The Earl of Lauderdalerose to move for the production of certain papers relative to some recent transactions in Parga, and the general administration of affairs in the Ionian islands by Sir T. Maitland. Although there was no reason to believe his motion would be opposed, the House would permit him to enter a little into the subject, with a view of showing the justice and propriety by which general Maitland's conduct had been marked. It would not indeed be difficult to show that he had rendered a service, and an essential service, to his country. It might be curious to trace the misrepresentations which had been circulated with reference to his government to their origin. At first those misrepresentations related only to the provisions of the treaties concerning Parga. The censure did not extend to the present high commissioner; but pamphlets had been since published, some with and some without names; and a review also had appeared, which, affecting to blame those pamphlets, gave additional force to the calumnies the contained. For the character of the officer in question he might well be supposed to feel great esteem, and no small regard for his person; and therefore he trusted their lordships would excuse his taking this opportunity of vindicating that character from unjust aspersions. The statements which he alluded to branched into a variety of accusations; the first of which was, that he had neglected his duty in making an improvident bargain for the people of Parga; secondly, that he had expended large sums of money; thirdly, that he had adopted a system of impolitic and oppressive taxation, by which an insurrection had been produced; and, lastly, that he had assumed an exorbitant power, which he exercised oppressively. Now, with regard to the provision in the treaty of Paris, as it respected Parga, he wished those who formed such decided opinions on the subject had adverted to it with a little mote care. The 486 island of Parga was occupied as a military station, on one condition only, of attending to the benefit of the people. We came to no agreement with the Pargui-notes, and came under no obligation to them. This was the statement of general Campbell; no one indeed, who knew how Parga was placed at the conclusion of the treaty of Paris would deny that fact. It was then stipulated, that Parga should be restored to the Porte; and indeed the expediency of keeping it in our own hands was only to be maintained by a total misrepresentation and mis-description of that island. It was without any port, and its means of subsistence were all derived from the coast of Albania. It could not have been defended against a strong force without new fortifications, and at least a regiment of men. The subjection of vessels coming to it to a quarantine of 40 days would have rendered its foreign intercourse most inconvenient. Now, what was sir T. Maitland's conduct? He was either to make a convention with Turkey for securing the privileges of the Parguinotes before he gave up the island, or obtain a guarantee for their future security. In effect, the strongest stipulations were made for their protection and good government; and arrangements made by which those who chose it might retire. But then it was complained that an incorrect valuation had been made, and that the Parguinotes had not been justly dealt with. It was not however, usual to let individuals set a final valuation on their own property. Three commissioners had been appointed, who were conceived to be well qualified for the task, and they had named the sum of 280,000l., whilst the agent for the Turks estimated the value at 56,000l. only. After a deduction of 33 per cent, which was the established regulation in the West Indies, sir T. Maitland secured to the Parguinotes payment of the sum of 150,000l. He himself had the most accurate information that the Parguinotes were entirely satisfied with the arrangement when first made. As there was not a sufficient quantity of Spanish dollars, a part was paid in gold, and there was no truth in the story of base money having been introduced. Many cases occurred of claims amongst the Parguinotes, and of debts and mortgages, 700 of which cases had been decided in three weeks. He would not read the authentic documents which he had in his possession with reference to these circumstances, but they 487 contained a body of irresistible evidence. The papers already produced clearly proved that sir T. Maitland was not drawing on the British treasury, but that he was carrying on all the purposes of his commission from the military funds. By the treaty of Paris we were pledged only to maintain the troops stationed in the Ionian islands; but, from an improvement of the revenues, sir T. Maitland had been able to pay the whole Mediterranean staff. That officer looked forward to a yet greater augmentation of the revenue, and he did not wish to see the convention settled till the amount of its produce could be ascertained. It had been urged, that the new system of taxation was extremely onerous—that it impoverished the rich and oppressed the poor. The fact was, that since the constitution of the Ionian states, sir. T. Maitland had imposed but one new tax—that upon olive oil, which had, he believed, the effect of increasing the produce on every proprietor's estate. Again it was said, that this was done without consulting the whole senate, and under the sanction of a committee only. Now no person had ever manifested a greater respect for the forms of the constitution, or a stronger disposition to maintain them. With regard to the charge of having established a monopoly of the corn trade, he