The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-26 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESD

ktbitrary and despotic countries, or to countries
there courts of justice are so organised as to be
tinder the control of the Government; but they have
ii4ll3ly stated, that in all countries our subjects are simply
L
share that protection which the law of the land
Rives
them. I deny that proposition.—(General cheering. )
say that it is a doctrine under which no foreign Minister
!Yer yet has acted. It is a doctrine which the people of Eng-
land will never suffer any Minister to act upon.—( Hear,
bear.) Do I mean to say that British subjects abroad are
to be above law, or to be exempt from and taken out of the
teope of the laws of the land? I mean no such thing—l
kettend for no such principle. Where the law is anplicable,
4ritish subjects are bound to have recourse for redress to the
means which the law of the land affords them. That is the
°Pinion which our legal advisers have given in innumerable
instances, and upon that principle we have founded our re-
Plies in cases where our aid and interference have been ap-
plied for. I have heard mentioned, with regret, aspersions
east upon the character of the legal advisers of the Crown,
from a quarter from which they ought not to come; those
'hat
were cast by a person who has been himself in
'Sat office, and who must have known, not only
the knowledge, independence of mind, but also the justice of
lodgment that qualify the individual who holds the office of
'Queen's Advocate.—( Rear, hear.) I should have thought
!tut hoped that the knowledge possessed of those qualities
by a man who had been in the Foreign-office would have
Protected the Queen's Advocate from those aspersions
altar. ) Sir, I may be departing from the strict orders of
the House in what I have just said, but I felt it due to an
honourable public servant, on an occasion like the present,
I,4_apeak in favour of and in vindication of his character.--
(Rear, hear.) If our subjects abroad have complaints
against individuals or Governments who are liable to the
Proceedings of courts of law, no doubt it is to courts of
ltistice British subjects ought to apply, but there are an
,infinity of cases in which either there is no confidence
14 those tribunals, or the tribunals, from their composition
and nature, are not of a character to inspire us with any
hope or confidence of obtaining justice.—(Hear, hear.)
&any of those tribunals are so completely under the con-
!pi of the Government that justice cannot be expected.
here are also nominally constitutional Governments,
there the tribunals are not free. But who is ,to be the
cadge? The British Government or the Government of the
state from which you would expect redress?: I will take a
ease which occurred not long ago, and one in which Lam
altre the people of England would not hold that a British
!libject was to be amenable to the laws of a foreign country.
am not now going to talk of the power of sending a man to
4iberia, nor of a country the constitution of which vests arbi-
tjary power in the Sovereign, but I shall state a case that
'4l)pened not long ago in Sicily. There a decree was passed
that anv man found with concealed arms in his possession
should be immediately brought before a court martial and
tried, and, if convicted of the offence, shot upon the spot.
here was an innkeeper at Catania brought before a court-
martial, and charged by two officers of police with this
offence. They stated that they discovered in an open stable
41 his yard a knife, and this was considered to be a concealed
for
The examination having been ended, the counsel
the prosecution said, " I give up the case. I think it
4 evident that there is no proof that either this knife be-
It'nged to the man accused, or that, if it did, he was aware
that it was in the place where it was found." The counsel
for the defendant stated, " Such being the opinion of the
into
for the prosecution, it is unnecessary for me to go
'hto any defence. I leave the matter in the hands of the
eourt.' The Court pronounced the defendant guilty of
the offence charged against him, and the next morning the
hthan was shot. Now, I would ask what the people of
England would say if any of them were left to seek redress
14 such a tribunal as that?—(Hear, hear). Yet that man
Was executed .according to law, he having been declared
glfilty of an offence by one of the tribunals of his country.
Our doctrine is that redress should be sought through the
ourts and laws of the country where those courts were free
act, but there are numberless cases where, if British sub-
tets were confined to courts of law for redress, they would
e deprived of that protection which they are entitled to re-
!ive.—( Hear, hear.) Then the question arises as to hew
that rule applies to demands made upon a Government. I
°Loght here to remind the House, and I shall do so in the
shortest possible manner, of the nature of our relations
With Greece, anti the state and condition in which Greece
has been, because that state and condition is a material
e 1 Went in the consideration of the propriety of the course
to have taken.—(Hear, hear.) It is well known that the
Greeks revolted from Turkey in 1827 or IS2B. England,
ranee, and Russia determined to interpose, and they ern-
00yed forcible means to bring Turkey to acknowledge the
independence of Greece. Greece was in 1830 and 1833, by
Protocols and treaties, erected into a separate and inde-
pendent state. And whereas, from the year 1820 up to the
tree when the protocol of 1830, on which the treaty of 1e33
Was founded, Greece had been a Republic, and governed by
44 Assembly and President, the three powers were deter-
kined that Greece should have a monarchy. But while, on
'he one hand, the British Government consented to this
arrangement—(l do not say consented, because it was
1,,i8 own opinion that Greece should assume that
form of Government)—on the other hand it was of opinion
'flat Greece sould have a constitutional Government.
The British Government would not consent to place
Greece under a more arbitrary form of government
than that from which it had revolted. Consequently,
when the three powers, in the exercise of that function
devolved upon them by the General Assembly of
Greece, chose a Sovereign for Greece, he then being a
toinor, the three powers, in announcing to the Greek nation
the choice they had made, announced, at the same time, that
that King would, in concert with the representatives of the
s'eople, give them a representative constitution when he
locarne of age. That choice was ratified by a decree made
by
the King of Bavaria. It was agreed that, during the
minority of the King, the question of the constitution should
he suspended, and that, when he became of age, he and his
tkople should arrange the form of the constitution. When,
owever, he became of age, no constitution was given. There
was a disinclination on the part of those who advised him to
eilei that engagement. The Government of England, in
Various ways and through various channels, expressed its
°Pinion that that engagement ought to be fulfilled.—(Hear,
gear.) Opinions of a different kind reached the royal
tar from other quarters.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") Other
°ountries naturally—and I say this without any imputation
against them—preferred their own form of government.
