Lords Sitting of 5 May 1843

MINUTES.
BILLS. Public.—1a. Apprehension of Offenders.
Reported.—Exchequer Bills.
Private.—1a. St. James's (Westminster) Improvement; Glasgow City and Suburban Gas; Milnes Free School; Preston Water Works; Neath Harbour; Newport (Monmouth) Gas.
Reported.—Northern and Eastern Railway; Cromford and High Peak Railway; St. Helen's Water Works; London and Brighton Railway; London Cemetery; Leeds Gas.
3a. and passed:—Kendall's Divorce.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Earls Fitzwilliam, and Clarendon, and Lord Hatherton, from Whithorn, Dunfermline, Newcastle, Lanark, and Musselburgh, for the Total and Immediate Repeal of all Corn and Provision Laws.—By the Marquess of Downshire, from Belfast, in favour of the present Irish Poor-law.—By the Earl of Shaftesbury, from the Isle of Thanet, for the Repeal of the Beer Act From Westbourne, Otterton, and Emsworth, for Altering the Poor-laws.—From Glasgow, for Medical Reform.—From Grendon, Castle Ashby, and Whiston, for the Repeal of the Malt Tax.

EDUCATION OF THE PEOPLE.
Lord Broughamsaid that he had had forwarded to him for presentation a number of petitions from Tring, in Hertfordshire, Birmingham and other places, on the subject of education. He believed that as the bill to which these petitions referred was not yet before their Lordships, it was not competent to him to present these petitions, but he would avail himself of the opportunity to say that he regarded with unfeigned and deep sorrow, almost with despair, the aspect which the religious mind of the community of Churchmen, Wesleyan Methodists and Dissenters, appeared lately to have assumed on the great subject of popular education. He really was beginning to despair of the Legislature ever being able to extend materially the inestimable blessings of instruction to the people, because he found that the friends of education in the Church, among the Wesleyan Methodists, and among the Dissenters, though all of them respectively very warm indeed in support of the principle of popular education,—though very anxious to extend to all persons sound instruction, as well religious as civil,—though all respectively great friends of popular education, yet, the baneful truth was but too manifest, that they suffered all their various efforts to be neutralised, because each and all of these various classes preferred to the extension of popular education one other object, and that one other object was a victory over each other. The Church was anxious to educate the people, but the Church was still more anxious to get the better of the sects; the sects were anxious to have popular education, but the sects were still more anxious than this to overturn the Church. Now it was quite clear to him, that until all the various parties chose to give up respectively somewhat of their various prejudices, and passions, and arrived at the improved state of mind which should teach them that it was a far higher object that the people should be
1248
educated, than that sectarian prejudices and passions should be exasperated, or that sectarian triumphs should be aimed at, it would be quite impossible for education to make that progress which it must make, ere it became generally beneficial, and which progress it might easily and surely make, and maintain when made, but for these unhappy religious dissensions.
Subject at an end.

SERVIA AND RUSSIA.
Lord Beaumontsaid, that in rising to submit to the House the motion of which he had given notice previous to the recess be felt himself under the necessity of trespassing for a short time on their Lordships' patience, while he recalled to their recollection some portion of the past history of Servia, as well as the important part that province of the Ottoman empire had ever played in the transactions which took place between the Sublime Porte and its powerful and aggressive northern neighbour. Nor was he forgetful that in approaching this subject he was entering on no less a field than that of the balance of power in Europe, and that on which the balance of power mainly rested, namely, the integrity and independence of the Ottoman empire. He might, moreover, be liable to the imputation of presumption when he stated that if the reports which had reached this country through the Augsburg Gazette, and Algemeine Zeitung, and other German papers, proved to be true, he (Lord Beaumont) would not hesitate to declare that the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in this country had permitted a heavy blow to be struck at our political importance, as well as our commercial prosperity in the East, and by so doing had seriously endangered the very existence, as well as independence of the Ottoman empire, for he must remind their Lordships that in the long series of attempts made by Russia against the Turkish empire, Servia was but one chapter in the history, one thread in the web, one link in the chain with which that northern invader was seeking to encircle and bind down the Sublime Porte. Nay, this last monstrous act of the Emperor was but one in that long list of similar events which so rapidly followed each other in the history of Russian aggression, which combined with repeated outrages on Turkey, studied insults and contemplated injury to England itself: it

