The Sun.
London, England, 1856-06-03 00:00:00

THE STATE OP GREECE.

Mr. JAS. M‘GREGOR wished to make some obser-
vations on the present state of Greece, and he.thought
that question, involving as it did the payment of 47,0001.
a year out of the national Treasury, was somewhat ger-
mane to the question of going into committee of supply.
It was to diplomacy alone that they had trusted for
many years to release this country froth the guaran-
tee into whioh it entered on behalf of Greece, the hope
of such a release being founded on the possibility of
a better administration of the public funds by the
Greek Government. As long ago as 1845, Lord Aber-
deen, in replying to a question put to him in the
Rouse of Lords by Lord Baaumont, said that that
guarantee gave this country a right to interfere in
the. affairs of ,Greece, and he deseritled the country as

a scene of murder, robbery, and violtnee. Diplo-
macy had done little to improve the condition of
Greece as thus described up to the time when the war
with Russia began. Since the war commenced the
allies had taken military possession of the Pirmus. The
question was what was to result from that occupation ?
Were they, through the icstrumentality of this military
possession, to be relieved from the paymentof the 47,0001.
a-year ? Was the court of Greece to be supported by the
noble lord opposite (Lord Palmerston) in carrying on a
system of government which was described by himself
as destitute of administrative talent ? The hon. gentle-
man then read an extract from a speech of the noble lord
in August, 1851, in reply to a question from Lord D.
Stuart, to the effect that the Government of Greece
bad been entirely unmindful of its obligations to
the guaranteeing powers, notwithstanding repeated
remonstrances from them. The hon. member said
he hoped he should succeed in eliciting from the noble
noble some explanation of the policy or coercion which
he intended to bring to bear on the government of
Greece. That government had as yet made no pro-
gress towards establishing the constitution which the
noble lord no doubt designed that they should establish,
and he believed the noble lord would be doing the
greatest service to Greece itself by exercising a degree
of coercion which, by improving the system of adminis-
tration, would enforce the fulfilment of existing obliga-
tions. He was quite aware that he mightibe met by a de-
claration that no policy could be so distinct as the occu-
pation of a country by a military force, but he hoped to
hear from the noble lord that the definite object of that
occup Alan was to compel the court of Greece to lessen
its extravagant expenditure and to discontiuueits corsupt
practices; or if this object could not be secured, he hoped
the noble lord who had made the King of Greece, would
feel it consistent with his duty and with the interest of
this country, to reduce him again to the position in which
he found him—namely, that of a German prince. He
was sure the noble lord's explanation ou this subject
would be received with much interest by the house and
by all who paid any attention to the affairs of Greece.
Lord PALMERSTON—With regard to the general
condition of Greece I have nothing to add to the opinions
which the hon. gentleman has quoted as having been ex-
pressed by me on a former occasion. I entirely adhere to
those opinions, and I am serry to say that the course
pursued by the Greek Government up to the present
time only confirms the justice of what I then said. The
occupation of Greece by the French and British troops
took place in consequence of measures of aggression
either instigated or permitted by the Government of
Greece upon the Turkish territory, and the Governments
of Eog!and and France thought, and I think justly, that
, when they were engaged in a war with Russia for the

defence of the Turkish dominions it was not fitting that
a small state like Greece, which was essentially bound
by the obligations of neutrality, should attack an empil e
which they were defending against the assaults of a
larger power. For that purpose the Pirmus was occu-
pied, and during that occupation the aggression which
has been alluded to ceased. I wish I could add that
that occupation had ended in a decided improvemen'.
either in the system of Government or in the general
state of Greece. But I cannot state that, fur the system
is still what it has always been, and those disturbances
which are commonly included under the name of
brigandage, such as robbing villages and plundering tra-
vellers on the highway, still continue, and to a very la-
mentable extent. The real fact is, that the Government
and the Court party have been, ever since the aeces.sion
of Otho, in conflict with the representative system. The
allies—the three powers, England, France, and Russia
—when they made arrangements with Turkey for the
independence of the territories constituting the kingdom
of Greece, issued a proclamation promising constitutional
government. The fulfilment of that promise was delayed
until the majority of the king should arrive; but oven
when that period was passed, he still delayed the per-
formance of his engagement. At last, in the year 1843
came the insurrection, which extorted from him tlio:e
institutions which he bad himself been unwilling to give.
From that time to this there has been a perpetual
endeavour on the part of the court to get rid of a con-
stitutional government. Thus the moneys which
ought to have been used for the payment of the debts
of Greece have been employed in the first place for cor-
rupting the electors, and then in the corruption of those
who have been elected, so that the Greek Parliament
has been rendered the more shadow of what it should be.
With regard to the enforcing of the payment of the debt,
as the guarantee was common to E❑gland, France, and
Russia, it has been held that no one power could rightly
enforce a cairn without the concurrence of the other

two, because it is clear that if the surplus revenae c.
_ _

Greece only sufficed to pay, for instance,one.third of the
debt, one of the powers by taking the third for itself,
would deprive the other two of their chana of payment.
With regard to the future intentions and policy of Go•
vernment, in connection with France and Russia, upon
the subject of Greece, that is an anticipation of future
events which I am sure the hon. gentleman and the house
will excuse me from entering upon.
Mr. M. MILNES expressed a hope that means would
be found to put a stop to brigandage in Greece.
SUPPLY.