''"ach Government thinks its own form the best, and
wishes to see it extended elsewhere ; and, therefore. it is not
from any intention to cast reproach on Russia, Prussia, or
Austria that I say that those three Governments being at
'oat time entirely despotic. their advice was given and influ-
Ittee exerted to prevent the King of Greece from granting a
representative constitution. We thought that in France we
might have found sympathy with our opinions, and also sup-
Ptrt and advice. We were unfortunate in that respect. The
Government of France, though not at all undervaluing con-
stitutional institutions, thought that the time was not yet
tome when Greece was ripe for a representative Govern-
kent. Bavaria leant to the same side, and, therefore, from
'he time the King of Greece came of age to several years
afterwards, the English Government stood alone. We were
anxious for the fulfiment of an engagement to which
sall the other powers were, either adverse or not, equally
sesirous to see fulfilled. That • placed us in a situ-
ation which, to say the least of it, exposed us to die-
favour on the part of other Governments. I do not think
:oe people of this country will be of opinion that we ought,
'or the sake of obtaining the good will of the Greek Govern-
kent, is have departed from the principle which we had laid
down.—(Hear, hear.) People talked of the antagonistic
'ofluence that existed at the Greek Court, and stated that
tit Minister and the Ministers of foreign Courts differed
‘a to which should have the appointment of nomarchs and
inarchs, but that is a mistake entirely at variance with the
'Sets. Our Minister Sir E. Lyons, never, from the time he
Went to Greece till the time he left .it, asked for any favour
°f the kind, and therefore there could have been no contest
°I that mean. low, and petty description referred to. The
(141 y conflict was about that which I stated, namely, whether
sreecs should have a representative constitution, while the
influences of other powers were exerted the other way.
One result of the absence of constitutional institutions was
that the whole system of government grew to be full of
!Very kind of abuse. Justice could not be respected while
~,`1,14 tribunals were at the mercy of the advisers of the
gown. Finance could not be expected to be in any order
When there was no public responsibility on the part of
'4oBe who either collected, spent, or accounted for the re-
Itenue. Every sort of abuse was practised. In later times
',II Greece, there has prevailed, on account of the daring
habits of the people, a system of appropriation (Laugh-
ler)—the forcible appropriation by one man of that which
oelonged to another—a thing very disagreeable to those on
Ithorn it, is inflicted, and exceedingly injurious to the social
'ontlition of the people, and calculated to impede their pros-
Derity. In fact, what a foreigner would call " brigandage"
Prevailed among them. The police of the Greek Govern-
,kent practised abuses of the grossest description.—(Hear,
hear.) And if you wanted any evidence in support of that
4.laertion I should appeal to the Hon. Gentleman who just
kit down, who, in a pamphlet which most of us have
teed, has detailed instances of barbarities practised by
the police which are most revolting.—(Hear, hear.)
have here the depositions of persons who have been sub-
acted to the most abominable torture which human inges
tioity could devise—torture inflicted on both sexes—(Hear)
torture of the most revolting and disgusting kind.-
11-lear.) Moreover one of the officers of the Government, a
Ifan of the name of Zeno—who was at the head of the po-
lee, was in the habit of inflicting the most diabolical tor-
glees on the unhappy people of Greece, as well as upon
'Curies and other foreigners. This man, instead of being
Punished as he deserved, not only by the laws of nature but
Sao by the laws of Greece, for the perpetration of these
atrocities, not only escaped punishment, but was actually held
.! great -favour. Well, Sir, then this being the state
things, we had in Greece, and have always
h+tl7a, a great number of persons whom we are
"ound, to • protect. There are, in almost every town
Greece, a great number of Maltese and lonians;
'afire are also a certain number of British subjects. It be-
tame the practice of those Greek authorities to make, no dis-
`4letion between these Maltese and lonians and their own
reels subjects. Vie shall be told, I know, by some, " No
foreigner has a right to be. better treated than the people of
0 uountry ; and if the people of the country were liable to
11leave heavy stones placed on their breasts, and persons
Seing upon them—if they are liable to have their heads
"ed to their knees, and in.that position are to be swung like
pendulums and bastinadoed as they swing—if they are
:I_ollle to have every sort of horrible practice inflicted upon
'atm, foreigners have no right to be better treated than the
iletives—(llear, hear, and langhter)—and therefore we have
110 business to interfere. We may be told that, bat that
'3 not my opinion, and I think it, is not the opinion
any , reasonable man. —;(Hear, hear.) Well, Sir,
'hen I say, considering the case of these lonians
for
whom we have demanded reparation, the House.and the
Practices
must look to the steteof things in Greece, and to the
jactices which are going on there, before they can come to a
right conclusion as to the step which we took in demanding
&alpensation, though, indeed, it was scarcely more than a
nominal compensation, something in the nature of a compen-
sation, which would be an acknowledgment that such things
lihould not be done in future.—(llear, hear.) Sir, I am sorry
t° say that these cases have been discussed elsewhere in a
'Pint and in a tone which I think was not befitting the per-
-1°,4 concerning whom the discussion to ,k place, nor those in
Whose presence it took place.—(Hear, hear.) We have had
grave matters treated with no little ridicule in a grave as-
letubly. We have had these claims dealt with lightly,
I°°oBely, and grave men have been kept in roars of
saoghter for hours together, because of the poverty of some
s the persons concerned—because of the misery of the
7„abitations of some, the nationality of one, and the religion
another.— (Hear, hear.) As if, because men were poor,
Loud
might be bastinadoed and tortured with impunity !
Loud cheers.) As if, because men happened to be born in
heoa tland, they might be injured without redress-e(Hear,
Jew —or, because their religion happened to be that of the
ish persuasion, they were fair game for any torture that
aforeign power might choose to inflict upon them !
(,beers.)
.Sir, it is an old saying, it is one that has been
often repeated, that a very moderate share of human wisdom
sufficientis for the guidance of human affairs. But there is
other truth, which is, that men who aspire to govern man-
t°l:l ought to bring to that task generous sentiments, cona-
vs„LlsiOnate sympathies, and noble and elevating views.—
‘lll%beers). Now, Sir, with regard to the case, I will first take
at
which I think would first present itself to the mind of
les
I,„Englishman—l mean the insult on the part of the Greek
"alorities to one of her Majesty's otficers.—(Hear, hoar.)

