The Sun.
London, England, 1832-01-27 00:00:00

LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JANUARY 27, 1832.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, JANUARY. 26.

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool-
sack a few minutes after Five o'clock.

Mr. Danvers, from the East India House, presented
papers.

On the motion of the Earl of SHAFTESBURY, the Bil
for consolidating the office of Surveyor-General with that
of the Woods and Forests, was read a third time and passed.

The Buckingham Palace Bill was read a second time,
and ordered to be committed to-morrow.

Lord LYNEDOCH presented a petition from the county
of Perth, in favour of the Reform Bill. The Noble
Lord had not trespassed much on their Lordships'
time during the former discussion of this question ; and
he hoped, therefore, to be allowed to make a few ob-
servations on the present occasion. He would take
this opportunity to say a few words respecting another
petition from the same county which had not yet
been presented to their Lordships, but the prayer of which
was the coutrary to that which he now had the honour of
laying on their Lordships' table. The cry of reaction had
first been raised within those walls, and it bad travelled far
and wide ; it had even got into the north country, for
when he went there be found it in every Tory's
mouth. The Tories of Edinburgh had thought proper
to call a meeting to show the extent of that reaction,
and he being in that city at the time had, out
of curiosity, tried to gain admittance to the meeting,
but he found that it was strictly private, open to
none but the friends of reaction, and any one tainted even
with the slightest stain of Whiggism or Reform,
was rigorously excluded. The same system of ex-
clusion had been carried on in the county of Perth
with regard to the Anti-Reform petition. At the meeting
at which it was adopted, it was found that it would be a
failure, unless other means were taken to procure signatures,
and he heard that the stewards of some proprietors had even
used threats for the purpose of obtaining them, but that
attempt bad signally failed. The petition was then sent
upon its travels, and went begging round the county.—
This also failed, and a new plan was the❑ fixed upon
which would astonish some of their Lordships. The pe-
tition was actually sent to the friends of Reform, and sig-
natures attempted to be obtained to the petition as one in
favour of that measure. The Bill was a great boon to Scot-
land, and nine out of every ten men in the country would
be found in its favour. The petition which he had the
honour to present was signed by upwards of 27,000, and
adopted at a meeting held in the open air at a
very inclement season of the year, and even at that time
the petition received 35,000 signatures. It had been
asserted that if the late Duke of Athol had been alive
no such meeting would ever have taken place.—
This was a libel on his late friend, for he was certain that
the great interest which he had in that county would have
been found to be exerted in the favour of the people.
His late friend was a Tory of the old school, and
if he had been alive at the present time he would have
been found in his place giving his vote conscientiously in
favour of the measure introduced by his hlajesty's Ministers.
He trusted that when the Anti-Reform petition came before
their Lordships they would receive it with great caution,
for it was an attempt to delude that House as to the
feelings of the people with respect to that great measure.
The Noble Lard moved that the petition be read by the
Clerk of the House.

The Earl of MANSFIELD said that the petition was
not to be taken as the petition of the county of Perth, but
only as the petition of those who signed it. He ad-
mitted they were numerous, but the meeting at which
it was adopted was not a legal county meeting.—
The Noble Lord had made some observations respecting a
counter petition from the same county. From what had
fallen from the Noble Lord, he seemed to $! aware that
he was somewhat irregular ; and be (Lord Mansfield)
would not Isl'ow irregularity further than to say that he
admired the prudence of those persons who petitioned
against Reform, and thought they had acted with great
propriety in having excluded those who would have in-
terrupted the harmony of the meeting; where the pe-
tition presented by the Noble Lord was agreed upon,
there were some expressions urged, not by mob-leaders,
but by a freeholder of the county, a gentleman who was
canvassing for a seat in Parliament under ti e Reform Bill,
expressions which, if imported into the petition, would
have been rejected by their Lordships with indignation.
