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

derived from the vile source of inquisitorial espionage.
I One example will suffice: it was said, when Fulgosio
was put to death, that Mr. Bulwer paid for his death in
gold. Calumnies such as these will be treated by the
people of this country simply with disgust and scorn.—
(ilear and cheers.) This is not the first time that
my Noble Friend has been made the object of
fierce and calumnious attack. Many a time
have I heard him assailed in this House with vehement
vituperation ; but my Noble Friend has ever, when ar-
raigned before the great tribunal, where the public men
of England are tried by the gentlemen of England,
has ever vindicated himself with triumph from each
attack, and has proved himself the conscientious, as he
is the able, champion of liberty all over the worP.—
(Hear, hear.) He will, I am sure, do so now.—(Hear,
hear.) My Noble Friend, like the rest of us, has his
faults ; but these are not times in which such faults as
his are to be made subjects of party strife—(Hear,
hear)—the tremendous crisis of European affairs will
not admit of our making experiments heedlesaly upon
public men.—(Hear, hear.) My Noble Friend has his
faults ; but among these faults his enemies will not
reckon the want of sagacity to discern danger, or the
want of firm tranquil courage, and of indomitable con-
stancy to encounter it.
Viscount MAHON assured the House that he ca-
tered upon the present discussion with the sincerest
respect for the Noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs, on
account of his eminence and undoubted ability, his long
experience in public affeirs, and the high 1 ost he now
filled. Nor was he insensible to the inconvenience of
saying anything that might tend to increase the diffi-
culty of our position with regard to a foreign power—a
foreign power, and lately a friendly power.—([lear.)
But this question having been once brought before the
House, he would venture to state the opinion which he
had formed respecting the transaction. In the first
place ho would concede to the Right Hon. Gentleman
that the Noble Secretary had a right, under all circum-
stances, to tender some advice to Spain. He thought
that, after the sacrifices which we had made for that
country, and after the assistance we had given her in
the civil strife connected with Don Carlos, we cer-
tainly were not to be considered as precluded from
offering suitable advice to the Spanish Govern-
ment. But then came the question—in what terms,
and to what effect, that advice was conveyed ? And
when he looked to the dispatch of the Noble Foreign
Secretary, of the 16th March, he was compelled to own
that he could not concur either in the scope of the
advice he gave or the terms in which it was given.—
(Hear, hear.) In the dispatch of the 16th of March,
the Noble Lord not only stated his advice as to the
course of policy which should be pursued in Spain, but
he went on to recommend a change of administration,
and advised that the Queen of Spain should call to her
counsels some of those men who possessed the confidence
of the Libsral party. Now, he (Lord Mahon) could
not but think that it was stepping somewhat beyond the
proper and the usual line in such cases to „give advice,
not simply with respect to the measures to be pursued,
but as to the men to bo employed. Let them look at
what might happen in this country. Ho believed that
it was not unusual for men of weight and station, who
stood in friendly relations to any Governmen', from
time to time, if they saw occasion, to go to the head of
that Government, and state their views with regard to
the course which the Government might be following;
and if such counsels were given in an amicable spirit
they were generally received in an amicable spirit-
But the else would assume a totally different aspect if
the friends of the Government were to say, " We
advise you to change the Administration; we trivio! the
Queen to call other men to her counsels;" and he could
nut help thinking that by so doing the friendly line he
supposed to exist would thus be overstepped. So the
Noble Lord, in the dispatch alluded to, had given advice
not only as to measures, but also as to the wets to be em-
ployed; and, looking at the terms of that dispatch, he
roust say that in them also lie saw some ground for re-
gret. Such a dispatch as that ought to have been worded
with the utmost circumspection, and with every imagin-
able care, lea a single word should fell from him which
was calculated to wound the sensitive jealousy of the
Spanish nation.—(Hear.) But let the House see bow
short—how unaccompanied by any argument—was this
dispatch, and how peremptory in its tone. It began—
" I have to instruct you to recommend earnestly to
the Spanish Government, and to the Queen Mother,
if you have an opportunity of doing so, the adoption