1249
was but a part of that extensive plan which embraced the occupation of the mouth of the Danube, under pretence of establishing lazzarettos, the seizure of the coast of Abasia, the raising fortresses south of the Ruben, and which had already succeeded in insulting our flag with impunity in the Black Sea by the capture of the Vixen, and not only estranged Persia from our alliance, but had by ingenious intrigues the noble Earl behind him into the most bloody and disastrous war that ever incarnadined the plains of Central Asia. It were idle for him to dwell upon what he had already stated, namely, that the balance of power in Europe depended upon the integrity and independence of the Ottoman Empire, but if they wished for high authorities, he could quote every great Statesman from Chatham down to the present day, all of whom had agreed that it was the undoubted interest of the Western Powers of Europe to maintain so important a Member of the European family as the Sublime Porte in its full integrity and independence. He might quote similar opinions on this subject from foreign as well as English works of high estimation, but amongst the infinite variety of sources from which he might produce high authority to back his opinion, he would consult the convenience of their Lordships by confining himself to two extracts. On the 30th of January, 1828, he found the followiug words recorded as having been delivered by a noble Member of that House:—
"I must state that the Ottoman power has long been an ally of this country—that the Ottoman power has long been an essential, part of the balance of power in Europe—that the preservation of the Ottoman power has been for a considerable number of years an object not only to this country but to the whole of Europe, and that the changes of possession which have taken place in that part of the world render the preservation of the Ottoman Empire as an independent power and capable of defending itself, an essential object,"
Such (continued Lord Beaumont) were the opinions professed in this House by the Duke of Wellington. On the 17th of July, in the same year, he found the following words reported as having fallen from another noble Lord in that House:—
"In his opinion the existence of Turkey as an independent power—as a power of weight and considerable influence in the affairs of Europe—was essential to the preservation of
1250
that balance which it had always been the policy of this country to preserve. In his opinion, if any material diminution in the power of Turkey took place, it would be felt by all the great powers of Europe, and if that was the case, it would be our duly to preserve it as entire as possible."
Such were the opinions of the Earl of Aberdeen, and he (Lord Beaumont) thought, that after the announcement of these two high authorities which he had selected from amongst so many others, he might very safely repeat his own firm conviction, that the maintenance of the integrity and independence of the Ottoman empire should ever be made a prominent matter in the councils of the European powers. Having laid down, by way of preface, these general maxims as the adopted rules of European policy in the Eastern question, he would proceed to show that the conduct of Russia in recent events bad been a violation of those general rules, and was, at the same time, both derogatory and injurious to the dignity and independence of the Sublime Porte. He would, moreover, undertake to prove, that its recent interference in Servia not only could not be justified by any of the three treaties now existing between Russia and the Sublime Porte, but that it was contrary to the spirit of her own declarations, and in defiance of the treaties which the emperor had ratified with England and other high contracting powers. And, if their Lordships would follow him through the rapid sketch he intended to give of the history of Servia, he would undertake to prove that Servia had ever been the door which Russia endeavoured to keep open for the free access of her intrigues in the Ottoman provinces, and that through Servia she had paved the way for her own intrusion into the counsels of the Divan, and hoped eventually to arrive by means of disturbances in that province at the complete usurpation of the authority of the Porte; for it was self-evident that the object she has in view was no less than the grasping with her own hands the power, influence, and position, which justice to Turkey, and the interest of Europe at large required that the Sultan alone should possess and retain. It wag not by arms, nor in the open field, that the insidious policy of the court of St. Petersburg sought to effect this purpose, nor in her past advances towards the coveted object, had she ever gained so

