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

lands saw such speeches delivered in the House of Com-
mons, it must have been a great inducement in him to de-
lay the settlement of affairs, He might have argued that, if
he could but delay ?he settlement by cavils and scruples,
he might at length find friends in die Pritish
Pathan-lent, who would help Lim to ,e participation
of the Belgian territory.(llear, hear.) The letters
which the Hon. CRettlerrian opposite had read were very
far from Proving that the embargo was the cause of the
delay of the settlement. There had been hat minor points
of difference at any time betwezn Ministers and the three
great Powers of Europe. There Were -stone 'lnlnor points
on which the three great Powers VitA-..1 disposed to say that
the King of Holland Was sitreare, and they wished to have
further negotiations, ars order to see whether those points
could not he Modified or dispensed with. This had been
the feeling of the Courts of Austria, Russia, and Prussia,
but that feeling was now diminished, and a conviction was
gaining ground that it was not these minor points which
constituted the difficulty, but that the bottom of all the
delay was the King of Holland's objection to sign any
treaty by which the sovereignty of Relgium should depart
out oh his hands. He had now a confident hope that with
the assistance of the other three Powers, such a language
would be held to the King of Holland that he would be
obliged at last to abandon whay.ever hopes he might now
entertain for deferring the settlement of the negotiations.
Sir. R. PEEL said that the Noble 'Lord had not made
the proper distinction in one part of his speech, for the
immediate question was lees on the principle of the em-
bargo than on whether the embargo itself was calculated
to effect the o'sject for which it bad been imposed. He
was rely glad, however, to hear the Noble Lord express
such confident hopes of peace. The Hon. and Learned
Gentleman, the Solititor-General, had stated that in point
of fact this *vas hot a question between Belgium and
Holland tlaCnt territory, but that Holland had fled for re-
fuge kn the Courts which were known to be the advocates
of legitimacy. The Learned Gentleman, it was true, had
afterwards explained what he meant by legitimacy, as if
he had been called upon as a writer of a dictionary. Be
knew not why the Hon. Gentleman had done this. 1 f
the Learned Gentleman's explanation meant anything it
was that all popular Governments were opposed to legiti-
macy. He meant that the three great monarchies of
Europe were ranged against England, France, and Belgium.
It was not necessuy, however, to mix up this question
with the question of foreign policy. He (Sir Robert
Peel) would admit that the object of the foreign policy was
justifiable, and he would further admit that it was
important to the peace of Europe to bring about this
settieraent; but if he admitted all this he would still
maintain that Ministers were not justified in coercing
the trade of British subjects, and in imposing an embargo
for that object.—(Hear, hear.) He would maintain that
the embargo was an illegal and unconstitutional exercise
of power and authority, whilst it was ineffectual for its
purpose. He did not think the Noble Lord a fair arbi-
trator in this case, for he deemed the embargo nothing
unless the Crown were authorized to continue indefinitely
this restraint upon commerce, and then which he (Sir R.
Peel) maintained that there could not be a precedent more
dangerous and pernicious. If a vessel with iron on board
represented her cargo as perishable, what did that prove
but that commerce was placed out of the pale of the law,
and was obliged to resort to such practices ? There was
no law in the case, and commerce was placed under the
discretion of the Crown Officers. Surely this was a
power very improperly lodged, and liable to be abused.
It was true that he had heard no complaint of abase,
but it was a pow,: which it was almost impossible to
e...ercise impartially. He for one would object to corn-
merce being ever put under such control. He sup-
posed that no objection would be made from the Trea-
, sory Benches to furnish the whole of the information
required. It was absolutely necessary, under existing
circumstances, that the power should be exercised by Par-
liament. If property on b 00..: of Dutch vessels was re-
leased on the plea of its being British property, why
should not British subjects insure that property ? Was
not this a powerful argument against both the justice and
policy of the embargo? He denied that the embargo could
be justified on the plea of mitigated war. Such a doctrine
never had been recognised by the law of nations. But
the main question was whether the injury fell on the sub-
jects of Holland or of England. He could not agree that
it fell upon the former; and it had been shown that, since
the embargo had been imposed, not a single mercantile or
commercial failure bad taken place, whilst the pressure was
so great and so severely felt in this country. It was very
well for gentlemen opposite to say that this was a party
question, and a factious motion ; hut, he would ask, who
was it that bad brought it forward ? Was it a gentle-
man who supported the ballot or not? This question must
relieve the Hon. Mover from any suspicion of being actu-
ated by any party bias. He had stated that be approved
of the general policy of his Majesty's Ministers towards
Holland, and yet he was an enemy to the embargo.