He trusted, that whatever abuse the Right Rev. Bench
met with out of doors, they would be fully compensated
for by the indignation with which it would be met
in that House. He trusted, that any observations he
had made would not give the least uneasiness or pain
to his Noble Friend and relation, but, in consequence of
the absence of the Lord Lieutenant of the county, he had
thought it necessary to make a few observations to their
Lordships.
Lord LYNEDOCH would assure his Noble Friend
that he was entirely ignorant of the charges brought
against the speakers at the meeting alluded to by the
Noble Lord. Nobody could respect more than himself
the Bench of Bishops, but with respect to the general
feeling that pervaded that part of the country, on the subject
of Reform, he would, with their Lordships' permission, re-
late a little anecdote. A few days before he left Scotland, he
asked a Gallant Officer (a friend of his) who lived within a
few hundred yardsof a village where the mail changed horses,
what was the feeling in that part respecting the Bill.
And his Gallant Friend stated that such was the anxiety
of the people in that neighbourhood to know the
result of its second reading in the Lords, that
every weaver left his work, and the greatest con-
course of people were assembled, to await the arrival
of the mail. The coachman wished to hoax them a
little, and being asked what was the fete of the Bill,
stated that two of the most distinguished Members
of that House had fallen victims to the popular fury.
This was received with the most marked demonstrations of
joy, and a meeting was held for the purpose of knowing
whether they should not illuminate in consequence of the
event. —( Laughter. )
Lord ELDON observed that of all the arguments he had
ever heard in his life, those just urged before the House
were of the most ridiculous description. The Noble Lord
felt strongly that it was a most shocking thing to know how
the Bishops bad been treated. But in order to prove that
the people of Scotland were in favour of Reform, it
seemed necessary to assure the House that two of
the most eminent men in the country had not been
murdered. Their Lordships had been told by the Re-
formers that they ought to address his Majesty on behalf
of men who had been guilty of the most enormous
and outrageous offences, and that if they hanged the Bristol
and Nottingham rioters, they ought also to hang his
friend, Sir Charles Wetherell, and all the Judges.
The people bad stated plainly, that if the King
and the Parliament would not legislate for them, they
must legislate for themselves.—(Cheers from the Opposi-
tion.) If his Majesty's Attorney-General had not insti-
tuted some inquiries into this subject, he had not done his
duty.—The subject here dropped.
Lord KING presented several petitions from Ireland,
praying for alterations in the law of tithes. If the state-
ments in the present petition were true, the law with re-
spect to tithes in Ireland was in a most curious state. The
petitienets stated their determination to pay their tithes in
kind. And the law existing in Ireland on that subject, if the
statements in the petition were true, was, that if more
than three persons gave notice to pay their tithes
in kind, the law presumed a conspiracy. If this,
therefore, were still the case, in his (Lord King's)
opinion, the Irish churchmen had pushed their rights
to a most monstrous extreme, and no person could be
surprised at the institutions which existed in that
country. He considered the Irish tithe system
a great evil o❑ the people of Ireland, and hoped soon to
see it lopped off.
The Earl of WICKLOW considered, after having
paid the greatest attention to the eloquent statement of the
Noble Baron on the present and other occasions, that Mi-
nisters in the selection of the Committee to enquire into
the Irish tithe-system, had been guilty of a very great
omission in having neglected to place that Noble Baron
upon it. He should therefore move that the Noble Lord
be added to the Committee.—(A laugh.)
Lord WYNFORD would not accuse the Noble Baron

of any wish to add to the excitement now prevailing in
Ireland, but lie could not help feeling that his statement
was calculated to excite it.
POLITICAL UNION.

Lord LONDONDERRY did not rise to delay the im-
portant motion of which notice had been given by his
Noble Friend behind him (Lord Aberdeen.) But as he
saw the Noble Secretary for the Home Department in his
place, having heard that the Council of a Political Union
had placed in the hands of that Noble Viscount an Address,
to be presented to his Majesty, he wished to ask if the
Noble Lord had thought it consistent with his duty to pre-
sent that Address, after the speech of his Majesty from the
throne bad spoken of these Associations as illegal?