of a legal and constitutional course of Government in
Spain." Why, surely, if his (Lord Mahon's) pre-
ceding observations had any foundation at all, the
Noble Lord ought to have prefaced those instruc-
tions with some reasons or explanations, and not to
have this decisively given his instructions to Sir
Henry Bulwer to interfere in the affairs of a foreign
power. The dispatch of the 16th March having been
communicated by Sir Henry to the Spanish overn-
ment, the Noble Lord, on the 19th of April, sent another
dispatch to him, approving the language he had held to
Queen Christina; and again another dispatch on the
20th, instructing him to state to the Duke of Sotomayor
that her Majesty's Government entirely approved of the
step which he (Sir H. Bulwer) had taken in making his
communication of the 7th instant, and likewise of his
note of the lAth. Now he confessed that he did not see
how the Noble Lord was to be entirely defended in re-
ference to these dispatches. If the first dispatch was
intended for communication to the Spanish Government,
it tended to weaken the claim, which we fully possessed,
of giving advice; but if it was only intended for the
private information of the Ambassador, and was
marked, as such, " confidential," then he asked why
the Noble Lord sanctioned the step of communicating
it to the Government of Spain? Did he or did he not
intend that that dispatch should be laid before the
Spanish Government, and if he did so intend, why did
he express it in a tone which he must admit was calcu-
lated to give offence? If, on the contrary, it was not in-
tended, then he asked how the Noble Lord could recoil •
cile to his sense of duty to sanction a step which was
clearly an error in judgment? He admitted that the
dispatches of the 16th of March and of the 20th of April
might be justified if taken separately, but how they were
to be justified both together he hoped to hear from the
Noble Lord in the course of the evening. Consistently
with his respect for the Noble Lord, he must observe
that there was another, and that the mot important
point, still behind, and that was with regard to the rela-
tionsinwhioint h
which we ee
stood to the Spanish w
Upon
this p
as m
oGovernment.most
correspondence
inconclu-
sive; but the Noble Lord had promised further papers
when the negotiations were complete, and he could not
but think that the Hon. Member for Dorsetshire would
have exercised a sounder discretion had he postponed
his motion until those papers were produced.—(Cheers.)
At present they were discussing the question in the
dark; but this state of obscurity was not to be perpetual,
for the Noble Lord had promised that it should be
removed. Doubtless, while negotiations were ac-
tually pending with a foreign power, the Noble
Lord might be perfectly justified in withholding
the dispatches until• those negotiations were com-
pleted; and as far as his judgment was concerned he
thought they ought not to have entered upon the dis-
cussion at all at a time when the most important part of
the case, and that not touching e parties or individuals,
but the national honour, of England, was not before
them. In this state of the case, therefore, seeing that
they possessed no information with respect to the
grounds on which the. Spanish Government had acted in
their dismissal ol• Sir henry Bulwer, it would not become
him to pronounce an opinion on that part of the subject.
This, however, he would say, that so far as the papers
on the table were concerned, lie saw no justification
whatever for the Spanish Government in dismissing the
ambassador of that very power which had befriended
them as the Goverment of this country had done.—
(Cheers.) They ought not to have forgotten that we
had stepped forward to assist them with our blood, our
treasure, and our moral influence; and that the assist-
ance we had given them would require very strong pro-
vocation indeed on our part before we could justify so
great an outrage as had been offered to us. But in those
papers there was no such justification, nor even the
shadow of such a justification.—(Cheers.) He did not
presume to say what else the Spanish Government might
have to bring forward. On that point, if it were
necessary, they would be able to express an opinion
hereafter. Nor did he mean to deny that in one respect
the Noble Lord's dispatches were fairly open to some
degree of blame; but what he contended for was, that
the outrage far exceeded the provocation—that it bore
no proportion
to the provocation, and that as far as he
could see there never was an act of so much importance
undertaken upon grounds which appeared to be so slight
and inconclusive.—(Loud cheers.) True we had done
such acts ourselves, for Count Gyllenberg, the Swedish
Minister, was sent out of this country, in 1716, but we
gave the strongest reasons for doing it, inasmuch as he
had been detected in correspondence with the Pretender.