Such was the Hon. Gentleman's opinion who brought
forward this question, and yet had he not declared
that he had three strong objections to the embargo?—
First, that it was illegal ; secondly, it was contrary to
the good faith of the country; and, thirdly, it was
totally inefficient to its purpose. He reprobated the
measure as contrary to good faith, and ineffectual for
the object in view. The House did not want long
discussions upon politics ; the point was, that the em-
bargo was doing to the country the reverse of good. He
would grant, for the sake of argument, that it was im-
portant to coerce Holland. He would grant that it was
necessary to compel Holland to a peace, but still, he would
ask, was the embargo a measure calculated to promote the
object in view? He had formerly expressed his opinion
that the maintaining of the embargo would defeat the
object of peace. He maintained the opinion still. The
embargo was the Telum sine ictu, and showed the
disposition.--

" Willing to wound, and yet afraid to strike."
This was the character of the embargo ; it inflicted no in-
jury, but occasioned irritation and animosity. The Hon.
Gentleman (the Member for the city of London) bad said
that the measure was creating a strong sympathy in
favour of Holland, and thus it was that Ministers com-
manded the poisoned chalice to their own lips.
Mr. HODGSON, after some few remarks, observed
that the effect of the embargo on English commerce was
most injurious, and he doubted whether England would
ever again have the same good market for her coals in
Holland. Before the embargo was laid on the export of
coals from Newcastle and Sunderland amounted to
160,000 or 170,000 tons per annum ; and the number
of vessels engaged in the trade amounted to five hundred,
the whole of which were thrown out of employ.
Dr. LUSHINGTON was at a loss to suppose that the
embargo imposed on the trade of Holland for six months
would not involve her in a situation which she would
find it difficult to survive. The Right Hon. Baronet, the
Member for Tamwortb, bad commented on the unconsti-
tutionality and of an embargo. Would that
Right Hon. Gentleman question the power which was
vested in the Crown of making peace or war, and would
he say that the Crown should not indict on Holland some-
thing short of a declaration of a war ? Would the Right
Hon. Baronet say that the Constitution had forbidden the
Government to resort to a mitigated measure, even though
it were to prevent a war in which, perhaps, all Europe
might be involved ? They were told by an Hon. Gentle-
man to look at all the insurances which were effected.
Now he (Dr. Lushington) would look to the fact that it
was not competent for any subject to make any insurances
which should be against the act of the British Govern-
ment. In justice and sound policy what must be the
consequence of allowing persons to insure against the acts
of hostility of their own Government, as applied to foreign
powers, and thus relieve the foreigner from the consequence
of the acts of their own Government, by paying him out
of the pockets of British subjects ? The Hon. Member for
Eessex (Mr.A.Baring), in commenting on the speech of the
Solicitor-General, had expressed his astonishment at the
doctrines which his Hon. and Learned Friend had laid
down. That Hon. Gentleman had himself entertained by
turns every opinion which had ever been promulgated in
that House, and he had at last come to a definitive con.
clusion. If lie (Doctor Lushington) understood his Hon.
and Learned Friend he said, that if the King of Holland
refused to abide by the principles of almost all the civi-
lized world—by the avowed principles of England and
France—that if the King of Holland took shelter under
the principles of the Holly Alliance--it was an act on his
part of injustice to attempt to exercise his thraldom over
la people who differed from his own subjects in all their
feelings and opinions, in virtue of the annexation of Bel-
gium to Holland in 1814. Ile would say that if war
were to come upon us to-morrow he would still thank
Divine Providence that for three years we had had pro-
found peace ; that we had had in that period the oppor-
tunity of economising our expenditure ; and, above all,
that the shedding of human blood had been postponed.
In conclusion, the Hon. and Learned Civilian observed
that so far from agreeing with the Hon. Member for
Essex in the fear which lie had expressed, that in the
course of policy which the Government had adopted they
were the victims of French diplomacy, he was thankful
for the past, and full of hope for thefuture.
An HON. Nlzaaamt, who stated himself to be the repre-
sentative of a shipping town, bore testimony to the very
serious inconvenience sustained by the shipping interest of
this country by the embargo laid on our commerce with
Holland, and statgl the case of the goods on board an
being transferred to an American vessel,
English ship
which vessel made a voyage to Rotterdam, arid, he be-