The Sun.
London, England, 1833-05-11 00:00:00

lieved, another port in Holland, and returned to a port in
England, from whence she took her cargo, in a very few
weeks, with a new freight, and having cleared 360/. ; and
that On her return she found the English ship still lying
in the same berth unemployed.
Mr. POLLOCK would maintain that the using that
which wan an inntrument of war in this case was at least
a tyrannical proceeding-.
Sir B. INGLIS said that the Noble Lord the Paymas-
ter of the Forces, in his character of Cabinet Minister,
had advanced doctrines which he hoped would not be
he listened to in that House. Now he (Sir H. 11. Inglis)
would ask that Noble Lord whether it were fitting that
he should state to the House that the King of the
Netherlands was procrastinating the deliberations o❑ this
great question, which had occupied three years of negoti-
ation, with a view to resume his power over Belgium?
Did not that Noble Lord know that from the first mo-
ment of the insurrection in Brussels, the King of the
Netherlands had recognised the separation of the two
countries ? With respect to the treaty of the 15th
of November, the King had never attempted to refuse to
grant the independence of Belgium, and the questions
which had been raised were comparatively on minor
points only. Did not the Noble Lord know that the
three great cities in the Low Countries were not so op.
posed to the House of Orange as his observations would
imply? He concurred in thinking that an embargo must
necessarily occasion much commercial embarrassment. The
Learned Civilian bad dwelt very ably on the horrors of
war, and he (Sir H. Inglis) was sure that no man who
recollected either Mr. Fox's or Mr. Burke's definition of
war could hesitate for an instant to agree with the Hon.
and Learned Civilian in their horror of war.

Lord ALTHORP said that as to whether the King of
Holland still wished to maintain his dominion over Bel-
gium that was at present purely a matter of opinion ; but
he had certainly never consented to sign any treaty having
for its object the independence of Belgium unless it should
be accompanied by certain propositions of a nature which
rendered it impossible for the Powers interested to ac-
cede to them. And when they looked at any Power
which, without making any declaration of refusal to grant
the independence of a country, still took care to avoid
signing treaties for that purpose, such a course amounted
almost to a refusal. Now, in respect to this question,
it had resolved itself into this narrow compass, for it
was simply whether it was fair play on the part
of this country to maintain an embargo with a view to
lead to the termination of the present state of things.
No man could doubt that the effect of the embargo must
be very distressing to the commerce of this country; but
this must be the consequence in any case that could be
imagined in which anything like force was used with a
view to fulfil a national object. The question for the
House to consider was, whether it was desirable for them
to interfere and put an end to this embargo (taking into
view the general policy of the country), and whether or
not it was necessary to proceed in the course which his
Majesty's Ministers had adopted, in order to secure the
general peace of Europe, because, though the evil of the
embargo, as it respected individual interests, could not be
doubted, still the evil of a war breaking out on the con-
tinent must be much greater? In short, the question
was, whether the interference of this House would not
have the effect of protracting the settlement of this ques-
tion ? The Hon. Baronet, indeed, seemed to think that
the preservation of peace must be secured from the state
of the different countries on the continent, but he (Lord
a 1.1—.0 would be maionined if
a war were to continue between Holland and Belgium ?
And here the question arose whether, having resorted to
coercive means, his Majesty's Ministers should persist in
the adoption of these means ? It was certainly the duty
of. .the Government to take every step which should
enable them to remove the restrictions which now
existed upon our commerce.

Mr. RowesoN and Lord PALMERSTON having made
some few remarks,
Mr. ROBINSON would ask whether, if the three
Northern Powers were really in earnest in their desire to
see the settlement of the question, Holland must not of ne-
cessity yield to the dictation of England and Fiance ?
Then, as to the navigation between Holland and England,
the fact was, that one eighth of our shipping were em-
ployed in it. The consequence of the embargo must be to
throw all these ships into other trades, when the rate of
freights was already diminished to a very great extent.
The members of Lloyd's were determined to pay all the ex-
penses arising from the confiscation, the insurances having
been effected in time of peace, and mgt of war. He was
not disposed to embarrass the Government, and indeed he
never saw any Government towards which more forbear-
ance was shown than the present.—(Hear, bear, hear.)
He really believed the three great Northern Powers were
desirous to prolong the negotiations, for the purpose of ob-
taining more favourable terms for Holland. He protested
against the original laying on of the embargo ; and the
conduct of Holland as contrasted with that of this country
was most creditable to her.

