The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-28 00:00:00

'

/1,130 might say, that even its that case the Government
1 Great Britain should not have interfered, that the
'ti's the country must be o%ryed implicitly and ems-
'utedly by those who dwell in it. Such, however, was
lot his opinion. In the case of Venezuok redress
!'s demanded for the Bri:ish suej.,cts
tglo ts were unjustly interfered with by the
4uvernment of that country. There had not
krt any blockade, but a firm, temperate, anti just
ipre,:ent;ttion was made by the Noble Lord the Seers,-
41.3' fur Foreign Affairs to the Vere-zuela Government,
1,4(1 his representation was attended with the success it
aserred. If there was one point more Oven another on
lbich the middle classes of this country should support
4e Government it was upon their foreign policy, and if
Lon.
Members of the party on the other side of the
+(lase were anxious to vote against the motion, on the
ha that it e ould be productive of a dissolution of Pa,-
'lreent, he could tell them that it was not the path that
'ould Isad them to the bed of roses they wished to re-
ltne upon.
?sir. SIDNEY HERBERT said he must confess that
se speech which had just been addressed to the House
tat one which he could not have much difficulty in
14swering, if he were to apply himself to the se-
'eral topics discussed. The Honourable Member had
l'tainly ventured to express his apprehension of a
'lsetion of some of their Liberal Members, but with
hat discrimination and good sense he had abstained
whetherng his regrets on that head very far.
or not the case of Venezuela, which tie had
tloted, was a precedent for that of Greece, was a point
Phich he was not in a mitigation to combat; but he
tonight that, allowing his argument the greatest weight,
did not much assist his views. The Noble Lord the
Peretary for Foreign Affairs, in his speech of the night
'lore last—a speech to which every one had done
'triage—(Cheers)—in that speech the Noble Lord -oh-
loted to the course taken by the Right Hon. Baronet
le'Alember for Ripon, inasmuch as in the reading of
4/ dispatch, on which he founded his strictures, and
tensed the Noble Lord of interfering, and that too in an
obecoming tone, in the domestic and internal concerns
se concluding
country, he complained of his not having read
low,
concluding paragraph of that dispatch to Mr. Bulwer.
'ow, he must do justice to his Right Hon. Friend, and
tY' that that dispatch was one in which it was not
4tended to communicate, in the sense in which he
'ed the word. The Noble Lord, however, took care that
go dispatch should appear, and the French also took
`he
that it should appear, because it appeared in print.
`he Noble Lord had himself been careful to suppress
sentence in which he could not apply a less severe ex-
Ire'ssion to General Narvaez, than that of his being a
reckless adventurer." The dispatch to which the
ieble Lord had referred in particular, exemplified suffi-
iently the system of non-interference. The Noble
tord, referring to it, said he was accused of having
sown a want of temper in his attempts at reconciliation
the Spanish Government. In this respect the
Panish Government, as he (Mr. S. Herbert) thought,
ma afford to be generous; for although the Noble
Ord said that the dispatch had been shown to both
'overnments before it was treated as authentic, yet
omitted to mention that that was taken out of
`Nista drafts which were submitted, as being the
'oat offensive of any. If that were not so, would
le'. Noble Lord produce the other drafts that the
, (letssi • might be set right upon it? With regard to
lAtian politics, the House would remember that in
tugust, 1847; there was the greatest discontent
'suiting from the conduct of the Govern-
-IPnt of many of the Italian states. Genoa
'ts governed by the Jesuits, through whom only any
',our or employment at Court could be obtained. Tus-
sriy was ill governed, though it had great resources
ind an industrious population. In the States of the
:hurch the misapplication of the law was so glaring
sat the inhabitants were frequently flogged and for-.