Time has been when men who aspired to public station would
have thought it their duty at least to vindicate the honour
sf the British navy. Times are changed.—(Loud cheers.)
It is said, " What is that.? They were only taken out of
their boat; a set of armed men were taken up to the guard-
house, but they were soon let out. again ; why should you
trouble your heads about that?" Why, Sir, did we ask
anything extraordinary or unreasonable for that? What
we asked was an apology.—(Cheers.) I really thought I
should not live to see the day when public men in England
would think that a demand of an apology for an arbitrary
and unjust arrest of a British officer and of British seamen
in the performance of their duty was a demand " doubtful in
its nature and exaggerated in its amount."— (Cheers.) Now,
Sir: is that the case ? Circumstances have been alluded to
with regard to that case which were connected with it, but
which do not form part of the statement of the case itself.
The case itself is well known. A son of the British vice-consul,
being en board the Fantome, was taken ashore by a coxswain
in a boat; he was landed on the beach, and escorted to his
father's house. The coxswain, on his return, was taken up by
the guard. The guard went down to the boat, and, findingmen
with arms, the guard wcunded one of them with a bayonet,
and they took them prisoners and carried them to prison.
After a certain time, by the interposition of the vice-consul,
they were then released, and returned to their ship. The
excuses were altogether misstatements.—(Hear, hear.) But
the gist of the excuse was this, that the guard thought that
this boat belonged to die Spitfire, and that they had been
seen landing rebels, one of whom escaped. Well, Sir, the
fact to which all that referred was this :—lt was the practice.
and has been and still is the practice, of the Government
of Greece, instead of punishing the brigands by which that
country is infested, to amnesty and pardon them from time
to time.—(Hear, hear.) It is even supposed that the
officers of the police frequently get shares of the plunder.—
(Hear, hear.) But that is a matter of opinion. The fact of
their being never punished and always pardoned is matter of
notoriety. This has given so much encouragement to this
system of plunder that they go about in armed bands, and
sometimes they actually occupy towns. Well, of these
bands there was a leader of the name of Mereditti, who
came with a band of armed men to take Patras. But in
Patras there was a governor and an armed force to a
certain extent. The governor, and the armed force, either
thinking that they ought to follow the example of their
governor, decided not to resist the banditti—perhaps con-
sidering discretion the better part of valour, they fled, leav-
ing the town in the hands of the banditti. The people of
Patras, however, did not at all like that result. They found
themselves deserted by their natural protectors, and threw
themselves on the foreign consuls. They begged and en-
treated the consuls to intercede and make some arrangement
which would save the town from pillage. It was finally
agreed that Mereditti should forego his contemplated pillage
of the town on payment of a certain sum—l forget the
amount. The money was collected and deposited in the
hands of the vice-consul. Mereditti and his band march
down t 0 the sea-shore, for the purpose of embarkation in a
British man-of-war. When the governor, who had retired
in the manner I have mentioned, thought that the band was
prepared to embark, he bethought him that it woul I be a
fortunate thing if he could attack the rear guard of Mere-
ditti. And it was intended to induce the commander of the
vessel to betray the band to the governor. But the officer
said, "No ; there is not only honour among thieves,
but there is honour to thieves."—(Hear, hear, and
laughter.) Yon have asked us to make this arrangement,
and we gave you a guarantee that we should protect
these men." The people of the town agreed to
give Mereditti about half the sum which he originally asked.
Well, this was the circumstance which M. Rondopulos al-
luded to when he said that it was not known whether or not
it was the vessel containing this armed band that was about
to be landed—that was the excuse offered for arresting a
British officer and British seamen in the performance of their
duties. This was an insult to the British navy, which the
Government of any other country would probably have re-
garded in a different way.—(Hear.) Well, Sir, then we come
to these lonians. And first I take the case of those who
were plundered •in the Custom-house. These men in their
boats pass near to this Custom-house. They see a person
habited in the garments of a Custom-house officer. They
naturally obey his orders. But when they enter they are
told that they are in the hands of a bandit. They were
plundered in the Castom-house, and not only plun-
dered but stripped of their clothes and beat. Well
then, Sir, I say, do not tell me that this is a case to be com-
pared with British subjects travelling through Terra-
cina, for instance, and insulted by banditti ; and that in such
cases the Government of this country did not think of asking
for compensation from the Italian Governments. I say that
it a Government do not protect its own Custom-house—
(Hear, hear)—if a Government permits an armed band of
robbers—robbers they were, for they were banditti—and
allows foreigners to be robbed and beaten in that Custom-
house—l say that such a Government should be called up n
for redress.—(Loud cheers.) Well, 1 think our demand was
a moderate demand. We asked for nothing but an indem-
nity against the injuries that had been sustained by British
subjects. We simply asked for that of which they had been
deprived. Then we come to the case of the other lonians.
It appeared that, on a festive day, they, according to the
fashion of the country, had exhibited flags in front of their
houses. But the police came and said they must be re-
moved. But the removal of the flags would not satiety the
Greek authorities. These lonians were arrested, manacled,
and thumb-screwed—(Hear, hear)—and in that state they
were marched off to prison. It had been said, " How
could they take a person to prison by any other"
manner except by conducting him through the streets.
Why, it is true ; but then there was no necessity for taking
them through the streets which did not lie in their way.
For the purpose of parading them before the gaze of the in-
habitants they were taken through all the streets of Patras.
Then it is said, " Oh, you say they were thumb-screwed ;
but what of that? They were not maimed for life—hew
could you call for any compensation for them ? If they
were maimed for life you might complain, but as long as
they were not so maimed—the mere fact of being thumb-
screwed and being compelled to take a pleasant evening
walk—(Langhter)—why, for that surely, no claim for
compensation can be made." Sir, I am of a different
opinion.— (Cheers.) I do not think that thumbscrews are
like gloves, to be put an and taken off at any time one
pleases. Sir, the facts that I have stated, namely, the
torture by the Greek authorities of British subjects—l
think it is necessary we should put our hand upon this case,
and require that a moderate compensation should be pro-
vided for it, and which has not yet been provided. These
lonians had committed no offence ; they were dismissed, no
charge being proved against them. As to the two men who
had been whipped by the Greek authorities in the pre-
sence of persons who had deposed to their treatment,
there was ample evidence that they had committed no
act of infringement whatever of the laws of Greece. Com-
pensation was duly demanded in this case, not merely be-
cause of the injury which they had received, but as a token
that we should have protection for British subjects.—(Hear,
hear.) Well, then, we come to the case of the Fantome. It
is said that Mr. Finlay was a " canny Scotchman," who
speculated in land, as it is said—who bought his land in the
cheapest and sold it in the dearest market.—(Hear, hear.)
