The Sun.
London, England, 1848-06-06 00:00:00

s.

the
10
1i
n

absolutely absurd, and more than absurd, most noxious
in the eyes of Enrope, wien, by the same post they read
in the journals the Lord President of the Council ex-
pres,sing an opinion so as to call on the Spanish Secre-
tary for Foreign Affairs to produce a dispatch expressing
the entire approval of his owu Government at home.
That is the position in which Sir Henry Bulwer was
Placed, an'. it is the position which is the key to all
these unfortunate circumstances; and now I come to in-
quire, and that is the important business of the night,
*'by this misunderstanding took place between members
of the same Cabinet. That brings me to the policy of
the Noble Lord. It has been shown to-night, frankly
avowed by the Master of the Mint, who seemed to glory
ia the circumstance, that all this is the necessary conse-
qhuoeidoscenpofththee quadruple treaty. The Master of the Mint
quadruple treaty as a magna charts of di-
Pl°Waq. He says it is the quadruple treaty by which
We bound the crown on the brows of the Queen of Spain.
aThis was flattering, to go by the next post to Madrid.
ttimes we were told that the Spaniards had that natu-
ralßad high born sensitiveness that they could not bear
slightest allusion to the Peninsular war—and
considerable time had elapsed since then—that they
4°111(1 001 bear allusion to vietories which redeemed their
fr HOW much more agreeable is it to be told,
4," that they owed their freedom to the British nation,
Sec
that the Sovereign owed her crown to an English
what treaty
of State? This is what they have told to us.?
I hat treaty has produced all this importent mischief
member when I first entered this Assembly that
ees
" any one made an allusion to the subject, it was
a'waYa receives} with unanimous derision. It seas not
;:le of the most magnificent monuments, not only of
ofugligh diplomacy but of the march of Liberalism, and
es
elee
81011.4 of Liberal opinions. What was this quad-
as
tieaty? The Noble Lord who became Lord
Secretary of State, necessarily, from his position,
: not only the organ and expounder, but, fortunately,
;01tranoit able expounder, of this great diplomatic talis -
esti; was supported by the Liberal party. He was
bi• -c4c.ly was
by the Liberal Members of the Ca-
tir- There was not an occasion on which we wereonnost
es° ' when subjects connected with external relati •
were
brought before the House, that whatever course
libell°'' England was to identity herself
tw.oinths
ina
4 course, to be the patron ot liberal institu
for!'"% countries and the Noble Lord accepte.d. and,
Thiteilltained himsel'f in power by advocating these opinions.
of Y were introduced into this House by a great master
rhe tome,fiariroe..and the House was persuaded that the
e e„ ", t foreign liberalism would never lead to
/s°lebir misconception or foreign war. Accordin to the
the e Lord,
" peace, reform, and retrenchment,"
.were
(krtti?,_t"° of the Government, and when my Hon. Friend
'semi "lakes) reminded the Noble Lord that non-inter-
Otrenry,ll was one of the grounds upon whichthenehw
*era,Tta, eht was to rest, the Noble Lord repudiated
.t e
but `ciliol; him the word used was not intervention,
anrheeitee• There was not the slightest reason, how.ever,.
lagf'ut that the word in the mouths of the Whigs of
kid 1.14nd 1832 meant non-intervention---(Hear, hear)—
Latest:6 Noble Lord is not correct in stating that non-
ha did did nut form one of the pleas put forth by
Riird`TY Ministry for the purpose of attracting to-
Lae id Adt Popular support, and indicating the policy it
reet%er`la t" pursue. I find in a book, which contains
of tile mi of the declarations made by the Members
hig Government in 1830 and 1831, a speech,
to •gch it is said, " our true principles are
Pate • matll4t,'lin universal peace." So the speaker anticir-
th 41) House will observe, the lion. Member for
is se
is
to definition
Riding of Yorkshire—(Laughter)—and here
is to uefinition of the peace policy :—" Our true policy
feree4tintain universal peace, and therefore non-inter-
to be is our principle, the great principle which ought
nis~ry•attdwlll be heartily adopted by the present M-
Wore: eaow, that statement perfectly justifies thel
Ata,-':.,de use of by my lion. Friend, but which was re-
there aotnewhat abruptly by the Noble Lord, and
Weir. is,. no doubt that they did, by meddling in the
thiej.c4 other countries, secure universal peace. My
to liberalism is this, that it is the introduc-
high
efhb) the practical business of life, and of the
tiou,,st °lode of life—political life—it is the introduci-
Ple3 ,-,,_Philosophical ideas, instead of political princi-
tate t's `uats in fact, when a man goes to Madrid, he is
tore s consider his operations with reference to the in
tcd England, but to set aside all practical rules,
Principles in in their stead certain abstract philosophical
tsail,,nes, and the promulgation of these
principles be-
%tee toe bond of brotherhood of some miserable fac-
hoed Which would have been extinguished but for such
You thq brotherhood. A small party in this House told
touts at this line of policy would never do ; that
.you
thin liot conduct English affairs on this foundation ;
Ulm t,') Practical advantage could be obtained from it ;
(list;t,would never yield you commercial treaties.--
(4111 C "ar.) By lending, however, all the moral' aid
YOathietlheountry to some miserable faction, you did p
h"lage4 ; but in every country and state in which
tiiilii4e interfered, from Athens to Madrid, you have.n
stl:thed the substantial prosperity of such nations
cod have deteriorated the condition or the people,
4,4(1;4 the seeds of infinite confusion. The Noble
het oeeeded in this course, he became the great 13Toon-
liffeip, liberalism in the management of the foreign
te s hf thie
-ay - country ; and I must do him the justice
Tech De' cuilat it was impossible fur any one entertaining
,°Pia,,.°lls and dangerous ideas to conduct their de-
, 'Attlee-1; 41 a more business-like manner than he did.