Iced at the discretion of the gaoler, and then told there
'ko no charge against them. In its financial aflairs
sere was the greatest corruption, so much so, that a
mall article of revenue, yielding 3001. per annum, was
°fleeted at an expense of about 700/. for stationery, and
1000/. for salaries. At that time the accession of the
?pe had inspired the Italians with the greatest hopes
(reform, but it was probable that he had played a part
Phich be never intended. His ambition was to raise the
itizens of Rome to the level of the people of Tus-
t)y; but the disputes of other states was too power-
!l for his Holiness to contend against. In the
lairs of the Italians every Englishman at this time
'ok the greatest interest, and when the reform
tkan the greatest alarm was felt lest there- should be a
°flision between Austria and the other states.
Was then that the liberal party used the name of
kastria as a bugbear, with great success, towards the
••eensplishment of the views of Young Italy.—(llear,
4ir,) At a time of great excitement the Noble Lord
Ireulated a document, intimating an intention of the in•
,salon of Sardinia, but he did not at the same time cir-
,lllate the direct contradiction made by the Austrian
loeernment. That document was designedly sup-
4'essed, and that act defended, on the ground that the
'oble Lord had no reliance on the disclaimer of the
klistrian Government. He asked them, was that a
lode of transacting business which the House of Corn-
Ss would sanction?—(Cheers.) The mission of Lord
‘into was regarded by the people of Italy as under-
Aen to push forward constitutional governments in
sl‘ly, It was misunderstood, and produced fetal effects.
Shen the Noble Lord (Lord Minto) addressed the
,),l'ople from the balcony at Rome, he could not have
sat
more objectionable words than those he used on
sat occasion—" Live the independence of Italy!" He
mew not whether the Noble Lord was an Italian scholar,
ht throughout the whole of Italy there was but one
leaning attached to these words, which was the expul-
;°,4 of the foreigner from the Peninsula.—(Cheers.)
'4O Noble Lord then went to Naples, and there they
itsd him supporting the repeal of the union between
ily and Naples. They saw their -fleet saluting a new
lag in that island, and subsequently the revolutionists
tere armed with muskets from this country by the Go-
Irtient, which also supported the nomination of the
iirkern of Genoa as the sovereign of that island. What
M. been the effect of all this interference in Sicily,
'(lnse, and Lombardy? It began in anarchy, and. was
°l'f ground down.by a military despotism. He would
enter upon the affairs of Greece, after the detailed
„Iseussion which had already taken place. He thought
country could not boast of the result of the dif-
!rence between this country and France. He found
'At in all the cases in which the Noble Lord interfered
;" had failed, and in those which he had not,. freedom
!i.d been established. Let them contrast the case of
leily and Lombardy, and Rome, - with Prussia, where
!'Prty had been established without his assistance—
bear)—and he hoped that in Austria matters
I.rere in the course of a satisfactory arrangement.
Pun a view of the entire course of these events, he
tled upon them not to sanction the policy of the
"Ale Lord.
11%. Gs GREY said it would be almost unpardonable in
&Ira. if he were to occupy the attention of the House for
't!l3' length of time in a further vindication of the prin-
s of that policy which had been pursued by his
;olite Friend the Foreign Minister of this country, as
,organ of the Government of which he is so distin-
tlis,hed. member.(Cheers.) The speech which his
ob:'e Friend addressed to the House at the close of the
Prtvi ous evening's debate—the most lucid, able, cora-
t'„Poluntsive, and temperate speech, in which he stated and
'lltittcated the. principles upon which the foreign policy
th Government had been conducted and guided, and
'which he met and refuted, one by one, the many
`Qari!es- and imputations which, from various quarters,
Old 'from every possible source, had been brought against
ik for a length of time.—(Loud cheering.) That
'l4e.ch had left little, if anything, to be added by those
,
'rho had to follow him on the same side.—(Hear, hear.)
