The Sun.
London, England, 1832-04-17 00:00:00

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

It was announced that their Lurdahips bad agreed to
several private

BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.

Lord STORMONT rose to bring forward a motion of
which he had given notice, on Friday evening, relative to a
breach of privilege committel by two solicitors for a Pri-
vate Bill, called the Sunderland Docks Bill, in the pub-
lication of two hand-hills, containing aspersions and
charges against those Members who had voted in Commit,
tee against the Bill, whose names it publi•hed.
After a few observations, the Noble Lcad woofed that
the placards lie read by the Clerk,
The pipers having been scud,
Lord STORMONT moved that the subject be taken
into consideration on Monday the 7th May.
Mr. HODGSON said, that if it was not a hzeach of
privilege to publish a list of the division in a public Com-
mittee, he did not see why it should be accounted as breach
of privilege to do so with regard to a private Committee.
►_le had the authority of one of the solicitors by whom this
letter had been written, to state that it was sent down ►o
Sunderland without any directions that it should be pub-
lished. While he by no means concurred in the senti-
ments expressed in that letter, he did not think that it
furnished any grounds for proceedings on the part of that
House against the writers of it. The Hon. Member was
understood to say, that it was he who furnished the list of
the division that had taken place in the Committee to the
solicitors for the Bill, but that he did not think it to he
more a breach of privilege to do that, than to furnish the
list of divisions in other cases.

Lord ALTHORP said, that there could be no doubt
that the letter and placard to which the Noble Lord bad
called their attention constituted a breach of nrivileea. and

Lord ALTHORP moved the order of the day for the
House going into Committee of supply.
Mr. DUNCOMBE begged to take that opportunity to
call the attention of the House and of the Government to
a ease which he conceived to be one of extreme hardship.
The complaint which he had to prefer was on the part of
the Rei. Mr. Curtin, who for 33 years had been a mis-
sionary in Antigua, from the Missionary Society for the
conversion of negroes. That rev. gentleman bad come
home here with a leave of absence front his diocesan, the
Bishop of Barbados, on account of ill health, and with
the promise that his leave of absence would he renewed,
if it should be necessary to do so, for the re-establishment
of hie health. He made severe! fruit!e's applications to
the Colonial-office to have his leave of absence renewed,
or his benefice exchanged for one in this country, but on
the 11th of February he received a letter from the Colo.,
vial-office, signed by the Noble Lord opposite, ordering
him to return immediately to Antieua. On tie vs rg*
same day, namely, the 11th of February, the eeitem r
far a provincial periodical, against which an action fi r
libel bail been taken, and who were desirous of ttavieg tut
benefit of the rev. gentleman's evidence on the triil, re-
ceived a letter front the Noble Lord, in reply ta an ap-
plication from them to that effect, in which they were
told that if they wished to detain him tor the period
they mentioned, they should undertake to reim-
burse him for the amount of his salary, which
he would lose for that time. This was a case, he
thought, of peculiar hardship. Was this old gentleman,
at the age of 68, to return to Antigua, in the uncertainty
of finding himself superseded when he arrived here
The impression of the public, if this reverend gentle-
man should be thus sent back to Antigua, would be, that
it was done in order to smother the evidence which he
might be able to give with regard to the colonies, and to
deprive the provincial periodical he had mentioned of the
benefit of his testimony. All the Rev. Mr. Curtin asked
for was, for six months' additional leave of absence, and
he (Mr. Duncombe) was authorized to say, that if, at tl e
end of that period, his health would permit, he would not
shrink from returning to Antigua. The Hon. Member.
concluded by moving, " that this House, having taken
into its consideration the case of the Rev. James Curtin,
missionary trona the incorporated Negro Conversion Mis-
sionary Society, is of opinion, that on account of his lung
and meritorious services for a period of thirty.three years
in the island of Antigna, and as his presence would tie re-
quired in a court of justice in this country, his leave a
absence ought to be extended to months, without pee-
judice to his salary."
Mr. BURGE seconded the motion.
Lord HOWICK had heard with extreme astonishment
the statement of the Host. Member. The resolution
moved by the Hon. Member implied that the House had
considered this case ; but the House hid just as much
considered it as the Hon. Member appeared to have done,
who had not ma de out the shadow of a case to support ,
his statement. His (Lord Howick's) defence for the con-
duct of Lord Goderich, was, that he could net act by
the existing law otherwise than he had done in this in-
stance. This rev. gentleman came on a leave of absence
for six months in the autumn of 1830. Now, according
to the existing law, the Bishop of Barbados could not
give a leave of absence for a longer period than six months,
and any extension of that leave could be obtained only by an
application to the Colonial Office.—(Hear.) Yet, though
this gentleman came home in September, 1880, be
gave no notice to the Colonial Office of his
being in this country until January, 1832, which was
more than twelve months after his leave of absence had
expired. It was impossible for the Colonial Secretary to
comply with his application for an exchange of his be-
nefice for one in this country, as the Secretary for the
Colonies had no benefices in his disposal except in the
colonies. Taking twelve months additional beyond the
period of his leave of absence, amounted in tact to a resig,
nation of his office, and if it were any other but a clergy..
man that were concerned, it would must assuredly he
looked upon in that light. This gentleman first applied
for an exchange fur a living in this country, which was
repeatedly refused. His next application was on account
of ill-health, but it was not particular or temporary ill-
health, and that application was also necessarily refused,
He then applied for an additional leave of absence, and at
the very same moment that that application reached hint
(Lord Howick), came a letter from the eolicitor for the
periodical against which an action for libel had been taker...,
also applying for permission for the rev. gentleman to re,
main some additional time in this country. It was not
unreasonable, under such circumstances, to conclude that
there was some collusion between the parties, and his
(Lord Hovrick's) letter was writeen to those solicitors
under the impression, which was the fact, that the offer
which it contained would not be accepted. The Noble
Lord concluded by contending, that under all the 'dream-
stances of the case, Lord Goderich could not do otherwise.
than be had done.
Mr. P. M. STEWART maintained that the Ray. Mr.
Curtin bad been baldly dealt with in this cove.
Mr. BURGE said that under the peculiar circumstances
of the case, the evidence of this rev. gentle.nan was of
such importance that his absence fur some time longer;
should be excused.

