The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-25 00:00:00

reigner's Government, that they would be justified in pro
claiming war against this country? He believed not. 9
the whale, he believed, that t case.,of the Pacitico
required calm consideration and d'he Inqtfiry, and he felt
assured that the result -would bet hat there was a. very great
exaggeration of the claim of this moo. Ha contended that
the interference of France was perfectly justifiable wider all
tile circumstances that he had elreadv stated, as well as with
respect to the capture of the six lonian boats at the custom-
house of sakina. I-la did net metre-to trespass on the
House much longer, and for that reason had confined h nisei
to the three claims which were ordered to be entbiced by the
L'ritish squadron. He should sav that the claims of the two
persons, Finlay and Pacifice, was without any foundation,
and thus the cool and firm answer of M. Londos to Mr.
Wyse. Nothing in his (Sir F. Thesiger's) opinion could be
more ceim or more dignified. And how was it answered by
the British Government? By an overwhelming armed force,
which was sent against a friendly Government, and against
whose commerce a heavy blow w,s dealt, and ves-
sels were seized of the value of 17,0001., in satis-
faction of the claims of M. Pacifico, amounting in the most
to 7,000/.—(Hear, hear.) Looking at the whole of the cir-
cumstances in those proceedings, he would ask the House
whether they were prepared to vote for the motion of the
Hon. Member for Sheffield ?—(Hear, hear, from the Oppo-
sition.) He would now refer the attention of the House to
the policy of the Noble Lord at the head of foreign affairs,
and ask the House if that policy was the policy of peace?—
(Hear, hear.) There were two small islands, Cerva and Sa-
pienza, about which the question had been raised, as to whe-
ther they rightfully belonged to, and should be considered
as part of, the dominions of Greece, or ought to go with the
seven islands which were in possession of Great Britain. A
correspondence took place on the subject, and the Noble Lord
sent instructions to Admiral Parker to proceed with an over-
whelmingarmed force and seize those islands. That proceeding
led to the interference of Russia, and to a correspondence be-
tween the Noble Lord and Count Nesselrode, which assumed
a rather serious aspect, and led to the withdrawal of the
Noble Lord's demand.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition.)
The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then directed the atten-
tion of the House to the negotiations which commenced on
the subject of the claims of M. Pacifico and others on the
Greek Government, and the offer of friendly mediation on
the part of France, and acceptance by the British Govern-
ment of such mediation. He then passed to the arrival at
Athens of Baron Gros, as representative of the French Go-
vernment, the interviews between bins and Mr. Wyse, the
British Minister at the Court of Athens, and of all those
subsequent proceedings in the history of the case which have
been already so frequently discussed, and are now publicly
so well known. In the course of the negotiation a demand,
he said, was made that 180,000 drachmas should be deposited
pending the negotiation, in satisfaction of M.Pacifico's claim& ;
and on the failure of compliance with those terms, coercive
measures were resolved on and resumed, in consequence of
which the King of Greece was compelled to pay one million of
drachmas.—(" No, no," from the Ministerial benches.) Then
it was not important.—(Laughter.) He now found that
330,000 drachmas were only demanded ; but it was not of lin-
portance.--(Hear, and laughter.) What was the condition
in which the Noble Lord stood at that moment? .The Noble
Lord was accused and insulted in certain grave charges made
against him—charges followed up by the _withdrawal of the
French Ambassador (M. Drouyn de l'lluvs) from the British
Court ; and at that moment the Noble Lord was compelled
to accept of terms quite contrary to those cf the convention
in the first instance—terms, mark, not containing one word
of thelpoints insisted on by Mr. Wyse. (The Hon. and Learned
Gentleman then read a copy of the communication made on
the subject of the settlement of the Greek question by
General Lahitte to the National Assembly, indicating
that France had not yielded anything of the conditions
which she at first proposed.) The Noble Lord, he said, held
out until he had almost driven the two nations to the verge
of war, and had subjected his own nation to humiliation; and
was at last compelled to accede to that which he might and
ought to have acceded to in the first instance. The opinions
of the French Government, and of the greater part of
Europe, was against the course taken by the Noble Lord.
