The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-17 00:00:00

other measures better calculated to suppress the trade.
What he rose for was, however to express a hope that
the House would not now, on the 16th of August, enter
into any very long discussions, but that they would
allow the Committee of Supply to proceed with the con-
sideration of the remaining estimates.
Lord G. BENTINCK reminded his Hon. Friend (Sir
R. Inglis) that during the fourteen years to which he
referred, we had by our interference inflicted the most
aggravated sufferings on from 80,000 to 100,000 wretched
beings. He gave credit to his Noble Friend (Lord J.
Russell) for being impressed with a most laudable hatred
of the slave trade ; but he thought he took an awkward
way of showing it when he gave practical encouragement
to slavery and the slave trade by the introduction of
slave-grown sugar.—(Protectianist cheers.)
The amendment was then put and negatived, and the
House resolved itself into Committeee.
On the vote that 72,500/. be granted for the salaries
and expenses of the department for Foreign Affairs,
Mr. BANKES renewed the discussion on the subject
of foreign affairs, demanding to know if hostile orders
had been given to the British fleet towards the Crown of
Naples ; and also demanding inquiry as to our present
relations with the Court of Spain, but imputing no blame
to Sir 11. Bulwer, and admitting that he did not exceed
the authority with which he was invested.
Mr. MACGREGOR drew attention to the case of
Colonel Bristow's expulsion from Spain; and asked for
explanation thereon; at the same time he readily ad-
mitted, with the Noble Lord, the great inconvenience of
discussing such matters at that period of the session.
Sir D. L. EVANS fully concurred in the last remark,
and expressed his regret that.the present session should
have been so remarkable for such discussions. In fact,
two continental powers could not have the least dispute
eithout inducing some Hon. Gentlemen of that House
to call upon the Government for intervention, while
other Hon. Gentlemen demanded that there should be no
intervention. The course now pursued regarding Spain
and Portugal was not new, but similar to that adopted
by this country for fifty years past. And again he must
say that he utterly deprecated discussion on such sub-
jects pending any negotiation.
Mr. HUME said it was true that for the last fiftyyears
our policy had been that of intervention, and that policy
he objected to. His opinion was that they ought to
adhere to the principle and pledge of the Hon. and
Gallant Gentleman's party as propounded by Lord Grey
of non-intervention, peace, economy, reform, and re-
trenchment. He had waited with great anxiety to see
what case had been made out by Sotomayor against Sir
H. Bulwer, and he found that he had made out no case.
Sir H. Bulwer had been well supported in this House
by the Noble Lord at the head of the Foreign-office,
and he ought to have been as well defended by the Noble
Lord's colleagues in the other House of Parliament,
where the attacks of Lord Stanley had been permitted
to pass unanswered.
Sir D. L. EVANS denied that he had ever recom-
mended intervention; he had simply stated that inter-
vention was not a new policy, but one which had been
pursued by almost every Administration.
Mr. P. HOWARD said it was undeniable that by the
intervention of this country last year, a period had been
put to a very fierce and bloody civil war in Portugal,
and the Constitution of that country had been restored
to its legitimate and ordinary form, and he trusted the
question between Austria and the Pontifical States would
not be lost sight of or disregarded in any of those pacific
measures of advice and intervention which were mutually
adopted between the Government of France and the
Crown of England.
Mr. URQ,UHART denied the accuracy of an asser-
tion which had been made in the course of the present
discussion, to the effect that the Duke of Wellington
had recommended intervention on the part of this country
in the affairs of Spain.
Mr. B. OSBORNE contended that the intervention of
England in the affairs of Portugal had certainly not
given free institutions to that country, but had entailed
an expense upon England the items of which figured
conspicuously in the estimates. As to the Spanish affair,
he did not think the House was now in a position to
discuss it. He then referred in terms of eulogium to
the very able speech of the Honourable Member for
Buckinghamshire (Mr. Disraeli) of whom it might be
truly said—Nihil tetigit quod non ornavit.—(Cheers.) The
Noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs had, how-
ever, gone far to allay any feelings of alarm and
perturbation which might exist in the public mind by a
speech in which the elevated views of the philanthropist
had been conveyed in the dignified language of the
statesman. Parliament would separate with a much
better heart after listening to that speech, from the as-
surances which it held out that peace would be pre-
served.—(Cheers.) He (Mr. Osborne) avowed that it
had been his intention to vote that the proposed grant of
2,0001. to Lord Minto be disallowed, but, after hearing
the speech of the Noble Lord, his views had been com-
pletely altered, and if the peace of Europe had been
maintained so cheaply, he should offer no opposition.
Lord PALMERSTON said he could hardly avoid offer-
ing a few words in reply to the Hon. and Learned Mem-
ber for the county of Dorset. In the first place he had to
remark that it had always been the policy of the Govern-
ment of this country in all former times of her history to
consider that the interests of Great Britain were deeply
concerned in the transactions which took place in other
countries, and every Administration had felt it to be its duty
to look to those interests and to take such measures as
might be necessary to secure their protection either by
negotiations—or, if negotiations failed, by other me-
thods.—(Hear, hear.) In the early part of this debate,
the Hon. Members for Inverness and Buckinghamshire
had bestowed much argument on answering a speech
made by him (Lord Palmerston) a considerable time
ago, and in replying also to a dispatch he had written to
M. Isturitz, and which had been laid upon the table 9f
the House. He, however, should not occupy the time of
the House by pointing out the total failure of both Hon.
