have caused their interference. If
1-the Queen of Portugal had said. " Lwill give guarantees
for future good government ; I will give an amnesty ; I
will recal obnoxious edicts ; I intend eo govern consti-
tutionally ;" if the British Admiral ,having received
these guarantees, had permitted Lisbon. to be fired,
and malefactors to be turned out and destroy property
in the streets, Spain and France would have inter-
fered. They would have rescued the Queen ; they
would have rescued property from such depredation. I
again say, the assent and sympathy of Europe would
have been with them, and you would have been blamed
for permitting such outrages in that country which, to
a certain extent, you have virtually taken under your
protection. Yeu might have been able in such a case to
make out a good defence on the rigid principle of non-
intervention; but the blood of the British House of Com-
mons would have risen—(Cheers)—and you would have
had no creditlor your rigid adherence to the principle
of non-intervention.—(Loud cheers.) But then again I
ask, what security had you that the cause of liberty
would have triumphed—what security had you that the
insurgents would triumph? I say, none whatsoever.
I say that the probability was that the Queen's cause
would have triumphed rather than the insurgents. Ob-
serve what has taken place. Although Spain had not
directly interfered, she had a force on the frontier. She
was lending the moral authority of Spain to the Queen
and her Government. She had not only marched her
forces to' the frontier; she had facilitated the passage of
the Queen's troops through part of her dominions. Her
forces on the frontier were thus ready to act. Had events
taken a sudden turn, had the fortunate moment for the
entrance of Don Miguel within Portugal arisen, Spain
would not only have interfered, but she had a right to in-
terfere, and then she was prepared for that act of
interference.--(Cheers.) But she was lending the coun-
tenance or the Spanish Government to the Queen of
Portugal, by having her army on the frontier. A pro •
position was made for the enlistment of a Spanish 4 mag, .
Wise offreereeirtuguese,...aucLe.oaplo.sed,in, the cause;
of 'the-Queen.e . You say. Spain, will. ,not -interfere; bid
Colonel-W•ylde writes -on tha,2lst.orMerai a di.spaoll:
receiVed, on the,2Bth of that mcnth, in which he says,.
``' Saldanhazs, demand to ,bo, allowed; ,to, raise a legion 11,1
Spain•haS beentaCeeded to by. the Gcovertanient .11"ere,'
That lyric, direct ,S pa n ish ~ in Ler IT ntio.4. .Xhte. SPATI„is.4..
'Govefnmetki, tatting 4<3..conaert,sitlirthg,rDrtu'ugs,e, .1-xo-
eiereasente lead, permitted eSaldatthatito. Xaien' e; 149 n toy
-actin liottiage4-4hat w.4,a %direct pe,nish intervention..'
I;lliphltda"kit• titratto."l4she.l2of°,rtlaaltguealeo.ytr7rpretnei'isatlinfad:lib'easerfie i
< bc.eet d tio,to Spain- Spanish igleirfgeiacu was' gii"en;'ind
\
How veal tbis -to ioet sesisted? --Colima Wylde yeiit'OA. to"
Say, " I have no doubt, if this measure is carrae&ifiVe
effect, that' none but ready-made soldiers wilLbe enUit63,
and that every facility will be afforded-him by the Spa-
nish Government for obtaining them by allowing men
to volunteer from the regular army." That was the in-
formation which, on the 22d of March, the Govern•
ment were in possession of.--(Cheers.) I take for
granted that the official accounts are correct. I have no
