The Sun.
London, England, 1832-02-10 00:00:00

B ANK RUTZ'S.

WILLIAM YOUATT, Nassau-street, Middlesex-hospital,
druggist.
THOMAS JONES, Kidderminster, druggist.
JAMES POOLE, Worcester, comb-manufacturer.
JOHN WARNER, Manchester, warehousemen.
JOSEPH GALE, Manchester, carver.
JAMES MONTAGUE, Charlotte-street, Bedford square,
jeweller.
DONALD GRANT, Kensington, builder.
JAMES CROSHA W JE WSB U RY, Canterbury,linen-draper,
THOMAS TAYLOR, ClitTord-street, Bond-street, mercer.
STEPHEN H ANNUM, Oxford, carpenter.
JOSEPH JACKSON, Rochester, brush-maker.
WILLIAM MORGAN, GEORGE RICHARD ROACH,
and GEORGE MORGAN, Liverpool-street, merchants•
DAVID DANIEL DAVIS, Fitzroy-squarethoarding-house.
keeper.
RICHARD LONGWORTH, Upper Rawcliffe, Lancashire,
rush-dealer.

JOPN DAVIS, llourton-on•the_hifl, Gloucestershire, auc-
tioneer.

NEWSPAPERS.—On the motion of Sir R.
bnts, an account was on Wednesday night ordered, by
the House of Commons, " of the area or number of square
feet of surface of one copy of each of the Daily Newspapers
printed in London during the year 1831, including sup.
plementary or extra sheets; together with the amount of
Stamp Duty actually paid on one copy of each Newspaper,
and the rate of such payment for each 1(10 square feet of
area."

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

ROUSE OF COMMONS, Fziatwzr 9.

( Continued from our Second Edition of yesterday.)

INN' 17. -
•' .
Ms' c" . •
tention of the 4:4te lilrfo i short narrative of the proceed-
ings with respec ..011rtitgaFfor :16,40, three or four
years. He I,*(years. Wai!;;ltittictliat r:peni of time whim
K
the Noble Lord by _ t P#liiment, with the Duke
of Wellington and t fl4ol;,Friend near him. It
was early in 1828 t INislty, by the advice of a
United Cabinet, withdrew his forces from Portugal.
He (Mr. Courtenay) mentioned this to show that
at that period there had been no determination on the
part of Ministers to interfere in any way in the
internal Government of Portugal. The troops of this
country had been sent there at the instance of Mr. Can-
ning, to repel a foreign invasion, and when those invaders
were repelled the troops were withdrawn. The connec-
tion of the Noble Lord opposite with the then exi-ting
Government continued but a few months after that period.
But it continued for some short time after Don Miguel
had gone to that country, not quite until he had wound
the title of absoltve King, but after he had, acconl-
ing to the avowals of Messrs!. Huskisson and Lamb,
exhibited the roost unequivocal marks of his intention to
depart from the engagements which he had made with
this country. He had removed every officer supposed
to he unfavourable to the Constitution. He had dissolved
the Chamber without calling another, contrary to
the Charter, and, according to Mr. Huskisson, had
ovinred a disposition to destroy the Constitution altogether.
After this the Noble Lord opposite concurred in the order
went by Mr. Iluski,son, for a recta of the troops. He
(Mr. C.) merely mentioned this to show the position in
which affairs stood, when that fatal separation in the
Government, to which he had alluded, took place.--
up to that time, all those gentlemen who were then
Members of Government lamented the elevation of Dnn
Miguel, and the dethronement of Donna Maria, hut do..
termined neither to interfere with the arms of England
to support the one or the other. Every thin; remained
in this state for upwards of two years ; there was
not any interference on the part of Donna Maria,
or against the individual who had usurped her rights.
Government preserved a peaceful neutrality during the
whole period.—(Hear, hear.) Towards the en lof
that period, however, the Government, which now
sate opposite, began to move. They expressed themselves
not quite content with the neutrality preserved, and the
'hen Hon. Member for Knaresborough made a motion
representing Don Miguel to have been placed on
the throne by the effort, of faction. At that peri,qi his
Right Hon. Friend at the side of him had laid down the
principles of neutrality, founding them on the same prin-
dplea as those pursued by Mr. Canning, not departing
from, but contending for, non-interference with the affairs
,if Portugal. On that occasion the pre,,..nt Lord Chan-
•!ellor, differing from the Member fir Knareshorough, de-
clared himself strongly in favour of non interference.
But upon that occAsion the Noble Lord opposite male the
first of those celebrated speeches on foreign affairs which
had no doubt contributed to place him in his present situ-
ation. He took a view different from that which had been
taken by the Noble Lord now occupying Cu important