Lord MELBOURNE said, that if the Noble Marquis
would consult any of the Learned Lords near him, they
would tell him that it was not any particular designation
that could make an Association illegal, but the objects for
which its Members associated, and the means which they
used to :atilt' them. When the Address to which the
Noble Lord alluded was put into his hands, he understood
that it was to lie presented to his Majesty as the-Address
merely of the persons who signed it. He believed that the
persons who waited on him with it, said that they were
the Council of a Political Union. He believed that they
so designated themselves ; but he was not quite certain of
it. However, on looking into the Address (the Noble
Lord was understood to say) he thought it would not be
his duty to present it.
BELGIAN AFFAIRS.
The Earl of ABERDEEN said that he was aware that
in the course which he was about to pursue, he might be
considered to interfere with matters which belonged solely
to the prerogative of the Crown. He was ready to almit
that to the King alone, in the exercise of his undoubted
prerogative, it belonged to contract alliances, to make
treaties, and to enter into negociations with Foreign
Powers. No man could be less disposed than he to question
the exercise of that prerogative. But it was to be con-
sidered that when the importance of the occasion demanded
the Parliament had interfered in the exercise of that as of
every other prerogative, for the exercise of which the Mi-
nisters of the Crown were responsible. It was not neces-
sary that the Sovereign should come down there to ask
the advice of Parliament respecting the conduct of difficult
negociations which were already in progress. But it had
happened that either House of Parliament had humbly
laid before the throne its opinions and advice respecting
the conduct and progress of negotiations, into which the
Sovereign had entered. He would not fatigue the House
by entering into precedents, but would content himself
with remarking, that at the close of the seventeenth cen-
tury the Parliament was in a very nearly similar situation
to that in which the present Parliament was ; the object
at that period being to endeavour to move Charles 11.,
and to detach him from his unnatural alliance with the
French, for the purpose of inducing him to enter into a
more close intercourse with the Dutch nation. Generally
speaking, with reference to such negociations as the present,
it was highly desirable that they should be kept secret,
and that nothing whatever should be known of them until
they were laid upon the table of Parliament. If, there-
fore, he was aware that at the present moment negocia-
tions were going on for the settlement of the affairs of
Belgium, he certainly would not have made that question
the subj ect of discussion on the present evening ; for,
however little might be the confidence that he
placed in the present Ministers, and however much
he might doubt the issue of this affair turning out
to the advantage of this country, still, under the circum-
stances which he had stated, he would have been content
to wait till the regular documents and treaties were laid on
the table of that House. His present motion was put into
the shape of advice, which he was entitled to do, as he
understood that the matter was not yet settled. If, how-
ever, the contrary had been the case, and it had been a de-
finitive treaty, it would have been his duty to make his
motion assume the aspect of censure. It now appeared
that the treaty was not concluded ; but in the speech from
the throne, Parliament was informed at the beginning of
the session of the nature of the treaty, and that a copy
would speedily be laid before both Houses. This appeared
to him to be a course produc ive of inconvenience, both
with reference to this House and the Powers who were
united with England in the arrangement of the question.
But this was not all. A short reference to dates would
show that the treaty could not have been ratified by any
one at the time that that speech was made from the
throne. Nor let it be supposed that this was a mere
matter of form ; the usual course, and not only the usual
course but the wise one, was to avoid giving any notifica-
tion of this kind to the Parliament until the ratifications
were exchanged ; in illustration of which he might men-
tion an instance which occurred during the time which he
had the honour of holding a place in the Cabinet, in which
a ratification with the Austrian Plenipotentiary had been
exchanged, and which was supposed to be, at the very
time to which he was alluding, on its road from Vienna ;
but although the matter was so near settlement, he did
not feel authorised in advising its announcement in the
speech from the throne, till it was absolutely certain that
Ministers would be able to lay it on the table of Parliament
in a ratified form. He was not aware what was required
on such subjects by the Constitution of Belgium, and
he had to apologize for his ignorance. He did not
know whether, according to that Constitution, it was
absolutely necessary that a treaty should be imme-
diately laid before the Chamber of Deputies by the King of
Belgium ; but be knew that in England this was not the
case; and he thought that such precipitancy was calcu-
lated to prove not only injurious to the interests of the
country, but even to the honour of the King. Since, how.