information except that which I derive from the official
papers. ..-
Mr. HUME—Saldanha only demanded to be allowed
to raise a legion. ._
Sir R. PEEL—Colonel Wylde says, " Seldanlia's de-
mand to be allowed to - raise a legion in Spain has been
acceded to by -the Government here."--(Cheers.) Why,
Government has to. act on probabilities, and come to a
sudden decision on information like this; and, if you
found that there had been a legion of• Spaniards engaged
in Portugal you would have found it too late to remon-
strate, and most difficult to carry any remonstrance into
effect ; and, unless you chose to send a military force
to Portugal, and identified yourself with the insurgent
force against•that.of the monarchy, you would have had
no means of:effectual resistance against the invasion of
Spain.—(Cheers.) Now, what are the indications that
the insurgent cause was likely to triumph ? Sir H.
Seymour, in a dispatch dated the 18th of March, re-
ceived the 23th of March, says—
Events of such nature are taking • place here as to
make it evident that a crisis of some sort must be at
hand. Marshal Saldanha writes to the Queen announcing
his intention.of.resigning his seat in the Council, in the
event either-of the Queen's refusal to sanction an appli-
cation for the assistance of Spain, ,or of any attempt
being made to come to terms with the insurgents."
Consider: what was the position of the Portuguese Go-
vernment at that time? The Queen, it is admitted, was
menaced with dangers. The Commander-in- Chief and
the Prime Minister had threatened to send in their re-
signations-if she did not early make application to Spain
for assistanee. How great, then, was her motive to seek
from Spain direct military assistance, when such was.the
counsel of her Ministers, and when this was the threat
they had made to her!—(Hear, hear.) On the 19th of
March, in a letter received on the 28th of March, Sir H.
Seymour says, " I cannot doubt that an application to
Spain for assistance will be made." Well, supposing the
Cancan had been victoricnee wliat me your guarantee in
that CeSO for constitutional liberty?—(flear, hear.)
Thera was some doubts about the result, and you 'will
find strong evidence he looking over these letters, al-
though the Junta at Oporto was. very firm, that yet
there were intestine divisions in the Junta, that the
people
there
was
were
no
o wish undecided,
to
encourageanhat inth thee
insurgents.provi nc e o f BeiraWith
the
the Portuguese forces under the command of Saldanha,
backed by countenance of Spain, I say that the,pro-
L bability
va
;vas, on the 28th of March, that the Queen
would haveGovernment
been victorious,.—(gear,
was exulting
io ii: s . (
in
Hear, hear.) And when
the
unexpected victory, what
' security would you have a
for-
bearance or constitutional order. !'or moderation and
ihe Observe—who would
have been the Governrent?Government would
have been composed of those who had advised the trans-
portation of the prisoners taken at Torres Vedras--of
those who had counselled the issuing of decrees by which
men taken in arms should be instantly shot. • f.
h
been done in the green tree, what would hays
beenthings addohne in the dry?—(Hear hear.) If you had re-
fused all intervention—if you had said to the Queen ot
Portugal, ". We 4tand aloof, we leave you to settle the
question;" and autyposing she had triumphed, what right