place in the Cabinet. It was then said that
al-
t.hough actively or by arms we could not interfere, it
was our duty, and the intention of Mr. Cunning,
o give to one party a moral support. An expression
vhich, he would venture to say, was not juatified by any
-hing which the late Mr. Canning had ever advanced to
chat House, and in direct contradiction to the course
,vhich he had taken in every similar case; and most par-
icularly contrary to tie opinion he had given when not
'tampered by office, and when he coincided with and
adopted the rules laid down by the Honourable
Gentleinan.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. Canning held that
-he non-intervention to be adopted should be absolute and
inqualified, unless they were prepared to sit night and
hy to impose taxes, and exert the whole power of the
;ountry for the interests of the party they had determined
to support. It was not until the month of February, 1830,
chat his Majesty had expressed to the House of Commons,
chat he had not deemed it vet expedient to place on their
ancient footing the diplomatic relations of this country with
Portugal. On that occasion the Noble Lord opposite did
lot speak ; but another Noble Lord, now in the House of
Peers (Lord Goderich), declared that, in his opinion, the
time must soon arrive when it would be necessary for
this country to acknowledge what was, de facto, the Go..
iernment of Portugal ; but at the same time expressed
his earnest desire (an important circumstance to be re-
membered) that no such recognition should take place un-
less it were accompanied with an amnesty to all those
persons in Portugal who were suffering from their ad-
herence to the other side of the question. But although
the Noble Lord opposite took no part in that debate, when
'he subject was shortly afterwards again brought before the
House, he made another of those speeches to which he
(Mr. C.) had already alluded, a speech of great ability, in
which he maintained that we were bound to enforce our
rights against Don Miguel, even at the risk of war. He
now came to the last speech from the throne during the
Administration of the Duke of Wellington. On the 2d
of November, 1830, his Majesty declared that he had not
yet accredited an Ambassador to the Court of Lisbon,
but the Portuguese Government having consented to grant
an amnesty for political offences, his Majesty thought the
time was coming when his relations with Portugal
might be re-established. On that occasion the Noble
Earlopfret
.sh :now
oh
racteLe
itoihe head
ridnam of h
opposite.
ne manner
totally
liaje
Gdi
isffet
different
en t
referring
rnmthteoot Government,,
e rr-
cent acknowledgment by this country of the King of the
French, advised the recognition of Don Miguel with the
,object of employing that recognition as a means of reliev-
ing the exiled, liberal, and incarcerated patriots of Portu-
gal ; and dwelt on the advantages of that principle of non-
interference which he recommended his Majesty's Govern-
ment to observe, and which principle the Noble Earl
ifterwards adopted himself. The fact was, that his Ma-
jesty's late Government did not make an amnesty the
condition of recognition. But they could not recognize
the Government of Portugal, while as many persons were
suffering in a cause with which originally this country
was so connected. At this period the new Government
was formed. The First Lord of the Treasury and the Lord
Chancellor had contended for absolute non-interference.
Oa the contrary, the Noble Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs had argued strongly against the existing Govern-
ment in Portugal, and had over and over again endea•
voured to induce the House of Commons to concur in his
opinions. His charge against the Noble Lord was, that
acting far himself, and on his own principle, he de-
parted from the great principle of non-interference,
and notwithstanding the disavowal of such a course
on the part of his colleagues, took a course which
rendered the restoration of an amicable diplomatic
intercourse between Portugal and this country im-
practicable. In the next spee.-h from the Throne, his
Majesty acknowledged that the Government of Portugal
had redressed several injuries done to British subjects;
but expressed his regret that he had not found it practi-
cable to re-establish amicable relations with that Govern-
ment. Of the nature of the injuries for which our
Government had obtained redress, papers which had been
laid on the table upon his (Mr. Courtenay's) motion, gave
a description. He would make ne farther remark upon
his part of the subject, than that it appeared to him that
for the injuries which we had referred, we had enacted a
full measure of satisfaction, and that in some cases, espe-
cially in that of the Captain of the Diana, we bad pressed
rather too hardly on the Government of Portugal. The
alleged cases of injustice were founded on the treaties with
Portugal under which this country had for two centuries
enjoyed peculiar privileges ; and not on the general law
of nations. Before the speech to which he bad just
alluded 5 had been delivered, a mush more import-
ant occasion in which the Government of Portugal
had been called upon for redress had occurred, to which
that speech had made no allusion. The French fleet
had entered the Tagus, captured a number of Portu-
guese men-of-war, and carried them to a French port.
On a question being put upon the subject in ihat
House, the Noble Lord answered that it was not unu nal
in war for ships which were captured to be carried oat to
the port. of the Power by whose arms they were so taken.
He (Mr. Courtenay) asked the Noble Lord whether the
war to which he alluded was not such a war of aggression
as that against which we were hound by treaty t- _:c end
Portugal ? To that question the Noble Lord's answer
was a challenge to bring forward a in.non upon that sub-
ject. It was that accidental o•nassion and answer which
had plaited him (Mr. Courtenay) in the situation in which
he was then placed, and co which be had no other claim,
of bringing forward . discussion of so much importance.
In reply to some .oservations which he had made on our
connivance in the attack made by France on Portugal, it
was said s:.at as we haul lately exacted redress from Por-
tugal f-. the injuries done to British subjects, we could
not :nterfere to prevent the French from doing the
ea-.e. But that was an inconclusive argument. In
tie first place, we had treaties with Portugal which
justified us in our demands ; but those very treaties
bound us to defend Portugal from an aggression
which was contrary to the law of nations. He
it
ourselves. vzas not
But on the 14th of May we were replaced in the same
ta
would not go into the several cases of injury which the
French Government had alleged to have been sustained
from Portugal. The first application made to the Eng-
lish Government by Portugal for assistance was on the 4th
ofe r Nliany. that li
we
e had
were b
withthat
time
Portugal
situation with respect to Portugal as that in which we
certain
n not tolda t that
war a t
had formerly stood by treaty. It had been, over and ever