1251
much by victory in war as she had obtained by diplomacy in peace. No: the usual plan of Russia had been to seek out or create some disturbance in the internal affairs of the empire, and then, under pretext of protection, or in the disguise of an ally, to insinuate herself with the Divan; or else assuming the garb of a friend to the liberties of some particular sect or tribe, assume to herself the privilege of interfering in the numerous concerns of the heterogeneous masses which form the population of the Ottoman empire. In fact, he knew not how to explain the conduct of Russia, unless he compared it to the habits of the spider, which, after having with consummate skill and systematic perseverance spun the foul web in which its victim is destined to entangle itself, retires into its nook, and there with sullen complacency and malignant patience, waits until the expiring victim has completely exhausted itself, and no longer able to attract attention by its struggles; then in silence approaches the entangled wretch, and at leisure devours it, when not a sound of complaint or an effort at resistance can be heard. In retracing the history of Servia he would go back as far as the first revolution in that province, which took place in 1804, when an insurrection broke out amongst the Haidouks, or robber tribes of the mountains, who under the leadership of Tzerny-George, were completely successful against the small garrisons of Turks, and after ravaging the country, entered Belgrade in triumph, and there committed the most frightful cruelties. Scarcely, how-ever, had they driven the Turkish troops out of Servia than disputes arose amongst themselves, and each of the vaivodes or neze who had followed Tzerny -George to Belgrade returned to his respective district, and there attempted to appropriate to his own use and benefit the taxes which he had formerly collected for the Sublime Porte. It would, perhaps, be as well for him (Lord Beaumont) to mention the condition Servia was in previous to the insurrection, in order to understand the means the people had at their disposal at the period of the revolt, as well as the nature of the constitution they attempted to give themselves subsequent to that event. Before the insurrection the Sublime Porte had divided Servia into twelve small pashalicks, or rather agaships, under the immediate direction of the vizier of Belgrade, These agas collected the taxes
1252
and paid them in gross over to the vizier of Belgrade. After the insurrection these twelve districts were increased to seventeen, and the chiefs or neze as they were called in the country, took possession of these districts, and after the expulsion of the Turkish troops, governed them under the nominal supreme direction of the Tzerny-George. They soon, however, in the collection of taxes, and the exercise of their usurped authority, so persecuted the people under them, that these rose against them and appealed to Tzerny-George, who, after some bloodshed, was acknowledged by the nation as dictator. It was his great object, as well as after him, that of Milach, to deprive these petty chiefs of undue authority, and to concentrate the power and administration of the province in a strong central government. It was also on the other band a great object with the people to have a sort of national assembly instituted, to which representatives from the different nahias or districts might be summoned or deputed, and wherein they might state their complaints against the local governors, and express their wishes and views to the nation at large. Some such institution lived in their memories, and had in former times been known under the name of a Scoupina. Such was the condition of the Servians, and such the object the insurgents had in view at the period of the first revolt. In the subsequent history of Servia a constant struggle was carried on between centralization on the side of the supreme authority or elected prince, and the spirit of independence on the part of the neze or local governors of the nahias or provinces. When, however, the petty chiefs found themselves successively defeated by the persevering energy of Tzerny-George, and saw that all things were gradually coming under his sole power and direction, they proposed (and it was the first time they thought of having recourse to such a step) to appeal to Russia as mediator between them and Prince Tzerny-George, and by her influence to settle the differences which existed between them; and Russia, who now refused to recognise the election of Alexander Georgewitch, because his election (as she pretended) had been the result of violence and revolution; then, when it suited her interests, not only undertook the superintendence and settlement of the affairs of a set of revolted chiefs, but, without hesitation, acknowledged the election