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY MORNING, JUNE 17, 1847..

am ready to vote against the motion without any amend.
ment. I will deal with the subject on its abstract
merits. - If I were a member of the Government,
I would not take an amendment which, after
all, will be passing by this censure.—(Hear, hear.) To
the principle of the- motion of the lion. Gentleman the
Member for Finsbury I have no objection; the question
of affirming it by the House of Commons is another
matter.—(Hear, hear.) The Government said to the
Queen of Portugal, 0 The conditions which we must have
from you are, complete and entire amnesty and exemp-
tion from penal consequences for every person engaged
in this insurrection; we make no exception; we will try
to prevent, as far as we can, any future cause for dissen-
sion, arising from the absence of a complete act of
oblivion; we require you to withdraw every decree
since the 6th of October at variance with the established
constitution; we also require you to constitute a Go-
vernment which shall inspire general confidence, and
from which we desire there shall be excluded every one
liable to public suspicion or popular distrust; and, lastly,
we earnestly implore-you to remove that person who has
occupied a prominent place in the palace, and whose si-
tuation in Portugal exposes him to suspicion." These
were the terms on which the intervention was based;
and having received- an assurance from the Government
of Portugal that these conditions should be fulfilled, hav-
ing, moreover, invited the insurgent party to lay down
their arms upon the assurance that those conditions
should be respected, I do say, in concurrence with the
principle of the resolution, that the honour of England
is involved in their strict observance.—(Cheers.) I
think it would be a breach of faith towards the insurgent
psrty (I regret the necessity) if you did not commit the
honour of England to the maintenance of the condi-
tions which you yourselves proffered.—(Hear, hear.)
gives me the best
etho these unfortunate
o
ited testimony, which
Taaffairs n
isc e portiontiioer
testimony,af theha
tterminationheu dispatchesn s unsolicited
I find to be borne to the personal dispositions of the So-
vereigns of Portugal. I, myself, attribute the misfors
tunes that have -occurred to the pernicious advice they
have received. It is usual, on all occasions, in consti-
tutional and loyal states, to presume justice and hu-
manity on the part of crowned heads; but I do find in
these papers conclusive proof that you may fairly attri-
bute the acts that have been done,notto the personal dis-
positions of the Queen of Portugal or her Consort, but to
the bad counsel they received from the Government of
Cabral and those who were leagued with it.—(Hear.)
I find that Sir 11. Seymour, in a dispatch of March 21,
affords an unsuspicious testimony to the good faith of
the Que, n and the character of the King. He says—
" The King has given a fresh proof of the wise and con-
ciliatory disposition by which he has been distinguished
in the Council, by addressing yesterday a letter to Mar-
shal Saldanha, calling upon him to make peaceful over-
tures to the Oporto Junta." That was the act of the
King in council. His suggestion was, not an:appeal to
arms, but that conciliatory overtures should be made to
the insurgents.—(Hear, hear.) Those overtures were
not made; but whose was the fault? That of the men
who threatened to resign should the course advised by
the King be taken.—(Hear.) With this evidence before
them, they were bound to make every allowance for the
conduct of their Majesties, having, as it was shown, been
placed in so critical a position. Mr. Southern says, in
one of his dispatches, that he had addressed a note pro-
testing against the transportation of the prisoners taken
at Torres Vedras, and that the subject had been re-
peatedly under deliberation in the Cabinet, and his com-
ment is, "I am happy to think- that the benevolent
feelings of their Majesties induces them to support my •
views; but the opinion of the Cabinet, to which some
extraneous persons were admitted, finally prevailed, on
being backed by a threat of immediate resignation on the
part of the Ministry." Thus it was clear the Sovereign
had interfered on behalf of the prisoners, but those who
directed theircounsels having threatened resiguation, they
were unable to effect their own charitable wishes.—
(Hear, hear.) Again, Sir H. Seymour says, on the Sth
of May, speaking of the action of the lit of May, when
the insurgents sustained a loss of 500 killed and
wounded—" Many of the wounded insurgents, in com-
pany with the wounded of the Queen's forces, have been
removed to the hospital at Lisbon. On the 3d inst. the
hospital was visited by the Queen and King, who spoke
to many of the wounded, and gave special orders that
every attention should be paid to all alike." Such evi-
dence of justice and moderation on the part of these
Royal personages inspires me with the hope
that if they are surrounded by more honest
advisers there is a prospect of returning peace
and tranquillity to Portugal— (Cheers.) Now, I trust
that nothing I have said will lay me open to the
suspicion that I approve of the measures which were
adopted by the Government of Portugal since the 7th of
October.—(Hear, hear.) I think that the change of
Government on the 6th of October, 1846, the sudden
removal of the Duke de Palmella, and the mode in which