General Lahitte had said that the French Government had
no other motive in the affair than to aid in effecting justice
between the parties, and the opinion of Russia and of all the
other powers were averse to the course taken by the Noble
Lord. He should be glad to know whether the course of the
Noble Lord was the course best calculated to procure peace.
He thought not, and that, so far from that, it was calculated
rather to subject the British nation to humiliation and'
degradation. With respect to the assertion that Lord
Aberdeen had used quite as strong language as that
used by the Noble Lord on the subject of the Greek loan,
he ( Sir F. Thesiger) must say there was a very marked
difference. The course adopted by the Noble Lord (the
Earl of Aberdeen) was of a very different character. He
could not conclude his remarks without alluding to a state-
ment of the Noble Lord, in which the Noble Lord had
said that he would not be the Minister of Russia or of
France, or of any other power—(Hear, hear)— but that be
would be the Minister of England only. lle must say that
he hardly understood the meaning of that statement of the
Noble Lord, but he presumed that the Noble Lord meant to
say that " upon every occasion while he was at the head of
the foreign affairs of this country he would be found to act
with regard to the sustainment of British interests, but not
with regard to the interests of any other country." Now,
if that was the meaning of the Noble Lord, he (Sir F.
Thesiger) thought it was a very unsafe and a very danger-
ous one. He apprehended that in political ethics a state
should be regarded in the same manner as an individual;
with all his responsibilities and rights; and the Noble
Lord, acting as the Minister of England, would be
departing from the rule of right if, in his management of
the interests of England, he were not to give the same at-
tention to the interests of other countries that he would to
his own. There was a difference between domestic policy
and foreign policy, according to the Noble Lord. • Itnvas not
a very high eulogium on a Foreign Minister to say that he
would be the Minister of his own nation only, and not or
any other. Now, in what situation would they be placed,
should the House assent to the motion of the ?lon. Member
for Sheffield ? They were not called upon to express a direct
opinion or censure on the policy of the Noble Lord. A
general resolution, approving of the Noble Lord's policy,
was presented to them in relation to his course on the ques-
tion now before the House. But a vote of this House in fa-
vour of that resolution 'would lose more than half of its
effect by a reference to a vote which had been come to on the
question in another place. Foreign nations were aware that
en opinion had been pronounced by a majority of the other'
House of Parliament, condemnatory of the Noble Lord's po-
licy on the question now under the considerationof this House e
and the sentence which had been pronounced by that House
had gone forth to all. lands. The Noble Lord had been cone
victed by that sentence, and let this House do what it might,
it was quite impossible that he could refute that sentence or
reinstate himself in the confidence of foreign nations. -
(Hear, hear,) He ventured, on the facts which he had sub-
mitted, to maintain that the Noble Lord at the head of fo-
reign affairs had constantly intervened, not to secure free-
dom, but for the puiPose of either insisting peremptorily for
demands which should not be made, or for the purpose of
encouraging revolutions which were called an approach to
self-government, and he could show that, having so inter-
fered, the Noble Lord had lett these revolutionary parties to
their fate. For these reasons, and being influenced by these
considerations, he intended giving a decided negative to the
motion which the Hon.• and Learned Member for Sheffield
had submitted to the House.—(Cheers.)
Mr. P. WOOD said that he came down to the House be-
lieving that the Commons of England would. have to discuss
a question of the greatest importance, and deeply affecting
the interest, the honour, and the dignity of this country.
He had no idea that the motion would be met by such ar-
guments as those which' had been used—of details of the
exaggeration of Don Pacifico's claim, or of the paltriness of
the vulgar speculation of Mr. Finlay, which he confessed
every one of which he had either heard or read before, and
which filled him with such ineffable disgust that he did not
believe they would have been sanctioned by the Hon. and
Learned Member for Abingdon adopting them. He was
surprised, too, that the lion. and Learned Geutleman should
have thrown out the miserable insinuation that the Hon.
and Learned Member fur Sheffield had earned a re-
ward, or was entitled to receive a reward, from
the Government for the part he took in con-
nexion with this question of such serious import.