ever, the communication had been made, he had no hesi-
tatio❑ as to the course which he ought to pursue. It was
his duty and privilege to tender that in the way of advice
which must have assumed the shape of censure, had the
treaty been concluded : and be trusted that the Ministers
would perceive that that advice did not come too late for
adoption.—(Hear, hear.) The manner in which he
should call upon the House to express its opinion would
be by an address to the throne.—(Hear, hear.) In the
speech which the Ministers made for tie King at the be-
ginning of the session, a confident trust was expressed that
the King of the Netherlands would see the necesity of ad-
hering to the arrangements made by the five Powers.
Now, he must not only take the liberty of expressing a
doubt as to that arrangement, but also of saying, that
should the King of- the Netherlands assent, he would be
wrong, because it would be assenting to something highly
detrimental to his interests, and because it would be im-
possible for him safely so to act in such opposition to the
unanhnous feeling, of his people.—(llear, hear, hear.)
The Noble Earl had formerly stated that he thought other-
wise, but he (Lord Aberdeen) hoped that the Noble Earl
had by this time changed his opinion, now that he has
seen what the united efforts of a loyal and patriotic popu-
lace are capable of effecting.—( Hear.) Now that he was
sure that enthusiasm, and energy, and zeal are notal ways the
characteristics of revolutionists—(Cheers)—now that he
has seen a constitutional King supported by a free
people—(Hear, hear, hear)—the words which the
Noble Earl put in the mouth of his Maj -sty at the
beginning of the session afforded a pretty good index to
the sort of feeling with which the negociations had been
conducted. His Majesty was ❑ot advised to say in that
speech, that he hoped the King of the Netherlands would
see the wisdom, the policy, or the expediency of agreeing
to the treaty proposed—but that he would see the neces-
sity of it.—(Hear, hear.) Under these circumstances, he
thought that the Dutch people had conducted themselves
with prudence and consistency above all praise; as if it
should please the Almighty to notice the case, he hoped
that he would visit them with success.—(Cheers.) The
cause of Holland was so just, so good—and when he said
the cause of Holland, he intreated their Lordships to re-
member that that too was the cause of England—(Hear,
hear)—for he considered them as inseparable and identi-
cal—he felt so convinced that this cause must, sooner or
later, obtain the success that it deserved, that lie could
declare, that it was with a feling of regret that he heard
it reported that the decision of the Dutch Government
was hacked by the reluctance of Russia and Prussia to
ratify the treaty. He gave full credit to the disinterested
motives of Russia in this respect ; but still they were open
to misrepresentation; but his regret was to see the Em-
peror of Russia in possession of that post which should
have been occupied by England.—(Hear, hear.) It had
been generally contended, that the resistance of Holland
arose from the secret support received from other Courts.
Nothing, however, could be more untrue ; and if their
Lordships would only reflect for a single moment, they
would see, that such an assertion could not be true. Undoubt-
edly, a despotic Prince might act contrary to the whole
feeling of his people ; but let their Lordships recollect
what the Government and Concitution of Holland were.