that removal was effected, were calculated to lessen,the
respect of the people for the throne.—(Hear, hear.)
I have come to the conclusion that on the whole it is
desirable that the power of England should be exerted
for the purpose of quelling these troubles ; but I do not
think it should be lent to giving countenance and sup-
port to arbitrary proceedings.—(Hear.) I have seen, I
had almost said with shame and regret, that illustrious
man, the Duke of Palmella, an exile from his own coun-
try and in banishment.—(Hear, hear.) I see with regret
that wisest politician of all the Portuguese—the man
who was a political ornament to his country—the man
who in 1814.15 was associated with the leading diplo•
matists of Europe for the purpose alaying.the founda-
tions of that general peace which has endured 27 years
—I do see wi: h deep pain that that man, the most emi-
nent of the subjects of the Queen of Portugal, is an
exile from his native country. And for what? Because
he wished to govern on constitutional principles—
( Hear) —because, in his intercourse with public men,
with the statesmen of Europe, he had learned, perhaps,
better principles for the conduct of constitutional go-
vernment than those who have been the ordinary coon
cillors of the Portuguese Sovereign.—(Cheers.) I look
to the advice he gave, and to the language in which Lord
Howard speaks of the progress he had made towards the
restoration of peace.—(Hear.) I read his law of elec-
tions—l see his resolution to summon the Cortes—l see
his advice not to resort to acts of severity—l see these
things, and I think it a reflection on public men that he
should be an exile from his •native country.—(Cheers.)
Sir, I think that the Portuguese Government, on the
6th of October, committed the greatest mistake that a
Government can commit, when, in anticipation of some
fancied dangers, they resorted to what is called a gaup
d'etat, that is, attempted to avert threatened danger by
the assumption of unconstitutional power.—( Hear, hear.)
That-was the mistake that was made by the Government
of Charles X., and it is the mistake that has been made
by those councillors who advised the dismissal of that
faithful subject of the Queen and attached friendof peace,
the :Duke of Palmella.—(Hear, hear.) It would have
been the true policy of the Government, even if these dan-
gers were real, to have met them, and not attempted to
avert them by the assumption of unconstitutional powers.
I—(Hear, hear.) These advisers of coups d'ttat have taken
PetittEici:thetnselvek for,firtnneall are tiqcisioai ; ;hey
,refee4obeestageof ,Louia XVI., .aud say that the causeof reenarchy was then lost by a want of firmness inA-
-decision. They pride, thenmelves on their deCision
:and energy, hut.they,do.not see the angpr of resorting
to these,extrerne acts of violence, er the epiageciueupe*
,which they may lead: _to --{tsar,, hear.) They pointer
att.the, progrmn,rne,. of ,Alle 4yptemEriati; NO I believe
that was nothing more than a proposed Change in regard
to electoral districts; and I;contend that any apprehen-
sinWeiltertailitglilll fq.-.M8,114,tg that :programme were not
sufficient to set aside e constitutional l&rty'rof Piar-
ttaoh•-,-(ear , hee,ro
t. o apply n t b
the powersiets,
will
whichl
Thar{,, was a grievOns mistake
content to
row subjects,
e
and what is theennsequerice,Of; resorting to Bitch-24'6'8f
power? YYoualienate from yourselves tii4 Sympathies
of Europe.—(Rear, hear.) Let your enemies, if they
il
will, meet and resort to unconstitutional acts, be you
nenf t
6u
thearc
around
un
ns
dtitu ytoi
uon
you, and then the good feeling of other countries, aye,
and t p
attack upon you be an unjust ' rally
one-
, but if the friends of
the monarchy will attempt to meet danger by coups d'itit,
ig:es vthe
and will violate the law in anticipation of dangers, then,
in that case, the sympathies of Europe will not be with
them—(Cheers)—that is the mode by which thrones are
more endangered than by disloyalty and disaffection on
the part of the people. I have now fulfilled that which I
said . Ilyould do, openly and frankly,, I have spoken my
opinions as a private individual; after a perusal of those
' '
papers before me, I cannot assent to a vote of censure on
the Government, I cannot consent to interfere with that
which is now in course of action ; but while I take that
course, while I would not interfere to put a stop to that
intervention which has taken place, I must at the same
time say that of the acts of the Portugueae Government
I cannot speak without condemnation.—(Cheers.) And
I say, in conclusion,' that unless those evil councillors
who have been placed around the Portuguese throne are
banishel—
An from. MEMBER—They will be banished. •
Sir R. PEEL—I 'believe that if that faction that calls
itself the Cabralist faction—and for an', thing I know
they may be worthy of the name they have chosen to
assume—if such men and such principles are to influ-
ence the future Government of Portugal, then there ie no se-
curity for peace, no security therefor continued attachnient
to the Crown.—(Hear, he tr.) And then, indeed, it will
net be in the power of England longer to give that 'ad-
viee, and to lend that assistance, which I think she can
freely give and freely lend, and which I hope will be
effectual for the single purpose for which they have been
given and lent—to maintain an ancient monarchycialnd
to obtain from that monarchy guarantees eft.
cOnstitu-
tional freedom.—(Great cheering-)' - ' • .
...,. . . • .

