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

THE SUN, LONDON, TIJESDAY EVENING, JUNE 25, 1850.

claims was wholly our own, referring as it did to
English honour and English rights. Tile other was
guaranteed by three separate nations. These facts were,
therefore, most distinctly understood by Baron Gros, and
if any person could be particularly marked and careful
in his instructions respecting them it was the Noble
Lord. His instructions were complete arid defined to the
Minister, and he said, " Mind, you must drop for the
present all consideration of the two islands and the
loan." It was clear from the statements of M. Drouyn
de I'Huys, that these two matters were taken out of the
instructions given by the Noble Lord. Baron Gros,
though understanding perfectly before going out what
his instructions were, did change the character of them
some time after he bad gone out. The explanation given
by him on first meeting Mr. Wyse wholly demonstrated
the fact that he knew full well what he was to do. While
staying in Greece he changed from day to day his office,
and at last pretended to he a mediator in respect to the
whole of our claims. But here comes the question with
regard to France. While the negotiations were going
on between Mr. Wyse and Baron Gros, 11. Drouyn
de
I'Huys says to the Noble Lord, " Don't you think we
can settle it among ourselves?" The Noble Lord imme-
diately acquiesced. An arrangement ass then entered
into, which did not arrive at Greece before an arrange-
ment had been made by Mr. Wyse. Baron Gros gave
up his mediation, saying, " I will withdraw from
it professionally—l can do no more—therefore I with-
draw." Mr. Wyse acted under instructions, and had
only one course to take. Now" comet the point which
gave off.•ncc. Aftcr Baron Gros had withdrawn from
the mediation, he received a letter from M. Drouyn de
I'Huys, dated the 19th of April. The Noble Lord wrote
to Mr. Wyse on the same date, informing him of the
plan, but this letter did not get to Mr. Wyse as soon as
the report had reached Baron Gros of what had taken
place between the Noble Lord and M. Drouyn de Niue.
Baron Gros writes to Mr. Wyse, informing him that he
had heard of this arrangement, and, on the 22d April,
Baron Gros writes a letter to Mr. Wyse, of which the
following is an extract:—
"A dispatch, dated the 6th of this month, received by the
last courier, contains word for word what follows. It ap-
pears front the language held by Lord Palmerston to M.
Drouyn de I'Huys that,* if the British Envoy should refuse
to accept a compromise which you might judge reasonable,
and to which the Greek Government had acceded, the affair
must be referred to London, and that until a definitive deci-
sion all things should remain in suspense.'
" If Mr. Wyse does not think he can subscribe to the last
amicable arrangement above proposed, and which the Hel-
lenic Government is disposed to conclude, the undersigned
demands of his Excellency the Minister Plenipotentiary of
her Britannic Majesty urgently, and in the name of the im-
portant interest which may be compromised, to consent to
maintain the status quo, and to refer on the subject to his
Court."
Now, Mr. Wyse writes to Baron Gros a letter, dated
April 24, 1850, nine o'clock:—
" I have just received an express which gives me impor-
tant news. Lord Palnieston requires some changes in my
first draft of convention, which is very incomplete, I con-
fess, but which has been in a singular degree improved as
regards English views. But this is better than all. He has
said to M. Drouyn de l'Huys, ' If the arrangement pro-
posed by M. Gros does not meet the concurrence of Mr.
Wyse, the negotiation would remain open. Mr. Wyse would
submit the proposals of the negotiator to the British Cabi-
net, and would wait for instructions. Measures of coercion
would be resumed without fresh orders, only in case M.
Gros should declare that he renounces the part of mediator.'
—(April 12 )
"What can be more precise?
"Well, then, I have not renounced the part of mediator; I
have submitted to you a project which I believe to be just
and satisfactory. In God's name submit it to the judgment
of Lord Palmerston.
" This is what I propose.

" I will withdraw my note ; I will return to you yours ;
all that has happened shall be but as a disagreeable dream."
Mr. Wyse, by this paper, seemed to renounce the idea
of mediation, and had given orders that the embargo
should be reinstated. It was reinstated, and an agree-
ment made with Mr. Wyse and the Greek Government.
In the nranwhile comes the statement of the Noble
Lord. And as the sensibilities of the French people
appear to be much aroused in respect to this matter I beg
leave to say a few word.. Of the two plans of arrange-
ment that had been taken into consideration, I believe
that of the Noble Lord's to be the most favourable to
the Greek Government. I believe that the only
difference between them is this, that the Noble Lord
had asked for a larger sum down at once than
Mr. Wyse, who did take a portion of it by way of se-
curity. It was ordered that the parties who complained
should be paid something for redress. The Noble Lord
said it was not worth while to disturb whet has been
already done, and thereupon up starts the insulted
French nation. But is it the French nation? Was
there not a curious coincidence apparent here? Was
there not a patty anxious to get up an emeute in Paris?
Did they not try to cause a diversion by talking of war
with England, that they might prevent the occurrence
of that which they so much dreaded? Were they not
going to make a change upon their own constitution?
Did they not mean to effect that by getting up an ap-
parent quarrel with England? But the body of con-
spirators, as I will call them, who hold in their own
hands now the power of the French people, and ignorant
of the means of conducting a constitutional government,
are endeavouring by the force of the bayonet to put
down all who say a word in opposition to them—these
are the party that are endeavouring to get up a
quarrel with England. Freedom does not exist in
France. Nee spaper after newspaper is put down there;
and in order to gratify their own wishes they will at-
tempt anything. And this is the morality of the ex-
citable people who talk of the honour of France. I be-
lieve that the honour of France is like the honour of
England—beyond the reach of such petty artifices.—
(hear, hear.) If we look around this European world
of ours, where is the people save England who could
safely go to war? Could France go to war? Could
Aust,ia go to war? Where would Italy be in such u
case? Could Russia go to 'war The fact is we are
forbearing because we are so powerful.—(flear, hear.)
There can be no doubt that it is weak people that are
the most sensitive,—so it is with nations. The most
powerful can aff,)rd to receive an insult without being
insolent, and meet petulance without quarrelling.
I acknowledge that it is totally impossible for
me to go over every step that Mai; been brought
under our consideration. I will only add one
word as to the form of our decision. I hope
that the House will not shrink from a fair
discussion upon this important question. I hope that
my lion. Friend opposite will not attempt to evade the
difficulty by pressing his amendment on the House. If
the policy of the Government, after being condemned
by the House of Lords, does not receive a clear, distinct,
and unambiguous approval of the House of Commons, it
is impossible that they sin remain any longer in the
seats which they now occupy.—(Hear, hear.) It must
be no half opinion. It must be nothing that can admit
of the excuse of one Hon. Member being siek or another
dead. The vote in their favour must be clear, strong,
and decided—such as shall enable the Government to
maintain the dignity of the country in the faoe of the
whole world, even if the world be opposed to them. The
Hon. and Learned Gentleman concluded by moving the
resolution of which he had given notice. (We regret
exceedingly that the low tone in which the Hon. and
Learned Geoff man spoke, particularly towards the
conclusion of his sentences, rendered it very difficult for
the reporters to catch the actual words he used.)
The question having been put,
Mr. HUME rose to withdraw the amendment of which
ho had given notice. He could not exactly agree in all
that was said by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who
moved the resolution. He expected that the Hon. and
Learned Gentlemen would have been able to vindicate
the whole of the foreign policy of the Noble Lord, com-
mencing with the year 1830. But after mentioning the
proceedings in Belgium, he jumped over a considerable
period to eulogise the foreign policy of the Noble Lord.
No man beard with greater pleasure than he did the
late Earl Grey's memorable speech in which he
stated that non-interference should be the ground
of his policy. He certainly would not now stand in
the way of the appeal made to him, lest it might
be supposed that he had improper views on
the question, and meant to injure the Govern-
ment. He was most anxious that they should retain
their position, as he thought that the welfare and pros-
perity of the country required their services. It was
upon that ground he interposed. He was sorry he did
so; for he found he did not understand those with whom
he sat.—(Laughter.) He expressed his regret that
anything should pass in this House that should create
anxiety and uneaiiness in respect to the relations be-
tween this country and France. He believed that the
connexion was essential for the peace of Europe, and he
would be sorry that anything should occur to estrange
the affection that should exist between the two countries,
and upon which the interests of the world mainly de-
pended. He was sorry he had undertaken this most un-
satisfactory duty, and he would most willingly withdraw
his amendment.—(Laughter.) He was never ashamed
to admit when he felt that he had not acted exactly
right. He certainly would not press his motion.
Sir F. THESIGER said that it was impossible, notwith-
standing the great extent of the motion which had been
made by his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Shef-
field ( Mr. Roebuck), not to look at the circumstances under
which that motion had been brought forward. On Monday
last a resolution was adopted elsewhere in these terms :
" That while this House fully recognise the right and duty of
the Government to secure to her Majesty's subjects residing
in foreign states the full protection of the laws of those states,
it regrets to find by the correspondence recently laid upon
the table by her Majesty's command, that various claims
against the Greek Government, doubtful in point of justice,
or exaggerated in amount, have been enforced by coercive
measures, directed against the commerce and people of
Greece, and calculated to endanger the continuance
of our friendly relations with other powers." That
resolution was said to have been carried by a
majority far beyond the gloomiest anticipations of the Go-
vernment, and necessarily created some difficulty in their
minds as to the course which it would be proper for them to
pursue. For two days a silence, deep and mysterious,
had been preserved, when at length his Hon. and Learned
Friend the Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck) asked a
question, and elicited from the Noble Lord the remarkable
declaration which he made on Thursday last, when, after ad-
verting to the terms of the resolution, he stated it was not
the intention of Government to depart from their policy or
resign the reins of government, in consequence of the reso-
lution of the other House. The Noble Lord (Lord J. Rus-
sell) cited certain authorities as precedents for the course
pursued. In the first place he told them that 140 years ago
there had been a resolution and address of the other House
against the propriety of assenting to any treaty which
would leave Spain in the possession of any branch of the
house of Bourbon, and yet, notwithstanding, a treaty had
been concluded in direct opposition to that vote. He then
adverted to a resolution of the House of Lords,
moved by the Duke of Wellington in the time of Earl Grey,
ho declared that if it was carried he should consider it a
vote of censure upon the Government. It was carried by a
and Ile nevertheless did not resign, and
continuedmajority o tot n
pursuete'
authorities, the Noble Lord was certainly not very ingenuous,
as he had only mentioned that portion of the precedent
which answered his purpose, and had forgotten to mention
the other portion of the precedent which he had not followed.
Ho had not stated that upon the last occasion he had men-
tioned four days after the resolution was carried in the House