11441:1 'Vet%) The Noble Lard was certainlyedu-f
nuat
i;i‘h one of the best schools, and
.o
Ns. Be-''',°°l he became one of the most die-
;4ll)le4 -re" Pupils; but, notwithstanding the quad-
tl4tl -- notwithstanding the fostering of
.con-
rlCeii°l)l:e, 4o Greece, in Portugal, and in Spain
a
-tt;t, ar,lldio:: he was forced by his party to con -
di j;"" with England, in this great work
%hid tai•tsin, under the idea that France and England
1(1 e4Plie term the alliance by which the new policy
see
h41(1 Lr, 'elly be pursued, he found that the system.
'51%) work. And how could it work ?--.(flear,
f° r)
4 °II
l'Ale, of late years, introduced a sentimental
(iskueC'f a constitutional principle in foreign affaire.-
5"
;nter 4hd cheers.) You wish to abolish slavery,
ttlttatiu; want all the world to join you, without any
te4„‘r,e, an So whether or not you are, by the course you
4i4',ilste;e•ruting the horrors of slavery, and laying the
of endless dispute between us and foreigirst
,?wever, the Noble Lord, when he saw h
ot4irik P'l"ks did his business like a man; and no man,
eititle-eteti Upou such misconceptions, could have more
u'illetc,ts:thattnelieed' extricating himself from the conse-
krlPPosi • )'lle conduct—(Laughier and cheers from the
htlie What have they done ? They have talked
Itatisseu-ogielath Constitution as if it were the model con-
oifollite)etb"e world_ a model farm—(Cheers and
rk the but in carrying out their views of foreign,
D4'441441-I only I,mked to a great general system. lot
tertietiler' which had nothing whatever to do svi!!.h. the
t ° kippo ,interests of England.—(e Hear, hear, from
Vet}1118) i:eltsiun.) In 1839-40, things began to get very
I,t'tri the Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston)—than
eC, riglanc'dtt better understands or regards the interests
hitc%td , or has more ability to sustain them—was.
l'Ztill)tilliitee:tterifice the interests of England because of
fairs Le,d with France, and what then happened? The
out' with si
.found that he could not manage foreign af-
the thls alliance with French liberalism through-
;e"rld .
• Oesp senEa—Question.
rte. 'AELI—The gentleman who calls question
het' ta-PPear to understand the question.—(Laugh-
sittliiess slay hat that in 1840 the Noble Lord set about his
ti,ci a Iyorkman-like manner, like a great Mi.
}oto If fr did all that he could to extricate
hes,i,with sin the difficulties which he had get
and Bard to the affairs of the Levant years
were r then arose the misconceptions with
bY 5441846, when the Noble Lord and his friends
It% Y the in accident called to power, what occurred ?
1,„? aout le
,tended colleagues of the Noble Lord entered
a disgraceful cabal—to keep the Noble
dov•h.) the Cabinet.—(Bear, hear, from the oppo-
ss(t,ia spec seak of that with which I am acquainted.
v'Nr,i;k from mere rumour, as others have done.
tie 4 went4r.) And what was the ground upon which
lats th to prevent the Noble Lord front having
.a
heC
? Why, upon the ground of his
(lett app, eY---the policy which years before they so
kat hf the°-‘,,Yett of. I have already alluded to the con-
ties *hat Lord with respect to France ; but 1
s ti° all el, Wect must it have, had upon his influ-
avtiekise doto urope when Isis own colleagues exhibited
rent that ell they could to cross him in every way?
et," reßm,:t enough alone to lead to a misconception
0 tO th
(l/e e relations between France and Eng-
,ea, hear.) Here let me observe that while
tee; circumstances which caused his fall, I
test
puziol who ruled France at that time as a
NT'. at last r`°".--(llear, hear.) The Noble Lord has
Chet
o,.the result of endeavouring to carry out the
it is it' liberalism in other countries—he has found
uteri is
d4ogerous course, and that it is not wise to
'44 t°4 ouch • "'
44 der n,tiwith regard to the internal .
kbitireet al!, or to attempt to select their Ministers
%eh° Lord ell' administrations. It is easy for. the
"t t° say that the calm expression of opinion
4/ b t to be
e sc), b a matter of censure.—(Laughter.) It
sat,ns
:eriaure ie not wise to take that course; for
e,ipot do
the respect to that expression of opinion,
the fekisteoellt any serious harm—it will not terminate
ere,
or --:(Cheers and laughter)—and we are by
hiet°4 upu, htreursietances obliged to express our
"er happened
of
sthe.most remarkable circumstances,
°Utar , lessened with regard to the interference or vrki!likr foreign affairs. This dismissal of our
budkid Wl,ict'4o result of the policy with regard to foreign
w 100 long characterised this country,
Pes,ea right y be said to the contrary, we
he ,ight to
t(l4 dig,,,uotrago complain of the gross and un
which has been committed against
ti}i 1i5t2....Y(00f the Sovereign and the honour of the
ud cheers•)
h 1.0 be , We ought not to allow our
ae aue the :cape-goat of the foreign policy
kietY of this
adopted. In alluding to the foreign
,I3ter eoante 1
oev,i, Ot th, poli Y
.( 0 not attack the individual
,)r,jace ipe, for foyt htch he has been too long forced
41eee that
t 1 owing
.his ministerial career I re-
tee hat he
d'ettcea and historic achievements, and I
endfd the honour and independence
r /`;'llotry, tin
°Pre t• le, ' the power of the empire.—(Cheers.)
this O'ntaie a;d that •h an insult to the
tali", of En,l -such
e,;:weveerY of pu ts and was an unparalleled fact. in
ee'' with ,gars to
(Hear, hear.) The complaint,
0_
t:ae :peeret to e to the interference was as_,mr much
the the manner as to the matter, fo
tointeif Secretary for Foreign Affairs had not
1e,./rqueellet te told InAtiniu.nic,atto • ith the Court of
our tusMwadrid to apply to
is) t-'l2ltitinq the-ttler"--(Ll:Eilgterr)a—.one of all her sex
lin
rekw the e et unhappy notoriety, and least like y
41%44 4t. pr,eoOhfideuce of this country. It was a most
Sir ebt iti w kicihing, and it was still more so from the
404 •". it Was conveyed.
