HC Deb 30 March 1836 vol 32 cc854-6
Mr. Patrick M. Stewart

said, seeing the noble Lord, the Foreign Secretary in his place, he wished to put to him one or two questions of great importance with respect to our national honour, and of vital importance to the commercial interests of this country. In the course of the recent discussion which took place, relative to the late unfortunate events at Cracow, the noble Lord stated, that communications had been made on that subject with the Ministers abroad. The first question which he wished to ask the noble Lord was, whether amongst the parties he had communicated with were included the authorities of Cracow itself; and whether any answer to his communications had been received? The second question he had to ask the noble Lord was, whether he had received any official notice of events which it was said had occurred affecting the victims of Cracow since the occupation of that place? Was the noble Lord aware that the Polish Refugees, having been induced to pass out of the district in which they were, instead of being forwarded to the place of their destination, had been delivered up by the three powers into the hands of Russia, and had been marched, in all probability, to Siberia or to Tobolsk? His next question had reference to our commercial interests. He begged to ask the noble Lord if he had information of an attempt on the part of Russia to close the mouths of the Danube by certain quarantine regulations. He begged also to express a hope that the noble Lord would inform the House whether it was the intention of the Government to interfere to prevent this further violation of the treaties of Vienna and Adrianople, by both of which it was declared that all the navigable rivers traversing the European states should be free and open in their course to the whole of Europe.

Viscount Palmerston, with reference to the first question, had to say, that he had received answers from most of those Ministers to whom he had written for information respecting the affairs of Cracow; but he had not had any communication with the authorities of Cracow themselves on the subject. It was the intention of the Government, when first they heard of the state of Cracow, and of the disposition to expel certain refugees from that country, to send the British Consul at Warsaw to Cracow, to obtain full information; but before the Government could give effect to their intention, they heard of the actual occupation of the town by the three protecting powers, and it did not appear to them that that was a fitting occasion for the Consul at Warsaw to present himself in the town of Cracow. It occurred to the Government that he not having any official character at that place, his presence there might rather be construed into a tacit acknowledgment of the measure which was carried into effect, or it might put him in a situation unfitting for a British officer. With regard to the second question, he had heard from two quarters that some of the refugees had been sent back to the kingdom of Poland, instead of being transferred to France or the other parts of Europe, as was originally agreed. An account to that effect had reached the British Minister at St. Petersburg, and he had asked for information on the subject from the Russian Government, by whom he was informed that they had received no notice of such an arrangement, and they did not believe that such an event had taken place; but they assured him that at all events what had been done was not with a view to subject the persons to banishment or punishment. Count Nesselrode gave it as his opinion that if there had been any such occurrence, it must have been because a certain number of individuals preferred the change, from a wish to return to Poland. He promised to make inquiries, and communicate the result to Lord Durham. With regard to the third question, he had to state, that he had not received any information with respect to that quarantine which it was said in the public papers had been imposed by the Russian Government in the mouths of the Danube. By the treaty of Adrianople, the Russian Government had a right to establish a bonâ fide quarantine at the mouths of that river. All the three branches of the river either fell into the territory ceded by the treaty of Adrianople to Russia, or one bank of them was bounded by the territory of Russia. But though Russia had a right to establish a bonâ fide quarantine, yet he thought it was indisputable that as the treaty of Vienna expressly declared that all the navigable rivers throughout Europe should be free and open to the navigation of Europe, Russia was not entitled to establish any quarantine on the Danube, which, under the pretence of preserving health, was really and truly intended to embarrass commerce. Having no official information on the subject, he could not give any other answer.

Mr. P. M. Stewart

said, he should feel it his duty on Friday, the 15th of April, to call the attention of the House to what he advisedly and deliberately designated the aggression of Russia.