of Lords, an habitual supporter of the Government, of course
by arrangement with them, brought forward the motion in
that House of approval of the course pursued by the Go-
vernment, and that it was carried by a majority of 263 to
98, who voted in the minority against Ministers. Now
that Vas a most important state of circumstances to distin-
guish between what took place in 1833 and the present oc-
casion. The vote of censure of the House of Lords was set
aside by an enormous majority in the House of Commons.
Why was it that the Noble Lord who was so fond of citing
precedents when in his favour, had omitted to follow the
whole precedent? Why was it that he had not thought
proper to come forward there and ask explicitly for a re-
versal of the House of Lords' condemnation of their foreign
policy ?—(Hear, hear.) If he valued precedent, be was
bound to have done so. If he had done so, he would have
found their policy regarding tha Greek nation a very
hazardous experiment. The Noble Lord thought it neces-
sary that the question should be submitted to the House for
its opinion, and in this difficulty the Hon. and Learned
Member for Sheffield stepped forward to their rescue. He
would not say that there had been any preconcerted ar-
rangement between himself and the Government, but lie
would say that the Hon. Member for Sheffield had pur-
chased a substantial claim to the gratitude of the Govern-
ment.—(Order.)
Mr. SO AERS here rose to order, and said the observation
of the lion. and Learned Gentleman was invidious and unfair,
and uncalled for.
The SPEAKER said he had not heard anything fall from
the lion. and Learned Gentleman contrary to the orders of
the House. _ .

Sir F. TIILSIGLR was never more surprised than when
he found the Honourable and Learned Gentleman stand fur-
ward in this gap, because in a debate in 1843, in which he
(Mr. Roebuck) took a part in reference to the affeirs of ekin-
g hanistan, althought there was no immediate and direct.
allusion to the forei,n policy of the Noble Lord (Lord Pal-
merston), he said he might be unhappy, most unhappy, ire
his opinion, but it was his impression that the Noble Lord
(Lord Palmerston) had exercised a most pernicious eflett
upon the foreign policy of this country. He had, at the
same time, made use of some ludicrous illustrations, liken-
ing him to Phaeton driving his chariot round the world to set
it on fire, and to a " lucifer match."—(Hear.) He declared
that the Noble Lord's mischievous activity extended over the
whole habitable globe, and that he looked with suspicion
upon every fact adduced in his vindication.—( Hear bear.)
Now, those were his sentiments in 1843. The Noble Lord
had returned since then to power, and now presided over
the foreign affairs of this country. He was the same man,
retaining every activity and pursuing the same policy.
There was the "lucifer-match" in the Foreign-office ready,
like another Phaeton, to set the world on fire.—(Hear.)
Now certainly with these impressions on his mind, and not
observing any alteration in his policy, this resolution, as
emanating from him, was one of the most extraordinary
and inconceivable that could possibly be imagined. His
Honourable and Learned Friend had not pursued the course
which was most proper—confining the question to_the Greek
question, and to a reversal of the vote of the House of
Lords, but he had taken a much more prudent course, and
made his resolution general, including Greece, but at the
same time including so many topics, and giving so ample a
range to the discussion, that any Honourable Member, if
inclined, could find some excuse for voting with the Govern-
ment. He wished the House to concur in a resolution that
the principles upon which the foreign policy of the Gove n-
ment was conducted were calculated to uphold the honour
and dignity of the country. He confessed he thought there
was some ambiguity hidden under the word .4 principle."
They were all agreed as to abstract principles. He thought
he never meant to confine the House to a question of that
abstract kind, and therefore he concluded that the House
was called upon to approve the principles of foreign policy
as carried out by the Noble Lord the Foreign Secretary.
Again, the words " foreign policy calculated in times of
difficulty and danger to preserve the peace of the world."
Did that apply to our own, or foreign countries? The Hon.
and Learned Gentleman had been pleased to explain that
would•be principle, and there was no doubt but that they
were called upon to sanction the foreign policy carried out,
in contradistinction to that carried out by the last Ministry.
It was impossible to have heard the speech of the Noble
Lord, and not to see that there had been a striking differ-
ence between the policy of the Noble Lord and that of the
Ministry of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for
Tamworth. He called upon them to approve the former as
most likely to uphold the honour and dignity of the country,
in opposition to that of the policy of the last Ministry. Now,
that being so, let them trace the policy of the Noble Lord in
his intercourse with different Governments of Europe, and
he would venture to say, that so far from its being calculated
to preserve the honour and dignity of the country, there never
was a course so likely to embroil them with all na-
tions, and which had resulted in the deepest humiliation
to England. He proposed, in considering the question,
to confine himself to two or three prominent occa-
sions, travelling as rapidly as possible over the ground. He
impatiently hung on the words of his Hon. and Learned
Friend the Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck), expecting
every moment that he would make some allusion to Greece,
but regretted to say—and he felt assured that the House ge-
nerally sympathised with him—that he did not allude to the
subject-matter of his resolution till the end of his speech,
and that conclusion was characterised with an approval of
the Noble Lord (Palmerston's) conduct. In consideration of
this question, he hoped that the House would duly weigh the
position of Greece with respect to the threeprotecting powers,
England, France, and Russia ; and he felt the deepest regret
that he looked upon those powers seeking more their own
individual interests, by intrigues and cabals, rather than
exercise their great powers for the protection of
a weak and feeble nation, which was the pledge
they bad given at the time of establishing Greece
on the constitutional grounds of a nation. lie next
thought, considering the strength of England and the weak.
ness of Greece, that the Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston)
should abstain altogether from using threats and menaces,
which would not be offered to any strong power of Eu-
rope. He admitted that the claims of British subjects
should be defended, but should at the same time say that
he felt assured that. many of them were exaggerated, and
he did not mean to adduce this in the light of a mere as-
sertion, but, would support it by the most irrefragable argu-
ments. First, he would refer to the claims of Mr. Finlay,
in which case he considered the conduct of the Noble Lord
(Lord Palmerston) as most ungenerous and unbecoming;
and he regretted to add, that he feared that such a line of
policy as that pursued by the Noble Lord the Secretary for
Foreign Affairs had left an impression on the minds of the
people of France which would not be speedily removed,
and which could not, therefore, fail to do much injury to
this country. He should enter into the details of Mr. Findlay's
case, and show that he, a British subject, in 1830 had pur-
chased a small plot of land, not much more than three-quarters
of an acre, for which he paid 101., or 300 drachmas. Now
when it was deemed necessary by the Government of that
country that this plat of ground should be taken for the
King's garden, an offer of 3,000 drachmas was made, but re-
fused by Mr. Finlay, on the ground that the land was
worth four thousand five hundred drachmas, or 1,5001, for a
piece of land for which he paid only 101.—(Hear, hear.) At
the time of this altercation between Mr. Finlay and the
Greek Government there were 100 other claimants of a
similar nature, but all agreed to the proposition of that Go-
vernment, as they knew that a constitutional government,
formed in 1843, placed their property under different cir-
cumstances to what they had been previously. However, as
Mr. Finlay persisted in his demand, it was considered most
judicious on both sides that the matter should be left to ar-
bitration ; and should the arbiters not agree,, that an umpire
of unprejudiced opinions should decide as to the sum to be
paid. He should here say, that the wish of the Greek Go-
vernment at first, rela, ive to the appointment of an umpire,
was not just or fair, because they required that one of them-
selves should be appointed to the office of umpire
in case the subject of litigation should go beyond
the arbitrators. Now he had one remark on the
matter to make, which was to be found in the blue book of
1850, page 50, that the case of .Mr. Finlay was closed on
the 9th of August, 1849. He therefore referred to this im-
portant question, whether it was justifiable on the
part of the British Government to interfere with an
armed force as they had done, particularly as the matter was
closed, according to the above quoted evidence between the
two litigant parties. He should say that be felt really
startled when his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for
Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck) asserted that there was nu inter-
national law violated by such hostile interference; but such
an assertion he begged leave to gainsay, for it is unjust for any
nation to interfere, except when justice is refused, or when
the right of a subject is violated by the seizure of his pro-
perty, neither of which occurred in the case of Mr. Finlay,
fur there was nothing more than a delay, owing to the mat-
ter not being adjudicated on. He was astonished that his
Honourable and Learned Friend (Mr. Roebuck) should
hazard such an opinion on the laws of nations, paricularly
as the contrary was agreed upon by all philosophers
and jurists, and also when Montesquieu and Lord
Campbell approved of the opinion given that night by him
(Sir F. Thesiger).—(Hear, hear). Lord Mansfield also said,
that the law of nations, founded on justice and equity, does
not allow reprisals, except in cases where the 'parties from
whom reprisals are taken are the aggressors.—(lronical
Cheers from the Government party.) If Honourable Gen-
tlemea would not inte'rupt him by such cheers, he would
fully explain, for, he did not mean to say that Mr. Finlay
was not wronged, but what he wished to explain was, that
as Mr. Finlay took the mutter to a 'court, he should wait
for the decision of that court before he should apply to
the ambassador of his native country, to assert his claims
by an armed naval force. It would be found in the blue
book of February, 1850, that the interference of this
Government was most unsatisfactory to France, and
most unfair, and perhaps injurious, to this coun-
ry particularly. As far as related to Mr. Wyse's
Letter of October 18, 1849, in which it was stated