11,t, the Icobris'Sir, I have heard with great satisfac-
httio44.lesty,: Lord declare that it was the intention of
11 of ti„ Government to avow their public appro-
-‘v
conduct of Sir Henry 13ulvier, and to adopt

the responsibility for themselves of that conduct.—
(Hear, hear.) I can assure the Noble Lord, however,
that in the speech he delivered he did qualify the appro-
bation of Sir H. Bulwer's conduct, by stating, as he is
represented to have said by the Hon. Member for Buck-
inghamshire, that the Government would assume the
greater part of the responsibility for the conduct of Sir
H. Bulwer. The Noble Lord's subsequent exclamation
led me to think that he would adopt the more manly and
more just course in this case, of adopting for the Go-
vernment the whole of the responsibility, and identify
themselves with Sir Henry Bulwer. Sir, I think it but
just that they should do so. I think it the more incum-
bent on the Government now to adopt that respoeibility,
and to give their sanction, because it appears recorded
in these papers which have been laid before Parliament,
that one of the causes assigned by the Spanish Govern-
ment for removing Sir Henry Bulwer was this, that
public opinion was adverse to him in Spain—
Several Hon. ME.MBERS —ln England.
Sir H. PEEL—In Spain! The public mind in Spain
was excited, and the papers say, " flow can we tees:well,:
Spaniards to your maintenance as Minister here, when.
in your own country, the Government gives you up?"
Sir Henry Bulwer was placed in Spain not by the Noble
Lord, but by my Noble Friend Lord Aberdeen, who
preceded him. He was sent there by my Noble Friend,
nut from political connexion between them, but because
my Noble Friend thought Sir H. Bulwer's past conduct
in the profession he had chosen entitled him to the fa-
vour and confidence of the Government, oven though he
differed in politics with the Government.—(Hear, hear.)
My Noble Friend thought, and thought most justly, that
the diplomatic profession should not be made subser-
vient to the commotions of party polities.—(Hear, hear.)
His Noble Friend thought that the diplomatic profes-
sion partook of the character of the naval and military
professions, and that it would be most unjust that a
man who had entered into the profession and had
proved himself worthy the confidence of any Govern-
ment should be removed from the position to which
his abilities entitled him merely because he differed on
politics with the Government.—(Hear, hear.) My Noble
Friend has been blamed by acting upon that sentiment;
but I am sure the true way to encourage diplomatic ex-
ertions is to show that, provided there was no such dif-
ference of opinion as to disentitle a man to the confi-
dence of those who employed him, those who engaged
in that profession and served their country faithfully and
honestly should not lose the prospect of reward because
the party entertaining different political views came into
power.--(Hear, hear.) It was on these grounds that my
Noble Friend Lord Aberdeen advised her Majesty to
place Sir H. Bulwer in the responsible and difficult posi-
tion of Briti.sh Minister at the Court of Spain, and I must
say that during the whole period Sir H. Bulwer acted in
communication with us, his conduct was such as fully to
justify the confidence we had reposed in him.—(Hear,
hear.) I confess that looking at these dispatches now
before the House I do not see the shadow of any grounds
for imputing blame to him in these recent transactions.
The instructions sent to Sir 11. Bulwer by the Noble
Lord opposite were such as to defy any man to draw
any other conclusion from them than that it was
meant to instruct Fir H. Bulwer to make the communi-
cation to the Spanish Government, and also at a fitting
opportunity to the Queen Mother.—(Hear, hear.) Such
was Sir H. Bulwer's construction of the Noble Lord's
dispatch, and accordingly, as he tells us, he took an op-
portuuity, and made the communication to the Queen
Mother. Whatever might have been the intention of
the Noble Lord opposite, I think that Sir IL Bulwer
was justified by the circumstances under which he made
the communication, in communicating the letter of the
Noble Lord in eatenso. Let it be remembered that Sir
H. Bulwer had seen the fall of thrones around him—he
had found that his own representations and remon-
strauces to the Spanish Government were of no avail—
that since he had received those instructions there had
been an insurrection iu Madrid; and under these com-
bined circumstances he felt it necessary to make a strong
appeal to the Spanish Government, but he doubted his
own powers of remonstrance, and thought they would
be made in vain unless he could show that he was
armed with higher authority than his own
fears, and therefore he communicated to the Spanish
Government the opinion of the Government of England
as stated in the letter of the Noble Lord opposite
(Lord Palmerston.) I think Sir H. Bulwer exercised a
wise and just discretion in the peculiar circumstances in
which he was placed, and I further think that if the
Government had abandoned him, they would have set
an example which would have warned every honest and
faithful servant of the Crown against incurring a similar
responsibility.—(Hear, hear.) Hence it is that I heard
with satisfaction the declaration of the Noble Lord at
the head of the Administration, that the acts of Sir H.
Bulwer are adopted and defended by the Government.
But the imEnediatepatter for us now to decide is,how wo
shall dispose of the motion brought forward by the
lion, and Learned Member for the county of Dorset
(Mr. Bankes). The Hon. Member for Buckingham-
shire says that we have three duties to perform on this
occasion: first, to manifest our determination to exempt.