That considered, how useless would be any Russian en-
couragement for the purpose abscribed ! He should like
to know what sort of encouragement the Emperor
of Russia was to give so as to enable the King of
the Netherlands to raise the supplies which would
be necessary to carry on the difficult transactions in
which he was engaged. The King could only depend
on the support of a united people ; and it was not Rus-
sian encouragement that could produce union in Holland,
or force the money from the pockets of the Dutch. Only
consider how Holland was situated--how it was bur-
thened—how numerous were its difficulties ! He might
simply say, that there was no country in Europe that had
so many difficulties with which to contend ; and yet the
States-General had almost unanimously granted the extra-
ordinary supply of four millions sterling to meet the emer-
gency of the present moment. He should like to know
how much of that sum was contributed by the Emperor
of Russia ?—( Hear hear.) No ! This was no loan con-
tracted with foreign capitalists ; but the constitutional of-
fering of a free people, and obtained iu consequence of a
vote of a free assembly from the native subjects of the
country.—( Hear, hear.) Nor did the Dutch army pre•
sent a less striking spectacle. Out of a population of
about 2,000,000 there were 100,000 men under arms,
which was composed almost entirely of the militia and
volunteers—the people leaving their homes and their
trades to take up arms under the difficult crisis in which
their Sovereign was placed. No foreign encouragement
could have produced such effects as these ; and it was im-
possible, with these signs, not to suppose that the whole
country felt as one man in this cause. Backed in this
manner, what might not the King of the Netherlands hope
to effect ? He (the Noble Earl), however, trusted, that as
all Europe had admired his constancy and firmness, they
would have equal reason to be satisfied with his modera-
tion, in not being tempted to press unreasonable terms, in
consequence of that spirit which it must be so gratifying
to him to find in his people. Before he came to the pro-
visions of the treaty, he would take a short view of what
had taken place since the peace of Paris in 1814. The
6th article of the peace of Paris placed Belgium under the
Sovereignty of the House of Orange; but the Allies who
had made the conquest of those provinces thought proper
to annex certain conditions to the delivery of them to the
King of the Netherlands. At that time the Allies were
perfect masters of those provinces; they might, if they
pleased, have restored them to the House of Austria ;
they might have disposed of them to Prussia, as Mr. Pitt
bad once recommended, as they had not been independent
for the last three or four hundred years. They, however,
gave them to the King of the Netherlands under certain
conditions, which were laid down in eight articles ; and;
consequently, the first duty to which the Sovereign had
to attend was the observance of those articles. He (the
Noble Earl) defied any man to say that the Sovereign bad
not observed those articles to the very tittle—(Hear, hear)
—and, indeed, the general course of his Government had
been such as to extort approbation from all mankind ; so
touch so, that he remembered, that when the Noble Baron
opposite had once been indulging in a general invective
against the Sovereigns of Europe, he stopped short, and
said that he was bound to except the King of the Nether-
lands, who was a man that honoured freedom, and go-
verned his country so as to set an example to all other
Kings. Two or three years ago, however, it became ne-
cessary to institute prosecutions against some Deists and
editors of newspapers in Belgium ; and from that moment
the King of the Netherlands lost the support of the Noble
Lords opposite.—(A laugh.) But he would take upon
himself to say that it was the King's observance of the
treaty that led him into that transaction.—(Hear.) One
of those entirely required strict equality among persons of
all religious persuasions, but there existed a bigoted Catho-
lic party who found their advantage in forming an unnatu-
ral union with an opposite sect for the purpose of foment-
ing discussion. If, at the time of the revolution of Belgium
breaking out, the King had possessed a corps of 20,000
Dutch troops, the revolution would have made progress;
but here his observance of the articles again embarrassed
him, for, in observance of those, there was throughout
the corps a strict amalgamation of the Dutch and Belgic
troops; and in consequence of the greater population of
Belgium, the Belgians formed two-thirds of the whole
army, owing to which every corps became disorganised,
and incapable of acting with decision ; and that revolution
was the more remarkable from the absence of anything
like a reason being assigned for its cause ; and he would
venture to say, that a more senseless, unintelligible revo-
lution had never been accomplished in the annals of the
world. Ever since its breaking out, no official statement,
no manifesto, no account, no reason, no statement of
grievances, had been made, under which it might be
shown that the measures of tyranny could no longer be
endured. On the breaking out of the revolution, the
Kirng of the Netherlands had called the States together,
and consulted them as to what course should be pursued.