1,
/ •
en he alluded to the temperate tone of the speech of,
13 Noble Friend, containing not one word which could
r,
the
pain or offence to any, man—(Cheers)—not even
'3 bitterest of his . opponents—he must express his,
'grs t at the tone of some of the remarks which he
I}'Ptlsted had inadvertently fallen . from the Right
`4, on. Gentleman who last addressed the House,
'lid be thought the Right Hon. Gentleman himself re-
Iti,tted that he had charged his Noble Friend with con-`
Oet incompatible with honour and integrity—(Cheers),
,`-'eorsduct, which he understood the Right Hon. Gentle-
'', lin to say, would be held to be disgraceful between man'
1114 man. The House had extorted from the Right
oil. Gentleman an admission that he had gone too tar,
4d he believed the Right Hon. Gentleman was glad of
4 opportunity of expressing his sense, in accordance
7ith the unanimous feeling of the House, of his Noble
k'riend's unimpeachable integrity. This is a question
inciple. The Hon. Member for Sheffield stated the'
latlE, truly, when he said the House was called on to de-
Nde whether the principles on which the foreign policy,
this country is conducted are such as, looking to that
Policy as a whole, to command the approval, or merit
the
censure, of that House. Ile must for a moment
qqtiee two charges which had that evening been pre
„
'4re.el against his Noble Friend. The first was only a
t,S)etition of one made the other night—he alluded to what
`4O Right Hon. Gentleman termed the wilful suppression of
,14.ispatch from the Austrian Government; the other re-
lorred to the production et. a dispatch from Mr—Wyse,
Englishman
himself with the honest indignation of an
t;nglishman against an unfounded charge reflecting on
his hear.) With respect to
official conduct.—(Hear,
the
first'charge, that relating to the suppression of the
Austrian dispatch, the Bight Hon. Gentleman seemed to
414ve forgotten what was stated by his Noble Friend the
'Other evening, namely, that if the production of that
dispatch had been deemed by the Austrian Government
'sl' by its representative in this country essential to its
4!onour and character, it might have been asked for at
y period dUring six months. With respect to Mr.
yse"s.dispatch, the. Right Hon. Gentleman seemed to be
ikliorant that General la Hitte, in a dispatch addressed
t° M. Drouyn de 'l'Huys, distinctly stated—this
`t least is the generally received meaning of
„ 'Oa words of the dispatch, and the meaning
lags adopted by the publio press in this country and
,made matter of comment—although Mr. Wyse knew
that the basis of a convention was agreed upon between
4is Noble Friend and M. Drouyn de l'Huys, he re-
faced
to delay his course of action until the arrival of the
dart steamer, which he was aware would bring him in-
telligence of the settlement of the question. The Right
got'. Gentleman complained of the production of the
dispatch which Mr. Wyse wrote in answer to the lIII-
' .cAlnded charge made against him, and the Right Hon.
Gentleman seemed to suppose that his Noble Friend ad-
)Pitted the other night that the accusation had never
been made against Mr. Wyse, because it was physically
I,tepossible the basis of the convention could have been
known in Athens at the time. His Noble Friend did
110 t say that it was physically impossible the basis of the
convention could have been known at Athens, but stated
that Mr. Wyse was informed from a source on which he
thought he could confidently rely, that the basis of the
convention had arrived and been communicated to M.
Bros, who had concealed them from him, and writing
faderk that impression he penned the dispatch which had
_'seen laid before Parliament. Far from thinking that
,
gill Noble Friend was censurable for publishingMr.Viryse's

•••

j

__ {

THE

dispatch, under the circumstances, be was of opinion that
he would have acted a shabby and mean part toward,
lUr. Wyse, if he had not given to the world that
gentlemati'sin.ifutation of what he conceived to be art un-
just charge injuriously affecting hi; character.—(Hear,
hoer.) To return from this topic, the principles oe
' which the motion let f the Hone was based were ac-
ettrat&y stated by the Hon. Meer for Sheffiel as
principles of policy which affect two classes of cases;
first, the individual rights belonging to, end wrongs sue.
fered by. British subjects; and, secondly „the general
interests, dieeity, and honour or the country. The teal
question et issue was, whether the present or any future
Government of this country should hereafter, in the as•
sertion of the principle affecting the first class of cases,
Let in accordance with the limitation placed on the ap-
elination of the principle which is involved in the reso-
lution of the ether House; or whether, on the other, it
should afford protection in the widest sense to every
British subject, let his situation in life be what it may—
let his religious creed be what it may—who, having
suffered wrong in a foreign state, was unable by the ordi-
nary process of law, or the misgovernment of the coun-
try, to obtain justice.—(Loud cheers.) They were bound
to give by treaty their advice to many countries,
and they had given that advice with a view to
withstand despotism on the one hand and anarchy
on the other. He did not believe that any person
could come out of so many charges so un-
scathed as his Noble Friend. He asked the House whe-
ther every specific charge
,had not been satisfactorily
and triumphantly answered.—(Loud cheers.) Hon.