Sir 11. Bulwer from all blame or censure; secondly, we
are to manifest our determination to support the British
Government in maintaining the honour of England,
which has been outraged by the Court of Spain; and,
thirdly, we are not to condemn the Noble Lord the
Secretary for Foreign Affairs, but the system of liberal-
ism which has influenced our diplomatic proceedings
with all foreign nations. Now, I confess that I cannot
see how we shall fulfil any one of these duties by voting
for the resolution which has been moved by the Hon.
and Learned Member fur Dorsetshire. First of all, I
see in it no recognition of the good conduct of Sir H.
Buie er, but I do see a resolution which, it adopted by
the House, would imply that he had acted improperly.
At least there is no distinction made between his con-
duct and that of the Government ; but we are called
upon to vote that " a proposed interference with the
internal concerns of the Spanish Government, as con-
ducted under the authority and with the entire approvel
of her Majesty's Ministers, has placed the British Go-
vernment and our representative at the Court of Madrid
in a position humiliating in its character." If we really
wish to ex mpt Sir H. Bulwer from any share of the
responsibility, we ought. if we are to vote any reso-
lutten, distinctly to declare that we do not disapprove
of his conduct.—(Hear, and cheers.) Another of our
duties is to manifest on the part of the House a desire
to support the Crown in vindicating the insulted honour
of the country. If so, we certainly ought to convey
the expression of our opinion in some less equivocal
form, if we wish to put on record that Spain has com-
mitted an outrage by her abrupt dismissal of our Minister,
and the assurance that the House of Commons will sup-
port the Crown in vindication of its honour.—(Hear,
hear.) Instead of that, if we vote " that a proposed in-
terference with the internal affairs of the Spanish Go-
verninent has placed the British Government in a posi-
tion humiliating in its character," so far from aiding the
Government in vindicating the honour of England, you
send the British Government to conduct this negotiation
with disgrace round its neck by a vote of this House, and
you incapacitate them from making the vindication you
wish.—(Hear, hear.) How is a Government, branded
with this vote of censure, to take a high tone towards
the Spanish Government? The Spanish Government
will reply, "We cannot defend Sir H. Bulwcr, if you
will not defend him; we will pay no attention to your
representation; for the House of Commons has told
you that you have placed the Government of England
in a humiliating position. Had you approached us
armed with the express authority of that House, we
must have deferred to it; but, as you have been cen-
sured by the House of Comntons, and have consented
to remain in office after that, it is utteely impossible
for us to attach any weight whatever to your represen-
tations."—(Hear.) Therefore, I think this second duty
would be most ineffectually discharged by affirming his
resolution. With respect to the third duty, of condemn-
ing the system, and not the Noble Lord (Palmerston), I
know not what the Noble Lord's feelings might be after
this vote; but as it distinctly recognises him as the
author of the interference, which it says has placed this
country in a humiliating position, I think the Noble
Lord would not be able to maintain his post, notwith-
standing the construction put on the tenor of the resolu-
tion by the Hon. Member for Bucks—that it goes to con-
demn the system, not to inflict punishment on the indi-
vidual.—(Hear.) Therefore it appears to me that no
one of these three objects will be accomplished. Now,
although I cannot concur in this resolution, yet I must
not have my refusal to concur in it to imply approbation
of the course the Noble Lord has pursued.—(Hear.) I
think the Noble Lord was fully entitled to give warning
and advice to the Spanish Government. I don't object
to the thing; I do object to the manner in which it was
done.—(Hear.) After all our relations with Spain, seeing
the peculiar position iu which Europe is placed—seeing
the tremendous events that have been and still are of
daily occurrence, I do not think it was an illegitimate
or an unfriendly act of the Noble Lord to say to Spain
and the Spanish Government, "Beware—be cautious—
watch the events that are passing—place not your reli-
ance on armies, however numerous or however disci-
plined—conciliate the general good will of the people, on
whose support alone you can safely rely."—(Hear.)
