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

in such cases the moral feelings were naturally weakened
But the Jews were gradually, under an enlighted
being admitted te the participation of those rights, and the
conserveerica- weeethat they were rapidly recovering from the
position in whichthey had been places by passed oppression
an rteniegovereiment. -le lees time teem that' _wheu. Grcece
teas liberated from the thraldom ite..witiqlt! it had been for-
merly held —when it wee placed . under the rule of a prince
of the Frank-Gel men 'race—that it would _have risen to its
pristine glory. Instead of thet. howeyer,• the independence
of Greece had been threateeed by being placed under Rue.
elan protection. In taking the course he had done the
Noble Lord had shown that, whether the claims of her sub-
jects Were great•or small, .England would spread the. broad
wgis of her protection over them.—(Cheers.) e.
Sir J. GRAHAM—Let us, Sir, before the eveningaosere
at all events get out of nisi pries.—(Loud cheers and laughter
from the Protectionists.) We • have now. . been discussing
this question for six hours. I have had the advantage of
listening to three gentlemen of the long robe; and, except
at the close of the speech of the Honourable and
Learned. Gentleman who has just sat' down, we have
not yet travelled out of Greece. The Honourable
and Learned Gentleman made an observation at the
commencement of his speech in which I concur, namely,
that it is hardly possible to exaggerate the gravity of the
question under discussion, coupled with the attendant cir-
cumstances of the time when we are discussing it. It
affects the dignity, the honour, and the interests of this
country.—(Hear. hear.) lam dragged into this discussion
most reluctantly and unwittingly, but, at the same time, my
absence would be construed into cowardice, and silence,
coupled with the opinion I am about to express, is equally
impossible. Yet, before I proceed to discuss this important
question, would you pardon me if I shortly revert to my
owieposition.—(Hear, hear..) I have given to the Govern-
ment which now presides over the destinies of this country,
for the last four years au independent and honest support,
because, in the state of parties, and with reference to the
general position of the ceuntry, I thought it, my duty so to
do; and in giving • that support I have not carped at
trifles, nor have I disparaged any portions of their conduct
from which may have differed, but• I have exercised for-
bearance.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man (blr, Wood) says he is not, personally acquainted with;
the Noble Viscount whcenow administers the foreign affairs
of this country. My position with respect to him is
entirely different. I have known him for many years. It
was my fortdne for four years to be his colleague' and during)
that period I can truly say I never acted with any person
whose conduct appeared more honourable, trustworthy, or
faithful, or for whom I entertained a more sincere or a more'
cordial friendship.—(Cheers.) It was not because of any
difference on foreign affairs that I parted from that Govern-
meat with which we evere both connected. On the contrary;
he and I, from the offices we held in the Government of Lord
Grey, were forced into intimate and perpetual communica•J,
don ; and though since I left that Government, now many
years ago, I have been thrown into opposition to that Noble
Lord, in public I have received from him every courtesy, and
in private all that kindness which he extends to his friends
without reference to party.—(Hear. and cheers.) I there 4
fore feel me hostility to the Government or to the Noble Lord',
but I feel that we are here to-night deliberately eo discuss,
not the narrow question of Greece, but the more enlarged
questioli of our foreign policy generally. Yon have- here
propounded a vote contrary to that to which the House
of Lords have arrived. •You say that the claims
are just, not exaggerated, and that the course
pursued has not tended to endanger our relations with foreign
powers. You recollect what was done when the Duke of
Wellington carried a resolution in the House of Lords recom-
mending that the neutrality which his Majesty suggested
with regard to Portugal should be observed. That was car-
ried by a majority of 10 against Lord Grey's Government.
The question was asked, "Is it your intention' to change
your policy with regard' to Portugal?" "Not at all" was
the reply. Colonel Davis then traversed the conduct of the'
Duke of Wellington in the House of Commons, showing.
that success had not attended the army of Don Pedro in
Portugal; and his resolution was
•carried by a majority in
this House of 150. That was a course quite intelligibl.