After a few words from Sir M. W. Ridley, Mr. Diln.
cotnbe, Lord Althorp, Lord Howirlr, .:nd Mr. Eme, the
gallery was cleared for a division; but the Hon. Member
withdrew it, without dividing the Home.
BRAZILIAN SEIZURES..
On our readmission, we found

Mr. DIXON addretalog the /louse on the subject of
Brazilian seizttt of British property. From the Hon.
Member's statement, it appeared that when war broke out
between the Governments of Rio Jauciro and Buenos
Ayres, seizures were made promiscuously and without
warning, by the former, of all shipping violating a certain
arbitrary line of blockade, amongst which seizures were
several British merchantmen. After much negotietion, a
convtrnti
Government, on was nt
seizures so opposed to every principle of jo,tlce and inter-
national law, but to this hour the penvisioes of that cone
oveintnite,(l t intoo make about
jni six
compensationyears for 'by the
Brazilian
veetion had in no instance been fultilleii.—( flew .) pre
felt himself, therefore, called upon to urge tire leje,ble
Foreign Secretary to take the triatur offieiallv 'thto ceneie
deration, so as to secure the owners, Bre:telt metal :nts,
of the property thus most unjustly selze,l, the comper,sa.
non to which by law and treaty they were entitled. The
Hon. Member then stated three ca;es of seizure az in-
stances of the harsh and equivocating conduct the
Brazilian Government. In one instance the rig: t of cum
pensation was refused beeatwe the vessel—p, sitively
fish as to its owner, crew, acid cargo, at the time
ef seizure, —hae,preaed at one time to hung to a
Buenos-Ayrea shipowner.. In aeozeer a vessel from
one of the West Jendien colonies W,.9 seized, though
it was clearly proved not to have violated the blockade ;
and in the third case compensation was refused, though
the:Coramon Pleas had decider in favour of the claimant.
Re trusted the Noble Foreign Secretary would insist, in a
peremptory tone, upon a. suit. fulfilment ou tie part of
the Brazilian Government, of the treaty of compensation—
the rather, as if the terms which
now offering were agreed to, the Britishc,:aftn.,n, would
be defrauded some 37 per cent. out of their for detnaud.
It should he recollected, that a loan was coirtreeted in
this country by the Brazilian Government the value of
which was not higher than 45 teat.. Cover-omega teas
per cent. from which they
might estimate the value et the 6:4 per'eent. now offered
to the British merchants. The Hon. Member moved for
copies of the correspondence between the Colooiel and
Foreign Offices and the Brezilien Government on the sub-
jest of the seizures of tire British vessels.
Aldermau THOMPSON seconded the motion.
Lord PALMERSTON did not think that it would
promote the interests of the uarties whose cau.e the Tina