It was clearly a case demanding inquiry, and a guarantee
that the same case should not occur in future. Now, Sir,
we undoubtedly by our law, and by the law of all countries,
if it is thought necessary to take land for public purposes,
for a line of public communication, for any great national
work—why public utility overrides private rights to this ex-
tent, that the owner is compelled to give up his property;
but then he is entitled to have his property fairly valued,
and to receive what may be the true and proper amount of
that value.—(Hear.) He is not compelled to take that which
the person who in such case desires to have possession of his
land chooses to give him, but he is allowed such an amount
as is adjudged to be due by him by an authorised valuer.
But this land was not taken for any public purpose. It was
taken for the private enjoyment of the King of Greece.
Well, Sir, I am sure nobody who wishes well to Greece, or
who takes an interest in the welfare of the youthful Sove-
reign of a young state, would say that it was not fitting that
there should be a residence proper for royalty in Greece, and
that those who happened to have land near the site which
was chosen for the palace ought not to give up the property
but upon being paid the value of that which was taken from
them. Mr. Finlay never bad any objection upon that
ground. Mr. Finlay was perfectly ready to give up his land
upon being paid the proper value of his land. Well, then,
is there any reason in saying that because some Years before
lie had bought this land at a cheaper rate than that at which
he offered it, he was not entitled to have a price given him
proportioned to the increased value which a difference of
circumstances had occasioned?—(Hear, hear.) Why,
Sir, the commonest principles of justice between
man and man would necessarily lead you to this—
that you shall not inquire what was the value of his land
when he bought it. It might have fallen in value. The
only question that had to be considered was, what
was the value of the property at the time it was taken from
him.—(Hear, hear.) I must say that, in my opinion, all
who feel an interest in royalty must have read with extreme
pain the proceedings on this subject. I cannot help recol-
lecting how different was the conduct of Frederick the Great
in a similar case. An humble individual happened to Pos-
sess a plot of land included in the site which Frederick the
Great had chosen for the completion of a magnificent place
for the residence of monarchy. The owner of this small plot
of land, on which he had a windmill, refused to part with
it, and the windmill and the plot in question were ulti-
mately included within the confines of the palace grounds.
Frederick the Great pointed with pride to the windmill, and
rejoiced that lie had the happiness to rule over people who
knew and were determined to maintain their rights.—
(Cheers.) Well, Sir, what was the conduct pursued by
the King of Greece on this subject? For fourteen long
years Mr. Finlay was driven from pillar to post, and put
off by every sort of shuffling and evasive excuses, and de-
prived of all compensation for his land, unless be chose to
take a sum totally inadequate to its value. Well, in 1843
came the revolution. Up to 1843 the Government of Greece
had continued arbitrary. The king declined, under the cir-
cumstances which I have mentioned, to grant a representa-
tive constitution. In 1843 the patience of Greece was ex-
hausted. They rose in Athens, and extorted by force that
which had not been granted to reason. When that revolution
came courts of justice were established, which were not in-
dependent, because the judges are not only liable to be dis-
missed at the will of 'the sovereign, but to be removed from
court to court, so that anycourt may be, and often is, packed
for trying the case which is to be brought before it.—(Hear,
hear.) In 18 t 3 there were courts to which Mr. Finlay might
have appealed. In these courts he had no confidence with
regard to transactions which had happened before the re-
volution. Mr. Finlay, therefore, reaped no benefit from
the change of government. But then, I heard it
most triumphantly, distinctly, and psitvely asserted
that when Mr. Wyse made his demand on the Greek
Government the claim olr Mr. Finlay was absolutely
finally, and conclusively settled.— (Hear, hear.). Sir, that
was by no means the case. There had been, indeed, an
agreement made for arbitration, and a most curious sample it
was of the manner in which things are carried on in Greece.
Mr. Finlay said, " I will refer this to arbitration." " It is a
subject," they said, "for arbitration; name an arbitrator
yourself, and we shall name another." Mr. Finlay, who has
been stated to be a " canny Scot," looking well into the
future, foresaw the possibility—which might, indeed, have
struck even a man not so far north as he—(Laughter)—that
the two arbitrators might possibly differ; be therefore hum-
bly suggested that an umpire should be appointed. (Hear.)
The Greek Government said, "You are quite right; we see
exactly how it is; we will appoint an umpire."—( Laughter.)
But Mr. Finlay, being a very sensible man, did not like to
commit his case to the keeping of three men, two of whom
were to be appointed by the Greek Government. And if
that arbitration had been gone into, no doubt Mr. Fin-
lay's claim would have been finally settled. But by the
law of Greece an arbitration so appointed must pronounce its
award within three months; or if it did not, the matter
dropped to the ground. The Commissioners could not make
their award without the production of certain documents,
which could only be furnished by the officers of the Greek
Government; but by some unfortunate circumstance they
did not furnish them—(Hear, hear)—and the arbitration, as
a necessary consequence, fell to the ground ; and, therefore,
at the time when Baron Gros came to examine into the mat-
ter, he found matters perfectly in the same state that
they were when Mr. Finlay first 2. omplained. Baron Gros
was at first astonished, and he said to Mr. Finlay,
" Why your claims have been subjected to arbitration, the
matter is settled, why have you not received your money ?"
