Star.
London, England, 1822-03-26 00:00:00

11

I

\ • -1,
• It :At A l s..
* _

of the Britikkkoverternent era rouse all the nations of
Eisregie• egiNt.the olliptcsatva domination of the
French, no means were spared to make such a feel-
ing general. Amongst the rest, Italy was not over-
looked, and overtures were made, in the most direct
manner, to the Government of Naples. It was to
be observed, that the Government of France over
Italy, though of the most despotic nature, yet pos-
sessed some advantages, as it was calculated to re-
animate the Italians, and it gave every encourage-
ment to the cultivation of literature. There was, there-
fore, a large portion of the people fi iendly to it,
though there was another party, and a numerous one,
who sighed for the liberation of their country. The
expulsion of the French being accomplished, it would
be now his duty to state the manner in which the Ita-
lians had been treated by the British Government.
At the peace of 1814, a deputation from the Milanese
.waited upon a Noble Lord, who then filled an im-
portant office in Italy ; but, in answer to their de-
mand of a Constitution, as the reward of their efforts,
they were told, " that however good liberty was for
the people of England, it would not suit the people
of Italy"—( Hear, hear).—He wished that Noble Lord
was here in his place, that he might set him (Lord J.
Russell) right if he stated that which was untrue.—
From that time the hopes of the Italians were disap-
pointed, and the consequence was, that Italy was
given up to Austria, without any guarantee being
made for her liberties. He (Lord J. Russell)• had
seen a Gentleman from Calabria a few days ago, and
he (Lord J. Russell) was assured by him, that there
was no education permitted by the Austrian Govern-
ment in Italy, but what was administered by Jesuits
and Priests. But this Gentleman stated a still more
carious fact. He said he had seen a Decree of the
Free Court of Justice of Turin exhibited, in which
the condemnation of four persons was announced, of
whom one was for treason. and the other three " for
being notoriously Fanatical, and for having a pro-
pensity to a constitutional system!-'—(Hear, hear).—
And what did the House think was the punishment
allotted to these men ?—nothing less than the punish-
ment of the galleys for life!—(Hear.)—Here, then,
were men who had evinced a friendly disposition to
liberty punished with the gallevs for life. Several
other sentences had been passed equally arbitrary
and unjust. Amongst others, the Mat quis Cologini.
a subject of the Pope, but in effect a subject of Aus-
tria, was arrested at Venice, and without any cause
assigned, for there were no papers found upon him,
he was taken up and sentenced to death, but by a
great exertion of mercy, this sentence was commuted
to solitary confinement for ten years! Tne meaning
of this was, that the unfortunate individual was to
be shut up, deprived of the use of pen, ink, or paper,
and allowed only half an hour to walk during the
day—(Hear, hear).—Such was the fate of a Gentle-
man of fortune and family, who had also a young
wife with two children. All this he (Lord J. Russell)
contended, was in consequence of our giving up Italy
without extorting from Austria a guarantee for the
preservation of their liberties. Ile contended, that
nothing could justify the treatment which the British
Government used towards the people of Italy. They
bad, in fact, sanctioned the suppression of schools,
and had given their aid to the progress of inciviliza-
tion and darkness. The future historian never would
acquit England of the crime of taking away from
unfortunate Italy all those means from which she
could hope for her regeneration—(hiar). The Noble
Lord concluded by moving that the petition be brought
up.—Upon the question of its lying upon the table,
Mr. WILMOT rose.—lt was his duty to explain
some facts of this case, which had been either over-
looked or mistated by the Noble Lord. He did
not quite understand the object which the Noble Lord
had in view. It never was denied that Captain Ro-
meo had rendered services to the British army in
Slcily, but for those services he received an adequate
temuneration. The Noble Lord was incorrect in
saying the Petitioner was the principal agent in the
transactions to which he alluded. The fact was not
so ; Captain Romeo was but a subordinate agent
upon these occasions. The promotion in which the
Noble Lord said he was disappointed was this: he
had been promised a Captaincy in a Calabrese corps,
which, as it happened, was never embodied, but
when he was leaving the service he received three
months pay in advance. From 1811 to 1814, this
individual never claimed arty further remuneration.
He had, in Pact, received the most ample recompense
for the services which be rendered the British army.
But it was said he was since persecuted by the Nea-
politan Government. But what had we to do with
that? The question, and indeed the only question
in the case, was, whether he bad been persecuted
'for his attachment to this Government, or whether
*the harsh treatment he received was a consequence of
his individual demerits? This latter appeared beyond
doubt to be the case. The Court of Naples upon
being applied to, not only disavowed the persecution
of Captain Romeo on the ground of his British con-
nections, but they absolutely stated the particular
causes of their treatment of him, which were, that
be had been engaged in several conspiracies—(Hear,
hear, hear).—Then as to the annuity of £5O a-year,
that was not for life, but for a given period of time ;
and it was a little too much, after he had quitted all
future claims by selling that provision, that he should
claim more.- It was true that Government refused
him a passport, because they were unwilling that he
should have the sanction of an English traveller, not
knowing how far he might prejudice their relations
with other States. Upon the whole he could not re-
cognize any claim which this individual had to fur-
ther relief; and he was sure that, so far from being
badly treated, he had experienced the most liberal
treatment from the British Government—(Hear,
hear).—He concluded by opposing the laying of the
Petition upon the table.
Sir JANIES MACKINTOSH was at a loss to see
bow the Honourable Member (Mr.Wilmot) could
misunderstand the precise object of the Noble Lord
near him. The object was clearly to make an ap-
peal to the generosity of a great People; and being
made by an individual, a foreigner, who had done
important services to this ceuntry, he (Sir James
Itlackintosh) did not think it redounded much to the
honour of the country, to take this appeal in the way
it had been done. If the allegations of the Peti-
. were to be believed, he was most inadequately
.ded for his services. Of these services there
to doubt, but an attempt had been made to un-
glue them by a statement that the Petitioner was

;ewar
Was rt 4
du vgi