Star.
London, England, 1823-05-01 00:00:00

'is future and nos past, and the mere (lesion 'era einse
should not beneficed too severely. I mast here beg
lest.* to say, although rather - out of plate Its to my
argument, that a great sensation was prodticed in
this House and the country by the seiaure of a Spa-
nish corvette by a French ve3sel of war. The first
intimation I had of this transaction was in this House;
and I must needs own the event looked a little
strange, inasmuch as if any orders for such seizure
had been given, it must be when the French Govern-,
ment had expressed such warm dispositions for
peace. But looking to the war of 175 G and that
of 1804., it was not for this country to throw the
first stone—(Hear, hear, hear, from Mr. Brougham).
As soon as I heard of this seizure, I sent off a mes-
senger to a.k an explanation on the subject. This
explanation had just arrived by telegraph, and wa;
put into my hands as I was coming to the House.—
The dispatch is dated Paris, 28th April, 182;, and
is as follows:

1, Nothing of has been received by the French Govern-
ment as to the seizure of a Spanish corvette by the French ship
of war Le Jean de Bart. Nu instructions for such seizure were
sent out, and if any such prize were made, it must be under very
particular circumstances. In any case, however, the French
Government will see justice done."—(Bear, hear, from both
sides of the House.)
—I have mentioned this circumstance in order to
slim there is a promptitude in explanation afforded
by the French Government whenever such
tion can be given. It has been mentioned in the
course of the debate .last night—l am not sane if it
were so, but it has been menti:nrea, that it was an
insult to call upon Spain to assure us confidentially
of the safety of the Royal Family. I can account,
however, for our making this request. It was one
of the cases stipulated for at Verona. We did not a4c
this tssui ante other wise than in the most friendly
manner ; we asked it as one friend would another ;
and we asked not any positive guarantee, but merely
a confidential assurance to that effect. On a subject
connected wilt this lam unwilling to speak—l al-
lude to some objections Which have fallen from My
Honourable and Learned Friend (Sir J. Nlackinto,h)
who seemed almost to exhaust the power of his mind
in that able eulogy which he pronounced on M. Ar-
guelles. I allude more especially to that part of his
eulogy Where he so much praised that. Minister for
spanrig King Ferdinand's. Iiie—ESirJAMES MACKIN.-
TOSU—I tried the word as sparing the delicacy of
King Ferdinand.j=l have no doubt my Hon. and
Learned Friend must have so intended, for no man
can be more aware how fatal it is to associate in the
mind and render familiar to less gifted persons the
danger of lightly treating Kings---(Henr, hear).—
If they did advise a change in their Constitution to
the Spaniards, they had done it in the mildest and
least offensive way possible. After paying a com-
pliment to the speech of a Noble Lord (Gower) on
this which had contributed much to set the
question on its right footing, he observed, that they
had refused to interfere in persuading Spain to mo-
dify her Constitution, and that afterwards they had
been called to account in that House her so neglecting
that which many now consider to be their duty, should
they not haie been taunted and reproached by certain
persons in that,liouse, with having pursued such con-
duct? He would rather haie now to defend his Majes-
ty's Govern ment from the chasge made against theni,of
having -suegested a change in the Constitution of
Sprtin, on the strength of suds information, than ha*
to defend them against the charge of insensibility to
the advantages they possessed, and stupidity in the
want of application of them to the practical question
.of the propriety of our interference on this point. He
regretted, and must ever regret, that the advice had
not been taken by the Spanish Ministry; he admitted
the point of honour, but still much would have been
done in clearing the way of difficulties towards our
,effectual interference, bad any, even *the slightest.
concession been made. It was at the time n3dch.re-
gretted that Spain had. no external cause for war, if
disposed to commence. hostilities. The case between
France and Spain stood thus: France. alleged that
the internal state of Spain•alartned and affected her
interests; Spain alleged that the existence of the
Army of Observation on the Spanish frontier alarmed'
and affected her- interests. This was a state of things
which admitted uT nothing but war or mutual conces-
sion. tin was it for our Government to say we could
not, owing to-some stupidjty Which palsied our Coun-
cils, advise Spain to make her internal State in some
degree acceptable to Prance; when we were perfectly
aware that by so doing she would have obtained
from France most important advantages, in the na-
ture of concessions, as to the external condition of that
country? In giving this advice, we hal not gone
further than we were warranted by the law of na-
tions; but that with a view to modify the differences
between them, we had only intreated the Spanish Mi-
nisters to abate a little of their just pretensions, and
not insist on the rigid justice of their case. It was!
