Captain Yorkerequested the attention of his Majesty's Ministers to the paragraph on which his question would he founded. It was this, and was to be found in The Times newspaper of the 15th inst.
Letters from Belleisle of the 10th announce the sailing, on that day, of the first division of the Portuguese expedition. The following order of the day, addressed more particularly to the English auxiliaries, was issued by Admiral Sartorius on the occasion. Order of the day.—The Commander-in-Chief of the expedition hastens to make known to the seamen and soldiers of the division, that his Imperial Majesty has been pleased to confirm the gift of the equipments which the Vice-Admiral, in his reliance on the well-known high-mindedness of the Emperor, had taken upon him to promise. His Majesty has, moreover, not only ratified the allowance of 55s. monthly pay, but, in order to testify his high opinion of the English seamen and soldiers, especially with regard to those who are under the command of the Vice-Admiral, he has increased that pay by 5s a month, during all the time that the Queen's flag shall remain hoisted on their vessels. The Vice-Admiral calls on his shipmates to second his efforts with heart and hand in a cause which, next to that of their King and country, is the most noble that an Englishman can serve—a cause laudably undertaken for the purpose of restoring an august Princess to her Throne—of opening the dungeons of thousands of victims, whose only crime has been fidelity to their duty and their oath—and of enabling Portugal to regain that constitutional liberty which has so greatly contributed in giving to your own country the sovereignty of the seas, and placing you among the first nations of the world. His Majesty's intentions are humane and conciliatory; but if they are disregarded, it will be then for us to prove, as true Britons, with the help of Providence, that reliance has not in vain been placed in our courage and our arms, for the purpose of scouring the oppressed, and procuring the liberation of the innocent.—Belleisle, Feb. 4.He wished to ask the noble Lord whether Admiral Sartorius held a Commission in his Majesty's service?
§ Lord Althorpbelieved that the person described as Admiral Sartorius, had been a captain in the Royal Navy, but he was not prepared to say whether he still held his commission or not.
§ Mr. Robinsonsaid, he remembered well that a proclamation had been issued by Government some years ago, forbidding the King's officers from entering into the 478 service of the South American Colonies on declaring their independence, and he thought the same course ought to have been pursued on the present occasion. The noble Lord professed himself unable to give an answer whether Admiral Sartorius continued still in his Majesty's service, but surely the attention of Government ought to have been called to that point on the sailing of the expedition of Don Pedro from Bellesile in which it was said a large number of British troops and sailors had embarked. It was a question of importance to ascertain whether the Government preserved a strict neutrality between the two branches of the House of Braganza. He was afraid it would turn out that they had given, not directly, certainly, but indirectly, some assistance to the expedition against Portugal, and in doing so he begged to observe that the British interests in that country were sacrificed.
Sir James Graham, who just then entered the House, stated, that he had no hesitation in answering the question. Captain Sartorius did remain on the list of captains liable to serve his Majesty; but he begged to remark, that, although on the list, he was not to be considered in the employment of the King; for there was a provision which prohibited any of his Majesty's officers who entered into foreign service, from receiving their half-pay while so engaged. Therefore Captain Sartorius, being engaged under Don Pedro, did not receive the King's pay. Nor, indeed, could he, or any other officer do so, without making affidavit that they were not engaged in the service of any foreign prince. He begged further to add, that Captain Sartorius was at present absent without leave.
Colonel Davieswas glad to hear from the right hon. Baronet, that Captain Sartorius was still on the half-pay list, and he hoped that he would long continue so. After the debate relating to Portuguese affairs a few nights since, he must say, he felt a little surprised to hear his hon. colleague take this opportunity of reviving that discussion; Don Miguel himself would be astonished when he found that he had an advocate in one of the friends of Reform and of liberal institutions. If the strict neutrality which his hon. colleague advocated had always been preserved, Don Miguel would most likely be at this moment a prisoner at Brazil, whi- 479 ther he would have been sent by the liberal party, but for the interference of this country.
Sir Robert Peelobserved, that the advice of the hon. Gentleman, in recommending his hon. colleague not to revive the debate on the affairs of Portugal, was much better than his example. He presumed that the right hon, Gentleman was aware that, by the Foreign Enlistment Act, any person, a subject of his Majesty, who should, without license from the King, accept a commission from a foreign state, was thereby guilty of a misdemeanor, and might be punished by fine and imprisonment. He, therefore, must say, that he thought the conduct of Captain Sartorius deserved the cognizance of his Majesty's Government.
Colonel Evansobserved, that the officer alluded to was amenable, if he had violated the law, and if he had done so, any one might prosecute him; but he thought that at least it was not the business of the House to interfere and press on the Government a prosecution of this kind. There seemed to him something of the spirit of party in this sort of conduct.
§ Sir Henry Hardingesaid, that a more unprovoked attack than that which the gallant Colonel had just made he had seldom witnessed. His gallant friend who asked the question had merely demanded whether Captain Sartorius was an officer in the British service, without any intention to urge a prosecution against that officer.
Colonel Evansrepeated his belief that there was something of a spirit of party in the question, for he did not think that when Marshal Beresford was appointed to a command in the Portuguese army, anybody had come down to that House to ask whether Marshal Beresford was an officer in the British service.
Mr. C. W. Wynnbelieved, that the gallant Colonel would find that Marshal Beresford had not accepted a command in the Portuguese service without a special license from this Government. The Government had a right to grant the license; and the only point at present was—whether they had given the license. If they had, and if they approved of Captain Sartorius accepting a command in the Portuguese service, there was an end of the question. Another might certainly then arise—whether they had acted wisely in granting the permission? He should 480 only now observe, that he objected to such permissions; tending, as they did, to encourage the violation of the law. While the law existed, he thought it ought to be obeyed. If it was a bad law, it ought to be repealed.
§ Sir George Clerkwished to ask, whether Captain Sartorius had leave of absence? He would not ask whether the Government had given him a license; for, after the repeated professions of neutrality put forth by the British Government, he should not entertain for a moment the idea that they had granted a license. He should also beg leave to ask, whether, in the leave of absence, there was not always inserted a clause, absolutely prohibiting the officer to whom it was granted from entering a foreign service? If that was so, and Captain Sartorius had entered into foreign service, he would be offending, not only against the Act of Parliament, but against the positive prohibition of the Admiralty.
Sir James Grahamobserved, that, in the answer he had before given, he had anticipated the present question. He had stated distinctly to the House, that not only Captain Sartorius could not draw his pension, but that he was absent without leave. He thought, after this, that it was quite unnecessary to add that no license could have been granted.
Sir Robert Peelprotested against the supposition, that a question of this kind was always put to the Government from a spirit of party, and with a view to oppress individuals. He did not think that, in the present case, it would be necessary to act with severity. It was not necessary to remove the officer from the British service; but his Majesty might recal him from the foreign service, and if he did not choose to obey that call, might then dismiss him. His Majesty possessed the requisite power, and it was a power that might be most beneficially employed.
The House then resolved itself into a Committee of Supply.