At length it was agreed that the separation of the pro-
vinces was indispensable—a wish that was shared by both
parties alike. The King, then, finding that if this was
to be acted upon, he could no longer execute the treaty,
called on the Allies to concert with him in what manner
this difficulty might be remedied. It was under these
circumstances that the first Conference took place ; and the
first object was to procure a cessation of hostilities. The
second was, the last with which he, as a Minister, was
concerned, having signed it the day after he resigned the
seals of office, viz., on the 17th November. He would
take that opportunity of giving a most unqualified con-
tradiction to an assertion that had been made by the
Noble Earl. The Noble Earl had formerly declared, that
on coming into office he had found the separation of
Holland and Belgium effected ; and that, forsooth, the
former Ministry had effected that separation. But the fact
was, that the Noble Earl had more than once confounded
the separation of Belgium with its independence. The
only separation that the late Ministry had authorised was
an administrative separation between the provinces—the
Government of the whole country, in all other respects,
remaining the same. About the same time with the corn
mencernent of the Administration of the Noble Earl, the
congenial Administration of M. Lafitte and General Sebas-
tiani existed in France ; and he therefore presumed, that
it was between those two that the independence of Bel-
gium was settled. So much, indeed, was this the case,
that whatever other advantages France may have derived
from the revolution, at least there is reason to believe that
her character for good faith has not increased ; and he
might fairly say, that while he was in office, no communi-
cation had taken place with that Government which had
reference to the independence of Belgium. The Noble
Earl then alluded to the protest of the Dutch Plenipo-
tentiary against the protocl of the 20th December, and
observed, that that protest was confirmed by the Govern-
ment of the Hague appealing to the treaty of peace of
Paris. It was argued, however, in a note that was made
at the last Conference, that the King of the Netherlands
had no right to appeal to that treaty, having deprived him-
self of the benefit of it when he admitted the necessity of
separation. Nothing, however, could be more unjust
orikngi
nsdisingenu
ous
h
own
was,tpeaon this p
ite propositionob:afeoetre t
ahi ascertain
e
carne
ah;
ma
what were
or all t
o h t
hte thea th
e
King fl
elt
eiel _
es
for a remedy for the difficulties which had arisen from the
revolution. But though the States were thus consulted,
no Royal answer had been given : and it was plain that
the object only was to modify an administrative separa-
tion. Another point in which the Conference went alto-
gether on erroneous principles, was in supposing, that be-
cause the Allies had once the right of disposing of the
provinces of Belgium, they still had that right. Such was
not the case; they had given Belgium to the King of the
Netherlands on certain conditions ; and those conditions
had been ratified. England in particular derived con-
siderable advantage from the arrangement made in 1814 ;
for we kept possession of the former Dutch colonies of
the Cape of Good Hope, Essequibo, Demerara, and Ber-
bice ; and though a stun of money was paid by this
country, yet it was not for those colonies, but, conjointly
with Rolland, for the purpose of defraying the expence
of putting the frontier fortresses into proper condition.
The proposals to Belgium were for some time rejected.
Those who made them were treated only with scorn and
caosntouvierrieiygn,a:d to this course the Belgians adhered for
some time. Passing over the intrigues for the election of
curious in themselves, and the more so in
connection with the great apostles of non•intervention—
(Hear, hear) —he would observe, that about about the end
of May Prince Leopold began to be seriously thought
of to fill the high office of King of Belgium.