Mr. Finlay replied, " I did not know that it was so, or that
even a sum was fixed as the amount of compensation I am
to receive." On further exarahlatioa appeared that the

matter was really in the same position in which it was before
it was referred to arbitration.—(Hear, hear.) Now, that
was a case in which we made no specific demand.—(Hear,
hear.) We only asked that Mr. Finlay should receive the
value of what the land might turn out to be worth; and the
sum ultimately agreed upon was that which the two arbi-
trators had fixed between them, splitting the differences
of amount which one thought was only adequate and the
other sufficient for satisfaction of the demand. One of
these arbitrators had been appointed by Mr. Finlay, and
the other by the Greek Government. (Hear, hear.) I
do not think in this case, taking these circumstances into
consideration, that the claim was unfounded in justice.—
(Cheers.) Well, then, we come to the claim of M. Pacifico,
which has been the subject of so much unworthy comment.
Stories have been told involving the honour, and imputa-
tions have been cast out against the character of M. Paci-
fico. All I know is this, that after the time to which these
stories relate, the Portuguese Government had appointed
M. Pacifico their consul in Morocco, and subsequently at
Athens; and I do not know that it is likel; that the l'or-
tueuese Government would have selected a man to have
tilled these offices upon whom there rested such grievous
imputations as is now alleged. For my part, Ido not
believe them ; but I say, as has been said by those who
have taken part in this debate, that I do not care what his
character may have been or what it is.—( Hear.) I can
never admit that because he may have done wrong at some
former period, he is for all eternity to be injured with-
out the right to obtain redress. The rights of man turn upon
the case in question, and it is nonsense to say you will not
give him redress for any injury inflicted upon him, because
on some other occasion he may have done something not in
accordance with the principles of justice.—(Hear.) Now,
what happened to M. Pacifico? Why, in the middle of the
town of Athens, his house—which, I must be allowed to say,
was not that wretched house which some persons have de-
scribed it—but no matter what it was—if it was a cabin or a
palace, it had a right to be safe from injury, and should be
protected—(Cheers)—that house which in early days had
been the residence of Count Ormsturm, the chief of the re-
gency, and which was situated in the middle of Athens.
within forty yards of the great street of the capital, and a
few minutes' walk from the guard-house, was entered by a
mob. They send for protection to the British legation; ap-
plication is made for that protection to the Greek Govern-
ment ; but no protection is afforded. This mob, in which
were found soldiers and gendarmes, who, if their officers were
absent, were, nevertheless, bound to preserve peace and order
—this mob, headed by the sons of the Minister of War, not
children, but young men of eight and twenty_years of age,
enjoyed themselves for two hours in gutting the house of an
unoffending man, and destroying and carrying away every
single thing which it contained. leaving it a perfect wreck.
Is that a case in which a subject was entitled to redress? I
humbly think it was.—(Loud and continued cheering.) I
think that there is no civilised country in the world where a
man has sustained such a grievous wrong, not to say any-
thing of the iSersonal insults offered to his family, that he
would not expect and seek redress from some quarter or
other.—(Hear, hear.) Where was M. Pacifico to seek that
redress? The Greek Government neglected its duty—it did
not pursue those judicial inquiries which it might have done
for the sake of finding out and punishing the aggressors.
The sons of the Minister of War were pointed at—they
were told, "Search that house, and you will find part of the
jewels of M. Pacifico ;" but no, they refused to take any
such steps; they told M. Pacifico that he must appeal to
the courts of justice. What was he to do? Was he to
prosecute a mob of 500 persons ctiminally ? Where were
his witnesses? His family were hiding and flying, in order
to avoid the outrages with which they were threatened. M.
Pacifico states that he owed his life to the interposition of
an English friend. It was only to a few of the leaders
that he could apply evidence sufficient to convict them
before a court of justice ; but what satisfaction could it
have been to him to have prosecuted criminally? The
wrong had been committed. He did not want revenge, he
wanted redress. Criminal prosecution was therefore out of
the question. To say nothing of the chances against him
under a Government where the tribunes were at the mercy
of the judges, who were themselves liable to be removed at
the pleasure of the Government, if he were to prosecute for
damages, what were his hopes of snccess ? If he had chosen
a particular individual for prosecution, see his difficulty. No
one man had taken all that was destroyed; and snppose he
was able to point out some particular article which had been
taken; after the trouble of an expensjye lawsuit, his legal
advisers informed him that if the party were a rich man he
would be sure of an acquittal, and if he was a poor man,
from whom was he to look for payment ?—(Cheers.) Well,
then, this is a case In which the Greek Government have
neglected to give that protection which they had it in
their power to afford, and who will say that this was
not a case in which we were entitled to call on them
to make some compensation?—(Cheers.) I think the
claim was founded in justice—the amount we did not pre-
tend to fix.—(Hear, hear.) If the Greek Government
thought the sum demanded was exorbitant, and that a far
less sum would have been sufficient, that would have been
a question open to discussion. But the Greek Government
denied the principle of redress. When Mr. Wyse made his
demand, all he renuired was that it should be settled or put
in the way of settlement, and when the period was limited to
the space of four and twenty hours for the Greek Govern-
ment to decide, nothing more was desired, and no particular
amount of -money was sought. All he wished was, that a
claim fairly and justly due should be treated in a fair and
equitable manner. Well, then, after these claims had been
treated by the Greek Government with subterfuge—in a
manner wholly unsatisfactory or with pertinacious silence
—it was at last forced upon us that we were either to
abandon these claims altogether, or, in pursuance of a
notice which we had given two years before, we were to
insist upon them by force. It has been said, Sir, " Oh,
what an ungenerous proceeding to employ so large a
force against so small a territory."—(Hear, hear.) Does
the smallness of the country justify immunity for its guilty
acts ?—(Hear, hear.) Is it to be held that because a country
is small and weak we cannot apply for redress for the
injuries it inflicts upon us?—(Hear, hear.) Why the small.
ness and weakness of the country make our generosity the
snore apparent in employing a force which would render re-
sistance impossible; or is it seriously to be supposed that our
subjects shall suffer without redress because we have such
ample means of obtaining it for them?—(Cheers and
laughter.) Well, then, was there anything so ungenerous
in sending this imposing fleet, which would make it palpable
to all the world that resistance was out of the question ? On
the contrary, it was mere consistent with the honour and
dignity of the Government on whom we made the demand
to send an armament which would show the vanity of resist-
ance. It would have been an indignity if we had sent a
frigate and a sloop. of war, or any force which they might
have thought it possible to have measured their
force with, or to which they would not have felt
it dignified to yield. Therefore, so far from being open
to blame for sending the force which happened to be on the
spot, I think that circumstance ought to be matter of satis-
faction to the Greek Government, as it removed the humi-

liation they would otherwise have experienced in being
obliged to give that which they had so long refused. Well.