. . . .
ftiabcr advocated to produce the documents called for by
his motion. While he expressed: thus opinion, he begged
to say that lie did trot steiaii tha;te to undertake the
defence of the Brazilian Goveinment. A memoranduen
had been drawn up between the two Countries for the
purpose of effecting a settlement of the claims ques-
tion, and the Brazilian Government had certainly not
shown a disposition to adhere to the spirit of that memo-
randum. With respect to the mode in which the
claims had been urged, he submitted to the House
whether more forbearance ought not to be exercised in
a case of this kind, than in circumstances where the
parties were on greater terms of equality.—(Hear, hear.)
Whatever forbearance had been shown, was far from origi-
nating in indifference to the demands of British subjects.
It lied been the desire of Government to abstain as long as
possible from compulsory measures, while there appeared
to be other methods of attaining redress. He had no reason
to believe that there existed any indisposition to take proper
steps for obtaining a speedy and final settlement of the
alarms ; and conceiving that the production of the papers
moved for by the Hun. Member would tend to no useful
purpose, but would prove inconvenient in the present state
of the transaction, he should request the House not to ac-
cede to the motion.
Sir ROBERT PEEL did not see that the relative
strength of the two countries was a substantial plea for
forbearance in the present case. It had not, at all events,
been acted upon i❑ the case of Portugal ; on the contrary,
there had been a❑ endeavour to cast censure upon his
friend, Lord Aberdeen, fur al lowing an interval of thirty
or forty days to elapse before he demanded satis•actien
from that country. But, even admitting the force of the
plea, the reasonable time for exercising forbearance had long
since expired—(Hear)—for the property had not been con-
fiscated by mistake, but for the purposes of plunder.—
(Hear.) He could unhesitatingly declare that if the whole
history of the affair were laid before the House of Com-
mons, they would come at once to the conclusion that
delays were no longer admissible, but that England was
justified in demanding instant reparation. So far from
the injury having been exaggerated, he believed that the
Government had understated its amount. There was,
moreover, great ground for suspicion, that these injuries
had been committed contrary to the wishes of the Mi.
nisters of Brazil, through the agency of the Admiral on
the station—( Hear, hear)—whose power was sufficient to
enable him to counteract the Ministers. He believed that
this could be substantiated by facts. He hoped that the
existing Government of Brazil would display a greater
disprieition to afford redress than was evinced by the last,
at the head of which was that individual—that Don
Pedro—(Hear)—the Emperor of Brazil, who, under the
sanction, and, as he suspected, the connivance of Govern-
ment, l,ad been permitted to trample on our municipal
laws, had been allowed to recruit for British soldiers toe
the British territory, so that he had now in his service a
body of troops called the " British Battalion." Under
the banners of this individual British officers, holding the
King's commission, hail been permitted to ranee them-
selves in direct violation of the law.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
What injuries, he would ask, had Portugal inflicted on
Britain, that she should tolerate such proceediugs ?
What insult had Don Miguel offered to our power, that
we should take a hostile part against him? What
infatuation had induced us, not nominally, but in fact,
to lend our countenance to that person who was direct.
ing his views towards the throne of Portugal ?—(Hear,
hear.) If the people of Portugal were determined to
acquiesce in the choice of Miguel ras the King of that
country, he (Sir Robert Peel) could not see on what prin-
ciples we lent the authority of our name (for the autho-
rity of our name we did lend) in promoting a contest.
He had the deepest impression of the injustice of our in-
terference, at the same time he was advocating the cause of
.Miguel, although be must admit the presumption that the
Por uguese preferred him as their Sovereign to Pedro.
And in what respect was this claim to a throne less substan-
tial than that of Louis-Philippe's to the crown of France ?
Assuredly not on the score of legitimacy. He would
maintain that the attack on Portugal could not take place
without the assistance of France and England, nor could it
succeed if unaided by the skill and courage of British offi-
cers, seconded by recruits drawn from our soil. On what
motives of policy such an interference could be baied he
could not understand. It was obvious that Miguel could
not have maintained his position for three years as King
of Portugal unless his authority had been sustained by a
majority of the Portuguese people. Had Charles X. or
Henry V. endeavoured to raise a military force in this
country for the purpose of invading France, would not
Government have said that they possessed the power of
en'orcing the law against any attempt of the kind—and
would they not have exercised that power? It would not
Au to return in answer, that France was a powerful nation
and Portugal a weak one. It was not only the interest of
Portugal, but the interest of Spain also, that was compro-
mised ; and notwithstanding the character of the Govern-
ment of Spain, no country had of late shown a greater
disposition to draw closer the bonds of amity and alliance
with Great Britain. He believed that for the last seven
years Spain had considered a British alliance as most fa-
vouratile to its interests, and he was persu tded that if the
last Administration bad continued in office, Spain would
by this time have recognized the independence of the
South American States.—(Hear.) The consequences of
Pedro's expedition, whether it were successful or not,
would extend to the whole Peninsula, and would endanger
our pacific relations with that portion of Europe. If the
people of Portugal wished to retain Dun Miguel as their
Sovereign, the principle of non-interference would be de-
parted from should this expedition be permitted to pro.
Geed in the manner in which it had set out.—(Cheers.)
Mr. G. ROBINSON regretted that the Noble Lord
(Palmerston) had replied in a way which showed that the
Government were not inclined to display more vigour in
following up the claims than had been heretofore exhibited.
Fur his own part lie detested a tortuous policy, sod con-
ceived that it would be much better to declare at once,
that if redress were not granted, we would proceed to
make reprisals. It was, no doubt, the interest of Eng-
land to cultivate amicable relations with Braz:l, but he
could not admit that this formed any excuse for delaying
she call for reparation of wrongs like those complained of.
Sir C. WETHERELL said that these claims ought to
have been long ago urged, and long ago settled. He did
not see why Great Britain should be put last, after Ame-
rica and Prance had been successful. If a relaxation of
the rights of nations towards England were once admitted
by us in the South American seas, we should afford an
example that would be imitated by the other American
States.—(Hear.) The only mode of getting reparation
front such States was by rept esentation to the Govern-
ment, not by resorting to similar piratical acts. If Great
Britain had the magnanitnily to release the vessels which
bad been seized, she ought etill to insist upon retribution
and comp-asation. He wished to ask the Noble Lord
whether he bad fixed a period for the adjustment of these
claims, beyond which other means would be called into
action to vindicate the honour of the British flag? The
merchants of London had had abundant reason already to
complain of the delay, and unless the Noble Lord stated
some period when justice was to he done, he should re-
commend an ad dress to his Majesty, praying him to take
maseaures for insisting on retribution.—(Hear.)
Lord ALTHORP agreed that the acts complained of
were a most genes injustice, and wholly unjustifiable on
the part of the Brazilian Government. The late Adini-
ni*-tration had two courses to pursue,—namely, to send a
squadron and make reprisals, or—which was the course
they did take—to call Ott the Brazilian Government for
aedress, and threaten reprisals if .t was refuse'. He con-
sidered that the late Government was wise in what they
did, in giving the Brazilian Government au opportuuity
to make reparation. The case was not one of abeolute
refusal, but unnecessary delays had ken interposed; ansi,
4, his Noble Friend had stated, instructions had been
Nen, to our Minister in the Brazils, to communicate to
the Goe.ernment, that unless those delays were put an era
to, reprisal' would be resorted to; and, in consequence,
the cases were :n a course of adjustment. He did not see
bow we could act otherwise than to declare that if we saw
any delays internosed, we should resort to reprisals.
Mr. EWAR4 hoped that the Noble Lord would not
wirer these claims to sand over indefinitely, but exact all
he could from the Braze; tan Government, and vindicate
the national honour.

