The Sun.
London, England, 1850-03-02 00:00:00

GREECE.

The following dispatch from M. Londos, Greek
Minister for Foreign Affairs, has been addressed to
M. Thouvenel, Minister of rance at Athens. It is
dated Athens, Feb. 9, 1850 :
"Sir,—l have only now been apprised of a publication
which bears no printer's name, and of which I know not
the real origin. I only know that it has been commu-
nicLted to all the accredited missions at Athens. It is
entitled A document Emanating from the British
Legation, and not contained in the collection of papers
published by the Greek Minister for Foreign Affairs.'
I have particularly remarked, Sir, the following
paragraph of a dispatch addressed to you by the
Minister of her Britannic Majesty on the 31st of
January (new style):—' The undersigned has, more-
over, seen with the greatest surprise that in an
expose published in the same collection, the
Greek Government has ,comprised (with what ob-
ject the undersigned cannot well conjecture) the ques-
tion fgeign t. that demand of the occupation by the
Greek Government of the islands of Cervi and Sapi-
enza.' (Anonymous publication, page 26.) It is my
duty to remove any doubt which may exist in your mind
as well as in that of the Government of the French Re-
public, on the subject of a reclamation which Mr. Wyse
did not address to me personally, but to which I now
hasten to reply. Tim text f the note addressed by Sir
Edward Lyons to M. Colocotroni, dated the 6th Decem-
ber, 1848, and to which Mr. Wyse has frequently
made allusion, contains a portion of a phrase which
is not repeated in the anonymous publication
of which I have the honour to speak to you. The
following is the portion omitted—' and stating with re-
' gard to these demands as well as to the others which
had not been satisfied.' Aftsr recapitulating in this
dispatch all the grievances which have given rise to the
demonstration of which Gteeeo is still the object., those
words must probably apply to the loan and to the do-
mund of the islands of Cervi and Sapienza. In his note of
the 2d of July, 1849, the Minister of her Britannic Ma-
jesty having repeated the same grievances, adds—' No
other reply has bean given to the note so frequently
quoted in the letter of Sir Edward Lyons, dated
the 6th of December, 1818, in which he recapitu-
lated those claims as well us others more impor-
tant.' (Anonymous publication, page 12.) What could
ti.che more important claims 13! if not the question rela-
tive to the loan and to the islands of Cervi and Sapienz ?
; It i 4, as you know, Sir, to these two nutee, one of the 6th
Decemb,r, 1848, and the of cr cf the 2d July, 1849,
that Mr. Wyse rarticu'a-1y referred at the conference at
which, in accord with Admiral Parker, he submitted to
the Government of the King the u'tim,stum cf which you
know the consequences, taking care by a separate note to
reserve the question of the loan. Did not this exception
on a single point allow' all the preceding demands to
subsist? I nevertheless yr tartaim d some doubts of this
in my own mind, and which I made to appear when se) -
ing to the Chamber of Deputies on the 6.18 th January.
The sixth and last dem4nd refers to a concession
of a portion of the Greek territory. It is true that
the Minister of Great Britain dues not make any cate-
gorical demand on this subject in the note which he
submitted to the Government. He mentions it indirectly
when referring to the previous note of his predecessor,
the Hon. Sir Edward Lyons, dated the 6th of December,
1848. However that may be, Sir without pretending
that this last question was, according to the opinion •of
Mr. Wyse and of Admiral Parker, to be, whether just
or unjust, resolved within 24 hours like all the others, I
maintain it is the right of the Greek Government, under
existing circumstances, to enlighten the nation as well as
public opinion as to all the demands not yet settled
which had been presented by the British Legation at the
moment when the differences arose. Now, Mr. Wyse
cannot deny that the islands of Cervi and Sapienza
were claimed several timer, and that no reply approving
of the claim was made to the note of M. Glariki, dated
17th November last, relating to this subject. Conse-
quently, such a claim exists, and it is my duty to refer
to it in order that none of the affairs to be discussed be-
tween the King's Government and that of her Britannic
Majesty should be unknown to anybody. It would be
easy for me, Sir, to replylto other passages in Mr.Wyse's
last note to prove that the Government of his Majesty
has furnished a reply to each of the demands of the Bri-
tish Legation at the period when they were made. Tho
Government of her Britannic Majesty has always confined
itself to remarking that itcould not take the obj ections of the
Greek Government into serious consideration, and that
it required full and complete satisfaction. For reasons
which everybody will appreciate, silence wat in some
measure impsed on my predecessors. As to the note
of the 6th December, 1848, you know, Sir, the state
of health of M. Colocotroni when he received it. (He
died within three weeks.) In the trouble which this
event caused, and in consequence of the numerous
changes which occurred in some months in the offices
of his successors, it may be admitted that the last com-
munication of Sir Edward Lyons—to which, more-
over, as I have had the honour to tell you, preceding
officers of the Minister for Foreign Affairs had re-
plied in advance, but their replies had not been taken
into consideration—it is admitted, I repeat, that they
may have been lost sight of. As to the dispatches ad-
dressed by Mr. Wyse to M. Glariki, dated the 19th of
June and the 2d of July, 1849, they so completely at-
tracted the attention of my predecessor that, preferring
acts to useless words which might produce irritation, he
arranged the affair relative to Mr. Finlay, although it
is again found repeated in the ultimatum imposed
on the King's Government. As to the last note of
which Mr. Wyse speaks—that is to say the note which
I myself received on the 26th December last, a few days
after I entered on office I leave you to judge,
Sir, whether my silence during 15 days, in the midst
of numerous occupations, can be considered as a refusal
to examine and to settle conformably to justice., to law,
and to the rest ect due t 3 a friendly Government, all the
claims of the British Legation. I request you will be
so good as to communicate this dispatch to the Govern-
ment of the French Republic, in order that in this ever-
to-be-regretted conflict it may know that I hs,ve not
deviated one instant from the line traced out for me by
my duties as a Minister, and my good faith as an honest
man. Accept, Sir, the assurance of my high considera-
tion, &c.,