dITTEES,

LIST OF MEMBERS PRESENT WHEN THE
HOUSE WAS COUNTED OUT ON MR. HUME'S
MOTION ON INTERFERENCE WITH POR
TUGAL.
Baine, W.
Brotherton, J.
B:am'stone, T.
Bowring, Dr.
Buzfeild,- W.
Barnard, E. J.
Clay, Sir W.
Ewart, W.
Gibson, T. M.
Ilume, J.
Molesworth, Sir W.
Monahan, J. 11.
Muntz, G. F.
Newdegate, C. N.

Osborne, U.
Palmerston, Viscount
Polhill, F.
Roebuck, J. A.
Roche, E. B. -
Somerville, Sir W.
Trelawny, J. S.
Thornely, T.
Tollemache, Hon. F.
Tollemache, J.
Toncred, H. W.
Tufm-11, H.
Villiers, C. P.

DEATHS AMONG THE PatEsTrtooD.--The follow-
ing are the names of the six. Roman Catholic priests of
Liverpool, and the chapels to which they respectively be-
longed, who (tied here within the last two months :—the
Rev. Mr. Nightingale, of St. Anthony's ; the Rev. Mr.
Fisher and the Rev. Mr. Gilbert, both of St. Mary's ; the
Rev. Mr. Parker, of St. Patrick's; the Rev. Dr. Appleton,
of Seel-street; and the Rev. Dr. Kelly, of St. Joseph's.
Prior to the influx of Irish paupers, there were, we under-
stand, 24 priests in Liverpool; now their ranks, which will,
of course, be recruited from other places, have been thinned
to 18.—Lirsrpoot dtbios,

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH. June 16.
(Before Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN.)
COLLISION.—SPARROW V. PEDLEY AND OTHERS.

This was an action to recover compensation in
damages for certain injuries sustained by a smack tiam,d
"Fox," the property of the plaintlf, by the negligence.
of the parties entrusted with the management of a steam
tug called the " Grey Mare Meg," belonging to the
defendant and others, who constitute the "United Steam
Tug Company." The smack was tacking across the
river, and the collision occurred oposie Wapping. The
bowsprit of the smack received some injuries, but they
were not of a serious nature.

The case was A commenced yesterday, and re-
sumed at the sitting of the Court this morning.
A considerable number of witnesses were examined
on either side—those on one side stating that " Grey
Mare Meg" was to blame, whilst those called on
behalf of the other as stoutly and positively
averred that the smack was decidedly to blame.
and that if she had not struck the steam-boat, she
would have come into collision with a number of barges
lying off Wapping. It was further stated by them, that
the smack was in a bad condition before the occurrence,
and that her injuries could be repaired for 10/. or 151.
The jury gave a verdict of 101. to the plaintiff.

JUDGES' CHAMBERS, June 15.
BRETIN V. BUNN.

In this case, which was an action by the husband of
Flora Fabbri, the opera dancer, against the h ssee of
Drury-lane Theatre, for an alleged breach of an engage-
ment, an application was made to Mr. Justice Coleridge,
on Monday, after the hearing of the summons in the
case of " Bunn v. Lind," fur a commission to examine
witnesses in Italy and France,. and for a postponement
of the trial. .