that the claims of Finlay were left, with the
mutual consent of both parties (Finlay and the Greek Go-
vernment), to arbitration, and that such aline of procedure
was the best that could be adopted• for the decision of the
question at issue, he therefore, uhelar those, circumstances,
considered it most unwise and unjust that an armed inter-
ference should take place, and expressed his regret that the
high honour and unimpeachable character of this country
should be looked upon in the light that she now was
by the other nations of Europe, and for that reason he con-
tended that the case of Finlay should not. be made ex-
clusive for the introduction of the hostile interference of this
country. (Hear, hear.) He would next refer. 'to
another case, and should at the same time express it as his
strongest hope that no Honourable Gentleman would for one
minute suppose that he had any unreasonable prejudice
against any one because of his religious persuasion, or that
because of his religion he would make an exorbitant claim,
and he therefore did not question whether that individual
was a Jew or a Christian ; but in the case of Pacifico, he be-
lieved that there could not be a more exaggerated case, for
while he (Sir F. Thesiger) admitted that some of his furni-
ture was materially injured by the mob in that country, he
could not be induced to believe that it was worth 4,9161., as
the man was in most needy circumstances, being obliged to
pledge his plate for 301., that he might lend out to the poor
people of that country, at a very usurious interest, and he
consequently confessed that he did not believe that he was
possessed of all the drachmas which he alleged be lost on that
occasion ; and he also wished to add,. that when the mob left.
his house they did not take with them' the accounts which
stated the amount due to bins by the Portuguese Government.
He therefore felt astonished that the Noble Lord (Lord Pal-
merston) should support such a claim as that of Pacifico for
such a sum ; and not only support him, but to enforce that
claim by force of naval arms. For he considered that., a.
Foreign Secretary should act with the greatest gentleness
and urbanity towards all -other nations, particularly towards
a nation that he was bound to protect; particularly as
Pacifico alao left his case to arbitration, on which occa-,
sion he endeavoured to implicate six persons, who were
all acquitted by. the court.—(lronical cheers from Mr. Roe-
buck.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Roebuck)
must know that that trial was not brought on for the in-
demnification of the losses sustained by that person, but for
the punishment of those six persons, should they be found
guilty of having violated the law of the country. He should
say that the tribunals of the country were open to Pacifico,
and that he should have gone to those tribunals before he
would plunge the honour and character of this country in
jeopardy, which latter course would be only justifiable,
should he, as a British subject, meet with injustice in those
courts. Suppose that in 1780 a violent and infuriated mob
had broken into the house of a Roman Catholic (a foreigner),
many of which cases had then occurred, would the Hon.
and Learned Gentlemen (Mr. Roebuck) agree with the fo-