But now, the lion. Member for Sheffield, nut acting in con-
cert with the Government, but exercising his own discretion,
has enlarged the subject and brought a much greater ques-
tion than that of Greece before the House. What we ate
now debating is not confined to Greece. The question is I-
Do you upon the whole approve of the policy pursued by
her Majesty's Government with reference to foreign rela-
tions since their last accession to office?—(Hear, hear.) I
understand from her Majesty's Government that in the
present circumstances it is their desire that the issue should
join upon that ground, and that the opinion of the House
should be taken upon it. It is, therefore, to this larger
question that I mean to address myself, if you indulge me;
and I will go very rapidly and frankly over some of the most
prominent points.—( Hear, bear.) I have already referred
to my connexion in office, during the Government of Lord
Grey, with the Noble Lord. Now, it cannot be
.supposed
for a moment by those who recollect the transactions of
that period that I am disposed to limit within very strict
rules the interference of England with reference to foreign.
nations. The Hon. Member for Sheffield referred to thesup-
port given. to Belgium, when she threw off the yoke of Hol-
nand. I was a party to the blockade of Holland, to the siege
of Antwerp, and to all the measures taken to ensure the sepa-
ration of Belgium from Holland, which was a direct departure
from the treaty of Vienna.— (Hear, hear.) But I call on you
to recollect how Lord Grey acted, and how those critical
affairs were conducted. They eveze conducted with Prince
Talleyrand in France, and every step was taken deliberately,
with the full and entire concurrence of all the representa-
tives of the great powers of Europe.—(Cheers.) We in-
terferred also with respect to Portugal very decisively, and to
the extent of not only blockading the ports of Portugal, but
of landing our troops, and we confirmed the dynasty of Don
Pedro and expelled Don Miguel ; but these transactions
'were so conducted as not to interrupt our intercourse with all
the great powers of Europe.—(Cheers.) I would just obtserve
that my view of the danger of the interference which after
Lord Grey ceased to'be at the head of the Government and
Lord Melbourne came into office, the .Noble Lord (Palnaer-
ston) exercised, is pointed out with great perspicuity by the
present Earl Grey, in a debate which took place in this House
when the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) was at the head
of affairs. The words are so pointed, so prophetic, they con-
tain such a forecasting of the future danger of that interfer-
ence in which the Noble Lord is so prone to indulge, that I
will read an extract or two. Lord Howick is speaking on the
address on the let of Feb. 1844, he says:
"Like the Right Ilea. Baronet (Sir R. Peel), he thought
there was no greater curse to the world at large, and to the
interests of civilization and humanity, than the carrying on
in every court in Europe, and in every country in the world,
a party struggle between what was called the English party
and the French party. He abominated the whole system of
such interference, and he would say that the more they ab-
stained from giving advice to other countries as to the ma-
nagement of their internal affairs the better The
ministers of France and of England might take opposite
views of what was most conducive to the interests of Mexico
or of Portugal, and little 'by little, totally contrary to the
wishes of their respective Governments, ,a sort of French and
English party was created. A struggle for ascendancy be-
tween those parties resulted, and the unfortunate system
was carried on, became the prey of factions which were oc-
casioned, and of animosities which were embittered by this
kind of interference."
Further on Lord Howick says :
" He bad heard with much regret the expressions of his.
Noble Friend (Lord Palmerston), who, adverting to the pre-
sent condition of Spain, had said that, under that union of
interests and that good understanding to which the Right
Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) bad referred, and that union of
interests which existed between France and England, the
late Regent of Spain, to whom he paid a high and well-
merited compliment, had fallen from power, and that a state
of military despotism, if not anarchy, had succeeded. He
joined in lamenting the unfortunate state of things now
existing in Spain,' but, while he did so, he rejoiced that the
Right Hon. Baronet and the Government of the French
King had abstained from taking any active part in prevent.
ing its continuance. He imputed blame to neither Govern-
ment for what had occurred, arid he 'only hoped they might
abstain in like manner from all interference for the future,
and that they would leave the Spaniards to settle their own
affairs for themselves, as the most likely means of restoring
that country to the state of constitutional government, and
security of person and property, which all must equally
desire."

