§ SIR GEORGE BOWYERsaid, that before the noble Lord rose to reply, he wished to ask two questions of great importance. By the capitulation of Gaeta the Swiss troops in the service of the King of Naples were allowed to remain in Naples; but it appeared from the accounts in that day's Times, that this portion of the capitulation had been violated, and Baron Ricasoli had ordered that the Swiss should leave Naples. Remonstrance had been made by the Minister from the Swiss Republic, and he (Sir George Bowyer) was anxious to know the rights of the matter, and whether Her Majesty's Government would exercise their influence to insure justice to the Swiss? Seeing upon the Treasury bench the great champion of Swiss rights, he had no doubt the subject would receive due attention from him, and he hoped the right hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) who, while out of office had shown such desire to protect the freedom of Switzerland, and to prevent the encroachment of Prance through corrupt transactions between Sardinia and France would, now he was in office, show a like amount of zeal. The other question which he wished to ask related to a matter of still greater importance. He wished to ask whether Her Majesty's Government would exert their influence with Foreign Powers, and especially with Italy, to obtain justice and fair play for the population of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. Without going into particulars, he might say that all accounts, public and private, showed that the state of things in that kingdom was most dreadful, bordering 1858 upon anarchy, if not anarchy itself. There was not even the ordinary security for life and property which Governments afforded to their subjects. The country was exposed to an armed despotism, and ruled by a cruel repression. It had been said that the Piedmontese had been received as deliverers by the population of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies; but how incorrect that statement was was shown in the correspondence of The Times, which was probably the most accurate of our sources of information. The disbanded army had nothing to do with the state of feeling which prevailed. The people were put down by movable columns, directed against persons who were called brigands, though it was a perfect absurdity to call them anything of the sort. He could produce evidence that these persons were not merely disbanded soldiers, nor in any sense of the word brigands, but the population of the country, who, if they had a chance, were ready to rise as one man to recall their rightful Sovereign, to whom they were still attached. They did not wish their country to be a province of Piedmont. Naples was the fourth city in Europe in importance and population, and that great city did not like to become a provincial town under Turin, and would never submit to such a fate. He had been informed that the Emperor of the French remonstrated against the cruelties committed by the Piedmontese in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. Last year, when he called attention to the bloodthirsty proclamation issued by General Pinelli, he was told that Pinelli had been dismissed. He did not believe that that was so, but, however that might be, Pinelli was now in that country with full powers. General Cialdini was in Naples with full military powers, superseding the civil authority altogether. The Government of Naples was one altogether of martial law. General Cialdini was a soldier, and nothing else, and he would stick at nothing necessary to carry out the object he had in view. The people were trampled under foot, and ho wished to know whether the (Her Majesty's) Government would use the influence they undoubtedly possessed to put a stop to this state of things? No doubt the noble Lord would tell him that by a vote of the people—a plebiscite as it was called—Naples was united to the pretended Kingdom of Italy. He was sure, however, that the noble Lord could not attach any importance to this so-called 1859 plebiscite, which had been carried out without any freedom of election. He knew of an instance where a person went to give his vote for the recall of Francis II., but was trampled under foot by the Garibaldians, and died of his injuries. There were no voting papers to be got for the recall of Francis II. The process of taking the votes of the people for the annexation to Piedmont was a cruel and wicked mockery, as was abundantly proved by what had subsequently occurred. If the people had really been in favour of annexation martial law would not be necessary, and it was only by martial law that Naples was now governed. If Francis II. had had less moderation and humanity, and had not dreaded the bloodshed which would have followed, there would have been a general uprising throughout the country for his recall. But the people were now kept down by a large military force, and by a rigid and cruel military despotism. They had no chance of asserting their own rights. The rights of the Neapolitan people to self-government, and the nationality and independence of the ancient and noble Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, were as sacred as the rights of Poland or of any other of the nationalities of which so much was talked now-a-days. The people of Naples detested Piedmont—the Piedmontese soldiers could not show themselves, but had to be shut-up in fortresses. The people of the city of Naples Were only kept under by the fear of a bombardment from St. Elmo, which Garibaldi wished to destroy, but which the King of Piedmont, knowing how necessary it would be to him, had preserved. Francis II. left Naples because he did not wish its inhabitants to be exposed to the horrors of war; but the Piedmontese monarch had no such feelings, and the Neapolitans knew that they would be crushed by a bombardment from St. Elmo if they moved. Her Majesty's Government pretended to be great friends of liberty and of nationalties, and he wished to know whether they would take into their consideration the position of this unfortunate people? He did not want from the noble Viscount any party speech, or any commonplaces about Italian unity and Italian nationality. He wanted him to apply himself to the facts, which were undeniable. He wished to hear from him whether he would use his influence to obtain for the people of Naples fair play—deliverance from the tyranny under which 1860 they were placed, and the opportunity of deciding for themselves, without the interference of Piedmontese soldiers, whether they would be under the Piedmontese Government or not? He was sorry that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not present. The right hon. Gentleman had written a pamphlet some years ago about Baron Poerio, and other persons, who were imprisoned under the authority of the King of Naples, and he (Sir George Bowyer) wanted the right hon. Gentleman now to write a pamphlet giving an account of the imprisonment of thousands and thousands of persons in Naples, and the execution by military law of hundreds—not men with arms in their hands, but men who were merely considered to be disaffected and reactionaries — that was to say, men who were loyal subjects—even priests, who were loyal to their King. He was afraid, however, that the right hon. Gentleman's sympathies were all on the other side, and that his indignation was all directed against the lawful Sovereign, who had punished those who had attempted to overturn his throne. He hoped that the noble Lord would use all his influence to put a stop to the present state of things in Naples, and to obtain for the people of the Two Sicilies the real liberty of determining for themselves whether they were satisfied to become a province of Piedmont, or whether they would prefer that their own King and their own Royal Family should return to rule over them.