reign( ea (34overnment, that they would be justified in pro-
claimi X.-; war against this country? He believed not. On
the wl r de, he believed, that the case of the Pacifico
require i i calm consideration and due inquiry, and he felt
assure i that the result would be t hat there was a very great
extigg oration of the claim of this man. Re contended that
the inn erference of France was perfectly justifiable under all
the cir zumstmces that he bad already stated, as well as with
reepec ,t to the capture of the six lonian boats at the custom-
house ,of Salcina. He did not mean to trespass on the
bus a much longer, and for that reason had confined himself
to th r. three claims which were ordered to be enforced by the
Briti a a squadron. He should say that the claims of the two
person is, Finlay and Pacifico, were without any foundation,
and V sus the cool and firm answer of M. Londos to Mr.
Wysi t. Nothing in his (Sir F. Thesiger's) opinion could be
mori calm or more dignified. And how was it answered by
thus: British Government? By an overwhelming armed force,
who ch was sent against a friendly Government, and against
wl lose commerce a heavy blow was dealt, and ves-
sel s were seized of the value of 17,000/., in satis-
fac lion of the claims of M. Pacifico, amounting in the most
to ,',OOO/.—(Hear, hear.) Looking at the whole of the cir-
ca instances in those proceedings, he would ask the House
w Nether they were prepared to vote for the motion of the
ion. Member for Sheffield ?—(Hear, hear, from the Oppo-
s tt.i (n.) He would now refer the attention 'of the house to
t Jar, policy of the Noble Lord at the head of foreign affairs,
ar (1 ask the House if that policy was the policy of peace?—
(? lear, hear ) There were two small islands, Cerva and Sa-
p «oiza, about which the question had been raised, as to whe-
t her they rightfully belonged to, and should be considered
as part of, the dominions of Greece, or ought to go with the
seven islands which were in possession of Great Britain. A
correspondence took place on the subject, and the Noble Lord
sent instructions to Admiral Parker to proceed with an over-
whel mingarmed force and seize those islands. That proceeding
led to the interference of Russia, and to a correspondence be-
tween the Noble Lord and Count Nesselrode, which assumed
a rather serious aspect, and led to the withdrawal of the
Noble Lord's demand.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition.)
The lion. and Learned Gentleman then directed the atten-
tion of the Houie to the negotiations which commenced on
the subject of the claims of M. Pacifico and others on the
Greek Government, and the offer of friendly mediation on
the part of France, and acceptance by the British Govern-
ment of such mediation. He then passed to the arrival at
Athens of Baron Gros, as representative of the French Go-
vernment, the interviews between him and Mr. Wyse, the
British Minister at the Court of Athens. and of all those
subsequent proceedings in the history of the case which have
been already so frequently discussed, and are now publicly
so well known. In the course of the negotiation a demand,
he said, was made that 180,000 drachmas should be deposited
pen ding the negotiation, in satisfaction of M. Pacifico's claims ;
and on the failure of compliance with those terms, coercive
measures were resolved on and resumed, in consequence of
which the King of Greece was compelled to pay one million of
drachmas.—(" No, no," from the Ministerial benches.) Then
it was not important.—(Laughter.) He now found that
330,000 drachmas were only demansied - but it was not of im-
portance.—(Hoar, What was the condition
po ri
nt an ce
which
.
the(HaNeobri
eand o
rlgda laughter.)
ohotde r.that moment? The Noble at
Lord was accused and insulted in certain grave charges made
against him—charges followed up by the withdrawal of the
French Ambassador (M. Drouyn de l'Huys) from the British
Court ; and at that moment the Noble Lord was compelled
to accept of terms quite contrary to those of the convention
in the first instance—terms, mark, not containing one word
of thelpoints insisted ou by Mr. Wyse. (The lion. and Learned
Gentleman then read a copy of the communication made on
the subject of the settlement of the Greek question by
General Lahitte to the National Assetably, indicating
that France had not yielded anything of the conditions
NS hich she at first proposed.). The Noble Lord, he said, held
out until he had almost driven the two nations to the verge
of war, and had subjected his own nation to humiliation; and
was at last compelled to accede to that which he might and
ought to have acceded to in the first instance. The opinions
of the French Government, and of the greater part of
Europe, was against the course taken by the Noble Lord.
General Lahitte had said that the French Government had
no other motive in the affair than to aid in effecting justice
between the parties, and the opinion of Russia and of all the
other powers were averse to the course taken by the Noble
Lord. He should be glad to know whether the course of the
Noble Lord was the course best calculated to procure peace.
He thought not, and that, so far from that, it was calculated
rather to subject the British nation to humiliation and
degradation. With respect to the assertion that Lord
Aberdeen had used' quite as strong language as that
used by the Noble Lord on the subject of the Greek loan,
he ( Sir F. Thesiger) must say there was a very •marked
difference. The course adopted by the Noble Lord (the
Earl of Aberdeen) was of a very different character. He
could not conclude his remarks without alluding to a state-
ment of the Noble Lord, in which the Noble Lord had
said that he would not be the Minister of Russia or of
France, or of any other power—(Hear, hear)— but that he
would be the Minister of England only. He must say that
he hardly understood the meaning of that statement of the
Noble Lord, but he presumed that the Noble Lord meant to
say that " upon every occasion while he was at the head of
the foreign affairs of this country he would be found to act
with regard to the sustainment of British interests, but not
with regard to the interests of any other country." Now,
if that was the meaning of the Noble Lord, he (Sir F.
Thesiger) thought it was a very unsafe and a very danger-
ous one. He apprehended that in political ethics a state
should be regarded in the same manner as an individual,
with all his responsibilities and rights; and the Noble
Lord, acting as the Minister of England; would be
departing from the rule of right if, in his management of
the interests of England, he were not to give the same at-
tention`to the interests of other countries that he would to
his own. There was a difference between domestic policy
and foreign policy, according to the Noble Lord. It was not
a very high eulogium on a Foreign Minister to say that he
would 'be the Minister of his own nation only, and not of
any other. Now, in what situation would they be placed,
should the House assent to the motion of the Hou. Member
for Sheffield ? They were not called upon to express a direct
opinion or censure on the policy of the Noble Lord. A
general resolution, approving of the Noble Lord's policy,
was presented to them in relation to his course on the ques-
tion now before the House. But a vote of this House in fa-
vour of that resolution would lose more than half of its
effect by a reference to a vote which had been come to on the
question in another place. Foreign nations were aware that
an opinion had been pronounced by a majority of the other
House of Parliament, condemnatory of the Noble Lord's po-
licv on the question now under the considerationof this House ;
and the sentence which had been pronounced by abet House,
had gone forth to all lands. The Noble Lord had been con-
victed by that sentence, and let this House do what it might,
it was quite impossible that he could refute that sentence or
reinstate himself in the confidence of foreign nations. -
(Hear, hear.) He venture.!, on the facts which he had sub-
mitted, to maintain that the Noble Lord at the head of fo-
reign affairs had constantly intervened, not to secure free-
dom, but for the purpose of either insisting peremptorily for
demands which should not be made, or for the purpose of
encouraging revolutions which were called an approach to
self-government, and he could show that, having so inter-
fered, the Noble Lord had lett these revolutionary parties to
their fate. For these reasons, and being influenced by these
considerations, he intended giving a decided negative to the
motion which the Hon. and Learned Member for Sheffield
had submitted to the House.—(Cheers.)
Mr. P. WOOD said that he came down to the House be-

that the Commons of England would have to discuss
a question of the greatest importance, and deeply affecting
the interest, the honour, and the dignity of this country.
He had no idea that the motion would be met by such ar-
guments as those which had been used—of details of the
exaggeration of Don Pacifico's claim, or of the paltriness of
the vulgar speculation of Mr. Finlay, which he confessed
every one of which he had either heard or read:before, and
which tilled him with such ineffable disgust that he did not
believe they would have been sanctioned by the Hon. and
Learned Member for Abingdon adopting them. He was
surprised, too, that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman should
have thrown out the miserable insinuation that the Hon.
and Learned Member for Sheffield had earned a re•
ward, or was entitled to receive a reward, from
the Government for the part he took in con-
nexion with this question of such serious import.
He told the Honourable and Learned Member for
Abingdon that the Hon. and Learned Member for Sheffield
had already earned a reward which it was in the power of no
Government to confer, namely, the affection and attachment
of the people of England. The Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man, however, was quite able to defend himself against such
an attack, and he (Mr. Wood) merely noticed it to show
the nature of the arguments they had to expect from the
quarter whence such insinuations emanated. The question
they were to discuss was one of great and serious import.
The determination of another place, as he suspected by their
resolution, was founded on this avowed principle, that they
desired to announce to Europe that the Foreign-office was not
England. That principle had been well and.promptly mat
by the counter-resolution of the Hon. and Learned Member

