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

CONISIISSION OF SEWERS.

Lord DUNCAN wished to ask the Noble Lord (Lord
Ebrington), the chief minister of sewers—(A
whether the printed minutes of the Commissioners of
Sewers were proper records of their proceedings, the
minute-book not having been entered up since Fe-
bruary last?

Loi7d EBRINGTON said he had been informed by a
barrister that the printed minutes would be good evidence
in a court of justice.
CLAIMS OF BRI Hsu MERCHANTS IN SICILY.

Mr. B. COCHRANE, seeing the Noble Lord at the
head of the Government in his place, wished to
ask him whether any correspondence had passed be-
tween her Majesty's Government and the King of the
Two Sicilies, not the King of Naples, on the subject of
some extravagant and absurd demands made by British
inhwehants in Messina.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied that communications
had passed between the two Governments, but as the
last dispatch intimated that the matter in dispute had
been referred to arbitration the time-had not arrived
when the pipers could be laid on the table.

Mr. B. bOCHRANE asked if any threat had been
held out to the King`that the British fleet would be sent
to Naples ? •
Lord J. RUSSELL said no such threat whatever had
been held out, but he must decline answering any
snore questions on this subjet, as the commu-
nications were going on with a Iriendly Government
upon claims that now appeared to be fair and just, and
these questions would only have the effect of impecUng
their recovery.—(Cheers.)' 4

TENANT RIGHT (IRELAND) BILL.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD intimated that he

wighed to postpone further proceedings on this Bill until
Tuesday next, in the hope that some arrangement might
be come to with the Government respecting it.

THE ENGLISH AND IRISH UNIVERSITIES.

The order of the day having been read for resuming
the adjourned debate on the subject of the proposed
Commission for inquiring into the state of the English
and Irish universities,

Lord J. RUSSELL suggested that the debate should
be resumed on Thursday, the 25th July. '
Mr. GLADSTONE said he hoped the Noble Lord
would fix some day less distant, and one on which
fuller attendance of Members might be secured.
Lord J. RUSSELL had no objection to name Thurs-
day, the 18th Jul, for the purpose.
The resumption of the debate was therefore fixed for
Thursday, the 18th July.