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTON—The hon. Member for Devizes (Mr. Darby Griffith) wishes to know what has passed in regard to the disputes between Spain and Morocco as to the occupation by Spain of certain points in the territory of Morocco. The original dispute between Spain and Morocco was a very unfortunate one. It is not for me to enter into the merits of it, but I think more explanation and a clearer understanding might have prevented the war. The result of the war, however, was that the Emperor of Morocco was to pay a certain amount of money to the Spanish Government as compensation for the expenses incurred in that war. This was to be paid by instalments, and the town of Tetuan was to be occupied by the Spanish Government for a certain period until a certain proportion of that indemnity was paid. The Emperor of Morocco, however, was under a mistaken impression as to the amount of treasure which he possessed. He imagined that he had in the Treasury 1861 of the State a larger sum than afterwards turned out to be there. That created a difficulty in regard to the payment of the instalments. Moreover, the present Sultan had succeeded to his father during the contest, and his authority was not firmly established in every part of his dominions, there being another brother who had the support of a certain party; and there was not, therefore, entire acquiescence in his succession to the Throne. This, also, created an additional difficulty in the way of a settlement with the Spanish Commissioners. The Moorish people, with a good deal of national feeling and religious enthusiasm, were indignant that money should be sent to the Spanish Government to pay the expenses of the war, and the Government of Morocco was unable to pay the stipulated sums. This gave rise to long negotiation and a protracted occupation of Tetuan by the Spanish forces. Those negotiations are still continuing, and, as far as Her Majesty's Government, by any good offices in Morocco, can assist the settlement of this dispute, I can assure the hon. Member and the House those good offices will be employed. In fact, Mr. Drummond Hay has gone to the seat of Government in Morocco to endeavour to make some arrangement. I have no reason to suppose that the Spanish Government has any intention of keeping a permanent occupation in Tetuan. The occupation is very expensive to the Spanish Government; and I believe that it only holds the place till peace is restored between the two countries. Any apprehensions, therefore, that may be entertained of a permanent occupation of Tetuan are not founded, as far as we are informed, on any real basis. With regard to the questions of the hon. Baronet who has just sat down (Sir George Bowyer), he wishes, first, to know what has been done in reference to certain Swiss troops that formed part of the garrison of Gaeta, and that have now been ordered by General Cialdini to leave Naples. I am rather inclined to believe that the Swiss Government has recalled these troops; but except generally I am not informed of the nature of the transaction. As to the other question of the hon. Baronet, he says the people of Naples are not willing to transfer their allegiance to Victor Emmanuel, and that their country should become part of the Kingdom of Italy. But if they were not willing to become subjects of the King of Italy, they must be a Very extraordinary 1862 people; for it is well Mown that the Government of Naples was, with the exception of that of Rome, the worst Government in the world. The Neapolitans must have been the most extraordinary people on the face of the earth if they were unwilling to transfer their allegiance from their former Government to that of Sardinia. But the fact is notoriously the contrary. It is perfectly well known to everybody that when Garibaldi, with six friends, arrived at Naples in a railway carriage to deliver the people from their former Government they were received with acclamation. At that moment there were in Naples 3,000 or 4,000 troops, in the service of the late King; but, instead of assembling at the railway station, and seizing and shooting Garibaldi, these troops quietly acquiesced in the transaction. As far, then, as that goes, the matter turned on the spontaneous feeling and general acclamation of the people. The hon. Baronet says the country is in a very disturbed state; but in doing so he makes two assertions that are rather incompatible with each other. He says the country is governed by martial law, its power, of course, exercised by the Sardinian troops; but he also says these troops are so hated that they dare not show themselves, and that they are obliged to be confined to the fortresses. If that is so the troops cannot exorcise the authority of which the hon. Baronet speaks. [Sir GEORGE BOWYER: I said, except in moveable columns.] Well, if these are moveable columns they are not confined to fortresses and dare show themselves.
§ SIR GEORGE BOWYERWhat I intended to say was that when these troops were in arms and traversed the country in moveable columns they exercised control over the country; but that individual soldiers dared not show themselves and they were confined to the fortresses.