for Sheffield, in which they were called on to state that
the Foreign-office had been well represented, and that the
course pursued was calculated to uphold the dignity
and honour of England. The Lords, by their vote, had'
expressed an opinion that the Minister of Eagland
had been regardless of England's honour. Every step
taken by the Noble and Learned Lord who submitted the
proposition in the House of Peers was well known in this
House; but the Commons of England had not expressed any
vote in consideration of that foreign policy, nor ware they
called upon to express any such opinion. No Member had
ventured to ask the decision of the House of Commons
whether England's honour had been tarnished during that
Administration which it was contended had brought them
into such a humiliating position. If that resolution were
correct the Ruse of Commons had neglected its duty, and
they had announced to the whole of Europe whenever you
have a complaint to make you know that you have the
House of Lords to complain to. Now, his opinion was
directly opposed to that holden in the resolution of the House
of Lords. He believed that the policy of the Noble Lord the
Secretary for Foreign Affairs, especially in reference to Greece,
was best calculated to uphold the dignity and the honour of
England, and to maintain phace with foreign countries. If
they took issue on the whole policy of the Noble Lord they
could ne,t have a better example than in the case of Greece.
So far from being *rutting in dignity- and honour by the
course pursued, they should have been wanting in both had
they abstained from interfering in sustainment of the right'
of British subjects, and in obtaining for them speedy redress
for the wrongs they suffered. The only blame attachable to
Lord Palmerston was, that he had not done that in 1848
which he caused to be done in .1850.—(Hear.) A British
subject failed to obtain redress from the Greek Government
in a just claim for compensation. He appealed to the re-
presentatives of the British Government on the spot where
the injustice had been done him ; and then they were told
that this was the case of a canny Scot, who had made a good
bargain, and wished to hold it.—( Hear.) Then there was
the case of the plunder of property of a British subject—the
sons of the Minister of War being parties to the mischief—
who in addition to the total demolition of his furniture, had
his wife and daughter beaten. The answer given
to this case was, that it was the case of a Jew, and that
he had put forward very exaggerated claims for com-
pensation. He (Mr. Wood) felt deeply ashamed that in a
place where Don Pacifico had not an opportunity of being
heard, it should be alleged against him that he bore the name
of a person who would have been convicted of forgery if he had
failed to put down a certain sum of money. In Pacifico's
case the plain broad facts amounted simply to this, that he,
a British subject, had been refused redress by the Greek Go-
vernment for gross insults and injuries which he experi-
enced; and would it be contended that they upheld the
honour and dignity of England if such a state of things
were permitted to pass unnoticed? In the third case a man
named Zumaika was subjected to the muse cruel torture,
after the Turkish fashion, without any evidence in sustain-
ment of some alleged charge being preferred against him.
He (Mr. Wood) could prove, as he would do by and by, that
the unfortunate fellow had been cruelly and brutally tor-
tured. Redress was refused him, and were they to be told
t hat the British Government should tolerate injustice on one
who had a right to claim protection front them? A
man was to be robbed, according to the morality
of those who supported the resulution of the other
House, because he happened to be a Scot; another was to
have his furniture destroyed, his house pillaged, and his
wife and daughter beaten, because he was a Jew; and a
third was violently and indecently tortured, because he was
accused of burglary without any evidence being produced
against him. in a fourth case a positive and direct ineult

was offered to the British navy, by the treatment• to which
the crew of the Fantome was subjected. They were told,
forsooth, that they should pass all those cases by. It did
seem to him that those who came to that conclusion must
have had rather a singular notion of what was due to the
honour and dignity of England. The Learned Gentleman
then went into the details of Mr. Finlay's case,
commenting on the manifest injustice of refusing
him compensation for the portions of his property
which the Greek Government had appropriated to
their own purposes, and showing that in 1542 Lord Aber-
deen considered he had a just claim for remuneration. The
Greek Government, aftsr various applications on the part
of Mr. Finlay, told that gentleman to take his re-
medy, but the law of Greece did not permit of any recovery
against the King. At length they consented to have the
matter arbitrated, appointing as an arbitrator the•president
of the tribunal, just as it justice in such a reference could be
expected from a party so interested, but they held back all
the papers connected with the matter in dispute until the
legal period of the reference had expired. In Pacifico%) case
it was asked why he had not applied to the authorities for
redress. He did try the authorities. He went before the
police, pointed out certain individuals, including the sons of
the Minister of War, as having been implicated in the out-
rage, but no redress was rendered him. M. Pacitioo com-
plained to the King's advocate of the outrage committed
upon him, that a fotoue mob broke into his house. heated by
the two sons of General Zavelios, one of the King's own
Ministers, and President of the Council; he pointed out
the hote‘es where his plundered property was concealed,
hut they refused to search, and he was una')le to assert
for himself the rights of a Greek citizen, because he was
a Jew. The Honourable and Learned Member for Abing-
don asked, whether during the riots of Lord George
Gordon in 1780, if a house of a foreign Minister were attacked,
beta use he happened to be a Roman Catholic, would it be a
case fin. the Government of that Minister to demand redress?
Undoubtedly it would, and the case would be rendered irre-
sistible if the leader of the mob who committed the outrage
was the son of one of the Ministers of the day—(Loud cries
of " Hear, hear")—and the foreigner robbed and plundered
because he was a Roman Catholic, a circumstance as likely
to happen in those miserable times as that of the outrage on
the Jew at Athens. That undoubtedly would be a case for
foreign intervention, and that was precisely the case of M.
Pacitico.—(Cheers.) The Greek Minister, however, when
informed of the transaction, said it was a mere frolic of a
parcel of idle schoolboys, and unquestionably in his (Mr. P.
Wood's) view of the entire transaction, that House and the
country ought to feel grateful to the Noble Lord at the head
of the Foreign-office for taking such care of the interests
of British subjects abroad, and securing them from
a repetition of such horrible and flagrant outrages
as were committed in the present case. But then
it was said that the money taken from him WAS
not his own ; and how did that affect the case? The money,
no doubt, was trust money—two hundred and thirty pounds
of it were given him to build a synagogue, and 801. of his
own money. It was also alleged that he had nojewelsein big
house, but witnesses deposed to their having seen them, as
well as to the costly character of the furniture destroyed, and
the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Buckinghamshire, who
delighted them in other respects by graphic descriptions, as
well as in his speeches in that House, knew well that it was
the custom of the Jews in the East to have their riches and
most valuable property secluded altogether from the public
gaze. As to the statement made that his claim on the Por-
tuguese Government was a mere pretence, he (Mr. Wood)
knew that he made his demand for that claim so early as
1845, and Sir Edmund Lyons, their former Minister at Athens,
distinctly states, in one of his dispatches, that he remem-
bered
well speaking to him on the subject, and it could not
therefore be trumped up for the occasion. If they looked at
Baron Gros's statement, and, without wishing to say anything
offensive to that gentleman, he should say M. Pacifico fell
into bad hands, they would find it the most extraordinary
for one in his position that could be imagined. He
was sent out as a mediator, and the first thing he did in
tnat capacity was to refuse the Portuguese claim on the
evidence of the debtor.—(Loud cheers.) The most extra-
ordinary circumstance in that extraordinary case was, that
there was a gentleman sent out by the French Government
to act impartially. He refused to admit the claim on the
Portuguese Government, because he received two dispatches
from that Government denying the claim. (Cheers and
laughter.) Next came the case which was not discussed at
all—natuely, that of a poor man named Zumaika, an lonian
subject. He was at Patras, working as a blacksmith, and
being charged with committing burglary, on mere suspicions,
he was, on denying the offence, put to the torture. They put
a heavy stone on his chest, on which two men sat, and then
the unfortunate creature had to undergo another process of
suffering of too horrible and indecent a description to
detail to the House. He made a complaint the
day after, and a mock investigation was ordered by the
Government, and a person with the pompous name
of Chricento Fulue, a doctor, was the person who
conducted it. He inspected the man, and what was his
report? That he had suffered no external injury—that no
organic change had taken place in him, and that his injuries
were the result of an attack of rheumatism - (A laugh )--or
of his trade as a tiuker. (Laughter.) He contended that
the case, up to the present moment, had been treated of, and
discussed like a nisi Kitts case, and not on broad or general
principles. The case of that man underwent a secret exami-
nation, and when the British Vice-Consul remonstrated with
the physician for sending in such a report, his answer was
that he could not help it, for that the police compelled him
to do so. (Cheers.) Sir Edward Lyons stated the same
thing in one of his dispatches, and asserted that the physi-
cian told him so. That was the state of things described
elsewhere with so much levity; and when the words
" brutal treatment" was so much cavilled at, could any
man doubt but that he was " brutally treated?"—(Hear,
hear, and cheers.) And in addition to the outrages to
which he had already called the attention of the House,
he was kept three months in prison, without any charge
whatever being sustained, or brought against him.
Anti after the refusal to • do justice on the part of the Greek
Government, was it not the bounden duty of the Foreign Mi-
nister to see that these things should not be repeated? But
that was not all; for continued insults had been Offered.
lonians were imprisoned without cause—flogged at the plea-
sure of those in power and a poor man fur putting up a few
flags was brought through the streets as a malefactor.—
(llear, hear.) Indeed, so great were the sufferings they en-
dured, that a memorial was presented to the Consul (signed
by forty lonians in nand) praying for redress and puttee-
tion, or they would be compelled to leave the country alto-
gether. Then came the plunder of the lonian boats, valued
at 1,2001., and which were enticed into the Greek custom-
house by brigands; and the last, the most flagrant of
all, committed on one of their own boats Wont:lug to
the Fantome ship, commanded by Captain Le Hardy.
The whole of these outrages were set forth in De-
cember, 18'8, and the Greek Government urged not to
mistake the forbearance of England, for ample satisfac-
tion should be given in the end. Mr. Vityse's letter
again recapitulated them, and used almost the same language
in his letter to Mr. Londos. What could be done under
such circumstances, but to demand reparation.—(Cheers.)
Should they have gone to Russia and France and say,
that if they were in their unhappy position, they would
demand reparation. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then
read the celebrated letter of Count Nesselrode, the Russian
Minister, complaining of what the Government, in pro-
ceeding with hostilities against Greece, a kingdom indebted
to Russia and France for large sums of money advanced to
her, and proceeded. They might talk of dignity, and assert
that this letter humbled England, but it only amounted in
his mind to this, Ithat if England insisted on having the
claims of her subjects compensated, there would not be
enough left to pay their demand. We hail broken that
delusion, he trusted, for ever, and shown that England
could be at once just and firm. The course adopted towards
Greece—that of stopping her trade for a short time—was
the only one open, looking at the relative strength of the
two countries. Surely Hon. Members did not wish
that we should have a " little war" with Greece. But,
after having waited for so many years, after
having so repeatedly remonstrated with the Government, it
was n-cessary to show that there was a limit to forbearance,
and he thought the step taken at last by the Noble LOrd
was the only one that could maintain the interests, the
honour, and the dignity of England, and also at the same
time maintain an honourable general peace. He had felt it
to be his duty to present this view of the case, because he
believed the public were not acquainted with it.—(Hear,
hear.) Few, indeed, could submit to the drudge, yof going
through the mass of papers in which the facts were con-
tained. But if any one would do so, they would find every
statement he had made borne out by these documents. It
was one thing to make a statement having reference to a
few small details, for the purpose of making out a case of
hardship, and another to look through papers extending over
the long period of eight years, during the whole of which
period every species of evasion and of idle trifling was re-
sorted to. He had done this himself, and he came