He told the Honourable and Learned Member for
Abingdon that the Hon. and Learned Member for Sheffield
had already earned a reward which it was in the power of no
Government to confer, namely, the affection and attachment
of the people of England. The Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man, however, was quite able to defend himself against such
an attack, and he (Mr. Wood) merely noticed it to show
the nature of the arguments they had to expect from the
quarter whence such insinuations emanated. The question
they were to discuss was one of great and serious import.
The determination of another place, as he suspected by their
resolution, was founded on this avowed principle, that they
desired to announce to Europe that time Foreign-office was not
England. That principle had been well and promptly met
by the counter-resolution of the lion. and Learned Member
for Sheffield, in which they were called on to state that
the Foreign-office had been well represented, and that the
course pursued was calculated to uphold the dignity
and honour of England. The Lords, by their vote, had
expressed an opinion that the Minister of England
had been regardless of England's honour. Every step
taken by the Noble and Learned Lord who submitted the
proposition in the House of Peers was well known in tbis
House; but the Commons of Etegland had not expressed any
vote in consideration of that foreign policy, nor were they
called upon to express any such opinion. No Member had
ventured to ask the . decision of time House of Commons
whether England's honour had been tarnished during that
Administration which it was contended had brought them
into such a humiliating position. If that resolution were
correct the Huse of Commons had neglected its duty, and
they had announced to the whole of Europe whenever you
have a complaint to make you know that you have the
House of Lords to complain to. Now, his opinion was
directly opposed to that holden in the resolution of the House
of Lords. He believed that the policy of the Noble Lord the
Secretary for Foreign Affairs, especially in reference to Greece,
was best calculated to uphold the dignity and the honour of
England. and to maintain peace with foreign countries. If
they took issue on the whole policy of the Noble Lord they
could not have a better example than in the case of Greece.
.So far from being wanting iu dignity and honour by the
course pursued, they should have been wanting in both had
they abstained from interfering in sustainment of the rights
of British subjects, and in obtaining for them speedy redress
for the -wrongs they suffered. The only blame attachable to
Lord Palmerston was, that he had not done that in 1848
which he canned to be done in 1850.—(Hear.) A British
subject failed to obtain redress from the Greek Government
in a just claim for compensation. He appealed to the re-
presentatives of the British Government on the spot where
the injustice had been done him ; and then they were told
that this was the case of a canny Scot, who had made a good
bargain, and wished to hold it.—(Hear.) Then there was
the case of the plunder of property of a British subject—the
suns of the Minister of "War being parties to the mischief—
who in addition to the tete' demolition of his furniture, had
his wife and daughter beaten. The answer given
to this case was, that it was the case of a Jew, and that
he had put forward very exaggerated claims for com-
pensation. He (Mr. Wood) telt deeply ashamed that in a
place where Don Pacifico haul not an opportunity of being
heard, it should be alleged against him that he bore the name
of a person who would have been convicted of forgery if he had
failed to pat down a certain sum of money. In Pacifico's
case the plain broad facts amounted simply to this, that he,
a British subject, had been refused redress by the Greek Go-
vernment for gross insults and injuries which he experi-
enced; and would it be contended that they upheld the
honour and dignity of England if such a state of things
were permitted to pass unnoticed? In the third case a man
named Zumaika was subjected to the mose cruel torture,
after the Turkish fashion, without any evidence in sustain-
ment of some alleged charge being preferred against him.
He (Mr. Wood) could prove, as he would do by and by, that
the unfortunate fellow had been cruelly and brutally tor-
tured. Redress was refused him, and were they to be told
that the British Government should tolerate injustice on one
who had a right to claim protection from them? A
man was to be robbed, according to the morality
of those who supported the resulution of the other
House, because he happened to be a Scot ; another was to
have his furniture destroyed, his house pillaged, and his
wife and daughter beaten, because he was a Jew; and a
third was violently and indecently tortured, because he was
accused of burglary without any evidence being produced
against him. In a fourth case a positive and direct insult