I contend that the principles there laid down by Lord
Howick are sound and most prudent.—(Cheers.) But, let
me contrast this advice, so given, with the conduct of the
Noble Lord (Palmerston) almost immediately after his ac-
cession to power in 1837. Recollect that the advice is
pointed by Lord Howick with respect to Spain. Almost the
first dispatch written by the Noble Lord (Palmerston) to
Sir H. Bulwer in 1846, violates, in my opinion, all the advice
given by Lord Grey. It strongly interferes with the
government of Spain, and affords a specimen of the spirit in
which the Nobls Lord began a system of interference in all
the affairs of Spain. He came into office in Julie, and this is
dated the 19th of July. This is the way in which he talks
of a great nation like Spain. He says—" She has a parlia-
ment by law, but all freedom of election has beeh overborne
by force or by other means."--(Cheers from the Minis-
terialists.) This is perfectly true, but is this the mode in
which the Government of Spain should be spoken
of by the Miniiter of an ally in a time of pro-
found peace? (Cheers from the Protectionists.)
The Noble Lord proceeded to • say that violence
and power had survived the fall of Narvaez, and then he ex-
pressed a hope that the Ministers of Spain would return to
the ways of the constitution and obedience to the laws. All
this is excellent advice, but then it ought to have been
practically impossible to administer it to the Government of
an independent ally.—(Cheers.) Sir Henry Bulwer shortly
after wrote home that the French Government had inter-
preted these dispatches as declarations of hostility against
the Spanish Ministry.—(Hear, hear.) I will now pass on
to 1843. After the great revolution which overthrew the
French monarchy, the Noble Lord again addressed an admo-
nition to the Government of Spain. At that time Narvaez
had returned to power. The admonition was, therefore, ad-
dressed to Narvaez himself, and Sir Henry Bulwer was, in
fact, ordered to communicate the substance of the message
to the Queen-Mother and to the Minister. This subject has
been already discussed in this House. The dispatch was
dated the 16th of March, and contained this declaration :
that Narvaez should enlarge the basis of his administra-
tion, and take some Liberal into office. Narvaez re-
ceived this communication with extraordinary
woulddiffmake
compla-
cency, and told Sir Henry Bulwer that he
to a
way for the Progreasista. He, however, m
determination, for, like the Noble Lord opposite, he did not
give way to his political rival. As regarded the reconcilia-
tion between the Courts of Spain and St. James's, he wished
to observe, that a sort of amends having been made for the
abrupt exp'ilsion of Sir H. Bulwer, the Noble Lord, while
he consented to the reconciliation, inserted in is
patch, a most uncalled-fir and extraordinary passage, h
fodisc
to
the effect that if Sir H. Bulwer was not already across the
Atlantic he would advise his Sovereign select no other
1-1
person than Sir A. Bulwer for to
select 00 other
person than Sir 11. Bulwer for her represefltsti her representative at the
court of Madrid. Was that the way to keep this country on
the most amicable relations with the great powers of Europe ?
(Cheers.) The selection of Sir H. Bulwer in that way
could have produced uo other effect than the renewal of the
most bitter enmity between the two countries.—( Hear,
hear.) Well, then, we had frequently interfered with Por-
tugal ; the object ot the Noble Lord being, far as wae
s
consistent with our friendly relations, to promote th
cause of civil liberty. But, had the Noble Lord been
successful in that respect, either in Spain or Portugal ?
Had be been successful in placing in power the men
who were most likely to effect that object ? He had
rivetted Narvaez iu Spain.—(Hear.) While in Portugal
he had endeavoured almost by the force of arms to sustain his
objection against placing the supreme power in the hands of
one particular man, that man being Costa Cabral. And yet
ever since Costa Cabral had been the Prime Ministerin Por-
tugal, and `vas likely to continue to be their Minister. In
the autumn of 1847 there was a heaving which indicated
the great earthquake of 1848, and the overthrow of the dy-
nasty of Louis Philippe. No where was that more strongly
indicated than in Switzerland. The Right Hon. Baronet
here took occasion to explain how anxiously he had desired
to speak before the Noble Lord, in order that if he should
make any misstatement or mistake, the Noble Lord might
correct him. He then went into the history of the fatal
schism which took place in the autumn of 1847 between the