Gentlemen opposite had waited for results, and having
been silent during the progress of events, when they ap-
peared not successful they came down to complain of
their policy.--(Hear.) He would appeal to the House
whether, two years ago, they had not had many predic-
tions of a European war? Were these predictions sue-
cessful?—(Cheers.) Had not their exertions averted
what had been apprehended on all hands?—(Hear.)
Was not the state of Europe now infinitely better than
what had been apprehended? The principles of consti-
tutional government were making progress against des-
potism on the one hand, and anarchy on the other.—
(Cheers.) Although under circumstances of unexampled
difficulty, his Noble Friend the Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs had, by his policy, preserved this country
in peace with all the world.—(Cheers.) He believed
the principles upon which his policy was founded
were more likely now to be successful than they
had ever been before. But even peace might be pur-
chased at too dear a price. It was not to be purchased
at the price of the national dignity and the national
honour. His Noble Friend had stated the principles
upon which he based his course of policy. He believed
them to be the feelings and principles of the great body
of his countrymen.—(Cheers.) This was not a narrow
question—a question not of the removal of one Minister
or of another Minister, but of great national interest and
importance; and he trusted the House would weigh the
matter apart from party questions, before they came to a
decision upon it. He trusted that they would not lower
the country in the eyes of foreign nations. It was a
question involving, serious results—a question involving
a total and entire change of policy in this country,
which might be fatal to the character and interests of
the country. He trusted they would .not lead foreign
countries to understand that they migh insult British
subjects with impunity and with success, or by a vote
of that House lead foreign nations to believe that Eng-
land would remove her Ministers if they attempted to
defend them. He trusted that they would not lead
foreign nations to believe that they were indifferent to
the principles of constitutional government—principles
which were essential to the progress of civilization, and
to the happiness of mankind.—(Loud cheers.)
There being loud calls of " Gladstone" from various
parts of the House,
Mr. GLADSTONE rose, and said that the speech of
the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir Gorge Grey) had little
bearing upon the resolution they were to arrive at that
night. They must 'deal closely with the question, if
they were to deal with it at all. A vote had been passed
in another place impugning the conduct of the Foreign
Minister in regard to the affairs of Greece. The Noble
Lord at the head of the Government (Lord John Rus-
sell), when at length drawn forth, boldly declared, the
Government do not intend to resign, or change their
policy, or take any specific course. The Nnble Lord
(Lord J. Russell) was connected with a family histori-
cally celebrated for its adherence to constitutional prin-
ciples. But were these constitutional principles? He
protested against the doctrine. The Noble Lord (Lord
John Russell) and his coadjutors intended to continue
the advisers of the Crown, and yet to take no step to
gain the confidence of that House.—(Hear, hear.)
The Noble Lord appealed to precedents. His first
precedent had reference to a resolution passed in
another place respecting the Bourbon family.
But was that a precedent? The House of Lords of
that day passed a resolution in respect of a matter that
had not taken place. But their resolution passed the
other day was in reference to what had already occurred.
—(Hear.) Again in 1833 a vote of censure was passed
in the House of Lords upon the Government, and imme-
diately that House was challenged as to whether it
would change the Government. The course of the Noble
Lord, on the contrary, is, that he is to wait for the Hon.
Member for Buckinghamshire.—(Hear and cheers.)
But the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire was not
dissatisfied with that vote.—(Cbeers and counter cheers.)