AFFAIRS OF GREECE—ADJOURNED DEBATE.
Sir JOHN WALSH rose to resume the debate. He
said one of the advantages he had in addressing the
House on this question at a late stage in the debate
was, that he should consider himself exempted from
troubling the House with a recapitulation of the facts
involved in the question, which he might fairly assume
were fresh in the recollection •of Hon. Members. He
had had the advantage of listening to the speech
of the Noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign
Affairs, from one end to the other, and he
would frankly say be entirely disapproved of the
whole foreign policy of the Noble Lord. At the same
time he hoped the Noble Lord would forgive him for
rendering his (Sir John Walsh'a) sincere and un feigned
admiration for that speech, considering it as an effort of
Parliamentary eloquence of a very, high order. The
Noble Lord had complained that no Hon. Member on
that (the Protectionist) side of the House, had thought
it to be his duty to meet the resolution in the other
House by a similar resolution in this House. Hon.
Members on that (the Protectionist) side of
the House thought that two alternatives were
presented for the adoption of her Majesty's Ministers.
These were, either to have tendered their resignation
on the vote of the other House, or to have justified them-
selves by a counter-resolution in this House emanating
from themselves or from some known supporter
of their policy. It hadbeen imagined by Gentlemen on
that side of the House that one of these two alternatives
must be followed, but a third course had been found out,
which the Government had adopted—that of doing no-
thing at all. They had left it to a gentleman
who was not always' a supporter of their policy,
but occasionally found fault with many parts of their
foreign policy, but who was now prepared to vote confi-
dence in their policy as a whole. But there was one
point which this present resolution would not
meet, and that was how far it was the duty of
a Government to protect its subjects abroad.
He contended that the Government of this country should
adopt and carry out that great maxim of political as it
was of Christian morality-" Do unto others as you
would have others do unto you." That in respect to
Greece we had neglected to adhere to that wise
adage, and had done what we should have
resented in the highest degree if directed against this
country. How should we like to set aside our own or-
dinary courts of justice, and establish other tribunals for
the express purpose of giving compensation to foreign
subjects who felt themselves aggrieved? Yet the Noble
Lord cLord Palmerston), who was supposed to be the
'champion of liberal principles, who wished to be con-
sidered in all the states of the world as the defender of
freedom, came forward in that House, and in glowing
terms announced his conquest over a dependent and weak
state. The Hon. Baronet then referred to the cases of indi •
vidual injury and oppression which the Greek Govern-
ment had committed, observing that in point of fact
there were only two instances where the Greek Govern-
ment had been culpable, namely in the treatment of the
lonians and the capture of a boat ;belonging to the Fan-
tome. The conduct of the Greek Government in both,
he thought, was justifiable.y With respect to the boatmen
at Salcina, the Noble Lord seemed to insinuate
that the Custom-house officers were accomplices of
the brigands; but as that seemed to be only an
insinuation, he (Sir John Walsh) thought he was en-
titled to assume that it was without foundation. He con-
sidered that the Noble Lord had afforded a very unsatis-
factory explanation as to the not laying on the table of
the House the documents on the arbitration between
Mr. Finlay and the Greek Government. He thought
that the Members of the House of Commons had a right
to complain of the suppressio veriin that case. With respect
to the case of M. Pacifico, it had been so much adverted to
in this debate that he should not think of dwelling upon it.
The Pacifico case was the first origin of all the subse-
quent troubles ; these claims were the foundation of all
the great character which these transactions had assumed.
The Noble Lord was bound to have satisfied himself on
the justice of these claims, but, as the: blue book
showed, Sir Edmund Lyons was directed at the
first outset to send in Pacifico's bill in the usual form,
and to leave it to the Greek Government to object to the
items as they chose. He would not go into the details
of the French dispute, but he would just allude to the
most unfounded assertion of the Hon. and Learned
Member who opened the debate, that the French Go-
vernment had been-actuated throughout the whole matter
with the utmost bad faith. Russia, in these transactions,
appeared to be the champion of the freedom and inde-
pendence of small states, as the protector of the weak,
said the opponent of. arbitrary power, as applied
to international relations; whereas England, on the
contrary, with her great power and undoubted su-
periority, was heralded forth to the world
as a nation which arrogated to itself the right to enforce
demands of a very questionable character, which might
be made upon foreign states. The Noble Lord (Lord
Palmerston) had resorted to the most unscrupulous
means in order to carry out his particular policy in re-
gard to foreign nations, and he had by doing so sown the
seeds of disturbance and revolution in many parts of the
world. The Noble Lord had always laboured under this
error; he constantly imagined that in fostering what he
considered liberal principles in Europe he was carrying
out and promoting something analogous to the glorious
system of English liberty; but if they traced the
whole history of his foreign policy, they would
find that that policy had encouraged Jacobinism and
anarchy, which in the end led to a reaction; and thus it
turned out that instead of the Noble Lord promoting the
cause of liberty he travelled through anarchy and blood-
shed to military Government. The Noble Lord secretly
end clandestinely intrigued for the purpose of placing
another Sovereign on the throne of Sicily, at the very
time he had sent Lord Minto as Ambassador to the King
of Naples. Throughout Europe the Noble Lord was
famed for his intrigues to keep up a revolutionary spirit.
His communications abroad were something like his ex-
pression at Tiverton, ?' Go it, my boys."—(Laughter.)
He could net give his vote in support of the foreign
policy of the Noble Lerd. It had proved injurious to
this country as well aS to foreign nations. He hoped
the House would not identify itself with the policy and
feelings of the Noble Lrd. If it did, England would be
regarded as the patron and champion of revolution
throughout the globe, and in a short time they wouli
not only find themselves exposed to the passive, but to
the active resistance of the whole world.—(Hear.)
Sir HARRY VERNER said that the speech of the
Noble Lord would be attended with a beneficial effect
to British interests throughout the world. Englishmen
would find themselves eh-titled to claim justice at the
hands of foreign nations, and protected while they did
well by the vigilant eye and strong arm of their own
government.—(Hear, hear.) Now with regard to his
policy with respect to Greece. The poor young King
found himself powerless to suppress the turbulence
which prevailed in that country. The government was
in the hands of a set of unprincipled map, who thought
of nothing but how they might keep themselves in
power. From correspondence which he had in his pos-
session; it appeared that the Noble Lord had been long
and constantly solicited to take the Greeks in hand.
Greece had been weak, and other countries had profited
by that weakness. The Noble Lord had accepted the
good offices of France, but the diplomatist employed
had not truly and fairly carried out his in-
structions. The Ambassador of France in this
country, M. Drouyn de l'Huys, had so far
as was known, acted an honourable part. His
had stated that he lamented having spent five hours
with the Noble Lord, and been unable to bend him from
his purpose. Now, why did not the Noble Lord bend
from his purpose? Simply because he thought that by
doing so, he would not be upholding the honour and
dignity of the country. The policy of the Noble Lord
certainly did not suffer by comparison with Lord Aber-
deen. The conduct of the latter in Rio de la Plate was
not fortunate. He rejoiced that this bold and general
vote of approbation had been proposed by the Hon. and
Learned Member for Sheffield. The conduct of the
Noble Lord was most worthy, and not deserving of the
censures heaped upon him. He had eminently served
the best interest of the country. He thought they were
called upon to affirm a great principle in their diplo-
matic affairs—that foreign nations should not have the
power to displace our Minister, and that Englishmen
should be protected abroad. He should cheerfully vote
for the resolution, feeling that the honour and interests
of this country abroad were safe in the hands of the
Noble Lord.—(Hear.)
Sir R. H. INGLIS said the question at issue was not
immediately respecting Greece; nor any particular trans-
action relative to that country, and therefore in his opi-
nion if the motion of the Hon. Member for Youghal had
been brought on he believed he would then understand
what was the real question. He dissented from the
proposition of the lion and Learned Gentleman the
Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck), who wished by
his motion to obtain from that House a vote of confidence
in favour of the Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston), in which
he did not by any means agree, for he did not consider
that the conduct of the Government, and more especially
of the Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston), was worthy of
the approbation and confidence of the House. He again
considered that the House of Lords were legitimately
exercising their functions in examining into the con-
duct of any Minister, and that such a course was
open to them as well as to the House of Commons;
and he could not avoid expressing his astonishment that
the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell), who held at his com-
mand the authority of the Crown and of that House,
should have expressed himself with respect to the House
of Lords in the manner that he had done. If it were a
money Bill, he would fully concur with the Noble Lord
(Lord J. Russell) that the House of Lords should not
interfere, but on such a subject as the present, he con-
sidered that both Houses had a just right to give their
opinion. He should say that while the Noble Lord had
given his support to free opinions in Sardinia, lie did
not support the principle of the Protestant religion in se-
veral other places. He meant to say that in Tuscany,
and even in Sardinia, the system of proselytism was not
admitted; and to what was the expulsion of thoe Pro-
testants who exer, ed themselves to instruct the people of
those countries attributable, but to the apathy of the
Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston), in conjunction with
the Government with which he was connected.
There was one circumstance that he was
glad to have it in his power to state—namely, that the