I do not find fault with that. But, adverting to the true
description of the Spanish people and of our relations
with them, which has been given by the Noble Lord—
remembering that they are a people inferior to us in
power—a people under deep obligations to this country,
not only for advice tendered, but for exertions made, for
vast sums expended, for noble blood shed in the defence
and vindication of their liberties—remembering, above
all, that they are a gallant nation, peculiarly jealous of
their independence, sensitive upon the point of honour—
(Hear, hear)—it is because I believe that the Noble
Lord has correctly described our relations with them,
has formed a just estimate of the Spanish Government,
and has justly dwelt upon its pride, its gallantry,
its sensitiveness, its jealousy, if you will—that I do
think, if the Noble Lord wished to make an impression
upon the minds of that people, it would have been wiser
to have held different language, and to have presented
it in a different manner to what he has done.—(Hear,
hear.) Of course, the object of the Noble Lord was that
the friendly advice tendered by him should be adopted
and followed in a cordial spirit ; but I think there is an
abruptness in the original letter that was presented—
(Hear, hear)—there is the assumption of a tone of supe-
riority which I think was calculated to offend the
Spanish Government—there is that recordatio of past
assistance which has very much the air of exprobatio,
which I think might as well have been avoided towards
a people sensible, no doubt, of their obligations to us,
but not very fond perhaps of being reminded of them.—
(Hear.) But the first letter, I think,
might be excused ;
it is perhaps not very surprising that the Noble Lord
wrote hastily, and I really do not find so much fault with
reminiscence
to
the first letter as I do with the second.—(Hear.) There
thati
uswhich t
ofs theeanguirinetaed totboliggaitvieonostrwenhin? Spain
underis
That
persona[ appeal to the Spanish Ministers,' in which
Noble ..aord reminds them that but for British assistance
w or certainly
conciliate
t nothe m
they might then have been exiles from their coun-
lthaet
try , warcianitcoulathtee a calculated
tdoupawionutnhteitrhocon-
fidence,
ad-
vice he was ,tendering.—(gear, hear.) Now the Noble 4

Lord the Prime Minister vindicates the Noble Lord
(Palmerston) by reciting a story which he had from Lord
Holland, which did not appear to me to be very germane
to the matter. Lord Archibald Hamilton had the alter-

native in that case of laughing atilleoffender or knock-
ing him down, and it might do very well to do either one
or the other.—(Laughter.) But here the Noble Lord
had done both.—(Bear.) If Lord A. Hamilton, after
adopting the milder alternative, had addressed the of-
fender in the longest sentence that was ever written in
the English language—(Laughter)—and had ended by
saying, "Sir, if it had not been for me, you would now
have been a beggar in the streets," Lord Holland
would certainly not have admired him for choosing
the mildest of the two alternatives. Look at the sen-
tence of the Noble Lord (Palmerston), in which,
after declaring that he was not in the slightest
degree
in offended, he proceeds to administer punish-
ment twenty-nine consecutive lines—he was so im-
patient that he did not take breath till he had penned
the whole.—(Laughter.) I think he is much more like
Sir Fretful Plagiary than Lord A. Hamilton ; for he
winds up with that reminiscence so painful to these
Dukes and distinguished Generals—" If' it had not been
for me and my Liberal policy, you would have been at
this time exiles from your country." That is ungracious;
and I think that is the part of the transaction which is
most to blame.—(Hear.) At the same time, I apprehend
it is very difficult to conduct the diplomatic transactions
of this country without occasionally making errors, and
even grave errors. The error in this instance, in my
opinion, is not an error of act, but an error in the mode
in which the Noble Lord has exercised his authority,
which is much to he regretted. I regret the more, be-
cause I feel that he has defeated his own end. Instead
of conciliating the Spanish Government, and establish-
ing the legitimate influence of England, by making
them feel that we were a friendly power, amidst all
these storms and convulsions, animated by a sin-
cere desire for Spanish welfare, the Noble Lord
bas alienated the Spanish Government and a part of
the Spanish nation entirely by the mode in which good
advice has been tendered to them. On that account I
deeply regret it.—(Hear.) I do not think the terms of
this motion well chosen. On the very second letter that
was presented it appears that the Duke of Sotomavor
invited Sir H. Bulwer to an interview, when Sir 'H.
Bulwer gave his advice very cordially, and it was well
received; and even Narvaez himself admitted the justice
of Sir Henry's views, and was ready to conform to them
as far as he could. It seems that when advice was pre-
sented to him in a proper form he went so far as to say
that he would abandon office, and let the Progresistas
come into power, with the provision, I think, that they
should adopt Moderado opinions.—(Great laughter.)
Still it is quite clear that Sir H. Bulwer had the oppor-
tunity of offering advice to the Spanish Government,
and that it was taken in a kindly spirit when offered in
the manner that wisdom and true policy dictated—as a
friend speaking confidentially on affairs of state. Sir,
I object to this resolution, because I do not think it con-
sistent with justice. If there has been an error in the
mode of conducting this transaction, I do not think it
would be just to visit in so heavy a manner, with
the censure of the House of Commons, the
Minister by whom these transactions have been con-
ducted under such difficult circumstances. I also
object to it, because the question is still pending as to
the reason of the dismissal of Sir Henry Bulwer in a
manner which, judging, from these papers, appears to
me to be wholly unjustified.—(Hear, hear.) The passing
of this resolutiou would tend to weaken the authority ut
the Government ; it would make us appear as partisans
of the Spanish Government, and assailants of our own ;
and it would prejudice the chance of a perfectly amicable
and satisfactory settlement by showing, at an eventful
time, that there was a material difference of opinion be-
tween the Ministers of the Crown and the House of
Commons.—(Hear.) Sir, I will not put upon record,
that my country is in a humiliating position.—(Hear.)
I will not take the first part of a transaction, and visit
the conduct of those who have beer and still are engaged
in it with censure. The period at which the resolution
is proposed is altogether premature.—(Hear.) If the
House is to express an opinion on this matter, it would
have been much better to wait for the whole of the
reports and transactions, than to select the first act of
a, complicated and unperformed drama, and take one
particular scene in that act, and visit it with censure,
unmindful of the effect it may have upon the denouement
of the drama.—(Hear, hear.) Upon these various
grounds—because I think the motion premature—be-
cause I think the conduct of the Noble Lord, the act of
giving advice, as distinguished from the tone and manner
of certain dispatches, was justifiable—(Hear,:hear)—
because I think the penalty would be far too severe for
the offence, for the heaviest penalty that can be inflicted
on a Minister is the censure of the House of Commons
—because I think it unwise fur this House to place upon
record that the country is in a humiliating position—
(Hear, hear)—because I believe that such a record of:our
opinion would paralyse the Executive Government, lead
the Spanish Government to entertain false expectations,
and place us in the situation of partisans of that Govern-
ment, instead of impartial arbiters, with a natural lean-
ing in favour of our own—because I think that the
public interest will be affected by our affirming this re-
resolution, I shall, instead of staying away from the
House (which would perhaps have been justifiable, as I
have hardly read the second delivery of papers pre-
sented this day), give that vote which certainly will not
imply entire approbation of the manner in which this
corresponaence has been conducted,—l shall vote for
parsing to the Committee of Supply, instead of affirm-
ing the resolution of the Hon. and Learned Member for
Dorsetshirc.—(Cheers).