therefore his duty, as Foreign Minister, to induce Spain
to relax something of its positive right, to procure the
pat..ificatiun so anxiously sought. .He would even
admit that he went to the wrong party to ask this con-
cession—the party who had most right to complain.
He quoted the authority of Vattel, which, he said,
he could the more safely rely on, because it was al-
ways applicable,
.and not formed fur the occasion,
who had laid it down as a principle, that the weaker
Power (even though situated as Spain was) should re-
linquish some of its right, with at view to effect a. pa-
cification. Under this authority, he felt lie might
safely shelter himself, more particularly as he had
given this advice with the best intention, although,
in this respect, too, be had been charged 'with parti-
ality. " Good.Gotir said he, "if I had pursued a
contrary line. of conduct, and were impeached, by
those who now arraign me, for adopting such a con-
trary line of conduct to that *hid) has been adopted
in these negociatiops, what woad be the tone of
triumph in wikh my conduct. would have been de-
nounced, coupled with this memorable sentence from
so high an opinion" as Vattel? might very fairly
have been added by me in that negotiation, that the
concession was the more necessary, as France was a
mighty Power, entrenched sound by extensive :Oli-.
antes, and so centrically and fortunately situated, as to
give her a preponderating influence amongst nations."'
He could not possibly say what might be the conse-
quences of the evil which France had done, or whe-
tiler it might not recoil back on the party thus vio-
lating the rights of nations—(Hear). But if it did
recoil on the aggrbssur, it should be leanllected
aggressiop, in this sense, was notian isolated existence,
either influencing or influenced by others, bdt that

•

• s.
. ,
this itCoii on tFe• aggresioi Might tatiikthe ne.
hours of tMt*aggression, possibly might affect the )67
terests, the tranquillity.of Europe. Alid in iliisiefise
he would say, that could we have put-Chased peace
by such a concession as the one alluded to, he should
have thought he li id purchased it Oeitoly tar
Spain, for Great Blitain, :and for Curgie-:airrear}:
With respect to the suggestion gf a concession, he
IshOuld observe that tl:e exre ?jerky of that measure
of pacification had many adVocates even in Spain:
Tne Constitution of Spain, As it now stood by law,
was liable to be renised at the end of the Bth year.
Some persons consid.o.ed the Sth year in this case wet
to be calculated from the commencement of its ac-
tual operation, whilst ethers contended it was to be
taken horn its date, which would make the-Consti-
tution, according to the first construction, have three
years to run still; and, according to the latter, it
had already run out its date. Now this opinion he had
from a Spaniard of great name, and who had taken a
very prominent part in the revolution of that country:
'.his was a question purely Spauish, with which he
had no concern, but 140n1 which it would appear that
some-of the revolutionists themselves thought that
for some years bac; this revision of her Constitution
might lawfully have taken place. Where then was
there :a colour for putting into the mouth of the
Cortes the pathetic appeal of our, poet, " Can I lay
[et:July on my soul ?" for here was a distinguished
ma 4, with as good a Spanish soul as any of the
Cortes, who thought that in subjecting the Constitu-
tion to a revision, he should not perjure himself or
violate the oath he had taken to observe and defend
that Constitution. (Heat, and a laugh.) There was
as great a diversity of opinion on this subject, be un-
tie' stood, among'st Spaniards as in this House on the
Catholic Ques:i:th ;, yet, would it be said that, in re-
commending the admission of the Catholics to the
first pi ivileges of our Constitution, which was in vio-
lation of the Coronation oath; that either the Hon.
