§ Lord Dudley Stuartsaid, he should be sorry to stand in the way of a question interesting to Irish Members, but having given notice of the present motion so long ago as before Easter, and having been precluded from bringing it forward on a former occasion by the Government having given precedence to Orders of the Day on motion days, he felt bound under those circumstances to proceed. He hoped, before he sat down, to be able to show that the question was important, though it might riot appear to be so to those who had only superficially considered it. He trusted to be able to prove, that the question he was about to submit to the House was a question interesting to the country, to Europe, 1086 to humanity. A question affecting, the character of the present Government, and particularly the conduct of the noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. If he should succeed in showing the House that there were Parliamentary grounds for the present motion, he trusted that the House would support him, and not allow the noble Lord to put aside his motion, if he felt so inclined, upon some flimsy excuse, or some unsatisfactory explanation. The motion which he had to submit to the House was for "Copies of any correspondence between this Government and the governments of Russia, Prussia, or Austria, or between this Government and the government of Cracow, relating to the entrance of foreign troops into, the territory of that republic; also, copies of any correspondence between this Government and the before-mentioned governments relating to the appointment of a British Consul at Cracow." This question had been so ably expounded on a former occasion by the hon. Member for Lynn, and the facts were so fresh in the recollection of the House, that he would content him-self with a very brief statement. The State of Cracow, though small in extent and limited in population, was thought of sufficient importance to be made the subject of a separate convention, which was signed by the three Great Powers, Austria, Russia, and Prussia. By the 18th article of the Treaty of Vienna that separate convention was declared to be of the same validity as if it was word for word in the text of that treaty. The 1st article declared Cracow and its territory to be free, independent, and a strictly neutral city under the protection of the three Great Powers. The 6th article declared that the three States were bound to protect the neutrality of Cracow, and that no armed force under any pretence whatsoever should be allowed to enter that territory. To this all the three Powers were parties, and any one of them could not do any thing to violate it without being guilty of a breach of faith to each other, as well as to this country. In 1831 a Russian force entered the State of Cracow, and remained there for two months. When they first entered they promised to pay for the support of the troops (though this was a point in no way affecting the question), and on going away the general refused all payment, stating that it was a just punishment for their disaffection. In 1832 the Three 1087 Powers, without giving England any information of intending such a step, took possession of Cracow with a number of troops. In 1833 the Three Powers took on themselves to abolish the old Constitution and establish a new one. Now, had the old constitution been one of the worst, and the new one one of the best, he contended that the act would be no less a violation of the Treaty of Vienna, and an interference with that independence which they had guaranteed to maintain. But this was not the case. By the old constitution the Representative Assembly had the right to choose its President. The new constitution vested the appointment of the President in the Three Powers. Under the old constitution there were twelve senators; the new reduced them to eight. Nine professorships in the university were abolished, and amongst them that of Polish literature and law, as if they sought to destroy every vestige of Polish nationality. The 1st article of the new constitution declared Cracow a free, independent, and neutral State, under the protection of the Three Powers. One of the excuses for this armed occupation of Cracow was, that it was becoming a focus of disaffected persons, who entered into plots dangerous to the governments of the Three Powers. But what did these plots amount to? Notwithstanding a most rigorous police, inquisitorial proceedings, and numerous arrests, all they had been able to discover amounted to nothing more than this: —It appeared that on the occasion of the illumination in honour of the birthday of the Emperor of Russia a window was broken by some person flinging a chesnut, and a person was found murdered. He certainly believed that there were plots and treachery, but the plots were on the part of these Powers themselves, and the treachery was practised by the paid agents of Russia. He contended that there had been no case whatever to justify the Three Powers in what they had done. One of the pretences was, that seditious books had been found in the hands of some of the students of the university, but on inquiry being made by the government of Cracow, it was discovered that these seditious books had been placed in the hands of the students by the professor of Russian literature, and he still held his place notwithstanding this fact. There was enough to show that Russia, from designs of her own, was, through her agents, exciting disaffection 1088 in order to have a pretence for interference. He admitted that whilst the Three Powers bound themselves to protect the independence of Cracow, that State was bound not to harbour disaffected persons. There was a stipulation that Cracow should not harbour runaways, persons under prosecution, or deserters; and that on such being found on her territory, she was bound to surrender them, under a proper escort, to the guard appointed at the frontier to receive them. He contended that the only ground or pretence was, that Cracow harboured the Polish refugees; but he denied that the Polish refugees came within the description contained in this stipulation. He really thought the conduct of the Three Powers so infamous that, if a conspiracy was hatched at Cracow, and any of the Powers subverted in consequence, and a democratic form of Government substituted in the place of the present form, the Treaty of Vienna would fully warrant such conduct. He had argued the case as if Cracow had refused to comply with the wishes of the Three Powers. But no refusal had been made. An order was sent to have the political refugees dismissed from the territory, and 300 were immediately desired to leave the city. One would have supposed that so little opposition, or, to speak more correctly, so much resignation, would have purchased some immunity from the outrageous demands of the Three Powers. But no such result had taken place. He would read to the House, on this point, a letter which had appeared in the Foreign Quarterly Review for January last, from the President of Cracow to Prince Metternich. It bore the date of the 25th of February, 1836. The noble Lord read the letter accordingly, which he said he had good reason to know was authentic.
§ House counted out.