He was not dissatisfied with that vote.—(Renewed
cheering and counter cheering.) But the Minister who
knew what constitutional government was, and who
knew that no Minister should conduct the affairs of the
country under such circumstance without an appeal to
that House, did not come forward.—(Cheers from the
Opposition.) No, they preferred to leave it to an inde-
pendent Member—to the Honourable Member for
Sheffield. And what bad he done? Had he pro-
posed a reversal of the vote of the House of Lords?
Hai he not shifted the issue.—(Cheers from the
Opposition benches.) Had he done it without a reason?
Why all this indisposition and hesitation to meet the
Wain of Greece?—(Cheers and counter cheering.)
Why were various motions which would have given
them the issue withdrawn?—(Cheers and laughter
amongst the Protectionists.) Why had the Hon. Mem-
ber for Montrose withdrawn his motion?—(Cheers and
laughter.) There was a reluctance to meet discussion
upon the affairs of Greece.—(Protectionist cheers and
ironical cheers from the Ministerial benches.) There
was a purpose in avoiding , discussions upon foreign
policy. There was a feeling in that House and else-
where, that, the Noble Lord the Foreign Secretary had
sources of peculiar weakness and of peculiar strength.
There was a feeling that they were not very far usually
from the verge of a war when our Foreign Affairs were in
the hands of the Noble. Lord; but, on the other hand,
he had a source of strength, because his policy was in
favour of an extended party which wished he further
their own particular views. It was his object to
promote the spread of popular prejudices. Now,
they had before , them, in the first place, the
particular question of Greek policy, which
belonged to a subject-matter quite apart from any prin-
ciple connected with foreign despotism, or the progress
of popular government. The Noble Lord had been en-
gaged in getting what he called protection for a British
subject.—(Hear, hear.) Now, there was no more im-
portant principle or important subject to consider. In
the case of Greece, they had to inquire under what cir-
cuinstances it had become necessary to coerce that coun-
try. They had • next to consider in what manner gua-
ranteed treaties were to be observed ; and, thirdly, they
had eteconsider whether the conduct of the Noble Lord
with respect to the great country of France had been
calculated to preserve peace ? He disclaimed altogether
the trial of the conduct of the Government of this coun-
try in Greece, by comparing it with what other countries
had done. On coming to the case of Greece he
wished to put aside all these minor claims which had
been set up and enforced by the country, and con-
fine his observations principally to the most import-
ant ones. As regarded the case of the seizure of the
men belonging to the Fantome, there could be no doubt
that the Gdvernment was entitled to demand an apology,
but certainly that could have been got without having
recourse to reprisals or the employment of force. Why
was sot such an apology asked • for? Suppose it had
been asked for, and the Government of Greece refused
to award it, then would reprisals or force have been jus-
tified, but it never was asked for, and therefore could
never have been refused. He also would pass the 201.
claim of compensation to the lonians, which formed part
of the demand against Greece, and in respect of which
Baron Gros was against the Government, as ho had
doubts as to the matter of fact on which those claims
were founded. Then as to the case of M. Sumachi, he
asked the House were they prepared to justify the act
of the Foreign Office in respect to that case? An ex
parte statement by a man of no character, who was
accused of theft, complaining of having been
severely tortured and maltreated by the Greeks, was
sent to the Noble Lord at the head of foreign affairs, who
without ever inquiring into the truth or falsehood of the
statement, immediately wrote to Sir Edmund Lyons, at
Athens, stating that her Majesty's Government had
learned with regret the barbarous outrage committed on
that individual, and instructing him, to demand the dis-
missal of the officers who had been guilty of it, and corn-
pensation to the man upon whom the outrage had been
inflicted, and requesting to be informed by the next
packet as to whether those conditions had been complied
with.—(Hear, hear.) Perhaps the House on the trans-
action might have' come to the cdnclusion which Baron
Gros did, in his impartial position of mediator between
the parties.— (Ironical cheers from the 'Ministerial
benches.) He repeated impartial position, and he would
at the same time tell the Government that if they had
any respect for their own reputation, or for the reputa-
tion of the country, they could take no more sure and
effectual means of damaging either, than by first calling