Mr. Ald. THOMPSON declined pressing his motion.

TURKEY.

Mr. HUME rose to bring forward his motion. If
there was any one thing more than another against which
this count.ry was more anxious to guard, it was war. The
question he wished to ask was, why the capital of Turkey
was left without a British Ambassador at a time like the
present, the French Minister left alone to act in the ca-
pital of that empire, and a Russian naval and military
force to establish themselves there ? This was a question
of great importance. He always contended that they
ought not to interfere in the affairs of foreign nations, and
he observed that when they did so, the interference ended
in disgrace. He avowed candidly that their interference
in Holland was disgraceful, and made them a laughing-
stock to all Europe. It was important to know how far,
through the negligence of Ministers, Russia, the greatest
enemy of Europe, was allowed to gain such influence in
Turkey. Their diplomacy for fourteen years, up to 1830,
cost not less than 400,0001. a year. Now, when the
hour of danger arrived, the Sultan was obliged to throw
himself into the hands of Russia, no British Ambassador
being there to assist the French. He believed there was
not even a British fleet to interfere. He wished to know
if an Ambassador had been appointed, and, if so, why he
was not at his post. There was a report within the last
feu ty•eight hours of a messenger having arrived in Russia
from the Sultan to thank the Emperor Nicholas for his
interference. The Hon. Member concluded by moving
for a return of all the Ambassadors and Secretaries of
Embassy appointed to Constantinople from January, 1827,
their salaries, length of service, date of appointment, &c.
Lord PALMERSTON had no objection to the return.
Sir R. Gordon returned home from Constantinople early
in last year, and Sir Stratford Canning set out soon after
on a special mission. Lord Ponsonby was then irntne-
diately appointed Ambassador to that Court. He believed
he had already arrived there, and would have arrived
sooner were it not for unexpected delays in his conveyance.
Though there was no Ambassador there at the time men-
tioned, there was a Secretary of Embassy, who acted with
great discretion, and entirely to the satisfaction of the Go-
vernment. He was taken to task by the Member for
Essex for perpetually meddling, and now the Member for
Middlesex took him to task for not meddling. Government
was blamed for interfering in matters passing just at their
own doors, and now they were blamed for not interfering
in matters passing at the other side of Europe. They
could hardly be censured for not sooner interfering in the
affairs of Turkey, for the Ambassador was on his road.
The Member for Middlesex asked, where was the fleet ?
He would ask the Hon. Member, in return, where the fleet
would be if his motion for reducing 7,000 seamen had
been agreed to ?—(Hear, hear.) He coold assure tile
House that his Majesty's Government was not inattentive
to the events passing in the East. They attracted their
most serious attention, and they were not negligent of the
steps necessary to guard against danger. When the proper
time arrived for explanation, he shoild be able to satisfy
the House that Government was not indifferent to the due
discharge of their duty.
Mr. A. BARING said this case of Turkey was a new
one, and there was no circumstance to show that the Go-
vernment took any steps to guard against the threatened
danger. It was not a satisfactory answer to be now told
that the ambassador could find no means of quick convey.-
sore. If the secretary of embassy did his duty so well it
was a justification of the opinions entertained by the Mem-
ber for Middlesex as to the expense of embassies.

Lord PALMERSTON said the fact was, the frigate
which was to convey their ambassador to Constantinople
was detained by contrary winds at Naples for a month.
After a few words from Colonel DAVIES and Mr. H.
L. BuLwEa, the motion was withdrawn.

In answer to a question from Mr. A. BARING, re-
specting the Bank Charter, and that of the East India
Company, of the delay of which to so late a period of the
session he complained,

Lord ALTHORP said he hoped he should be able to
bring forward the subject of the Bank Charter by the end
of next week, or the beginning of the following. The other
was a subject attended with more difficulty. He could
not say now precisely at what time it would be brought
under the consideration of the House.
_ .

Mr. C. GRANT said the correspondence with the
Directors was still in progress to settlement. He did
think he could have brought the subject forward before
Easter, but was prevented by circumstances which he
did not anticipate. He would bring it on at the earliest
possible period.