It the Spanish Government could show a similar cause
then he was sure that this House would not preclude
itself from admittieg
it as
existed, a justification; • but at present
no such justification had been
shown.exd, he And if it
Ia s shouldcer-
tain
v
turn out that no such justification
differences within the House, or party
that no party dd
would prevent them from concur-
feelings of arty kin
ring in any course which the vindication of our national
honour might seem to require.—(Cheers.) This was
of the subject; though
what he had to say on that part
he deeply regretted that it should have been stirred
and
at a time when they could speak only_
documents were
'°d
important
buts," because the most
now to be considered
not before them. It remained
whether the House would concur in the vote proposed by
the Hon. Member for Dorsetshire. Ile (Lord Mahon)
he could not concur iw it. That
would say, at once, that _
vote was a vote of
-ensure; it expressed regret, but regret
nothing m
from this house was n ore nor less than a vote
of censure. And let Hon. Gentlemenremember what
would be the consequence of carrying in this House a
'
resolution like that which the Hon. Gentleman had pro-
posed, expressive of the Le
deep regret with which the
of the
English
House observed the humiliating position
Government.—(Hear, • ,o
har and laughter.) He admitted
the humiliation, but he was not yet prepared to say
by
whether that humiliation was incurred the fault of
our diplomacy, or by the unjust suspicions oftthhSp_a_mish
Government.—(Hear, hear.) The condhe
etitie Noble
Lord was partially open to animadversion;to say
immediate
retirement animadversion should be followed by the
retirement of the Noble Lord from the councils of the
Queen, and the possible retirement of all those Noble
Lords and ,„Right Hon. Gentlemen who now composed
the Government of her Majesty, was what ho could not
coincide in; and he must observe that, until they had
fuller information respecting the whole case, he could
not but think that the House of Commons would not
consult the true interests of the country, or show a
proper feeling of dignity,. if, • upon imperfect information,
it came to any such decision.—(Cheers.)
Lord J. RUSSELL,—Mr. Speaker—The Noble Lord
who has just sat down has spoken so fairly on this eines.
tion—(Cheers)—has expressed his doubts where ho has
doubts, his approbation where he approves, and his re-
luctance to agree with a vote of censure, in terms so be-
coming a Member of this House, that I cannot refrain

from at once rising to endeavour to satisfy the Noble
Lord with regard to those points upon which he is as yet
uninformed. The Noble Lord is wiling to admit, and
I think the majority of this House must he willing to
admit, that, even putting aside the peculiar relations
which subsist between this country and Spain, it is com-
petent for the Government of one country to give advice
to the Government of another; and that it may even feel
at times bound to give that advice with respect to its in-
ternal affairs.—(Hear, hear.) Provided that advice is
conveyed in friendly terms, and that it has a friendly
object, there are few Members in this House who will
deny that there may be occasions on which such advice
may be given.—(Hear, hear.) Without referring to
the innumerable examples which may be found where
such advice has been given by persons of the highest
authority on all matters of international relations, I
will mention one case that I happened to be reading, I
think, not more than two or three days ago, with re-
spect to the late events in Naples. A person of high
authority sent for three of the Foreign Ministers, and
informed them that tranquillity was restored in the
Cabinet; whereupon one or them took upon himself to
speak on behalf of his colleagues, the two ~ther Foreign
Ministers, and said that their opinion was that the time
had come when clemency ought to be shown by the,So •
vereign and the Government. Who was the Minister
who tendered, unasked, this advice to the Government
of Naples? It was the representative of her Most Ca-
tholic Majesty the Queen of Spain.—(Loud cheers and
laughter.) Subsequent discussion occurred with one of
the Ministers of the King of Naples, in which the nature
of the Constitution and the propriety of dissolving the
Chambers were laid before those Foreign Ministers.