in the aid of a friendly power to help them out of their
difficulties, and then, when the views of the individual
appointed by such power to carry out its good
offices towards them did not altogether tally with
their own, to raise a taunt and a sneer against
him. (Loud cheers.) He asked again,
of
againf,oretihgenn,i
the House was satisfied with a system
po-
licy, which, on the separate statement of a man of
doubtful character, was to assume a hostile attitude to-
wards a weak state, and demand the dismissal of certain
officers of that state, and compensation for wrongs in re-
spect of which no means had been taken to inquire as
to whether or not they had been inflicted?—(Hear,
hear.) In the month of August he made his demand for
compensation, but in the month of January following he
again wrote, demanding that the case should be investi-
gated, and nothing more was heard of it. If it was the
case that the man was tortured, he had not got his com-
pensation in damages, nor had the officers who did so
been dismissed, and it might be that here was a British
subject who had been subject to the greatest outrage
and violence, but whom the Noble Lord had failed to
protect. The principal cases, however, were those of
M. Pacifico and Mr. Finlay, and to these he wished more
particularly to call the attention of the House. Mr. Finlay
was a respectable man, and there could be no doubt that
he was entitled- to have his claim investigated, and to
receive that compensation for his property to which the
law entitled 14w. In his case, however, there arose the

-• • • .
r -yr
a
U- N
3.

question, hu
•-ies to he-regulated?—was there to be a
^ve was the law in respect of British subjects
in foreign count. sof then or were they to be sub-
special law in respet._ t the:laws the-cot:l:tries in.
jected to the operation o.
th e power,, in case of
which they were resident, NV. 4.n
ti eir being refused the benefit of I,..hce, of appealing to
'dioloniatic interference.
That was a q nestioti which lay
at the root of their relations with all forsign countries.
The Hon. Member for Cambridge had said that British
subjects abrosel were entitled to be governed by as good
laws as existed its their own country, but in that he
thought the 11,,use would not toincide with the Hon.
Gentleman. He would, however, take the definition of
the matter as given by the Noble Lord at the head of
Fors ign Affairs, that when the law of the country in
which British subjects were resident was applicable
to their case such law ought to be taken the be-
nefit of by them, and upon that the question arose,
was the law of Greece applicable to the case of Mr.
Finlay?; Ho (Mr. Gladstone) maintained that it wipe
Mr. Finlay himself admitted that, he ought to have
gone to the legal tribunals, and he gave his reasons for
not doing so.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. Finlay said as to
carrying his claims before the legal tribunals, he would
not get compensation for the arbitrary seizure of his
property, ho would only be remunerated for the value of
it. Now, he believed it was the fact, that previously to
the property being seized, Mr. Finlay applied to the
King to purchase it from him, and a sum was offered not
far below what was now awarded him, but there now
arose out of his case the two questions, the value of the
land, and what damages be was entitled to for its arbi-
trary seizure. It was true the Greek tribunals could
not award him anything for the arbitrary seizure of his
property, but they could have fixed the value of it, and
it was the duty of Mr. Finlay to have gone before
those tribunals to have ascertained that value.
That was the opinion expressed by Baron Gros.
Mr. Finlay then said that the expense and delay
which would be occasioned by going to those tribu-
nals, would be tantamount to a refusal of his claim, and
a denial of justice to him. But be never was fortunate
enough to hear of a case respecting landed property in
the courts of law in this country, which could be decided
without considerable expense and delay. Mr. Finlay
next said that it was impossible to sue the Greek Go-
vernment in their own courts with any degree of suc-
cess so long as the judges of those courts were liable to
be dismissed from day to day. The reason then was
that the judges were not appointed for life. What would
be said in this country did a party refuse to go before
the Lord Chancellor with a suit, because the Lord
Chancellor held office at the pleasure of the Crown? or
what would be said in the colonies where the judges
held office from day to day, and were liable to be dis-
missed by the petty head of a small community, subject
to the revision of no one except the Colonial Secretary,
at the distance of some thousand miles from the
spot? Then, again, were the tribunals of Greece so
corrupt that they could not be entrusted with the case.