Sir F. TRENCH complained, that whilst minor States
could obtain redress from the Brazilian Government, Great
Britain was, in fact, treated with ridicule, •
Lord MORPETH said, that he had a pstition to pre-
i.ent from trierchants, who stated that they suffereJ. great
distress, through the indefinite delay of the adjustment a .
their claims. He hoped that Government tvuuld act as
vigorously in the new world as they had done in the 01d.
Lord SANDON said, that two-thirds of the amount of
the cairns were due to Liverpool. He should like to hear
whether the Noble Lord was disposed to assign a specific
time tor the adjustment of the chino', beyond which fri-
volous and vexatious delays should no longer be tolerated,
Mr. HUME regretted that English merchants should
be so treated. The British flag, which was once respected
in all parts of thew rid, was now mocked every where.
Sir H. . p , 1:44/17. that if the statement. of
Att
Hon. NI )eoli.' e insitt4S red to the British flag
r 14R
were co es;l4 teas incurnAistiißsot e Government to put
a stop to the disgrace. He w, ..". to ask whether any
steps hid been taken by'b0i',......., to recall those offi-
cert in the army and navy.,whis- "7 taking improperly a
part in the contest now gonig on -,•,.
Colonel VirANS 'rid !t; Wiwi. reed, both at Lisbop
: AL4 ty,