The house then went into committee of supply.
On the vote of 3,461/. towards defraying the expenses
of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners till the 31st March,
1857,

Mr. W. \VILLIA.MS objected to the vote, on the
ground that this mini being exclusively for Cnurch pur-
poses ought to to ba paid out of the funds of the Church.
The committee then divided on the vote, when the
numbers were—
For the rote
Againet i ..
Majority
—(Loud cries of "Hear, hear.")

165
66
-100

The vote was agreed to
16,0231. was asked for to defray the expenses of the
Charity Commissioners.
In reply to questions from Mr. MOWBRAY and Mr.
LIDDELL,
Lord PA.LMERSTON said it was the intention of
the 'Government to introduce a bill this session founded
on the last report of the Charity Commissioners.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS called the attention of the com-
mittee to the increase in this vote of 3,6321. 102., and he
wished to know the reasons for the appointment of three

new charity commissioners, at an exiirise of 2,4001. per
annum,. and he moved that the vote be reduced to the
amount of last year, viz., 12,3911. 10s. The hon. mem-
ber remarked on the unsatisfactory manner in which the
charity commissioners dealt with the charitable funds of
the country.
Sir J. THOLLOPE also complained of the conduct of
the Charity Commissioners with reference to the chari-
ties in Spalding, in Lincolnshire, which was opposed to
the interests and wishes of the inhabitants, and contrary
to the will of the donors.

Mr. lIEADLAM also complained of tho com
missioners.

Mr. BAINES was unable to give any reply to
the specific cases mentioned by lion. members with
reference to the conduct of the commissioners in apprJ-
priating certain funds. He could inform" the house that
the Lord Chancellor in a few days would introduce five
or six bills in the House of Lords founded on the Charity
Commissioners' report, for carrying out certain schemes
therein recommended. One was a scheme for Dulwich
College, and also one for each of four or five other places.
He defended the conduct of the commissioners, as the
best they could pursue under the circumstances.
Mr. HENLEY thought it very objectionable that the
property of charities should be diverted from the chan-
nels in Which the founders intended they should fi)w by
the decision° of charity commissions. He thought the
necessity of coming to Parliament to sanction new
schemes for charities was a very proper safeguard to be
applied in such cases.

Mr. STUART called attention to the fact that pro-
ceedings were sometimes instituted and afterwards
dropped, by which useless costs were driven upon chari-

ties.

Sir J. PAXTON objected to the manner in which in-
formation was obtained by the Charity Commissioners ;
no notes of the names of those giving evidence was taken.

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY remarked that the measures
of which the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Baines) had
spoken would reach that house in the dog days, and
hon. members were aware what attention they would re-
ceive under Euch circumstances. With regard to the
increase of tae vote, he believed it arose from the large
employment of inspectors. The committee ought to be
careful before it sane:i•'ned such large increase in the
number of Government employes.

Mr. SPOONEL-t—calied atte-ution to the fact that two
stuns of 5,000/. had already been voted for solicitors'
bills, in le-spect of which no particulars had been furnished.
Mr. WILSON explained that these two sums had no-
thing to de with this commission. They were for the
costs of Mr. Fearo n, who had acted in the prosecution
of proceedings in Chancery under the former system.
• Mr. KNIGHT remarked upon the expenses which had
been incurred in the administration of charity suits. In
the six years from May, 1835, to June, 1841, these suits
coat at the rate of upwards of 3,0001. a year. In the
next period, durirg which returns were made, the ex-
pens .8 were 8,4001. a y.ar ; and for the last four years
for which there were any returns, viz , the lohr years
ending 1835, the expense was 10,0001. a year and up-
wards. Thus it appeared a great increase had taken,
pace in the expenses of those matters, a state of thing',
in his opinion, demanding some explanation. Ho sug-
gested that the soiicitor should be paid by salary, as in
the case of other public departments.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL wished to say a word
on behalf of one of the best officers in the public ser-
vice, Mr. Fearon. 'lt was true there had been an in-
crease in the aggregate amount of costs ; but the reason
ofthathe tas that there had been a very great increase of
business done, Parliament having thrown rnanY ad-
ditionaleherlities into the hands of the commission. If
it was tphreeP:
present
tsure of the house to substitute a' salary
for the mode of paying the solicitor, there could
be no objection
that the had
there was no reason for suggesting
ad. multiplied business for the purpose
of increasing the costs:
The committee divided :
For the original vote
For the amendment
Majority
3.06
was then agreed
next— pro
Tl;io'ell7.t'faor the Statute Law Commission was
posed.
Mr. L. KING complained that no reform in the shape
of consolidation or codification had resulted from this
commission. It was understood when the commission
was appointed that it • would be a working commission
but although 12,0001. had been expended, nothing had
been done in the way of clearing the statute book from
obsolete statutes, aed consolidating the written law. The
only hope remaining since the abandonment of the plan
laid down by the Lord Chancellor *as the two bills pro
mired by the hon. and learned member for Suffolk, but
as .yet the/ fiacl 'tat made their appearance,. and there