That could not be alleged, but over and above that,
there was a treaty between this country and Greece, and
which every one who had spoken on the part of the
Government would seem to have forgotten. In that
treaty it was laid down, that throughout the whole ex-
tent of the Greek territory the subjects of this country
should, in respect of the administration of justice, enjoy
the privileges of natives of Greece. That treaty was
entered into in 1837, and at the bottom of it, on the part
of England, he found the name of Lord Palmerston.—
(Hear, hear.) They must, therefore, show that the
Greek tribunals were corrupt before they could agree to
this being overlooked, as had been done in the present
case. But Mr. Finley himself admitted the efficiency
of the Greek tribunals, for he stated that those tribunals
had so nobly defended the rights of the press against
Government, that he should feel every confidence in the
judges were they appointed for life. In respect of Mr.
Finlay's claim having been submitted to arbitration,
and the reason why it had not been considered
by those arbiters, he bad to state, that the
Government of Greece. agreed to suspend the law in
reference to such arbitration, only continuing for three
months, and that Baron Gros himself had stated
that the reason why the arbitrators had done nothing
with it was, that Mr. Finlay bad never submitted the
papers respecting the case to them. . For that, then, the
Greek Government were not to blame. In respect of
M. Pacifico's claims, the same observations were applic-
able to it as to Mr. Finlay's. It never was submitted
to the Greek tribunals, and it was wrong to have em-
ployed France in the obtaining of it without going
through these tribunals. He did not inquire what was
M. Pacifico's character, he only looked at his claim, but
M. Pacifico himself dragged in his character in his claim,
for on the very face of it there was the greatest exag-
geration apparent. He contended that the Noble Lord
was bound by the treaty of 1830 to consult the great
powers of Europe with respect to the islands of Sapien-
za and Cervi, instead of sending out an armed force, and
a dispatch to the Governor of the lonian Islands to take
immediate possession of them, by which incautious
act he risked the peace of Europe. The Right
Honourable Gentleman complained, also, that the
Noble Lord, instead of acting in a friendly
spirit with other powers, had rushed, as was his cha-
racter, into a complicated mass of difficulties. His re-
cognition of the Duke of Genoa as king of Sicily,
while Palermo was in the hands of the insurgents, was,
in his opinion, a most unwarrantable act, which would
reflsct indelible disgrace on the British nation. He
thought that when the Noble Lord anticipated a sepa-
ration of Sicily from Naples he was performing an act
which showed a spirit of hostility such as no Minister
could do without a violation of his duty. If it had
happened in Canada, when it was for a time in the
possession of. the insurgents, what would be thought "if
before any soldiers had been expelled, there was Wl-
eared to the insurgents by a foreign power a choice of a
particular monarch ?—(Cheers.) He (Mr. Gladstone)
was prepared, with distinguished men, to bear the
abuse which would be poured upon him,•and though it
might be said he was in favour of foreign powers
and influence, his reply would be, that he was
for justice. The Noble. Lord said the English-
man was to be like the Roman of whom le spoke, and
he held him to that admission. The Roman citizen was
a member of a privileged caste—the citizen of a nation
that held all down by the strong arm of power—there
was to be one law for him, and another for others.—
(Hear, hear.) Was that the view of the Noble Lord
with regard to the other nations of the world?—(Cheers.)
If it really be the business of a foreign secretary to
Noblehi
s duty Lordw as to
to beg govern
theer
carry on war with all Europe; if, dike the knights of
old, he was to be armed at all points, be admitted the
-ththe
greatesteon mu
tarsyt aster oi
its
hisfor
eairgtn. r
eBl But
tions by sound and just principles; theyouglit not to set
themselves up as superior to other nations. They
abused all who were opposed to, them; and if 'any portion
of the nations of Europe ever differed from them they
were called " foreign conspirators.", They not , only
abused despotic Governments, but constitutional ones;
and even went so far, when they had nothing else to
do, as to abuse republican Governments.—(A laugh.)