Viscount PALMERSTON—Sir, I certainly concur in
what appears to me to be almost the general opinion,
even in the view of the Hon. and Learned Member who
has made this motion, that the motion itself is prema-
ture and inexpedient.—(hear, hear.) For while the
Hon. and Learned Member expressed a wish to vindi-
cate the honour of the country, if it should turn out to
require vindication, he begins by proposing to us to
affirm that the country is in a state of humiliation. That
certainly is not the mode in which his object can best be
accomplished. if he finds fault with the first part of the
transaction—the dispatch which I wrote, and which was
communicated by Sir. H. Bulwer to the Duke of Soto-
mayor—to that his motion ought to have been directed,
and upon that ground I should have been prepared to
defend myself, as I now am. First of all, I will answer
the question ,he put, as to who was responsible for the
approval of Sir Henry's conduct. Sir, I have no hesita-
tion
ryinascat)Cifngthtaitiaktilnda, nfdorlthaelosnigm
alone
am
of approval
communicated from that department over which I pre-
side; and if the House be of opinion that that approba-
tion was improperly conveyed, and that Sir H. Bulwer's
conduct ought to be censured, it is upon me, and me
alone, that that censure ought to fall.—(Cheers.) Sir,
I think no censure is due for that approval; because, in
my opinion,Sir. H. Bulwer acted according to the best
of his judgment, and exercised a proper discretion; and
I think I was borne out in giving him the approval
which that dispatch conveyed.—(Hear, hear.) But
I must add, that that dispatch of mine of the 16th of
March was not for the purpose of being commui-
cated in writing to the Spanish Government. Any
man who reads it will see that it was not so intended.
—(Hear, hear.) First of all, the form is not that of the
draft of a note to be presented to the Spanish Govern-
ment ; had it been so there would have been a greater
development of views, and it would have been written in
a very different manner.—(Hear, hear.) However
Livonian the sentences may appear to the on. Member
opposite, undoubtedly if I had been writing a note to
be sent to a foreign Government it would have been
written in a very different manner. It was a text upon
which Sir Henry Bulwer was to speak, not intended to
be presented in the shape in which it stood. After
what has fallen from the Right Hon. Baronet opposite, it
is hardly necessary for me to justify myself for having
written that dispatch, instructing Sir Henry Bulwer
to give advice upon those matters to the Government
of Spain. Those gentlemen who have looked at the
from
dispatch,papers will see h that,ad
information before I wrote
Sir
the
course Henry
which
ht,hien Spanishn
iGo
no,v ewransm likent
13w:a to s
pmr.
oeddui
Tot iganrgeat
opposition in Parliament, if Parliament continued to sit;
that the opposition was likely to induce the Government
to prorogue and get rid of the Parliament; and that if'
that course were pursued there was the greatest danger
of insurrection in the different parts of the country, more
especially where the Carlist party
.was in force. The
state of Europe at the time, the mighty and disastrous
events which came to our knowledge from day to day,
and the representations or the course likely to be pursued
by tke Spanish Government, and its probable conse-
quences—l thought a full justification for instructing
Sir 11. Bulwer to bring under the consideration of the
Government of Spain those matters which pointed out
danger on the one hand, and on the other the means
by which that danger might be averted. I had no
reason to think that such a course would give
offenee to the Spanish Government ; because it will be
seen that on a recent occasion the Duke of Sotomayor
had had a conversation with Sir H. Bulwer on other
matters, and of his own accord, had turned the con-
versation towards the internal condition of Spain; he
spoke to Sir Henry of the intentions of the Spanish
Government; Sir Henry's opinion being invited, ho gave
it, and they discussed in a very friendly and animated
spirit the opinions and the reasons by which they were
supported.—(Hear.) Now, I have been asked about the
asterisks in one of the dispatches with all that curiosity
which attaches to something unknown; it is supposed
the passage contained some grave and important matter
bearing on the question we are now discussing. I have
here the dispatch from which the extract is given, and I ,
Fan read to the House the passage omitted, but perhaps
it will not ask me to do so when l state the nature of
the passage, which is this:—That the Duke of Soto- '
mayor stated to Sir H. Bulwer what were the views
and intentions of Spain with regard to her rela-
tions pith a third power. It had nothing to do
with the relations between England and Spain,
but with the relations between Spin and a third
air
power; r t too
tphueb
ai sslti trliisakt (
BHoe
Lahr , t hear. e Soof
power; and I think the House will agree with me that
its.
he
na uwcohallvdi regard not 6e
Sotomayor and General Narvaez permitted Sir Henry
Bulwer to talk freely to them on the internal affairs of
Spain, and I had no
_reason to think that the instruc-
tions which I gave Sir H. Bulwer were calculated to
produce irritation or unpleasant feelings, In point of
fact, the instructions of the 16th of March only stated
that which Sir H. Bulwer had before stated verbally,
thus anticipating the instructions which he afterwards
received. Then the question is, was Sir H. Bulwer'
having received that dispatch which was meant to be
only personally and verbally communicated, justified or
not in applying that dispatch to a different purpose ?
and in communicating it to the Government of Spain I
think he was, and the reasons he has given for pursuing
that course were sufficient to justify him in exercising
his discretion.—(Hear, hear.) He had exhausted all
means of personal and verbal exhortation; he represented

,-the facts and arguments to the Duke of Sotemaysr and
the Duke of Valencia, but he found that his represen-
tations were unavailing. Under these circumeances,
he was naturally desirous of giving to those represen-
tations that weight which they would derive from its
being manifest that they came not from himself, but
from his Government. Another motive fur putting his
representations in writing was, that by so doing they
were likely to come to the knowledge of persons to whose
knowledge they would not come if communicated per-
sonally. I was of opinion, and I still am of opinion,
that Sir H. Bulwer was borne out in the course he pur-
sued, and, therefore, I gave him that approbation, for
which lam respousible.—(Hear, hear.) If I bad even
doubts, which I have not, as to the discretion which he
exercised, I think that when the dispatch and letter
were rejected as they had been, it would be a shabby
abandonment of a public officer, if I did not arm him
against the Government from which that rejection pro-
ceeded, by giving him the full and entire approval of
the head of the department under which he served.