Various opinions were given, the Spanish Minister
giving one opinion, the English Minister giving another
but it never occurred to the Minister of the Kieg of
Naples to say, " Any advice upon the internal affairs of
this kingdom is an unjustifiable int, rference, and I call
upon you to refrain from such interference, unless you
wish, me to give advice with respect to the mode
of conducting the Governments of England and of
Spain."—(Hear, hear.) But, Sir, there were, as the
Noble Lord admits, peculiar reasons why England
should have some title to give its advice to the Go-
vernment of the Queen of Spain.—(Hear.) Her in-
terests had been deeply concerned when the Marquis of
Nliraflores came here to pray, to beg, to supplicate for
assistance. Our assistance had been given too readily
—our assistance had been too effectual—for us not to
think that if an occasion arose when the throne of the
Queen of Spain should be in danger, our sympathy
might be exhibited, and our friendly counsels might be
tendered without fear of arousing the national suscep•
tibility. Sir, the events of the present year have been
extraordinary. My Right Hon. Friend the Master of
the Mint (Mr. Sheil). who went through this case in a
manner so masterly that I can add but little to what he
addressed to the House, referred most aptly to a dis-
patch of my Noble Friend in 1846, in which my Noble
Friend observed to the Ambassador—" Such are the sen-

timents of the British Government, and you will inform
those with whom you have intercourse that you will act
in accordance with those sentiments: kut you will not
obtrude any advice with respect to the internal affairs of
Spain." But, as I have said, the events of this year
have been most extraordinary, and there was no country
hardly which could be considered to be sate from those
convulsions which have overset thrones—have destroyed
constitutions—have placed towns at the mercy of mobs,
and have threatened to convulse the whole of Europe. It
was impossible, considering the relations between this
country and Spain, that the state of Spain should not
seriously and painfully attract the attention of the
British Government. My N,,t& Friend read a dispatch
of the 16th Match, and the NAL, Lord opposite asks a
perfectly justifiable qu'stinn—viz., whether that dispatch
was written with a view to being communicated to the
Spanish Government, or whether it was only intended
for the information of Sir H. Bulwer? The answer
which I shall give will be given in relating the
events as they occurred. My Noble Friend reai
that dispatch. It is in those terms in which a dis-
patch is couched that is communicated in a note
to a foreign Government. It' was in a dispatch
written in that form which is intended for the informs.-

tion of the Minister; but at the same time it was for
the information and guidance of a Minister who had
been cho.en for his eminent abilities—who was tho-
roughly acquainted with the state of Spain, and in
whom the Government of this country most wisely re-
posed confidence. Sir H. Bulwcr, in the first place, under-
stood that dispatch as it was meant—as being for his
guidance. But there occurred a state of things which
tilled him with alarm as to the security of the throne of
Spain. He has described the circumstances in a dispatch
dated the 22d of April. In that dispatch he relates
that extraordinary powers were obtained by the Spanish
Government—that the Cortes were prorogued—but that
no sooner were they prorogued than almost every officer
of note in the Progresista party was arrested or ban-
ished, and some of the most distinguished deputies were
seized and imprisoned, with the apparent intent to de-
port them, and all this without the parties thus treated
being told of their offence or submitted to any sort of
trial. Now, on this part of the case I must say what I
believe the opinion of Sir H. Bulwer to have been, for 1
have seen it frequently stated in dispatches and letters
of his, viz., that the best policy for the Queen of Spain
to pursue would be to unite, if possible, in her
councils the most eminent of those who support her title
as opposed to the title of Don Carlos; and that, whether
they were called Moderadoes or Progresistas, it was her
interest to see her throne surrounded by both those
parties, and to make of those parties, united as it were, a
rampart against the attempts of those who support the
pretensions of another prince. Whether that were a
just opinion or not I have no occasion to argue. I only
say that was the opinion formed by Sir H. Bulwer, not
from any regard for one party or tl e other—not from
any wish to take part in the internal politics of Spain,
but from a wish to see the Throne of Spain strengthened,
and the title of the present Queen confirmed and esta-
blished by the whole nation. With this opinion, then,
the House can well conceive that Sir H. Bulwer saw
with alarm that not only was an extraordinary law
passed suspending all the guarantees of public liberty,
but that the most eminent men who had held Progre-
sista opinions in the Cortes—men who were distinguished
writers—men of attainments and of character, were seized
and imprisoned without a trial, and threatened with
the loss of their liberty wherever they went. Such
being the case, Sir 11. Bulwcr was afraid that the par-
tikins of Don Carlos or of a republic might make a
successful insurrection. "In this state of circumstances,"
he says, " I consulted my instructions. I had already
acted upon them by giving friendly' and intimate advice,
without any effect having been produced." That shows
he rightly understood the instructions authorizing him
to use friendly and intimate advice without immediately
producing the note in which he was authorized to do so.