'andiu this country, that there was an officer, high in rank
in e British army, who had been in correspondence
with the Portuguese Government.
Lord PALMERSTON had nut expected this sort of
discussion on the merits of the contest between Don Mi-
guel and Don Pedro. In reply to the question of the
Right lion. and Gallant Member, he could only say,
there was a person in D Pedro's service who was for-
merly an officer in the British navy, but he no longer held
a commission in the service. If there were any military
officers in Don Pedro's service, the stme rule applied to
them. His Majesty's Government hail observed a strict
neutrality. With respect to the alleged insults and
ckety of the British flag, he had no knowledge of the
grounds upon which the statements had been made. His
Noble Friend had correctly stated that the cases were in
a course of investigation. The case of the Henry and
Isabella was under adjudication when the last advices came
away.
Sir R. PEEL thought, that the best course for the Hon.
Member for Glasgow to adopt after the declarations which
had been made by Mini.ters, was to withdraw the motion,
anti leave the question in their hands.
Mr. DIXON said he was ready to follow the suggestion
of the Right Hon. Baronet, and withdraw his motion.
. .

Sir J. M. DOYLE said, th tt if he did not think it
unbecoming a Member of the House of Commons to turn
informer, be could point out several British officers who
were at the present moment in the service of Don Miguel.
He could also inform the House, that a British officer,
receiving half-pay, and who was besides in the military
service of Portugal, was Don Miguel's diplomatic agent
in this country ; but he could not, of course, recollect the
name of this respectable individual.—(Much laughter.)

The House then resolved into a Committee of supply ;
on the motion of Mr. KIN NEDY, the ordnance estimates
were postponed till Wedne.day.
IRISH TITHE BILL.