TTO OP,

Noble Lord did not support the cause of the' Poles
aging' the Russians, thflugh he, at the same time ..c-
-tuated other states to establish their independence by
revolution, or any otheemeaus of opposition to their
lawful and long-recognised Sovereign.—(Hear.) He
questione i whether, the PeaCennen iri.that House would
support the Noble Lord -(Lord. Pelinerstbn) who had
been the instrument of war throughout theeehole conti-
nent. He returned his eincere thanks to the Noble Lord
for his able and indefatigable 'exerti, ns for the destruc-
tion of the slave tralle bat at the same time should say
the, he believed that the Noble Lord was virtually en-
couraeing that slave trade by his connivance at the im-
portation of slave-grown sugar into this country.--
(Hear, hear.) He regretted with the deepest pain, from
his high respect fur the Noble L _.rd, that he should on
the present occasion withhold his assent to the propo-
position of the Hon. and Learned Member for Sheffield
(Mr. Roebuck).
The Marquis of GRANBY said that the Noble Lord
(Lord Palmerston) had taken the privilege of travelling
over all the nations of Europe, in order to defend his
conduct, by showing that he was directed by the spirit
of propagandism, and for that reason he was most
strongly opposed to the opinions of the Noble Lord
(Lord Palmerston.) For if such a principle were to be
sanctioned, he was at a loss to know where it would end,
as Russia, France, Austria, and other countries, would
ride roughshod over all the other nations of Europe.. He
would only ask the House what was the meaning of
Lord Minto's travelling; commission? Was it anything
else than to carry out.. the principles of propagandism?
Look to the state of the Sardinian Government, and
also to Sicily, and let the House say was it for peace or
reconciliation, or for the benefit and pros-
perity of the people or the Governments, that the
Noble Lord (Lord Minto) under the dire-ction of the
Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) had unduly interfered
with those states. • He would again ask what right or
grounds had the Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) to say
that Prince Metternich was not honest and sincere? He
next contended that the people and Government of
Greece were very unjustly treated by the Noble Lord
relative to the claims of Pacifico and Finlay, particu-
larly the former individual, who never brought his case
before a tribunal of that country. When the Noble
Lord (Lord Palmerston) alluded to Mr. Findlay, he
should say, in opposition to the Noble Lord, that the
arbitration had, ,not -Ceased before the, Noble Lord's
orders for blockade were issued and put into execu-
tion, and, moreover, he was prepared to prove that
the arbitration had not closed till the day after
those orders were issued and carried into execution.
With respect to the proffered mediation of the French
Government, the Noble Lord had not met it in the.,right
spirit in having said that the British Government would
not abate one jot of its claims. Then as to the conven-
tion in London, the basis of which was' foemed On the
sth of April, it was the duty of the Noble Lord to have
sent instructions of that convention at once to Athens,
but the Noble Lord had failed to do so, ande to that
omission of duty was attributable much of , the'danger
that arose out of the negotiation of those claims. With
respect to the assertions that the interests•of 'Austria
and Prussia were antagonistic to those of England, he
contended that such was not the case. He admitted the
great talent of the Noble Lord, but if talent were-mis-
applied it was dangerous, and looking at the whole of
their foreign policy under the Noble Lord, lie found it
insulting to other nations, and must, therefore, vote
against the motion of the Hon. Member for Sheffield,
which was a vote of confidence in that policy.