then, did we in the application of that force either depart
from established usage, or do anything which pressed harshly
upon an innocent unoffending nation? I say innocent and
unoffending nation, because it was against the Government,
and net the nation, we made the claim. The course pur-
sued by Government in cases like the present, where an in.
jury has been inflicted for which redress is refused, are either
of the three following :—The first Is commonly called re-
prisal—that is, seizing something of value and holding
it by way of deposit; or, if necessary, applying it by way
of compensation for the wrong. The second is a modi-
fied operation of war, such as a blockade, a measure
very frequently adopted by all states and governments.
The third course is the commencement of actual hostilities
and the adoption of such measures as have been pointed out
by some other countries—for instance, by France, when she
demanded redress for injuries sustained. By the bye, when
lion. Gentlemen complain of the peremptory manner in
which the demand was made, I merely wish to call the at-
tention of the House to a case in 'which the French nation
were involved, which happened no later than the year 1848.
There was an insurrection at Naples. The great street of
the town was filled wi:h barricades, and the troops had to
force them. To do so they had to occupy the houses
upon the right and left as they forced one house after
another. They forgot or neglected to fasten the doors after
them, and they were followed by the lazzaron , who com-
menced to plunder all before them. Some of these houses
were the property of Frenchmen, and they complained to the
French Minister, who immediately put himself in communi-
cation with the French Admiral Godat, who happened to be
lying with his fleet at Naples. What does he do? He lays
his ship broadside opposite the Palace, and writes a note to
say that he has been called upon for protection by the
French inhabitants. This letter is dated " "nalf.past one
o'clock," and states, unless he receives a satisfactory answer
that' the Neapolitan Government will guarantee them full
protection by three o'clock, he will proceed to enforce
it. - (Cheers and laughter.) Sir W. Parker acted with
the greatest moderation. He began with reprisals—he
did not begin with a blockade—he wished to avoid
all interference with the commerce of other countries;
and ' he made these reprisals in a manner in which
they had not often been effected. The Government was
the offending party, and he took possession of the vessels
of the Government. The reason that other nations pre-
fer to seize vessels belonging to the country are very
obvious. Vessels belonging to the Government are gene-
rally armed, and vessels which are so may feel it their duty
to use them—this involves the possibility of bloodshed, so
reprisals are generally effected upon commercial vessels,
which are not ammunitioned, and where the probability of
resistance is not so great. In this instance we began by
seizing the armed vessels. As this was found not suffi-
ciently to answer, he laid an embargo on all vessels, which
implied that he had a lien upon them, and ordered
that they should not quit their ports. As these means
were still unsuccessful to obtain his end, he was
obliged to make reprisals and seize some merchant
vessels, which he did to a limited number, avoiding as
much as possible, or than it was absolutely necessary, in-
flicting injury on the commerce of the people or of other
nations. They had been told that he had seized a
number of fishing-boats belonging to the poor. He knew
nothing of the circumstance, and did not believe it.— (Cheers.)
The embargo did not extend to fishing-boats or vessels ofj
small tonnage employed in the coasting trade.—(Hear, hear.)
In that state of things the French Government offered their
good offices. We readily and cheerfully accepted them, and
by a note, dated the 12th of February, we stated the grounds,
the conditions, and the extent to which they were to be ac-
cepted. There could be no mistake about the matter, its we
took as a precedent the course which had been pursued on
the sulphur question when Mr. Thiers was in office.— (Hear,
hear.) In that case it was arranged that all hostilities were
to be suspended the moment the French Minister was autho.
lised to negotiate. In this case the moment the offer was
sufficiently made and sufficiently accepted instructions to
the same effect were to be issued. In both cases we could
not release the ships that had been captured, because, if
we had done so, we should have given up the position

in which we stood. It has been stated that some misunder-
standing arose between the Governments of France and
England in the course of the mediation and good offices. I
cannot say that there was any misunderstanding between
M. Drouyn de l'Huys and myself, because it will be seen by
his statements in the French Assembly that he clearly under-
stood the grounds on which these good offices were accepted,
and he repeatedly states, " England gives up none of her de-
mands, none of the principles of her demands, and the only
questions our negotiator is allowed to discuss are questions
which do not involve the negation of the principle of the de-
mand." What were the questions? Why the amount of
money to be received by M. Pacifico and Mr. Finlay ; not the
question whether he was to receive anything or nothing.—
(Cheers.) A question arose, What were the circumstances
on which the good offices were to cease? It was distinctly
understood upon my part, and that of M. Drouyn de PHuys,
that Mr. Wyse was not to take it upon himself to say when
this mission had failed, but when Baron Gros announced it
himself.—( Hear, hear.) It was further agreed specially, on
the 9th of April, if a difference arose between Baron Gros
and Mr. Wyse on those points which Baron Gros was com-
petent to discuss, that he was not to stand out on his differ-
ence, and if he did not think it possible to give way, in that
case he was to refer home for instructions. And it is now
said that it was very wrong of me not to have sent out to
Mr. Wyse information of the understanding to which
I had come with M. Drouyn de l'Huys. In the first
place, I had sent, on the 25th of March, instructions which,
if acted upon, would have rendered further reference unne-
cessary, for at last, when Baron Gros and Mr. Wyse came to

the question of-the—amount-of money which -ought to be
ipaid, Baron Gros said he would counsel the Greek Govern-
ment to pay 150,000 drachmas- Mr. Wyse said he was
willing to accept of 150,000 drachmas, and that being the
' difference existing, between them, Mr. Wyie at last, acting
in a much more prudent manner than if he referred the
point to the Foreign-office, and so exposed Greek commerce
to restraint by the continuance of the statu quo for a whole
month, stated, " If other things are agreed to, I will come
down to that amount, and accept of the sum which you say
you are disposed to recommend the Greek-Government to
Ipay."— (Hear, hear.) Therefore, practically, and in the
result, that case did not arise to which those instructions
Icould apply. If these instructions had reached Mr. Wyse,
they would not have applied to the differences which had
arisen between him and Baron Gros, for the difference was
this:—lt turned on the claim of Don Pacifico. Baron Gros
on the 16th of April was willing to recommend to the Greek
Government to undertake an engagement for the investiga-
tion of Don Pacifico's claims, arming out of the destruction
of those documents which constituted his demand on the
1 Portuguese Government, and that they should deposit—l
i mean the Greek Government-150,000 drachmas as a pledge
1 of their good faith in the execution of that engagement. The
only difference between Mr. Wyse and Baron Gros on that
day was this—that Baron Gros proposed that the deposit
should be lodged in shares of Athens in that bank—that is
to say, in the custody of the Greek Government—and Mr.