But it occurred to him that if he went no further no

record would remain of that advice which had passed in
conversation ; and it seemed to him that for the sake of
the British Government, that it might appear we bad
left no warning untried which could have been ten-
dered, that we had not allowed recklessly the throne of
the Queen of Spain to be subverted, and that at all
events we should be justified in case the throne
were placed in peril,—in those circumstances
ha wrote the note to the Duke de Sotomayor,
enclosing the dispatch of my Noble Friend.
These are the circumstances that account, first, for the
dispatch being written in terms which, I think, were un-
thought of and were more abrupt than those in which
my Noble Friend would have written if he were sending
a noto intended to be laid before the Spanish Govern.
moat ; but they also account for the conduct of Sir. 11.
Bulwer in afterwards delivering that note to the Spanish
Government. What course were we to take, then ? It
was not at first intended that the note should be laid be-
fore the Spanish Government, but then Sir H. Bulwer
acted upon his discretion, and wo have to consider
whether he had properly acted upon that discretion.
It was our opinion that he had so acted properly upon
his discretion, and that he deserved our support and ap-
probation. I think it would have been a bad course, in-
in-
deed, if, looking to the conduct and career of Sir H. But-
wer at Madrid, who had been there for years, and who
was well acquainted with that country, if we
had taken advantage of a technical point, and
said, ",You were not instructed to give that
note, and therefore your conduct must be disavowed."
We should have very much lowered the Government had
,we so acted, and we consider we were right in taking
upon ourselves the responsibility, or rather let us say,
the greater part of the responsibility, for the Hon.
Member for Dorsetshire is right in saying that if there
is cause for censure, the censure must rest on the Go-
vernment at home, and not on the agent.—(Hear.) We
therefore, do take the greater share of that responsibi-
lity, and we stand here to be acquitted of all blame, or
to be censured, if it should please the House to censure
our conduct in this proceeding. But, at all events, sot
denying or seeking to evade the responsibility which
properly rests upon us, my Noble Friend's subsequent
dispatches to Sir Henry Bulwer have been censured on
another ground ; and it has been said that after such
an affront had been offered him as that of sending
back his dispatch, he ought to have fallen into a pas-
sion, and in pompous terms, and by some acts of an
extreme nature, he ought to have resented the indig-
nity put upon him. I think my Noble Friend took
a much better and a wiser course in explaining that his
motives were friendly, and that if the Spanish Ministers
were angry, we should not be offended with them. j
recollect a story which Lord Rolland told me, of a din-
ner at which he was invited ; and when he arrived, he
found there lord Archibald Hamilton end a gentleman
who was not known to him. Lard Archibald came up to
him and said that the gentleman had been saying such
things to him that he must either laugh at him or knock
him down; upon which, said Lord Holland, I advised my
friend to laugh, and not to think of knocking down. So,
I think, is the case with my Noble Friend (Lord Palmer-
ston), the question is not one which involves a grave na-
tional quarrel. Then there has been another species of
criticism passed upon the language used in the notes ad-
dressed to the Minister of Spain by Sir IT. Bulwer. It
has been said that we ought not to remind Spain of the
obligations she is under to this country. Now, I differ in
opinion with those who think thus. Ido not think that
it the Spanish Government had really consulted the in-
terests of their mistress they would have returned such
an answer as that of the Duke of Sotomayor to Sir 11.
Bulwer. They ought to have been too mindful of their
Queen's interests to indulge in such sarcasms as were
vented in their reply to Sir Henry Balwer's note of
April 7. But as they had chosen to do so, they fairly
drew upon themselves the retort that the Queen of
England had received no such obligation as had been
bestowed upon the Queen of Spain. The Honourable
Member for Dorsetshire has chosen to bring forward his
motion, and he thinks it both wise and becoming to do
so whilst negotiations are yet pending on the very sub-
ject under discussion. He professes only to ask for in-
formation, and doing so, he proposes to the House to
agree to a vote of censure on our conduct. I endea-
voured to justify the discretion of the Honourable Mem-
ber; for whilst it was not proper for us to ask him to
put off his motion, I cannot agree with him in his asser-