Sir WILLIAM MOLESW ORTH said that the Hon.
Member for Sheffield bad in his motion reverted to the
foreign policy of the Noble Lord at the bead of the Fe
reign Department, and had asked the House to support
that policy. They sat there as a court of solemn appeal,
for the purpose of pronouncing a solemn verdict on that
policy, and they were bound to do so. The English peo-
ple had so much to attend to in their domestic interests,
that they commonly confided their management of fo-
reign affairs to the hands of the Government; the repre-
sentatives of foreign nations were aware of that, and the
effect of the vote of this House would be either to iden-
tity the people of England with the foreign policy of her
Majesty's Ministers or to Separate them from that policy.
What were the principles of their foreign policy? The
Noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
had, in the ablest speech that was ever delivered in that
House—(Hear, hear)=declared it. He (Sir William
Molesworth) considered it an unsafe policy. Now, as to
the claims of British subjects in foreign countries, it
was said that it was the duty of her Majesty Ministers
OD exert their influence and power in protection
Of those claims. Now, that appeared to him to .
de rather a dangerous doctrine, for according to such
octrine, if a subject should be injured and not able to
Obtain redress, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs would
be bound to interfere in his. behalf, and commit the
Baden in strife, and that was the course taken by the
Noble Lord. Why, if a British subject were waylaid and
plundered by banditti in a foreign country, the Noble
Lord, according to that doctrine, would be bound to in-
terfere and call for redress from the Government of that
country.—(Oh,, oh.) If a foreigner in' this country
should be robbed of his property by pickpockets, accord-
ing to the doctrine laid down by the Noble Lord, the
Government of such foreigner's country would be bound
to take the matter up, and call on the British G overn-
went for redress.—(oh, oh, and laughter.) And accord-
ing to that: doctrine also, if the judges. in the courts
Of law in foreign - countries should decide against
British subjects, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs
in this country would be at liberty and bound
to take the matter up.—(Renewed cries or "Oh
oh.") That doctrine was appreciated by all despotic
countries, and if carried out, the Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs would become the chief police Linen to
enforce it, and in truth the Noble Lord, in the conclu-
sion of his speech, had said that a British subject should
be protected—(Bear, hear)—and referred, -in support of
that policy, to the declaration of a Roman whenever in-
jury was inflicted on him. Civis Romanus sum—."l am
a Roman citizen." Why Rome, at the period of history
to which the Noble Lord had referred, was mistress of
the world, and•trampled on the rights of all opposed to'
her. He (Sir William Molesworth) maintained ,that if.
Englishmen chose to go wandering in foreign countries
wherever pleasure or business may lead them, they must
take the consequences if anything occur to them in those
countries, and the more despotic the country to which
they may go, the less should they look to ,thei r own
country to aid them.---(0h, oh.) With regard to the in-
terference of this country with the affairs of other coun-
tries, the Noble Lord had made use of the same' lan-
guage made use of, by the. Hon. Member for Sheffield
in his motion, and Spain, Greece, Switzerland, Eome;
Sicily, and other countries, had experienced this con-
sequences-of the Noble Lord's interference. Thee Hon.
and Learned Gentleman had said that all that was good
in many of those states, they bad chiefly, received from
England, and that she was justified in interfering 'where
she considered there was anything wrong; and tb e Hon.
and Learned Gentleman in his statements had irr puted
all sorts of motives to Austria and Russia. It hi sc t been
said that the Noble Lord only wished to propag:i ste his
principles in-other countries by ," moral" influence.. Why,
that had been said by the leaders of the:first Frere eh Re-
volution. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman, in speak-
ing of France and this country, had said that t; he two
countries should feel towards each other as tv es indi-
viduals. He agreed in that sentiment, but be m rust say
that one nation had no more right to interfer tin the
private and internal affairs of another natice s than
one man had to interfere in the private a f 'airs of
another. Those tronsactions of " officious me M idling"
were very dangerous, and that was p t wisely
their character among the nations of the earth.
He was told that they ought to vote in favour of the
motion of the Hon. Member for Sheffield, for that her
Majesty's Ministers would "go out" if not w E 11 sup-
ported, and the consequence would be, as there s Pere no
Liberal Members to take the Government and fiii l their
places, the Tories would come into office, an.event which
would lead to revolution and the destruction of pro-
perty.—(Hear.) Suppose her Majesty's Miniso s. rs were
to go out of office—and he, for one, should be ve r y sorry
to see them go out of office, because he had be t 13, and
was still, a supporter of much of their policy- - he did
not apprehend that the coming in of the Tories; would
be followed by revolution and the destruction of pro..
perty.—(Hear, hear, from the OpPosstion.) Belt it was
said, if there would be a " dissolution" of Parl a meet;
and why not?-;-(Hear and laughter.) He, sad s one of
those with whom he acted were for " triennial "
liaments—(Hear, hear)—and three years of 'the, Iprosent
Parliament had already expired.—(Hear, and laugh-
ter.) And it was also said that some of then,' would
" lose their seats," and why not?—(Hear, her a and
laughter.) Why, that would but prove that the , were
not the representatives of the people.—(Hear, ; bear)
He would refer them to the Reform Bill, and in 'conclu-
sion he would refer them their institutions, and . would
express his belief that it was a calumny to say t I sat any
Member would vote against" his conscience. The refore,
they should come to the conclusion that every !, one of
them should vote according to his conscience. Ile had
for many years protested against the &reign l whey of
her Majesty's Government; his convictions r tmained
the same on that subject; and he should, there; tore, on
the present occasion deliberately, vote against the mo-
tion of the Hon. and Learned Member for S beffield,
regrettipg that he was constrained to separate lhimself
i
on the question from those esteemed friends witl whom
he had, on most other occasions, so long and so o srdially
acted.

