BUSINESS—ADJOURNMENT—DISPUTE WITH NAPLES. (Hansard, 15 April 1840)

§ Lord John Russell
said, that in moving the adjournment of the 1119 House, it might be convenient to the House that he should state the course which he intended to pursue with respect to the public business, which stood fixed for certain days after Easter. He intended to propose that the House, at its rising, do adjourn to Wednesday, the 29th of April, on which day, of course, orders of the day would have precedence of notices. He believed, however, that the hon. and learned Gentleman, the Member for Reading, wished to bring on his Copyright Bill on that day. On the Friday following he would not proceed with the Ecclesiastical Duties and Revenues' Bill, but would defer it to a future day. On Friday, the 1st of May, and on Monday, the 4th of May, it was intended to proceed with votes in committee of supply and the miscellaneous estimates; and on the Friday following, namely, the 8th of May, his right hon. Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, would make his financial statement. He had already fixed the committee on the Canada Bill for Monday, the 11th of May, and he should propose to proceed with it on that day, in which case he would postpone the Ecclesiastical Duties and Revenues' Bill till the following Monday, namely, the 18th of May. He would now move that the House, at its rising, do adjourn to Wednesday, the 29th instant.

§ Viscount Mahon
begged to ask the noble Lord, the Secretary for the Colonies, in the absence of his noble colleague, Secretary for Foreign Affairs, whether any directions had been issued for commencing a blockade, or taking other hostile proceedings against Naples?

§ Lord John Russell
said, that certainly instructions had been given by her Majesty's Government with respect to the sulphur monopoly, and further instructions had been given, that in case, within a certain time, there should not be a satisfactory answer received from the Neapolitan government, that, in that case, the British admiral commanding in the Mediterranean, should detain all ships sailing under the Neapolitan flag, or belonging to Naples. These instructions had been sent out, and the last intelligence which the Government had received from Naples was, that our minister at the court of Naples, having delivered a note, had received a reply, which was evasive and unsatisfactory. The ambassador upon this had communicated with the admiral, who had at that 1120 time under his consideration what measures he should deem necessary to adopt, to carry into effect the instructions he had received.

§ Lord Mahon
had a further question to put as to the authenticity of a document which he had seen in the public prints, and which purported to come from the British consular authority at Naples, and directed to British merchants.

§ Lord J. Russell
I have not seen it.

§ Mr. Hume
I will read the document to the noble Lord. The hon. Member then read the following document:— Gentlemen—I am directed by the hon. W. Temple, her Britannic Majesty's Envoy Extraordinary to the court of Naples, to inform the British merchants resident in this kingdom that circumstances have arisen which very probably will oblige the naval forces of her Majesty to make reprisals upon ships sailing under the flag of the Two Sicilies, and to warn them to make such reserve in their shipments on board such vessels as in consequence of this notice they may think right. I hasten to communicate this information to you, and if any ulterior measures tending to fetter British commerce are deemed necessary, or may arise, you may rely upon my making you acquainted with them. April 2, 1840." TH. GALWAY. Before the House adjourned for a single day, there ought to be given some explanation with regard to the treaty which had been agreed to be signed and ratified on the 1st of January last, by which the sulphur question was conceded. Why had not the treaty been carried into effect? The House ought immediately to have a copy of all the correspondence that had taken place, as it was likely that war would be the consequence. They were at war with China already; they were obliged to maintain a fleet on the coast of Turkey; matters in North America were in a very precarious state, and now they were to have a war with Naples. The House ought not to adjourn a single day until they received some satisfactory explanation upon the subject.

§ Lord J. Russell
said, he had not seen the document which the hon. Gentleman had just read, but he was aware that her Majesty's minister at Naples had given instructions to the consul to issue a notice to British subjects and merchants, and he did not see any reason to question the fact that the document read by the hon. Gentleman had been issued in pursuance of such instructions. With regard to the 1121 general question of the commercial treaty, he thought that the House and the hon. Member had already received an answer from his noble Friend, the Secretary of State for the Foreign Department. There was a proposal made for a commercial treaty, but no authority had been given on the part of the Neapolitan government to sign that treaty, and no treaty satisfactory to the commercial interests of this country had been agreed to by the Neapolitan court. With respect to the sulphur monopoly, that was a question upon which her Majesty's Government held that the stipulations of a former treaty had not been complied with. Therefore, what they demanded from the government of Naples was, that the stipulations of that former treaty should be complied with, and that British merchants should not be injured by a violation of that treaty. This subject had already excited attention in this country, and it was probable that the hon. Member for Kilkenny was aware, as most persons were aware, that there had been a discussion in the other House of Parliament concerning it, and her Majesty's Government were accused of being very tardy and remiss in not demanding satisfaction for a clear violation of a treaty.

§ Mr. Hume
said, that he did not accuse the Government or the Secretary for Foreign Affairs with culpable neglect, but that House ought to know, before the country was involved in a war, every circumstance connected with the subject. The House had better adjourn till tomorrow.

§ Lord J. Russell
said, that he did not think that any papers that the Government could lay before the House would materially alter the question. Before the discussion on the subject came on he thought the hon. Member for Kilkenny had better make up his mind, whether the Government had been tardy and remiss, or whether they had been hasty and intemperate in bringing this matter to at conclusion.

§ Sir J. Graham
begged to ask, whether any order in council had been passed for detaining Neapolitan vessels until reparation should be obtained, as in the case of China?

§ Lord J. Russell
said, that no order in council had been issued, as none was necessary. In China such an order was rendered necessary by the time that must 1122 elapse before communications could be held with this country.

§ Sir J. Graham
said, that the noble Lord had admitted that instructions had been given to the British admiral under certain circumstances to detain all Neapolitan vessels. He had yet to learn that, according to the law of nations, any such proceeding could be authorised without an order in council.

§ Lord J. Russell
said, he would not then enter into a dispute with the right hon. Baronet with regard to the law of nations. He trusted that the Neapolitan government, either upon its own motion, or by the advice of others, would give satisfaction on this subject; in which case all vessels that might be detained would be released without the necessity of bringing them before any court of admiralty.