(Signed)

" A. LONDOS."

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, March 1.
TENANT RIGHT.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY presented a peti-
tion from the tenant-farmers of the counties of Down
and Londonderry, in public meeting assembled at Cole-
raine, praying their Lordships to puss a statute ensuring
tenant-right to the occupiers of land. Tenant-right w tas sr
boon given by the landlord to the tenant centuries ago. tie
took up this as apubhe question. Great excitement existed
in Ulster on the subject of tenant-right, and great bitter-
ness
sinned,
e ftoladrnt sd e ltallioaadut seyexl achiasltde e)bn'eetca:h had
du co
to excite the far-
Lucas against the rate in aid, by the unfortunate
affair of Dolly's Brac, and by the meetings which had
been called during the last autumn and winter by the
Protectionist leaders, who had made most exciting
speeches; and the most remarkable circumstance was that
the very persons who had b. en then called together by the
Protectionist landlords had united to call for a large re-
duction of rent from the landlords, and for tenant-right,
and not only for that, but fur a perpetuity of tenancy ;
in fact, they claimed the land as their own and threat-
ened all those farmers who dared to take land from which
others had been ejected. In other instances they had
actually determined not to pay rent—had, in fact, con-
fiscated their landlord's property.—(llear, hear.) In
such a case as this something should be done ;
he did not call upon the Lord-Lieutenant to
roclaim the county, but really
_something must be

(done to arrest these gentlemen in their progress, and to
prevent the preaching of these doctrines. He had been
called upon by a Presbyterian minister to substantiate
what he had stated with regard to the non-payment of
rent, which he alleged that those ministers had seated:
He had received a letter, written by command of the
I-Lv. W. Dobbin, calling on him to retract or sub-
stantiate those assertions. (The Noble Marquis theta
read the letter, challenging him to prove. his.
assertions, and charging him with calumniating
those who were equally regardless of his •
smiles and his frowns, and treated him with unmitigated
scorn, and dared him to to try the question of privilege
with them.) He had also received a letter from a most
respectable landlord of the county of Down, who ex-
pressed
his satisfaction that he (the Noble Marquis) had
drawn the attention of the House to the calumnies of the
Presbyterian ministers, and to the reign of terror
chicle tLey were seeking to establish, making
the county of Down a' second Tipperary. He ho
that the Government would discover some mode. of
expressing their disapprobation of the proceedings of
the:, Pr, shy krian intuistetr. Attempts at murder had
h et. made in the county of Down, and he hoped that the
G rent ent would otter large regards for the discovery
of the ix rpetrt.t.rs of the be outrages. Of ona thing he
v. at c e• tain, that the landlords would not be intimidated.
but ti.w they would resist with firmness these exciters to
teu.tler and incendiarism.