The Noble Lord bad, done so in the. ease of the
Oregon question, as regarded' the United States; and
when Lord Ashburton's treaty was in pro'gress of being
settled the Noble Lord showed the spirit which actuated
him. That spirit must be given up. It would be said,
after that debate had concluded, that English interests
would be neglected by those who opposed the Noble
Lord—that they were actuated by personal interests;
but if there was• an appeal to the Houses of Parliament
of that description, there was an appeal to the people of
England also, and from them to the civilized nations of
the earth. In pursuance, however, of their duty in that
House they were bound to, give a . verdict according to
their conscientious convictions, and protest against a
policy whicirmust of necessity ,be in 'its results unfa-
vourable to British interests abroad, and particularly un-
fourable to the sacred object of maintaining the peace of
the world.

Mr. H. DRUUOND and Mr. BROTHSRTON rose to-
gether amid counter-cries of '4 Adjourn !" and "Go
on I" which rendered both. Members inaudible. The
latter Hon. Gentleman made a faint but despairing
appeal to the clock, which indicated twenty minutes past
one; but suffering himself to be overpersuaded, the Hon.
Member for Saltord resumed his seat without moving the
adjournment of the House.
Mr. H. DRUMMOND was quite willing to accede to
the wish of the House, whether it were to chat or 'to
sleep.—(A laugh, and cry of "Go on.") Among the
anomalies of the present debate the most extraordinary
was that the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Gladstone)
should have taken under his protection his (Mr. Drum-
mond's) Hon. Friend the Member for Bucks (Mr. Dis-
raeli).—(Laughter and cheers.) He (Mr. Drummond)
could not be supposed to have any great antipathy to
seeing a personal run made upon an individual member
of a Whig Administration for the purpose of destroying
his Government—an individtial not the most ig-
noble among his colleagues, an individual selected, not,
as he (Mr. Drummond) maintained, .for any dereliction
of duty, but because the purpose of a faction ;night
be served and because foreign whisperers had. been
at work.—(Hear.) It appeared that the Right Hon.
Gentleman the First Lord of the Admiralty, in conse-
quence of a requisition from the Foreign-office, had
selected the vessels that were to go to 'Greece—vessels
with uncommonly apPropriate. names. Lovers some-
times made known their sentiments by the means of the
language of flowers. It was natural that the First Lord
should make known his sentiments in the,choice of .his
ships, and he accordingly selected the Firebrand, the
Dragon, the Spitfire, the Tartarus„ the Bulldog, and the
Spiteful.—(Laughter.) The Noble Lord (Lord Pal-
merston) had considered the question under two heads
—first, the claims more particularly in dispute, and
secondly, the general policy of the Country. Now,
when Hon. Gentlemen confined the policy of the country
to these Greek claims they put the question upon a
basis perfectly fatal to them. The policy of Lord Pal-
merston was to assert a claim for redress to British sub-
jects. To oppose that was to deny that they would ever
support a claim of a British subject.—(Cheers.) If Hon.
Gentlemen talked of overthrowing an Administration
upon the ground of the Noble Lord's present policy, and
adopting a contrary principle,of action, it would be a
declaration to the world that, let the subjects of this
country be treated as they might, the Foreign Minister
should not perform his duty.—(Cheers and " Oh.")
Upon the nisi prius part of the question; as it had been
called, he would not enter. But, from the speech of the
Foreign Secretary, it was clear that from the beginning
of this dispute the opposition "to the demands made by
Great Britain was fostered and encouraged by the Rus-
sian and Austrian Ambassadors. But was it a matter
of surprise that the present Administration of this
country should be looked upon with suspicion and dis-
trust by all foreign Governments? The political fathers
of the present Ministers were the panegyrists and apo-
logists of all the atrocities of the first French revolution,
the peculiarity of which was ti at it esteblished a propa-
gandism, the spirit of which' was that every other
country ought also to cut off its king's head. A cha-
racter was not gained in a day, and the successors. of
the apologists of the French revolution could never be
the advocates of peaoe.