Member for Bramlber or himself Wished to lay per-
jury on the soul of any one, much less on that of the
inheritor of the Clown ? He could have no objection
to the experiment being tried as often as possible of
.seeing how diff,rent Constitutions might suit, or be
practically usef'il, provided that the effects of the ex-
periment were tobe visited only on the parties who tried
it. It was argued that we had dune wrong in even let-
ting France be aware of our intention to maintain a
strict neutrality ; and in order to give a colour to the
supposition that this bad influenced the French Go-
vernment to take the decided ground she adopted of
entering the Spanish territory, reference was made to
dates, which proved, as was alleged, that on the 81st
of March, our determination to preserve a strict neu-
trality was known, and, on the 7th of April, the
French Army crossed the Bidassoa. Now, so far
from this being true, Preece was kept in utter dark-
ness, as to our intention to remain neuter, from the
time the French King made his well-known Speech
to the Chambers up to the very period and after the
period of the French Army entering Spain. Before
that Speech our intended neutrality had been avowed,
but after that Speech the profession of our intention to
remain neutral was withdrawn ; and he himself, in
anlinterview he had with the FiencliCharge d'Affaires.•
told him that it*as in consequence of the purport of
the Speech of the French King, that the pledge of our
neutrality was withdrawn—(Wear). Was this truck-
ling to the French Government?—(Loud Cheers.)— •
And why bait' he done so? because he saw in
rthat Speech that we were about to be brought back
to ancient times, when France did not conceal her
settled enmity to British intetests ; and such being the
case, would it have been right in him to set France
at ease as to the consequences of such a step ? The
declaration again of our neutrality was then" Wit-
hheld Until things were too far gone to make it Of ins-
pgrtanee to conceal our intentems; yet somehow an
opinion gained ground that the British Government
would be forced, in spite or itself, to take part with
Spain by the influence of the popular voice. He was
atraid this had a share in inducing the Ministry of
Spain to brave the dangers of her situation. Nothing
could relieve the regret which he felt at her present
situation, but the idea of his being in the least acces-
sary to the grating disappointment which, she must
have experienced from the calamities which have since
awaited her, and which have produced results so con- .
vary to the wishes and general feelings of th is country.
if we had been accessary to plunge her in war, we
should have been liable to the greater responsibility.
The greater ground of objection rested on the diffi-
culty to prove that peace was our proper policy.—
it was not enough that the country had a just cause
of war; but it must be of such a nature that war
must be prescribed as a duty ; in short, that it was
our_duty with reference to Spain, to Portugal, to
France, and the whole state of the world. So fat'
this question was thoroughly met by the Member for
Westminster, yhq, conscious that one of the first
sinews of war was supplies, had stated that those
whore he represented were willing to grant a sub,
sidy for carrying on this war—(A laugh)—on the
condition that this should be such a war as' they
would like; in other words, a war of subjects against
Kings; a concession to which I should not like to
be a party; and not much unlike that 'Resolution
passed by the National Convention in the year.l79S,
offering assistance to all nations to throw off the yoke
of M-maichical Government, and adopt that of a
Republic like their own. He thought the House
would be in a predicament similar so that of King
James I. who having asked two Bishops in his Coun-
cil, iV4lliams and Neale, whether he had not a right
to take his subjects' money? Williams said—"
forbid; your Majesty is the breath or our nostrils."
The same question being put to Neale, he said—
" your Majesty is certainly at libsity to take brother
Williams's money." If his Hitmiturable Friend, the
Member tor Surrey, were applied to for a subsidy,
from his constittieuts, he might ti,ate a similar re-
mark, and say he was erttitled to take the Honour-
' able. Member for Westminster's subsidy. He 01r.
Canning) had been attempted to be bnbed by that
Honourable Member recalling to his recollection
the line of conduct which be him..self pursied with
respect to Spain in the year 1808, when the flame of
freedom burst forth in that country, in 'despite of
all the difficulties and disasters it had to encounter.
H"c'hoPunlrrykLagtcsbthacek • te:Mthinte ant
rimeel 'anal straggle;
must now
roe :rbeoel:ttui ain'ts under the most difficult• cir-
cumstances—to the long and arduous trial aidlich we
so nobly sustained in the Spanish territory, who dirt
not feel excited in his bosom an enthusiasm which,