He should not go into any particulars connected
with his Royal Highness's acceptance of the throne;
They were not essential ; and it would be sufficient
for his purpose to say, that he accepted the throne in the
beginning of June. The Conference then again receded ,

PRICE 7D

from their irrevocable articles, and new propositions were
offered to Holland, upon which he did not dwell, because
they were rejected, and led to no consequences. Neither
would he advert to the military events which followed the
arrival of Prince Leopold at Brussels, and which were
produced by the gross outrage upon Holland, by which
she was deprived of her ancient and undoubted posses-
sions. He hastened to speak of the treaty. In October,
the Conference came to a decision, and drew up twenty-
four articles, which in November were embodied into a
treaty. Looking at that document, he was at a loss to say
whether it was more impolitic or unjust. By one of the
additional articles, the execution of all was guaranteed by
this country. He begged to ask the Noble Earl (Grey)
whether he was really aware of the obligation this country
then incurred ? It had long been the policy of Great
Britain to guarantee nothing, the execution of which did
not depend upon herself ; but if this treaty were finally
completed, the obligation would be to an extent and of a
nature that never bad been thought of before. Great
Britain guaranteed the execution of articles, the least ob-
jection to which was, that they were impossible.—
(Cheers.) Among others, she guaranteed by Belgium th •
payment of no less a sum than 700,000/. annually. A
Noble Friend near him, informed him that he had under-
stated it—that it amounted to 84,0001. a year ; but this
was a mistake—the precise sum was 8,400,000 florins, or
about 700,0001. sterling. Had such a guarantee been
given for Holland, with a fixed, well-known, and trust-
worthy Government, the objection would hare been
less ; but to enter into such an engagement for 111-
giurn, which had just emerged from one revoluti(n,
and might, at this moment, be on the eve of another,
was scarcely less than preposterous. The whole treaty vs as
composed of articles so complicated and various, that th-
Conference must be perpetual in order to give its superin-
tendence to their execution. On former occasions Noble
Lords opposite had repeatedly objected to Conferences and
Congresses ; but now they seemed so in love with them,
that they had contrived the Belgian Conference should
be everlasting. —(Hear, hear.) The article which fol-
lowed that to which he had referred was still more obj•t-
tionable, and utterly impossible to be executed. It related
to the free navigation of the waters of Holland for Belgian
merchandise, so that, if a dispute arose between a Belgia❑
barge and a Dutch custom-house, the matter must be re-
ferred to the Conference, and this country might be call d
upon by virtue of its guarantee. This article passed in
injustice all injustice previously done in any age, by per-
sons professing to be friendly. In the last note of the Con-
ference, on the 4th of January, it was said the treaty
was only a developement of the articles (miscalled final
and irrevocable) which bad been previously settled, an
therefore, the King of Holland had no reason to complain
of it.—(The Noble Earl here entered into an examination
of the article of the treaty regarding the navigation of
the rivers of Holland, and into the protocols and notes
particularly relating to it, especially adverting to a com-
munication from Lord Palmerston, dated the 18th of Fe-

bruary, where it was said the article of the treaty related
solely to the navigable rivers traversing and dividing the
two countries. His Lordship also noticed the special pro-
visions regarding the navigation of the Scheldt, and for
the :reciprocal regulation and freedom of Dutch and Bel-
gian commerce.) He complained that the most grievous
injustice had here been done to the King of Holland, and
particularly in what was said respectiug the boundary
of the Rhine, with which Belgium could properly have
no concern. He also adverted to the difficulties which
were likely in future to arise in consequence of the diffe-
rence between the conventional and geographical Rhine.
The Belgians might insist the Rhine meant the geo-
graphical Rhine as laid down in the maps; but the King
of Holland might contend that it was the conventional river
by which navigation was carried on to Leyden, to
Utrecht, and even to Arnheim. On this point he argued.
that the Members of the Conference had gone beyond
their jurisdiction. Another article of similar import, and
equal injustice and preposterousness for friends and neu-
trals to impose, was that which gave the Belgian Govern-
ment the right to pass through the fortress of Maestricht,
and, as the treaty was worded, " not to be interrupted on
any account whatever ;" so that even in the time of war
this right might he claimed and enforced. Belgium had
revolted against Holland, and surely that fact did not give
the former any peculiar claim to favour or advantage, in
order that she might enjoy an outlet for her commerce.