Mr. Lewis (Lewis and Lewis) said he appeared on the
part of Mr. Alfred Bunn in this cause, to ask tor a com-
mission, and he had an affidavit made by the defendant,
showing that he could not proceed to trial without the
evidence of certain individuals, whose names he had set
forth, and who were now residing abroad.
A gentleman from the office of Mr. Gell, the attorney
for the plaintiff, resisted the application. lie said the
cause was to be tried on the 28th inst., and until an hour
before the attendance he had not seen the affidavit on
which the application was made. Of eourse he had no
time to answer the affidavit.
Mr. Justice COLERIDGE said, that in these applications,
if required, time must be afforded.
Mr. LEWIS read a portion of the affidavit of the de-
fendant, stating that he could not proceed to trial with-
out the evidence of Mademoiselle Taglioni, M. Adrian,
and M. Petipa, and that it was necessary to issue a
commission, as he had ascertained within the last few
days that Mademoiselle Taglioni was in Italy, and the
other parties in Paris.
His LORDSHIP said he should certainly give time to
the plaintiff to answer the affidavit.
Mr. LEWIS observed that he had two objects in view,
namely, a commission, and to postpone the trial.
On the part of the plaintiff it was said that the action
was about to be tried, and there was no ground for a
delay.
His LORDSHIP adjourned the summons, on the ground
that the plaintiff had an undoubted right to time, in
order to answer the matters of the affidavit made in sup-
port of the application to examine witnesses, a pro-
ceeding which, in this case, would probably delay the
trial of the cause.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, June 16.
(Before Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD.)
IN RE PRENTICE.
This was a dividend meeting under the estate of the
bankrupt, who had been a fishmonger at Tollesbury,
Essex.
A proof was tendered on behalf of a Mr. Crick for
181., which was objected to on the part of the assignees.
The Solicitor to the assignees said, that proceedings
in Chancery had been pending between the bankrupt and
Mr. Crick, and it had been prey ously doubtful whether
or not he was a creditor, and the proof had been post-
poned. The bankrupt had been taken in execution on
a judgment for the debt, but had been liberated, on
signing an undertaking, admitting that he owed the debt
and costs, and that his release was not to be considered
a waiver of the demand.
His HONOIIR said the bankrupt having been taken in
execution such a document as this did not revive the
debt so as to entitle the claimant to prove.
The Solicitor said that as the estate would pay 20s. in
the pound, he had to apply for interest on the debt.
His Hollow:. said that the dividend must be declared
first, when it would be ascertained what surplus there
was. He would allow the bankrupt his full expenses for
his different journeys, &c.

SECONDARIES' COURT, June 16.
(Before Mr. Secondary JAMES.)

OUTHWAITE AND ANOTHER V 31ITHELL, EXECUTRIX.

The plaintiffs in this action are wholesale tea dealers
in Fenchurch-street. The defendant is the widow and
executrix of a person named Mitchell, who formerly
lived at Devizes. There was no defence to the action,
and the defendant by suffering judgment to go by de-
fault admitted that she had assets in hand; itiwas, there-
fore, only necessary to prove the order and delivery of
the goods, and this being done, a verdict was given for
the amount claimed.

CROPLEY V. NOTTON.

The plaintiff in this action is a hat manufacturer in
the Borough, and the defendant is a shopkeeper in
High street. Chatham. The claim was for 131., for
hats supplied to defendant, who rut in a plea of infancy
on the record.
The defendant's attorney said, that it would be
necessary for him to prove that the defendant was not
of age when the debt was contracted, to entitle him to a
verdict.
The defendant's mother was called, and proved that
her son was born on the sth of May, 1826. She entered
the circumstance in the family Bible, but she had not
got it with her. The action was commenced on the 21st
of April, 1547.
The Learned SECONDARY said that it appeared a pity
that such a plea was put in, but if it was made out the
defendant was entitled in law to a verdict; it was quite a
matter of law.

Some of the jury said they were not satisfied with the
unsupported evidence of the mother.
The Learned SECONDARY said it would perhaps have
been better for some document to have been produced,
but if the mother was to be believed, there could be no
doubt. If they gave a verdict imputing falsehood on her
part, they ought to give their reasons. The only cause
he could see they had to disbelieve her appeared to him
to be that they did not wish to do so. Tney were, on
their oaths, to give a verdict according to the evidence.
The jury then gave a verdict for the defendant.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.