to the deliberate conclusion that the Noble Lord
had taken the only step that was open to him in
the matter. He came to this conclusion from no
personal feeling, because, though for many years he had
watched the course of the Noble Lord, he did not know him

personally, nor did he know that he had ever exchanged a
word with him. But this he did say, that looking to the
year 1848, when the peace of Europe was menaced to so
alarming an extent, and to the adroitness with which the
Noble Lord maintained the position and influence of England,
and at the same time conduced to the preservation of peace-
in Europe—(Cheers)—looking at that, and seeing that at all
events peace had been maintained, he could not believe but
that the Noble Lord was entitled to the admiration and the
support of the country.—(Cheers.) It was true that the
Noble Lord had been engaged in negotiations with France
and other countries, arising out of those events. But those
who deprecated the interference of the Noble Lord, spoke as
though there kad been no interference elsewhere, as if France
bad not interfered at Rome—(Ministerial cheers)—Russia
in Hungary (Cheers)—and Prussia with Denmark.—(Hear,
hear.) These were armed interferences, whereas the inter-
ference of the Noble Lord had in all cases been first solicited,
and had always been confined to friendly meditation, with
the view of maintaining peace.—(Great laughter on the
Opposition benches.) He could understand why that state-
ment was ridiculed by those who were for maintaining peace
by at all times ranging themselves, on the side of absolutism
—( Ministerial cheers)—who were, as the Hon. and Learned
Member for Abingdon had said, "the party.of order and not
of change." His Hon. and Learned Friend, no doubt,
thought he had made an antithesis when he used that ex-
pression, but there was little philosophy in it. He believed
That change was the only mode of maintaining order.—
(Hear.) He would ask any one who had observed the pre-
sent state of European nations, if they believed that order
could be long maintained if it was not for change. It was not
for us to stimulate that change. Our desire was that every
nation in t urope should be as free and as happy as ourselves.
But it was well known that our power and influence were
limited to friendly advice. Whenever that was asked it was
given freely. We did not interfere against existing autho-
rities
wellrit
or money from the British Government. He must say
anytne
they
o luvno turlyd, annodt those
ve whon s s
iospt
ap
no sn themte
r in kanr en:
sthinat
-
that he regretted that when the Hungarian :deputation
came to this country they should have trusted
more to the declarations made at public meet
ings, by persons who kad no power of realising their
statements, or of giving efficient assistance, than to the
exposition of the Noble Lord's views in that House, in
which he frankly expressed his deep sympathy with that
unfortunate people, but at the same time frankly stated that
they could have no assistance from the Government. If
these gentlemen had been deceived it had not been by the
Noble Lord, or the Ministry with which he was connected,
which had strictly acted on the avowed policy of non-inter-
ference with the internal affairs of Foreign States. lie well
remembered that when the Hon. Member for Buckingham-
shire ventured to raise a debate with regerd to Italy, he was
not able to point to any act of interference which was not justi-
tied by the Noble Lord, by showing that his advice, so far
from being volunteered, had in every instance been asked.
It was requested by the Sovereigns of Rome, the Court
of Austria, and the Cabinet of Prussia. In the case
of the mediation at the instance of Austria, there
could be no doubt the Noble Lord had aided in
preventing French armies being sent to the plains
of Lombardy.—( Hear, hear.) With respect to the affair at
Athens, much had been said in depreciation of the claims of
one of the parties, because he was a Jew; but Hon. Mem-
bers were aware that the, teem Greek Ihad a similar signifi-
cation for the French people. The fact was, that the
Greeks and the Jews had been trampled upon' oppressed,
and precluded from the exercise of constitutional rights, and

i in-such cam the moral- feelings were •naturally weakened-.
, But the Jews were gradually, under an enlighted policy.
being admitted to the participation of those rights, and the
consequence fpnirelltiohne
positon in which w
w hicahs at tbhaeav
bweeerne rapidlyplaced
brye cponvscareidn go
p'
and misgovernment. It was their hope that, when Greece
was liberated from the thraldoin in which it bad been for-
merly held —when it was placed tinder the rule of a prince
of the Frank-German race—that it would have risen to its
pristine glory. Instead of that, however, the independence
of Greece had been threatened by being placed under Rus-
sian 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.)
Sir. J. GRAHAM—Let Us, Sir, before the evening closes,
at all events get out of nisi prius.—(Loud Cheers and laugljter
from the Protectionists.) We have new 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 Leained Gentleman Made an observation at the
commencement of his speech in which I corcar, nitnely,
that it is hardly possible to exaggerate the gravity of the
question under discussion, coupled with the attendant cir-
cuinatances of the tints when we aro discussing it. It
affects the dignity, the honour, and the interests of this
country.--(Bear, 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, woald you pardon me if I shortly revert to my
own position.—(Hear, hear.) I have given to the Govern-
ment which now presides over the destinies of this country,
for the last four years an independent and honest support,
because, in the state of parties, and with reference to the
general position of the country, 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 I may have differed, but I have exercised for-
bearance.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man (Mr. Wood) says he is not personally acquainted with
the Noble Viscount who now 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 fortune 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 i
cordial friendship.---(Cheers.) It was not because of any
difference on foreign affairs that I parted from that Govern-
ment with which we were both connected. On the contrary,
he and I, front the offices we held in the Government of Lotd
Grey, were forced into intimate and perpetual communica-
tion ; 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-
fore feel no hostility to the Government or to the Noble Lord,
but I feel that we are here to-night deliberately to discuss,:
not the narrow question of Greece, but the more enlarged'
question of otir foreign policy generally. You 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-i
mending that the neutrality which his Majesty suggested;
with regard to Portugal should be observed. 'I hat 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 250. That was a course quite intelligible
But now, the Hon. Member for Sheffield, not acting in con-
cert with the Government, but exercising his own discretioni
has enlarged the subject and brought a much greater ques-
tion than that of Greece before the House. What we are
now debating is not confined -to Greece. The question is -
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 sue ;
and I will go very rapidly and frankly over some of the most
prominent points.—(Hear, hear.) 1 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 the sup-
port given to Belgium, when she threw off the yoke of Hol-
land. 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 yon
to recollect how Lord Grey acted, and how those critical
affairs were conducted. They were conducted with Prince
Talleyrand,inFrauce, and every step was taken deliberately,
with the full ind 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 nut only blockading thaports of Portugal, but
of lauding oar 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 porters of Europe.—(Cheers.) I would just observe
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 ohice, the Noble Lord (Palmer-
ston) exercised, is pointed out with great perspicuity by the
present Earl Grey, in a debate which took place in this Howe
when the
.Right Hon. Baronet.(Sir R. Peel) was at the head
of affairs. The words are-so pointed, so prophetic, they On-
taia such a forecasting of the future danger of that interfer-
.ence in which the Noble Lord is so proue to indulge, that I
will read an extract or two. Lord Howick is speaking on the
address on the Ist of Feb. 1844, he ear::

" Like the Right 800. 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 tile Trench 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 Ina-
nagetnent of their internal - affairs the batter 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
wishei of their respective Governments, a sort of 'French ato
English party was created. A struggle .for..ascendaney be-
tweeri thOse parties resulted, and the unfortunate system
was carried'on, became the prey of factions which' werefon-
casioned, and- of animosities which were embittered by this
kind of interference."