had in the first instance put an end to a monopoly that before existed; but commercial intercourse was not there quite so free as it was in some other places, and Parga was actually threatened with famine by means of a combination of merchants in Corfu. It was for this reason that corn was ordered to be purchased at the public expense, and this system was to continue till the same danger should have ceased. The effect merely was to raise the price a little higher than it formerly had been. He now came to another charge—that of imposing local taxes; and the whole of this resolved itself into an impost for the purpose of finishing a canal in Cephalonia, which was approved by every landed proprietor and merchant in that island. Every attempt had been made, however, both there and in the other states, to excite revolt, and to produce false impressions with regard to the objects of the British government. At Santa Maura these attempts had been actively and pertinaciously made, and he had received some information respecting them from the very best sources of intelligence. One of these—the eldest son of a principal inhabitant, who had re- 488 presented Santa Maura in the assembly of the Ionian islands—described the insurrection to have been caused by a person who had long been employed in endeavours to interrupt the tranquillity established by the British government; that it did not last above one day, and was raised chiefly by a false alarm that many of the inhabitants were to be conveyed to the West Indies. It was in fact brought about by much the same means as those used in fomenting disturbances nearer home. sir T. Maitland had throughout shown a respect for the constitution and for the privileges of the inhabitants, which had not been shown by the Russian government. The civil government of the Ionian islands, including even Malta, formed no longer any charge on this country, and we were also on the point of obtaining a reduction in our military expenditure. Their lordships were aware that he was too nearly related to the officer whose conduct he was vindicating to deal in panegyric. Had he been more distantly connected, he might have been more able to do justice to his merits. He felt, on this occasion, that he had certainly said nothing more than was strictly due, and that there was not the slightest foundation for any of those calumnies which had been so unceasingly and so extensively circulated; His lordship concluded by moving for copies of certain correspondence that had passed between the British government and commissioners of the Ionian states.
§ Earl Bathurstremarked, that the whole administration of sir T. Maitland was deserving of the highest credit: a most important and delicate trust had been committed to him—a trust of a peculiar nature, and in the discharge of which he could derive no benefit from past experience. This, however, he had executed with the utmost temper, ability, and moderation. There was no governor in the, various colonies and dependencies of Great Britain who had acted in a more upright, honourable, assiduous, and prudent manner. He now wished to offer a few words as to the conduct of his majesty's government, which had likewise been much misrepresented. Whenever the subject should be fairly examined, it would appear that the British government had never exercised its protection more liberally or more scrupulously. The whole error of those who censured our proceedings in that quarter, arose from an idea that we had any option to exercise. 489 But the truth was, that we had originally no right to retain possession of Parga, that we were under no obligation to retain it, and that we never engaged, on occupying it, to keep it under our protection. In the treaty of 1815, the Ionian dependencies were described, and Parga was expressly excluded from the stipulations made respecting them. He knew that it had been confidently reported some time ago, that one of sir J. Campbell's officers had entered into some engagement with the Parguinotes with regard to their becoming a dependency on this country; but as he knew that no such instructions had ever been sent to sir J. Campbell, he had requested an interview with that officer, who was too ill to meet him, but who had sent what might be looked upon as a death-bed declaration, in which he stated that he had never authorized any officer to give the Parguinotes reason to believe that they would be taken under our protection. It was a mere occupation on our part, and stood on the same ground as our occupation of Egypt in a former war. Egypt also belonged to the Porte, and when we drove the French out of it, it was because their possession was contrary to our belligerent interests, and showed that the Porte was itself either unwilling or unable to exclude them. But when peace arrived, Egypt was restored, and the case of Parga was quite analogous. As to what might be supposed due to the people of Parga, on its cession, he must say that it would have been quite unusual to grant them three or four years for the sale of their property; but of what use would the delay, if granted, have been to Parga; for who would have purchased property of that description? By the arrangement actually made, Ali Pacha had been induced to purchase it, and at a better rate than could have been secured by any other stipulation. The only additional ground on which the cession had been blamed was, that Parga had surrendered to us, and that we ought therefore to have retained possession of it. Those, however, who knew the situation of the place, well knew what must be the difficulty of defending it.
§ The motion was agreed to.