Lord BROUGHAM. had the other day expressed his
sir lig reprobation of a letter written by a reverend
runtle man to h 6 Noble Friend, but that letter was no.
th.r.g to the letter which had then re.ed. Any comps.
mcre remarkable fir mere vulgar abuse, more
unw( rthy of a gentleman, more unworthy of an educated
man, more utterly unworthy of a minister cf the Gospel,
hi had never heard. If those persons thought that threats
would make any Noble Lord swerve from the performance
of what ho considered his duty, they would find them-
telves bitterly deceived, for whatever faults might be
!aid to the account of their Lordships, that of yielding
to vulgar intimidation was the last thing of which they
could be accused.

The Earl of DEVON was opposed to legalising what
was commonly called tenant-right
The Earl of RODEN agreed with the Noble
Earl who had last spoken ; but he maintained, that
all good landlords made their outgoing tenants ample
compensation. He denied that the county of Down was
in the disturbed state represented by the Noble Marquis.
He considered the letter read by the Noble Marquis
to be a most insolent and most vulgar tirade,
and as such to be utterly reprobated. Reference had
been made to the violence of the Pzesb)terian clergy,
but among every body of men so large as the
Presbyterian clergy violent persons would be found, and
it was unfair to make the body answerable for the faults
of individuals. As a body there was not •
more respectable or worthy body of seen to be
found than the Presbyterian clergy of the north
of Ireland. He regretted that the attention of Parlia-
ment had been drawn to the subject, as he thought it
could not but produce disastrous effects.
Lord BROUGHAM explained that he had not
meant, in what he had said, to bring any charge
against the Presbyterian clergy at large. Never had he
seen so little of the insolent spirit exhibited in that letter
in any body of men as in the Presbyterian clergy, and
he hoped they would repudiate the writer of that letter.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY had never in.
tended by anything he had said to impugn the conduct
of the Presbyterian clergy at large. He defied the
Noble Earl to prove that the county of Down was not
now in a state of great excitement, occasioned by the
meetings recently held there.
The Earl of MOUNTCASHEL was sure that the
great majority of the Presbyterian clergy would repu-
diate the language that had been used by
the clerical agitators at tenant-right meet-
ings, and as to writers of letters, such as
those read by the Noble Marquis, they should be brought
to the bar of the House, and severely punished. As to
teni:nt•right, the word had been invented by Mr. Sher-
man Craw ford, and he (the Earl of Mountcashel) did not
understand tl e meaning of it. The landlords in the
north c f Iraland had always been most kind to their
tenants, but that did not constitute a right on the part of
the tenants to the allowance which had been made to
them by the kindness of their landlords. He trusted
their Lordships would never pass any measure for
legalising tenant-right.
The petition was then ordered to lie on the table, and
their Lordships adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 1.

PARLIAMENTARY VOTERS (IRELAND) BILL.

The House then went into Committee on this Bill.

On clause 1 being proposed,
Mr. HAMILTON observed that if it were necessary
to extend the franchise, it ought not to be done at the
expense of the franchise that existed already. The
franchises that now prevailed in Ireland ought to be
preserved, end he should therefore move that after the
word " that " in line 11 the following words be inserted:
"in addition to those qualified by law to register and
vote at any election of a Knight of the Shire in Ireland
in virtue of any qualification not requiring occupation."
On the amendment being put,
Mr. BRIGHT said he should be glad to know whit
question they wet e now to decide. Would the Attorney-
(it nerol fur Ireland be so good as to explain it.
Mr. HATCHELL said, the Bill in point of fact did
not titlect the franchise that existed already, but, in order
that there should be no ambiguity about the matter, Go-
vLrntnent had no objection to insert these additiocal
word F.