Further on Lord Howick says:
" lie had heard with mach-regret the expressions of his
Noble Friend (Isord Palmerston), who, iciVerting 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) had 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, and 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 Noble, Lord began a system of interference in all
the affairs of Spain. He came into office in June, 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 Minister of an ally in a time of pro-
found peace? (Cheers from the Protectionists.)
The Noble Lord proceeded to say that violence
and power bad 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 inters
preted these dispatches as declarations of hostility against
the Spanish Ministry.—(Hear, hear.) • I will now pass on
to 1848. 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 returoed 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 administr
a.
tion, and take - some Liberal into office. Narvaez -re.
ceived this communication with extraordinary
lcompla.
ceney, and told Sir Henry Bulwer that he would
way for ,the Progressista.. He, however, .came to,
a differentraake
determination, fur, like the Noble Lord opposite, he did]not
give way to his political rival. Asre garded 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 expulsion of Sir H.
Buivrer • the Noble Lord, while
he consented' to the reconciliadtion, inserted in his
e.
lldis-
patch, a' most uncalled-for an
the effect that if Sir . extraordinary Passag
Bulwer was not already across the
Atlantic he would advise his Sovereign to select. no other
person than. Sir H. Bulwer for her representative at the
court of Madrid. Was that the way to keep this country on
the most amicable relations • h
(Cheers.) The selection
with thegrea powerst of Europe ?
could have produced no other effect than
o of Sir 11. Bulwer in that way
the renewal of the
most bitter enmity between the two countries.—( Hear,
hear.) Well, then, we had frequently interfered with Por-
tugal ; the object of the Noble Lord being, as far as was
consistent with our friendly relations, to promote the
cause of civil liberty. But; bad the Noble Lord been
successful in that respect, either in Spain or Portugal ?
Had:he been successful in placing in power the men
who were most likely to effect that object ? He had
rivetted Narvaez in Spain.—(Hear.) While in Pi rtugal
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 Minister in Por-
tugal, and was 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 Ron. 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
.schisin which took place in the autumn of 1817 between the

different states composing- the Republic of Switzerlandron
one hand the Sonderbund, on the other the ultra-Republi-
cans—and of the part acted in reference thereto by France
and England. Guizot was -in favour of the Sonderbund
or moderate Republicans, and for checking the Sonderbund:
At that time M. Morier was withdrawn, and Mr. Peel ap-
pointed our charge d'affaires. It was proposed by the Che-
valier Bunsen that a mote should be signed by the five powers,
and a draft of the note was prepared by the Duke de Broglie.
On .the 6th of November the note was tendered by the Duke
de Broglie to the Noble Lord, who kept it till the 16th, with-
out any communication relating thereto. On the 16th he
sent it. suggesting alterations, to Paris, and from, the 16th
to the 26th of November was consumed in agreeing to and
.signing the note. , On the 91ed of November Mr. Peel wrote
to the Noble Lord frees Basle, stating that General Dufour
had advaneAl on Lausanne, where the Sonderbund was col-
lected. liis. letter was received on the 26th,- the day the,
note was signed, and on the 27th the Noble Lord addressed
'him instructions to the effect, that if on arriving at Bask, he
found the Sonderbund dissolved dttur a complete Victory, in
that casehe must not present ate nOte• Air. Peel, in conse-
quence of private instructions from the Noble Lord, sent to
general Dufour, directing hint to lose no tite, but to make
haste in his operations.
Lord PALMERSTON—That k not true:- (Cheers.)
• Sir.l. GRAIIAM—The confidence of the Government was
not, Lowever, withdrawn front Mr. peel. He remained
chargé d'aftitires, and was, he believed, still in the employ-
ment of the Government. .

Lord PALMERSTON—I sent no. such message.— (Cheers
soda laugh)