There was only one other article of the treaty to which
he wished to advert—the arrangement respecting
the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. Here the injus-
tice done to Holland was without colour, pretext, or ex-
cuse. He was satisfied that Austria and Prussia would
never consent to ratify a treaty which violated the very
foundation of the German Confederation. What did the
act of the Confederation, dated in June, 1815, stipulate ?
" That no voluntary cession of rights of Sovereignty could
take place without the consent of all the members of the
Union." On what authority, then, had the Conference
ventured to dispossess the King of Holland of half of the
Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, attempting at the same time
to make compensation by cession on the side of Lim-
berg ? He might quote, were it necessary, eight or ten
other declarations of the same kind by the German Con-
federacy. True it was, that at one time the King of
Holland consented to the consideration of the question
regarding Luxembourg, with a view to territorial indem-
nity; but he reserved to himself the right of de-
ciding, ultimately, for or against the arrangement. Of
this consent, extorted by deference to Allies, the Con-
ference had availed itself; and instead of giving the King
of Holland a fair indemnity (however convenient to him
might be the change on some accounts), they had deprived
him of not less than 50,000 subjects. This surely was
not maintaining the integrity stipulated by the German
Confederation ? and Austria and Prussia, as its protectors,
could not sanction such an unjust dismemberment by the
ratification of the treaty. That such a course should have
been pursued by unfriendly Powers partitioning a con.
quered country was very intelligible, but how it could be
adopted between friends and Allies he could not understand.
The members of the Conference might say, indeed, that,
wishing to see Holland prosperous., they had placed her
in a better condition ; and it turned a fine sentence in the
papers on the table, where it was asserted that in the great
(lays of Holland, when she filled so wide a space in history,
she was unconnected with Belgium. It was to be recol-
lected, however, that in the great days of Holland she was
a Republic, and that conquest and territorial aggrandise-
ment were wholly foreign to her policy. Now the case
was very different; she had been erected into a formidable
State on the frontiers of France ; a counter-balancing and
substantive weight in the scale of Europe, had been given
to her, and she was no longer able to pursue the line of po•
licy of her great days. What; he would ask, in the new con-
dition of Holland, could compensate for the loss she bad
sustained, for the colonies she had sacrificed, for the for-
tresses on which she had expended so much treasure in
order that her artillery might be turned against herself?
How was site compensated for the loss of all she had
acquired frotn the Treaty of Munster to the French
Revolution ? It was possible that she was meant to be
compensated by the neutrality of Belgium. If this satis-
fied the King of Holland, he must indeed be easily satis-
fied.—(Cheers.) But if the terms of the treaty were
unjust, the manner of enforcing them was, if possible,
worse. These obnoxious articles had been drawn up and
agreed to without the slightest concert with the King of
Holland—without even his knowledge. They were com-
municated in a letter, of which the following is an ex-
tract:—" They contain the final and irrevocable decisions
of the five Powers, which by common consent they are
resolved to complete, and of which they require full and
entire acceptance." On the receipt of this letter, what
did the Dutch Government? They requested to be al-
lowed to negotiate, with a view to the modification of
some of the most objectionable articles, and on the 10th
November they were categorically told that "neither the
substance nor the letter of the 24 Articles could undergo
any modification." This, it was added, they owed it both
to frankness and friendship to state.—(Cheers.) It was
impossible to conceive how this line of policy might b
pursued towards a stranger, but how it was possible to
pursue it towards an old and intimate ally, was to him in-
explicable. The Conference stated that the Dutch Ple-
nipotentiaries bail had an opportunity of being heard ; but
what (lid those Plenipotentiaries reply ? They complained
that topics bad been introduced that never could have been
expected, and that particularly with regard to the 9th,
11th, 120, and 13th Articles their opinion was never coo
stilted. This outrageous violat on of all consideration and
decency aggravated and embittered theinjury. Yet all was
clone under the mask of friendship, and of a wish to p;e
serve the principle of mediation. On this point whet
did Sebastiani say ?—" The Conference of London is a
mediation, and it is the intention of the King's Govern-