Members in answering either the speech or the dispatch,
nut he should be content to leave both to be compared
with the speeches this day delivered by the two Hon.
Members. But he (Lord Palmerston) felt it due to Sir
Henry Bulwer to notice three charges which had been
brought forward by the Hon. Member for Inverness-
shire (Mr. H. Millie) as the grounds which he thought
justified the Spanish Government in demanding
his recall—and, if not recalled, in sending him
away from Madrid. The first charge was that
Sir H. Bulwer had permitted conspirators to as-
semble at his residence. This charge was contrary
to fact, was totally unfounded and untrue. Sir H.
Bulwer did no such thing—he had denied it in the most
distinct and positive terms—there was not even the
shadow of a proof adduced to support it, and he (Lord
Palmerston) reiterated that the assertion was untrue,
and was totally and entirely without the shadow ofi a
foundation.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member had
wholly misunderstood the argument which he (Lord
Palmerston) had used in the dispatch bearing upon this
question. In that dispatch he had stated that in' a
country like Spain, where there had been from thirty to
forty changes of government in the space of eight or ten
years, it was impossible for any Foreign Minister to
avoid personal intercourse with individuals who were
opposed to one government or another. A foreign
Minister could not shut his door against the individual
with whom he had been in official communication as
apo
t the memberthaedonmf
eitxnhties
he
administration sr: waionanisahouoGtfoovfheriosnment the day before,
Madridso
of
regulate
communication
of
h ist his
because
socialw oi
itrnh tep ore cfr os ffi c
se uac Tic
eds si r p-
sHi teiaorn,
hear.) It was impossible that the representative at
uo
nrasnseyoapsponotsohetedrt t
obneathe
o the
Govern-
mentcould of the day. Such was the argument contained in
his dispatch.—(Hear, hear.) The other charge made
against Sir H. Bulwer was that he had harboured per-
sons who had conspired against the Spanish Government,
and who were
in a state of concealment from the pur-
suit of justice. Sir H. Bulwer,to that accusation had stated
that acting upon the universal practice of all the ,foreign
Ministers at the Court of Madrid, he had received for a
temporary refuge an individual who admitted that he had
been concerned in the insurrection, or rather in the at-
tempt at an insurrection, and some others who had been
suspected, and as it afterwards appeared unjustly sus-
pected, of having taken part in those proceedings; but
Sir H. Bulwer alleged 'that as the practice was ac-
knowledged and admitted in Madrid, it would have
been disgraceful in him to have refused a temporary
asylum to these individuals; and he (Lord Palmers-
ton) thought that his having done this presented no
just ground on which the Spanish Government had a
right to ask for his recall or to send him away.—
(Hear, hear.) The third and last charge made against
Sir H. Bulwer was, that he had given no refutation
to the accusation of having contributed money for the
purpose of getting up the Madrid insurrection. Why
that ridiculous and trumpery charge had been refuted
by General Pezuela, who had the command of the
Spanish forces at the time; and he (Lord Palmerston)
trusted it was not necessary for him to assure the House
that there existed not the slightest ground for that ridi-
culous and absurd imputation.—(Hear, bear.) It had
been said that it was a great pity that her Majesty's
Government had not allowed Count Mirasol to retract
these charges. Count Mirasol preferred no charges, but
only came as a witness. But ample time bad been
afforded to M. Isturita to retract them, and no attempt
was made either to retract or press them. He therefore
wholly dismissed that matter. It had, however, been
asked, what was the present state of the relations of this
country with Spain'? His reply was, that the present
state of the relations with Spain stood thus—the diplo-
matic intercourse between the two countries was sus-
pended. Further it had been inipired, what means a
British merchant resident in Spam, and who had
suffered wrong from the Government there had to ob-
tain a redressal of those wrongs? The reply was, that
in every part of Spain this country had consular officers,
whose duty it would be to make applications to the Go-
vernment on behalf of the British merchant, and if
those applications were not attended to there were other
measures which the Government would adopt to secure
attention to representations of the character alluded to.
—(Hear, hear.) Another Hon. Member wanted to know
how this country stood now with reference to its treaties
with Spain. Those treaties were not in any degree
affected by the suspension of diplomatic relations be-
tween the two countries ; and though it was not his
(Lord Palmerston's) province to answer hypothetical ques-
tions, he would not hesitate to state that if any applica-
tion was made by Spain to this country to carry out the
treaties, it would then be for Majesty's Government to
consider whether the claim made was good, and to give
the Spanish Government an answer accordingly. He
would also go as far as to say that the quadruple treaty
had been contracted for very particular circornateness, and
that it was not very likely that at present any question
would arise to which the provisions of that treatyh could
be applied. Again, • t had been asked what good had been
mixed itself up in the
effected by the Government havinghat benefit had accrued
affairs of Spain and Portugal, a_l2.lw
Why, it must be remem-
from the quadruple treaty ? W
treaty put an end to a
bered that the very signing that
dreadful civil war in Portugal—led to the surrender of
Don Miguel, and to Don Carlos at once consenting to
quit Spain. This was all accomplished with any ex-
pense to this country beyond that of the pea and ink