Wyse insisted that the deposit of the money should be made
in the Bank of England, or, if Baron Gros required it, in the
Bank of France.—(Hear, hear.) Now that seemed to be a
difference of opinion that could easily have been adjusted.
But on the 2ed of April Raron Gros altered his mind. He
retracted his opinion on that point. He said that later in-
formation bad convinced him that Don Pacifico's claims on
the Government of that nation were ill founded, and that
he would not consent, therefore, to recommend the Greek
Government to enter into any engagement to pay Den Pa-
cifico anything on that ground; that investigation
might be entered into, but if there was a claim at all on the
part of this individual, it was on the Portuguese and not on
the Greek Government; and, in short, that Isacifico's claim
was undergoing a further consideration. Now, Sir, that was
not a point which it was competent for Baron Gros to
act upon, much less to decide.—(Hear, hear.) It was in
clear violation of the very terms upon which we accepted the
proffered good offices of France, nor would Mr. Wyse have
been authorised in departing from the instructions which he
had received on the 25th March, those instructions being
clear and positive for the guidance of his conduct. Then
Baron Gros withdrew from the negotiation. On the 23d,
Baron Gros not only ceased to act, but wrote a formal letter
to Mr. Wyse, and another to the Greek Government, an-
nouncing finally his withdrawal.—( Hear, hear.) On the
24th it seems that Baron Gros receives a dispatch from Ge-
neral de la Hitte, which dispatch purports to give an acs
count of a conversation which passed between M. Dronyn de
l'Huys and myself on the 9th. That account is not correct,
and it dwells upon generals instead of particulars. It
is there said that I agreed to the arrangement proposed by
Baron Gros; but it is, not stated in what re-
spect I had limited that consent. - It is not,
therefore, a correct description of the arrangement which
had been come to between M. Drouyn de l'Huys and myself.
M. Gros, however, on the 24th, wrote to Mr. Wyse, express-
ing his willingness, in consequence of the note of General de
la Hitte, received on the 24th, to retract or correct his note
of the 23d, and to make a reference to France and England.
The impression has gone abroad that, on the 24th, Baron
Gros received, and communicated to Mr. Wyse, not merely
an account of the conversation between myself and M.
Drouyn de l'Huys, but also an account of the basis, and of
the nearly approaching arrival, of a draft of the conven-
tion which was for the first time proposed to me on the
15th, which was discussed in terms on the 16th, which
was agreed to on the 18th, and sent off on the 19th.
Mr. Wyse has been greatly blamed by many persons, both
here and in France, upon the assumption that whereas
Baron Gros informed him, on the 24th of April, that the
English and French Governments had come to an agree-
ment as to the essential basis of the convention that had
been signed between the two powers, and that Mr. Wyse,
being in mane] possession of that information, and knowing
of the existence of that convention, had nevertheless, with a
full knowledge of that fact, renewed coercive measures, by
which he compelled the Greek Government to agree to his
proposal. That assertion, Sir, is, as far as he (Mr. Wyse)
is concerned, utterly and positively untrue.—Gear, hear.)
Mr. Wyse received no communication from Baron Gros on
the 24th, or at any time earlier (I believe) than the 2d of
May, realative to the draft of a convention of any sort or
kind.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.) Whether Baron Gros re-
ceived the communication or not is to be settled between
him and his Government.—( Hear, hear.) I declined, from
the statements of General de la Hitte, to believe that he did
not receive that intimation. "Our own correspondent" of
the Times—(A laugh)—stated that Mr. Wyse had received
this intimation from Baron Gros, and was a most valuable
auxiliary to some who had spoken and written on these
matters; but the information was not correct, as the blue-
book established. The correspondent of the Times distinctly
stated—and, no doubt, public opinion in this country was
much formed upon those statements—that the British Go-
vernment did inform Mr. Wyse on the 24th of this conven-
tion, and that he did receive by the ship Vauban information
of the convention. and yet that, in spite of this, Mr. Wyse
proceeded with his coercive measures. I understand the
French Government now to say that they were, in the first
instance, under a mistake, and to acknowledge that Baron
Gros did not receive by the Vauban information of the con-
vention. and therefore, no such communication having
tuken place, Baron Gros could not communicate, and
Mr. Wyse could not receive it. —(Hear, hear.) Therefore,
Sir, the complaint against Mr. Wyse, come from what
quarter it may, is now disavowed and is no longer perse-
vered in.— (Loud cheers.) As to the next complaint, that I
did not write on account of what passed on the 9th of
April, my answer is, that Mr. Wyse was already in posses-
sion of instructions which were tantamount to a communi-
cation, and that, had those instructions been agreed to in
spirit and substance, the arrangement would have been
carried out on the spot, and reference to home would have
been out of the question. But, said those objectors, why
not send out instructions by the Vauban, as the French
Government did? Why, I was in London, and General de
la Hitte was in Paris. The steamboat was at Tou-
lon, and to send a steamboat from London the
journey would not have been performed in so short a
time as by the ordinary testae by Marseilles and Trieste.—
(Hear, hear.) When it is said that those demands of ours
are so much repudiated by this Governments of Russia and
France that our putting"them forward would cause the risk
of involving us in a war with these powers, I must be per-'
mitted to say that, with regard to Russia, the dispatch of
Count Nesselrode to Baron Brunnow, of the 19th of
February, totally negatives any such assertion as regards
Russia.—(Hear, hear.) In that note the idea of our finally
resorting to coercive measures is distinctly admitted—that
two years ago, in October 1847, he was of opinion that the
time was coming when he should think it necessay to have
recourse to coercion, and that at the moment when we should
have recourse to these measures, we ought to ask those powers
for their assistance, •so that they might use their efforts
in order to obtain that which' it wteeclear we could not post-
pone indefinitely in 'deference- to their wishes.—(Hear, hear.)