His letter was not calculated to produce the irritation
which it seems to have excited. It was not transmitted
in that formal manner in which diplomatic documents
are usually communicated. It did not say,
the under-
signed is instructed to inform you,' but he says, "I beg
to transmit to you some remarks which flats's, teceived
from the Secretary of State," qualifying the dispatch
which he communicated not as advice to be given, but
"
as remarks communicated to him on the state of affairs
in Spain. With regard to the right to give friendly ad-
vice, I do not put that simply on the ground of obliga-
tions which we have conferred, not on the ground of gra-
thetr e s t establish
of S p
titude due from the Spanish nation and Government for
gfrrtoeunnddly i
aitvhininek tb w r
the mii e
services rendered by England, though even upon that
ain aitscel
were liable under treaty to be called on for assistance by
Spain in cases that may arise. The quadruple treaty was
nut an engagement voluteered by this country. It was
urgently sought for by the Spanish Envoy, who WAS sent to
lafi;m but t c)
I givepu
it on the higher and more indisputable ground, that we
this country for the express purpose of eatreating the
English Government to step forward and assist Spain.
It was said we gave that assistance because we thought
the Queen of Spain had the best right of the two
claimants. That only formed a part in the decision to
which the Government came. Undoubtedly if we did
not think the Queen of Spain had the best right, we
would not have given her the support asked for; but we
would not have given it merely on that ground, but be-
cause we believed that her cause was identical with the
liberties and independence of the Spanish nation; and
that the people of Spain were almost universally enlisted
on her side, and that the banner under which they
fought was not the banner of Isabella, but the banner of
the constitution ; and that, therefore, we would be
backed by the approval and support of this country.—
(Hear, hear.) It was upon that ground that support
was asked for when the first-act of that transaction was
complete, and when Don Miguel and Don Carlos were
expelled from Portugal and Spain, and when applica-
tion was made to complete the additional articles,
which applied more specifically to Spain, the ground
on which additional assistance was asked for is
thus stated by M. Martinez de la Rosa:—He dwelt
on the manifold evils which were to be apprehended from
a return of the Pretenders to the Peninsula. He said
that the question was not only one relating to the suc-
cession of the thrones of Portugal and Spain, but to
those constitutional principles which agitated Europe,
and which sooner or later would disturb England and
France. It was on that ground that the support of
England was asked for. If that were so, into what
position would this country be put if we were appealed
to under the conditions of the quadruple treaty, not to
assist the Spanish nation in establishing the constitu-
tion, but for the purpose of enabling the Government to
overturn that constitution, and to establish in Spain that
very despotism against which the treaty was originally
made.—(Hear, hear.) It has been said that it is a
boastful assertion to say that the Queen of Spain owes
her throne to the support of England. It may be boast-
ful, but it is founded on fact. And it has been matter
of reproach to me in this House by gentlemen who
were in favour of the contending Prince. There was on
the one band the great bulk of the Spanish nation con-
tending for Isabella and the constitution, and on the
other a small party, but a party supported by foreign
influence, whose expenses, as is now well ascertained,
were supplied by large contributions of money from
withuut.—(liear, hear.) It was not, therefore, a mere
contest between two parties in Spain, but one of a larger
and more comprehensive description.—(Hear, hear.) We
have been told that non-intervention, in addition to
peace, retrenchment, and reform, was the creed of Lord
Grey's Government. But what did that non-interven-
tion apply to? It was to what was going on in Belgium
where a revolution had taken place, in which it was ap-
prehended that England and other powers would inter-
fere by force of arms to compel the people of Belgium to
acknowledge the authority of the King of the Nether-
lands. But so far was Lord Grey's Government from be-
ing founded on the principle of non-intervention, that one
of the first proceedings they were obliged to adopt was
the joint interference of the Five Powers in the dispute
between Belgium and Holland.—(Hear, hear.) I contend
that in writing the dispatch of the 16th of March I did
no more than on point of principle the Government was
entitled to do; and when the Right lion. Baronet thinks
there were words in that dispatch which were not calcu-
lated to conciliate or persuade, my answer is, that it was
nut intended to be communicated. The Right Hon.
Baronet thinks that there was no allusion to benefits
conferred; but he will find that it is not so, the allusion
to past benefits being in the subs( quent dispatch.—
(Hear, hear.) The Right lion. Baronet says that I
both laughed at and knocked down the Government
of Spain; but sonic Gentlemen think that in that
dispatch I was not spirited enough, and that I
ought to have been more offended than I stated
myself to be; whilst others think that I showed too
much irritation. I leave those who entertain these
different opinions to discuss them amongst themselves.
It appears to me that this is a case in which the British
Government need nut be offended; and I Wive any
person who reads the note of the Duke of Sotomayor, in
which the dispatch was returned, will say that it is not
calculated to raise any feeling of auger or indignation
in the mind, but that it is calculated to raise a far
different feeling.—(Hear, and laughter.) If I erred in
showing too much forbearance to the Government of
Spain, I can only say that I would rather be blamed for
being too slow in taking offence than for being too prone
or too prompt to resent it.—(Hear, hear.) With regard
to the other stage of the matter, communications aro
going on with the Minister of Spain on the subject.