Sir J..GRAIIAII,--Then the Noble Lord meant to convey
that the Ministers of France and Spain so 'stating were
guilty of saying what was nor borne out by fact. (We un-
deretood Lord Peltnerston to assent.) The misunderstand-
ing that arose between M. 6uizot and the Noble Lord in re-
ference to that transact len led to a degree of animosity on the
part of the Noble Lord, which pursued Ai. Guizot to his fall.
—(Oh; oh.) He was compelled, however, to cheep . upon
the Noble Lord a much heavier responsibility- the over-
throw of a Monarchy and the establishment of a Republic,
whiCh the authors of it now desired to modify. He leas
sure it eveeld, be to the end of the Noble Lord's life a source
ot regret to him that, whereAs be only intended to overthrow
M. Guizot, in his efforts to do so he effected a change the
results of which it was iriipoisible' to calculate.—(Cries of
" Oh.") Then, with regard to Anstria. In February, 1848,
the Noble Lord laid on the tabltea short correspondence, con-
taining a dispatch to Lord Poneonby, Which implied that
Austria was engaged in designs inconsistent with the indee
pendence of Piedmont, and in which 'the Noble Lord said
distinctlythat the execution of any such purpose would not
be'regarded with indifference by her Majesty's Government.
It was a fact beyond all doubt, that the Noble Lord received
in answer to that dispatch a note from Prince Metternich at
Vienna, containing a solemn •of . any such intention,
and stating that the policy of,: Austrialtowards Italy was
purely defensive, that 'east of all did she entertain the alleged
intention towards Piedmont, and that so far from it she was
ready to enter into an arrangement to maintain her indepen-
dence. That correspondence took place in' August and Sep,
tember, 1847, and in February, 1818, • the Noble Lord pre-
sented a paper to that House containing the letter of accusa-
tion, but not accompanying it with the letter of Prince Met-
ternich in• reply. It was not until the month of Angust ,
when Lord Brougham moved for a copy of ir, that the dis-
patch was produced. Such was the transaction' with Austria
which had been so loudly complained of, and which he must
say redounded little to-the honour of this country.' The very
fact of that dispatch was a cause of. excitement. Piedmont
became the assailant, and then the question Arose—did her
Majesty's Governmeut do all in their. power to restrain her
attacks ? Their exertions, he regretted to say, amounted to
.a simple suggestion that Austria was strong and Piedmont
was weak. Austria applied to,the Noble Lord for his media-
tion, and the Noble Lord refused it 'Unless Austria consented
to the surrender of Venice as well as Lombardy. It was impos-
sible to divine the amount of mischief which had flowed from
that refusal. Well, Rome was in the occupation of the French
array; Lombardy was again 'occupied by the absolute sewer
of Russia; Venice had been reconquered ; so that, in point of
-fact, there was not to be seen. a vestige. of that liberty
which the Noble Lord said he was so anxious, to
.preservee
.With regard to Sicily, it was open to her Ma-
jesty's Government to give any, advice; and Sicily
bad, moreover, peculiar claims upon our intervention.
But the interference that took plaCe Was in terms not very
complinientary to his Neapolitan "Majesty; arid not only' in
the shape. of advice, but elle British fleet was actually em-
Ployed on the coast ot Sicily. The Sicilian liieurgerits
thought for aerecenent of tendering the, crown to. the Duke
of Game, and they sent a messenger on board a British man-
of-war, and assurances were given that if the Duke of Genoa
would accept the crown be would be recognised by Eng-
land. 'The King of Naples asserted his. power.. The insur-
gents bad been encouraged by us;. they relied on our assist-
ance; they. prolonged their resistance, relying on our assist-
ance ; they were overcome ; we left them to their fate •
and when a large body of these Sicilian refugees fled to Malt;
they were retlised admission by: our Governor. These
matters he was anxious to have:explained by the Noble
Lord.' With regard to the Hungarian refugees, he admitted
distinctly in terms ae etrong as could be used by any gentle-
man, that the message sent by the Emperor of 'Bessie, through
au eide-de-camp, demanding either the expulsion or the
surrender of the Hungarian refugees, was a harsh measure,
,and . one evbich it became England to prevent. The
Course taken by her Majesty's Government in the first •
instance was not only unexceptionable, but right and
highly honourable;' theiy appealed to the ' generesity
and good faith of the Emperor, in a dispatch fine in its tone,
And 'yet conciliatory in its character while doing, this. But
it was not wise to take any step which could' be construed
into' menace. To send a fleet to the' Dardanelles before- an
answer was given to that message was imprudent, in
the highest . degree. .By • the treaty ofieliukietr- Skelessi,
it was, provided that - the . Dardanelles—And.-- the
Bosphorees should not. under any pretext, -be passed
withoute special firman from the. Sultan.. The Eugliah
fleet, however, not only proceeded to the mouth of the Dar-
danellee, but Sir Stratford Canning called on the fleet to go
ep to Constantinople and, if he was not 'mistaken, the
fleet went part of the Way ; but, be that as it
may, it went inside the Dardanelles. When the Emperor
of -Russia heard that this hostile demonstration had been
made at the mouth .of tho Dardanellts, ho was
naturally,. very indignant, and an excuse was made. by
the British Government.—(Opposition cheere.) Now, this
was a question which touched the honour of the English
nation. Was the excuse which was made consistent with
the facts or not? The excuse was that• the fleet was driven
within the Derdanelles by stress of Weither. Now there
eras a living witness, a Alemeer of the' Wiese of Peers, who
stated in his place in Parliament, that, so far from being
driven in by stress of weather, Sir William Parker weighed
anchor On a fine day, arreentered the Dardanelleu in smooth
water.—(Hear, hear.)' Now, this brought him to the affairs
a Greece. He had already said that the toneus utned by
the Noble Lord to foreign linisters was sometiineeso offen-
sivethat he was not surprised that hostile feelings should be
'generated even 'where it was desirable .that .the relations
Should be most amicable. lie heldin his hand a letter.pur-
porting to be .written by the Noble Lord to' AL t viararchi,
'dated October, 1847, and which_) had appeared in. ere Greek
.p4per. The. French, party was at Out time in power at
:Athens, and this letter was published there, and had not been
contradicted._ (The Right Hon, „Baronet then read the letter
ip question, whiele stated thatiSf. Delararchl would do well to
abstain 'from—Unfounded accusations against lier'
Government, and he ought not to forget that these were net
the means by which the relations of the British' anti Grecian
Governments could be placed on a more satisfactory ,footing.
Her Majesty's Government had-heard with great regret
the'declaration that MSDelararchi had resolved 'on pur-
suing the same course which bad been pursued by M..Co-
letti ; that system had-been a system of illegality, of cor-
ruption, of violence, injustice; and tyranny, oppressive and
disgusting to the Greek nation. Her Majesty% Government
had, hoped that thil'ioiquitousS system would haVe ceased
with the life of a Minister who was considered as its author,
but as M. Delararehi declared that he meant to continue
the same eysteni it was evident thht he was acting under an
influence equally hostile to the welfare' of 'Greece and
to this country.) Was. it not quite natural that there should
be some difficulty in preserving amicable• arrangements
after &letter so addressed? The Noble Lord took great
credit to himself for furthering free institutions. It so--hap-
pened that after the demise of Mr. Canning, the question of
the independence of Greece was unsettled. ,It was not until
1829, when the Earl of Aberdeen was Secretary:for Foreign
Affairs, that the independence of Greece was established,
and it was not until 1845, he thought, that there was -any
constitutional geeernment, and it was when his Right lion.
Friend (Sir Robert Peel) was in power, and Lord' Aberdeen
was at the head of the Foreign department, and • very much
in. consequence of representations from our Government,
that the ccnstitutionel government was established. Well
now, he imagined that, after all, truth and plain •'dealing
were the best. Well now, he had every reason to be-
lieve that Greece *as not innocent of covert inter-
ference and fornentiag insurrection iu the loniau Islands.
Had there been any evidence to sustain the charge, there
was ho' length to which we might not have pushed: our
hostility. Now Sir Henry WarllS in it speech addressed to
his senate:: preferred the eharge in direct-terms.- It was met
indignantly by King Otho ; Sir Henry Ward then retracted
it, but in the papers presented to the French Chambers in a
dispatch dated the ,14th of Merch, by M. Drouyn de Melee
:that complaint was again referred to .by the Minister of I'o-
reign Affairs. Now with respect to these Grecian claims,
the claims of M. Pacific() and of Mr.. Finlay, and niore espe-
cially inrespect of au English boat's crew that had been
oeized, much had been said in vindicatiou of them,'bat be
must say these appeared 'to him,to be the least important
part of this matter. The Honourable and Learned Mem-
ber for ' Sheffield, who, 'he . hoped, would excuse him (Cr
saying so. had with great address taken the part df an
able advocate, but passed entirely 'over the claims of the
dthiffietucurisainidndidsopuabtatbfalle.c;
two islands. Sir Henry Ward said that our claim to
Nseowdidhe
Venice, When Venice was conquerneodt
It depended, in fact,
te:int.—(Hear, hear.)
whether these islands belonged to
treaty. Now it was, by must say, that a more
• France, and as to
whether they bad been transferred to Venice by :a ;previous
islands were not seiied in October last, according-to an
the merest accident that -these
-order; from' the For • office-ro the- Admiralty, and an order
from the Admiralty' et) ;Sir William Parker. Neither of
these documents wasegiven in these papers, but there was a
letter from Sir William Parker acknowledging the receipt of
the September, answer was dated
instrucAtionnceordent
October. . hastye and ill-advised order was, never
given, AA have bad a
' d bad it been executed it was (iste. plena, that
of Sir William Parker, in h •
bdli By the prudence en-
cases •
France and Russia would, from a casus federis,
This
tatirig to execute that order, this complication affairs with
France and Russia had been avoided.brought him to
the conduct of this country towards France with reference
to Greece ; and again he said be deeply regretter . the
course taken by her Majesty's Government. Some Gentle-
men had expressed an opinion that ir-was-right to
refuse the mediation of France, and also her
good offices. Perhaps he might agree in the prudence of re-
fusing mediation because the affair had advanced solar' and
we had asserted our rights with so high a hand, that to
have accepted the mediation of France might have., been
hardly consistent with an independent position ; but:he must
say' France having tendered her mediation, to accept her
good offices appeared to him to be the surest course to lead
to a misunderstanding. But when the convetvion in London
had been signed, the natural course would have been, when

from some misunderstanding another, arrangement had
been extorted by force of arms,,:; the natural course,
and the wise course, would bop, been that the
convention in London should have been accepted,
and he thought it a great misfartune that that contee
was not taken. 0: course it would have been said tha
we attempted to obtain conditions less derogatory to the
dignity of England; but the transaction had ended eI•
actly m our accepting the worst of the Conditions thAt could
have been obtained from us. lVell now, consequent upon
that sotne.negotiation had taken place; and perhaps to wake
a point in the House of Lords, some portions of a correspou-
' dence had been published charging Baron Gros with a breach
of faith. Then another dispatch of Lord Normanby's was in-
troduced explaining how the mistake had arisen. Then At
last, he was sure to the joy of that House and of the country,
notwithstanding all these charges and tke jeopardy of a good
understanding with France, the negotiations had terminated
favourably, the convention of London had been accepted, And
that which was likely to end with such fatal
consequences
hid teriainated'in. peace. Something. bad been ,nßid with
I regard to Denmark, and its regions With Prussia.