Afier a few observations from Mr. Rossencx and Sir
W. Ftf3IERVILLE,
Sir F. THESIGER wished to know from the Go-
venire, nt %healer the Bill did not propose t 3 sweep
away a:1 the existing franchises for the purpose of en-
tire!y reconstructing the representative system in Ire-
land because, most unquestionably that was the way
in which he read the Bill.—(Hear.) Most undoubtedly
comb psi-lies already registered would have under some
clauses of the Bill a prima facie right to be registered
again, but not according to the qualification which they
posses: el at present, but to a new qualification established
under the Bill. It was important to understand at the
Outset that the Committee would have to eecide whether
they would adopt the plan put forth by the Government,
viz., that the existing franchise should only remain so far
as it would constitute a prima facie right to register un-
der this Bill ; or whether they would adopt the words
introduced by his Honourable Friend the Mem-
bar for the University of Dublin, by which he con-
tinued all the existing rights, but proposed
t.) supply the deficiency which had arisen in the number
of electors, by certain new rights which were established
under the Bill. He was ready to admit that in the pre-
sent decayed state of the representation in Ireland addi-
tional voters should be created,but it was for the Committee
to consider in what way this purpose could be best effected.
The Reform Act substituted an occupation of a 10/.
franchise, but it left the property qualification, with a
very small alteration, precisely upon the distinction
which had existed from the earliest times. The first
inroad which was made on that distinction arose on the
Chandos clause of the Reform Act. That clause intro-
duced into the county constituencies persons who merely
occupied, and were liable, to the payment of rates on the
value of 50/. At the time when that clause was pro-
posed to be introduced the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell)
object( d to it on the ground of the abuse which
might be expected to arise from it, but by reason of
that alteration of the basis the Re form Act established
a county qualification, viz., property and not
occupation. Now, the Reform Act was one
grand comprehensive scheme, the object of which
was to bring the representative system in the
three parts of the empire to a perfect similarity;
and if' llon. Members would compare the existing repre-
sentative system as established under the Reform Act
with that which was established in Ireland, they would
find as much uniformity as was possible under the ex-
isting circumstances of each particular case. In 1129
40c. freeholders were annihilated in Ireland. The
Re form Act fur England established a quali-
ficationfouily
wasu rr i pcounae freehold
d
o u i regard ate
to
Members would find, with regard to freeholders for life
ric h
Ireland. it
would
The H b
Hon.
Members o
in England, an occupation was required of them if
ReformtheoccuApcietd
ino Enlyoufgtishud
evaleusetaobfulsho/e.d a now rightor under. The
in favour of the assignees and lessees of terms.
Then came the Chandos clause, by which a lease of sixty
years, according to the 20th clause, cf only 10/. a year,
gave a right to vote. Then it was determined that those
who paid a rent of 5/. a year, in rural districts, should
also have a right to vote, provided they had a certain in--
itne rbeos tr
boroughs,
gthh
s, the pbryoptherotsye.
who
osht
eolfdatlel
tenements
eutths
of
the rightl
a toyouks
year rent. When the Reform Bill was passed an entirely
new system was adopted, and revising barristers were
appointed to see that the registration of voters was just
so far as it went, although of course it could not be per-
fect.—(Bear, hear.) When it scemed
desirablenstitu
to pass another Bill for registering
ency Ireland, the whole of the bar were parti-
cularly anxious that the law of representation should
the co•
be assimilated to that of England. If the system were
good, it ought to be universally adopted, and arranged
fur the whole of the United Kingdom. The Reform Act
was based upon the Bill of 1725, corrected by
the Act of the 35th George 111., in which this
distinctly a
Bill
recognised.
In 1835 t
through of the ayintroduced d
p 1 e of f o representation
Government
Sergeant O'Loughlen for the purpose of alter-
ipisrginceiee franchise, and giving to Ireland a double
appeal. In 1.838 Sergeant Wolff introduced a
similar Bill, which was met by a rival Bill.
but neither of them came to an) thing. In 1840 began
the memorable struggle which was commenced by the
introduction of Lord Stanley's Registration Bill. Of that
keeping
et
Lordßill did.
don Th i s
hisßill showedmind
Bill the Noble Lord at the head of the Government ex-
pressed an opinion that of all the measures which tended
toot he t unsettleop: cs
necessitys thei
un nwh fiocorhf kemt the
the Reform s
i
in-
tact.hio
u s e
byA Lordßill Ahiaodr p alsotth,
whichbeen w a
sa B
introducedil
ifor into
altering th e
and amending the representation as well as the regis-
tration of the people of Ireland. The Right Honour-
able Member for Tamworth had said of that Bill, thet
it was calculated to revolutionize the franchise'.
In order to provide for the deficiency, the Government of
the day proposed to create two now classes of elector!,
the first class resembling that proposed to be established
by the present Bill. It gave every person who in a county
was rated to the extent of 20/. a yetlr a vote, making
the class equivalent to one created in England by what
was called the Chandos clause. The second class that
aas proposed to be created was the 5/. freeholders. The
Noble Lord at the head of the present Government did
not object to the 30/. class, but with regard to the
5/ freeholders, he suggested that the amount should
be reduced to 40s. The measure, however, was not
persevered in at the time, and he merely mentioned it
now to show what were the views and what were the
objects of the Government of that day, with
which he had the honour to be connected, and in order
to preserve his consistency he proposed to