So far as to Russia. Then as to France. What was the
basis of the convention of the 19th of -February ? it was a
convention acknowledging all the principles of our demands
and even the amount which France thought we had a just
right to demand.—( Hear.) lam sorry that that convention
did not arrive before another settlement took place. But
that was not the fault of our negotiator. It was not Mr.
Wyse who put an end to Baron Gros's interference. Why,
Sir, it was Baron Gros himself.—(Hear, hear.) Heformally
and officially, by a written communication, withdrew from
1 the negotiation. Baron Gros addressed his letter of with-
drawal, not merely to Mr. Wyse, but to the Greek Govern-
ment. I repeat he withdrew voluntarily and formally.
—(" Hear, hear," and cries of" No.") I say he withdrew
formally.—(No, no.) Yes, he was willing to retract his
j letter, and on the 24th he sent back the note of Mr. Wyse,
saying " I cannot do that, but I have another proposal to
make—a proposal which I have made before and which I
om authorised to make. You ask me to refer to England.
I will do so, but in the meantime to keep those Greek vessels
in custody for a whole month, whilst the reference is being
made, would be rather hard—it would inflict a great hard-
ship on the Greeks and subject them to apprehensions of fur-
ther violence. I propose, therefore, that if the Greek Go-
vernment will send me 180,000 drachmas, which is the sum
I require, with a letter stating that that amount is in
satisfaction of all our claims, except that claim of Don
Pacifico with regard to Portugal, I will"—do what? Con-
tinue• the status quo?—No, but said Mr. Wyse, "I will at
once release all the Greek merchant vessels—l will only de-
tain two or three Government vessels as a pledge that some
settlement will be made of Pacifico's claims." The effect of
that arrangement would be that the discussion and
adjustment of Pacifico's claims would be left to the future,
the points upon which Mr. Wyse and Baron Gros dif-
fered would be allowed to stand over, the convention would
have arrived in.time, and the only final difference would be
that whereas the convention fixed upon 220,000
drachmas, Mr. Wyse was content with 180,000 drachmas.
—(Loud cheers.) But what was Baron Gros's 'answer to
that? Why it was this :—" I have withdrawn from the
negotiation." So that, not merely did Baron Gros announce
his withdrawal on the 22d or 23d, but he repeated that state-
ment, and he refused to act officially, or, as the organ of
France, to make any representation to the Greek Govern..
ment. Baron Gros would, had he done so, have kept
matters open for investigation and for convention. But
Baron Gros, although he said he had officially withdrawn,
and therefore could not assent to the proposal of Mr. Wyse,
in a private letter, intimated that he had made
known Mr. Wyse's offer to the Government of
Greece, and that by five on the following after-
noon he had recommended that the money and
the letter asked for by Mr. Wyse should be sent by the
Greek Government. But was Mr. Wyse in a great hurry
to resume aggressive measures? Did he seize upon the first
moment, as he might have done, after non-compliance with
the demand, to direct Sir W. Parker to renew his opera-
tions? Far from it; he waited from the '23d to the 24th,
from the °4th to the 25th, and did not in any way manifest
the slightest impatience, but, on the contrary, the greatest
reluctance to act upon the offensive.—(Hear, bear.) Why,
Sir, after Baron Gros had withdrawn. Mr. Wyse still offered
to accept of the same terms as before, and to acquiesce in
the private suggestions of Baron Gros. The negotiations
which have since then taken place between the Governments
of England and France have at length brought those mat-
ters to a satisfactory conclusion.—(Cheers.) We are, and
were, perfectly 'ready to accept of such parts of the proposed
convention as were applicable to the matters which as yet
remain unadjusted—to accept of the arrangement proposed
by the convention instead of the corresponding arrangement
of the 27th of April, which was drawn up on the spot. We do
not of course, having received 190,000 drachmas and distri-
buted them, insist on the difference between that sum and
that proposed in the convention. The arrangement made
in Athens will not be carried into execution as regards
the claims of Don Pacifico on Portugal and the destruction of
such papersof his as refer to that claim. A pledge has been given
that the matters will be adjusted. Of course, as M. Londos
has written a letter pledging the Greek Governinent to a
certain course, it would be preposterous to ask him to take
back that letter and sign instead a much better one,
written bp M. Drouyn de l'Huys, written here for his signa-
ture.—(Cheers.) Among the questions which remain to be
settled is this one regarding Pacifico. Baron Gros's ar-
rangement was the exchange of notes, but the exchange of
notes binds only the Minister by whom the notes were ex-
changed, and might be disowned by his successor. Mr.
Wyse, therefore, required substantial security, to consist of
the lodgment of a deposit of a certain suns of money, and the
investigation was to be made by the Governments of France
and England. The convention of which I drew up the de-
tails in concert with M. Dronyn de Lhuys contained a di-
nlomatid guarantee, because the convention was concluded
by plenipotentiaries, and was to be ratified by the two So-
vereigns, who were to provide commissioners of arbitratian—
those commissioners to be named by the two Governments,
for the purpose of investigating those claims. We are
perfectly ready to substitute that of the Greek Go-
vernment if they wish that we should do so, and we have
prepared, and are sending out, the draft of a convention
which substitutes an arrangement respecting those claims.
Of course, if we get a diplomatic guarantee, a substantial
L guarantee is no longer necessary. Mr. Wyse acted, I
think, judiciously, having heard that the Greek Government
was collecting and beating up for claims against the English
• Government for damages occasioned by our interference in
1 providing against the concession or preferment of any such