Mr. STANLEY moved the third reading of this Bill.
Mr. RUI'HVEN opposed the Bill, because he thought
it was not calculated to satisfy the people of Ireland.
Mr. M. O'CONNELL opposed the Bill, and protested
against the principle of it.
Mr. PETRE said that, as a Catholic, he felt bound, on
the faith of that solemn engagement which he had made
on entering that House, to support the Protestant Church,
and the Protestant establishment, both of Ireland and
Eng:and, as part and parcel of the constitution of the
country. It was on such principle that he supported the
measure of his Majesty's Ministers; anti he denied that
he, fur one, had entered into any designs against the Pro-
testant Church or religion of either country.
Mr. SHEIL took that opportunity again to enter his
protest against the principle of this Bill ; and he hoped he
might be allowed to do so, notwithstanding the conscienti-
ous declarations of his Hon. Friend the Member for Ilchester.
In the course of a former debate on this subject, he had
spoken of the effects which might follow the Reform
Bill in Ireland, if not accompanied by other conci-
liatory measures on the part of his Majesty's Govern-
ment. The language which be then employed, and the
prophetic warning which he then felt it his duty to give
to his Majesty's Ministers, had been in the recent debate
elsewhere, ingeniously turned into an argument against
the Reform Bill itself. Now the whole of his statement
was that they should prepare Ireland for Reform by con-
ciliation, and that was no argument against Reform,
though it was an argument against the present mea-
sure. Reverting to the scruples of his Hon. Friend,
the Member for Ilchester, he begge 1 to say that according
to the oath which he had taken, he would feel bound in
conscience and in duty, if a propositio❑ should be made t
strip the Protestant church of all its temporalities, to
oppose such a proceeding ; but be did not think that that
oath prevented him from supporting, like any other Member
of Parliament, measures which went to deal with that
establishment, or to sett'e it on a more liberal and legitimate
basis. Such was his reading of the oath—such, he was
sure, would he the reading of it in the eyes of men of
common sense; and he was equally certain that it never
was the intention of the Legislature in imposing that
obligation to prevent Catholic Members from acting like
other independent Members of Parliament.

Mr. STANLEY observed that the Hon. and Learned
Member for Louth appeared to be disposed to resort to
sophistry in explaining the obligations of the oath which
the Roman Catholics took on ente,ing that House. The
plain common sense interpretation of the oath was, that the
Catholics would abstain from using the power they pos-
sessed to injure the property of the Church. The doc-
trines which had been promulgated by th,- Hon. and
Learned Member were the severest blow which the Irish
Reform could receive. Let the Hon. and Learned Mem-
ber beware of the course be was pursuing. The principle
upon which Ministers had founded their measure of Re.
form was not that of universal enfranchisement, but that
of giving a share in the representation to as large a portion
of the people is possible without danger to existing insti-
tutions. lie believed the people of Ireland were slandered
by those who said that they would return Members to a
Reformed Parliament pledged to the destruction of the
Protestant Church establishment. If he did not be-
lieve that a safe constituency would be established by the
Irish Reform Bill, he would even now abandon that mea-
sure. The question at present at issue in Ireland was, not
that of tithes, but a question of law and of property. The
measure before the House was directed against those per-
sons who possessed ample means of paying the legal de-
mands of the clergyman, and who incited the poor
peasantry to resist paym.nt, in order that they might
themselves escape. These individuals would yield to the
power with which the present measure would arm the
Government, and which they were determined to exercise ;
and when once the leaders in the system of resistance to
the payment of tithes should be reduced to obedience, the
feelings of the deluded peasantry would return to their
proper current, and they would see that their best in-
terests were involved in the maintenance of the law.
Mr. H. GRATTAN defended the course which he and
other Irish Members had pursued with respect to this
measure. The tithe questio❑ would have been agitated
sooner in Ireland, but that the people knew that till Ca-
tholic emancipation was accomplished, it was useless to at-
tempt the reform of abuses in that country. But now
that that essential condition of the pacification of Ireland
had been effected, they might rest assured that they would
never cease to hear of agitation, till Ireland and England
had but one common system of laws and government. To
the passing of the Catholic question, Ireland had been go-
verned by the bayonet ; but a " change had come o'er the
spirit of its dream."
Mr. HUME was sure the Right Hon. Secretary for
Ireland " stood alone" in asserting that the Church
of Ireland should be preserved in its present monstrous
form,—alone even as a member of the Government ; for
had not the Noble Chancell ,r of the Exchequer pledged
himself to a remedial measure, and to a measure of " ex-
tinction" in the same breath, with a measure for enforcing
the payment of tithe arrears?—(Hear.) And was not
this promise of a remedial accompaniment the only means
of reconciling public opinion to a continuance of a rnon•
serous system which, do what they would, would soon be
withered by the scorching rays of public opinion,—he
might say of public indignation ?—(Hear.)

. .
The House divided -
For the third reading of the Bill :,"
Against it. 7
._ .. . . . ..

Majority for the third reading
After which the Btll was passed.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and
the House adjourned at Three o'clock.