Mr. Justice Patteson, accompanied by the Right llon.
th 9 Lord *.ayor, Alderman Hughes, and Sheriffs Challis
atfd itidaWd, opened the Court this morning.
A second edition of the " Calendar" was published
to-day,- which contained the names of no less than 267
prisoners. -
Several prisoners were placed at the bar, but Mr.
Citatutsorr stated that he had only just-been furnished
with the depositions, and therefore was.not. in a position
to proceed with those cases. . . • .
It-Was then arranged that another -course should. be
taken; in this instance the judge had not been furnished
with the-depositions.
Mr: iTUStIee.PATTES d, atc said, must decline to proceed
with the case under these circumstances. Is any counsel
engaged to conduct the prosecution?
Mr. CLARKSON replied in the negative.
Mr. Justice PATTEsori said, it is a very serious thing
to throw the responsibility of conducting a case on the
j udge.
Mr. BALLANTINE stated that this was entirely owing
to the scale of fees allowed for prosecutions being so low,
that no respectable attorney would conduct a prosecution,
and, consequently, that the depositions were handed
over to counsel, who had to do the duty of both attorney
and counsel.

Mr. Justice PATTESON said he thought that the scale
of fees should be altered. It was a most unfortunate
matter, and he did not think it proper that the conduct-
ing of a case should be imposed upon the judge, who
could not be supposed to be acquainted with the facts.

VENTILATION OF THE COURT.
The imperfect ventilation of the Court has been a
fruitful source of comment with the judges, and Mr.
Justice Patteson remarked upon it this morning in terms
of reprobation.
No case of any interest occurred during the morning.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
BO VV-STREET
was placed
Mary Lane, a woman of bad character,
at the bar before Mr. Henry, charged on suspicion of
stealing a watch and a breast-pin from the person of a,
Mr. John Saunders, in Northumberland-court, Strand,
at about one o'clock on Monday morning.
= The prosecutor said, that at about the time stated he
met the prisoner in Northumberland.court, and she
asked him for charity, telling a long and piteous tale,
every word of which afterwards turned out to be false.
He was so far from suspecting any imposition, however,
that he gave the supposed unfortunate a shilling. Just
at that moment two men came up to him and asked the
way to Charing-cross, and while his attention was en.
gaged by them the prisoner disappeared. Soon
afterwards been missed his watch, the handle of
which had cut, in order to release it, and
his breast-Pin. He did not immediately discover
the loss of the latter article, a brass
meat having been
put in its place, so as to deceive hi first. The
watch (a silver one) was worth 31., and the pin about
6/. Having lost sight of the prisoner, but being de-
termined, if possible, to find her, ho went to the sam
spot the next night at the same hour. The prisoreer
again met him, not mppTtring to hnow !aim, and rep.c,t2d
the story oho had told him on Monday morning. E,.,
'...
64'
tonded to listen to what she was saying, r.hehy ;n2
ing into conversation with her induced her to
m
go
her rti
with
bins until he met a constable, to whom he gave
charge. Two men had been watching them from the
further side of the street, but he could not say whether
they were the two men who had s
night before or not. spoken to him the
A ring, supposed to be the handle of the watch, was
found by the policeman on duty
committed. It had
in Northumberland-
„court shortly after the robbery was
been cut with some instrument.
Mr. HENRY remanded the prisoner for a week.
MARLBOROUGH STREET.
Paws Sauter, was brought before Mr. Hardw'ek,
charged with stealing a trumpet, value 12/., .he pre Percy
of Mr. Robert Davis, one of the musicians employed at
i the Haymarket Theatre.

It appeared that the complainant, after the perform-
ance on Saturday night last, deposited his trumpet in
the music-room in the theatre. On Monday evening
about ten o'clock he went to fetch his instrument, and
was surprised to find it gone. H© inquired of ei'ery