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONI do not wish to raise any discussion on that point. No doubt, there are bodies of troops traversing the country for the purpose of preventing every sort of outrage being committed, and restoring security for life and property. The hon. Baronet says, the people who commit these outrages are not brigands. Well, perhaps they are not brigands in the ordinary sense of the word. Brigands rob and plunder for a subsistence; they take what they want for their own use. They seize travellers and carry them up to the mountains to extort a 1863 ransom, sending their prisoners down whole if they get the whole of the money, and piecemeal if they get it in portions. But these men of whom the right hon. Baronet speaks are much worse than brigands; they commit every sort of atrocity, not for money, but as a political vengeance. They are the instruments of the political vengeance of persons who live in safety in the city of Rome. These persons send out these men by hundreds. They are furnished—I will not say by whom—with arms and money in great quantities. Some of their arms were those which some time since were handed over to the Roman Government to be kept in security when a portion of the garrison of Gaeta made their escape and took refuge in the Roman States, when they were disarmed by the French troops. Their arms are sent by parties in the holy city of Rome, to commit the most unholy acts, to disturb public tranquillity, to murder, to torture, to burn people alive, to perpetrate every sort of atrocity. These are the sort of persons the hon. Baronet takes into his tender compassion, whom he is sorry to see put down by these moveable bodies of troops, and in whose behalf he wishes the English Government to exert itself to procure them impunity. I can assure the hon. Baronet, with great satisfaction, that the English Government will do no such thing. We hope that the vigour of Cialdini and Pinelli will succeed in restoring security in the disturbed districts of the Neapolitan territory; we trust that by a vigorous application, where alone these outrages are committed, of these moveable columns the wretches who perpetrate these crimes will receive their proper punishment, in the course of no great length of time; and that the population will be relieved from the misfortunes that have been brought on them from Rome. I have no doubt at all as to the general feeling of the people of the Neapolitan territory. My opinion is diametrically opposite to that of the hon. Baronet. I am convinced that they are fully sensible of the benefits that will accrue to them from forming part of the Kingdom of Italy, governed by a constitutional Government, instead of the iron despotism under which they have so long groaned, and under which their fathers and grandfathers have been so much demoralized.
§ MR. SEYMOUR FITZGERALDsaid, the noble Lord had rather avoided than answered the question of the hon. Mem- 1864 ber for Devizes. There was a singular contradiction between his statement as to the Spanish dispute with Morocco and the statement of the Foreign Secretary some time since. Lord John Russell distinctly said that he had received from the Spanish Government an official intimation that it was their intention permanently to occupy the fortress of Tetuan. The noble Lord now said the Government had no information that led it to suppose Spain intended such an occupation of Tetuan, or any part of the coast. But not only was Spain occupying the place; it had been officially announced that it intended to convert it into a fortress of the first class, and to occupy the whole of the country adjoining, so as to make the Spanish possessions extend from Ceuta to Tetuan. Further, they intended to convert Tetuan into a fortress capable of containing a garrison of 15,000 men. He must press upon the Government the necessity of not allowing any such occupation. The Duke of Wellington had pointed out the importance of continuing this coast in the hands of the native Powers, and the noble Lord himself had once said that no permanent occupation of these points by Spain could be permitted. This was no new design on the part of the Spanish Government; they had persistently pursued it for many years; and it might be ascribed to the former opposition of the noble Lord that it had not been carried into effect sooner. The Moorish debt never could be paid; and the pretence, on the part of the Spanish Government who was in debt to all the world, and never paid even when they had the power, was a piece of unparalleled impudence and assurance. Remembering that the noble Lord had himself charged the Spanish Government with breach of faith in regard to their obligations with foreign Powers, it was surprising that he should permit the Spanish Government to shelter itself in their occupation of this territory under the plea that the Government of Morocco had not fulfilled the stipulations of the treaty. The noble Lord said he regarded this as a temporary occupation; whereas he (Mr. S. FitzGerald) was convinced that this was the first step in the occupation of the whole coast from Tetuan to Ceuta, and from Ceuta to Tangier. Any English Government, however, that would permit such an occupation of the African coast by the Spanish Government would neglect, in the highest degree, the interests of England.
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONwished to ex- 1865 plain that the difference between his statement and that of his noble Friend (Earl Russell) might be explained by what he was about to state. There had been a great misunderstanding between the Governments of Spain and Morocco. At one time the Emperor of Morocco was supposed to have said that he would not fulfil his engagements, and that he would not pay a shilling more. The Spanish Government then said, "We will take permanent possession of Tetuan." He was, however, in hopes that the Emperor of Morocco would fulfil his engagements, and he could not doubt that under these circumstances the Spanish Government would fulfil theirs and evacuate Tetuan.
MR. SEYMOUR FITZGEEALDsaid, it was only a week since the authoritative announcement was made in the Spanish Gazette.