When these communications are completed, and
when her Majesty's Government shall be able
to come to a decision, I shall be prepared to
communicate to Parliament the correspondence
that has passed. While these communications—I will
not now call them negotiations—are passing, I am sure
the House will feel that it would be highly improper in
me to state the precise nature of what is passing, or that
I am prepared to lay the papers on the table of the
House.—(lleur, hear.) Though I declined to have any
direct communication with Count Mirasol, as having no
official capacity and no diplomatic character, and whose
assurances therefore could have no official value, and
whose statements could have nu official authenticity, I
nevertheless expressed to M. Isturitz, the Minister of the
Queen of Spain, that her Majesty's Government were
ready to receive any statements which he might think lit
to communicate. I shall only say that, in a country like
Spain, which had been subject to such multiplied
changes, it is difficult for an Ambassador who represents
a foreign court not to hold communications with men of
all parties.—(Hear.) In a country where, between 1632
and 1847, there have been 30 Presidents of the Council
—(Laughter)—and 38 Ministers of Foreign Affairs—
(Laugh ter)—l think it must have been difficult indeed
for any man having to deal with those various and suc-
cessive Ministers not to hold social and personal inter-
course with those who for the six months may be in
office, and that it cannot be considered surprising if he
keeps up habits of intimacy with the 'thirty-seven
Ministers of Foreign Affairs besides the one in office, or
the twenty-nine ex-Presidents of the Council, which
were in habits of personal intercourse with him.—
(Hear, hear, and laughter.) I really feel, after the
manner in which this question has been discussed, and
after the small difference of opinion on the material
points
which has prevailed, that I may leave the matter
in the hands of the House, little doubting how it will
dispose of the question.—(Hear, hear.) But, if any re-
sponsibility attaches to any person, I am ready to take
on myself that responsibility which it is.. my duty and
my desire to take on myself.—(Hear, hear.) It seems to
be the opinion of all that no blame attaches to Sir H.
Bulwer for his conduct on this occasion. If that be so
I was right in approving of it also; but if any censure
is due, if any error was committed, on me let the judg-
ment of the House fall, and on me let the responsibility
rest.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUME said he hoped, after the debate which
they had heard, that the motion .
would be withdrawn
(Hear, hear.) He entirely approved of the conduct of
enabled them to
Sir H. Bulwer, as far as the documents
judge, and he considered that the Spanish Government
were guilty of the greatest ingratitude towards this coun-
try. He hoped the Noble Lord would take warning frothem
this, and would not interfere any more affairs of
foreign countries.—(Hear.)
Mr. URQUHART (w
tie rose amidst strong mani-
festations of impatience) said he would only ask the
minutes, while he
for five
attention of the house
proved that the conduct
of England in Spain had
been the bane and curse of
f this country ever since she
oommenced intermeddlingin the affairs of that coun-
as h
coun-
try. (The Honourable Gentleman, yroceeded,
was met by such constantb cries and such
to
anon, as render his obser-
vations inaudible.) He expresser)sup-
porting the motion of the Hon. Member for Dorsetshire,
as a means of bringing home to one Minister
the the conse-
quences of conduct for which all Cabinet were
that the circumstance of that
responsible, satisfied
rendered fr. Noble
Lord being; Foreign Minister, friendly rela-
tions with foreign powers impossiblet —(Cries of Oh.")
Mr. BANKES said he did no wish to divide the
House.
LorSbELL-
- , if the Hon. Member
d J. RU does not
divide he must allow the motion to be negatived.
The motion was then put, and negatived without a
division.
The House then went into Committee of Supply, but
immediately resumed.
LAW OF ENTAIL (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Mr. SCOTT hoped that the further consideration of
the report would be postponed. The Bill had been very
briefly discussed in its various stages.
The LORD ADVOCATE had no objection to post-
pone the Bill until the following evening.
Mr. F. MAULE hoped his Right Hon. Friend would
press the Bill through the present eagts, Any discus-
sion could be taken on the third reading.
The further consideration of the report was then post-
poned until to-morrow (this day).
The other orders of the day were then read, and the
House adjourned at a Quarter past One o'clock.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSE\ MESS
(From the Votes and Proceedinga of the Rouse of Cominv ns.)
MONDAY, JUNE 5.
STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE.
The following Resolutioni were reported from the above
Committee:—

1. That in the case of the Farmers' Ertate 'Society
(Ireland) petition, for leave to deposit a pe titian for a
Bill, the standing orders ought to be dispens ed with:_
That the parties Abe permitted to deposit a p et ition for
a Bill within three clear days after the prose citation of
this report.
2. That in the case of the Lancashire and 1 orkshire
Railway (Amendment of Acts and Reg& ration of
Capital) petition, for leave to ;deposit a petit ion for a
Bill, the standing orders ought to be dispense( 1 with:--
That the parties be permitted to deposit a pet ition for a
Bill within three clear days after the presenta',;ioa of this
report.—Resolutions agreed to.

NOTICES GIVEN AT THE PRIVATE BILL OFFICE.
The following Bills are ordered to be :read a third
time on Wednesday, June 7:—
London and Blackwall Railway (Improvement and
Branches to the St. Katharine's and London Docks).
Bristol and Exeter Railway (Branch from Bleadon to
Wells, Glastonbury, and Street).
Bristol and Exeter Railway (Taunton and Castle Cary
Branch).
Strathtay and Breadalbane Extension Railway.
Great Northern Railway (Isle of Axholme Extension .
Drumpeller Railway.
Low's Patent.
North and South-Western Railway (Harrow to Brent-
ford).
Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Railway (No.
2—Deviation of Line, and Power to Shrewsbury and
Birmingham, and Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and
Dudley Railway Companies, to contribute and make
Arrangements).