SHAFTO ADAIR contended that Briti ah sub-
jects residing abroad were fully entitled to the sa itie pro-
tection that they would enjoy at the bands of the .Eritish
Government when living in England. He admit sci that
non-interference was the rule, but circumstances might
policy of then now.
w N
at ototal l e
Mi-
nister meted
which would, in his opinion, render noes -inter-
ference highly culpable, and those circumstances had
occurred in F
in with Foreign Affairs,
w
theeic
to censure by a vote of the House of Commons. The
arguments used in the attempted justification of tha tt vote
of censure were those which had been already fe ontra-
dicted and exposed. If he thought that England pros-
titut'd her power for purposes of Oppression, no ties of
friendship for the Minister engaged in such a 7pursuit
—no consideration of party would induce him :to give
his assent to that system O. P
policy—no atte leirment,
personal otherwise, would persuade him ti) give a
silent vote o
r onsuc
such an occasion; but because. he did
not consider that the foreign policy of her 1/01, ajesty's
Government was deservint, of reprobation Ito stood
forward to support it ''
blie
fcould a trace
nkind th e
firmly and determinedly.
the world, with
tl
onrgs pperresservnetreedd operation of that policy throughout
a gnaga.deivnnaoslnist
eat
theal hglae,
generally, and
Ninotshon o
Noble
dal
er ndbi
he trusted
chargesßritish
itinterests,tf andhe
tei
ie dutylt
lookedc c u accusa-
tions
our Government to interftre with foreign states, for the
protection of British subjects, he alluded to the Act of
the Venezuelan Legislature, passed in April, 1848,
under which subjects of Great Britain,:, 'residing in Ve-
nezuela, were, in some instances,,denied theirrights, and
in others, where an unjustifisble delay in treknowledging
their rights took place. There were some, perhaps,