1253
of a prince, whose whole power and supremacy had been the result of a most violent and bloody insurrection. With her advice, and at her suggestion, each of the twelve districts were called upon to elect a deputy, and it was further proposed that these twelve deputies should form a senate, and act as a council under the presidency of prince Tzerny-George. In addition to this proposed constitution, the Emperor suggested through his envoy Rodophinikin, that in order to secure to the Servians the independence they had achieved by their late revolution, that province should be put under the joint protectorate of Russia and the Porte. Thus did Russia interfere to acknowledge the right to revolt, and to confirm an election founded on a popular movement; and now that self-same power interferes in an opposite sense, and makes a revolution an excuse for annulling the recent election. Tzerny-George, however, rejected the advice of Russia, and not only refused to acknowledge her right to control the affairs of Servia, but on every occasion endeavoured to assert the independence of the Servian people, both as regarded Russia and the Ottoman Porte. Nor was it till the governors of the Nahias had nearly triumphed in their resistance to his dictatorship that he consented to the promulgation of a constitution under the nominal protection of the Emperor. During the whole of this time the utmost confusion had reigned in the province, and a continual struggle was maintained between the prince's party and the discontented Neze. Turkey was involved in a war with Russia, and had too much on her hands at that moment to punish and subdue her revolted subjects at Belgrade. In the year of 1812, however, that war was brought to a speedy conclusion, and it is from this date that the present claim of Russia to interfere in Servia is invariably stated to refer. The war which then broke out between France and Russia made the latter power eager to conclude a peace with the Porte, nor was the Porte at all reluctant to accede to the terms of peace suggested by the envoys of the Emperor; for while Russia was anxious to withdraw her troops from the Danube to meet the advance of a more formidable enemy on her western frontier, the Porte was distrustful of the proffered friendship of Napoleon after it had become acquainted with the propositions of Tilsit and the
1254
understanding come to at Erfurth. The war then, which for three years had raged between Turkey and Russia was terminated by the treaty of Bucharest, and he requested their Lordships to remember that it was under the stipulations of this treaty the Russians attempted to justify their recent interference in Servia. Now he would undertake to prove that this treaty gave no such claim to Russia to interfere, nor did it contain any provisions to enable that power to take part in the choice of a governor of that province, nor by any construction or interpretation of the clause in question could the emperor justify the attempt to usurp a control or share in the internal government of the country. The eighth article of the treaty was the only one which alluded to Servia, and all that article provided was.
"The Ottoman Porte grants a pardon and general amnesty to the Servians who shall in no wise and means be molested for their last actions. The fortresses lately erected in their country shall be demolished as being unnecessary, and the Sublime Porte will put garrisons into the ancient fortified places. Bat that such garrisons shall not infringe any of the rights belonging to the Servian people, the Sublime Porte will for such purpose adopt in concert with the Servian nation such measures as may be necessary for their security. The Porte grants to the Servian nation the same advantages as are enjoyed by her subjects of the islands of the Archipelago, and cause it to partake of the effects of her magnanimity by permitting it to have the sole management of its internal concerns by fixing the mass of contributions which it will receive from its own hands, and finally, will regulate all these matters conjointly and in concurrence with the Servian nation."
In the whole of the article there was not the slightest mention or notice taken of the right of Russia to interfere in the choice of a chief for that country: on the contrary, it was specifically stated that the election should be the sole act of the Servian people under the protection of the Sublime Porte, and by the remaining terms of the treaty it was distinctly Specified that Russia should exercise no such influence or veto in the election or choice of a chief. He said this distinctly and advisedly, because the could not otherwise interpret the circumstance so remarkable, and the distinction so clearly drawn in this and all subsequent treaties between the principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia, and that of Servia; for though the two principalities formed a conspicuous

1255
topic in all these documents, they were invariably separated from Servia and treated as being under totally different provisions. These states had separate articles made with reference to their administration, and although in those articles it was stipulated that Wallachia and Moldavia should remain under the government of the Porte, but that the internal administration of the country should be placed under the superintendence of the Hospodars. Yet it was specifically laid down that the rights of these parties should be guaranteed by Russia, and that she should, as joint protector, exercise some authority in the appointment of the chiefs; whereas in the article regarding Servia, that province was treated as an integral, part of the Ottoman empire and made totally independent of Russian interference. In continuing the history of Servia subsequent to the treaty of Bucharest, their Lordships would remember that in that treaty there was a provision for a general amnesty to the Servians for the part they had taken in the late war with Russia, but the Turks did not interpret that amnesty as extending to the revolt in the year 1804. The vizier therefore entered the province in the year 1814, seized on the ancient fortresses and recovered Belgrade, punishing at the same time the insurgents of the year 1804, and confirming the election of their chosen ruler Tzerni-George. The restless and discontented Neze, however, renewed their struggle against the central government, but the Servian people insisted on the fulfilment of the rights that had been guaranteed to them by treaty, and on this as on subsequent occasions refused to abandon the ruler whom they had chosen. Russia did not interfere either then or in the following year, when Tzerni-George, disgusted by the opposition of the minor chiefs and ill-supported by the authority of the Porte, threw up the reins of government and abandoned his country. It was then that Milosch, who had first appeared in the ranks against Tzerni-George in 1813, came forward as the leader of the people, and by them was elected ruler or Ober-neze. He submitted to the vizier of Belgrade, and by him was appointed chief of Servia, and the agent through whom all communications should be made to the Porte. The contest, however, between the local authorities and the central government still continued, and it was necessary for
1256
their Lordships to remember that the object of Milosch, as of Tzerni-George before him, was to extinguish the power and independence of the petty chiefs, and concentrate the administration of the country in his own hands. The Turks assisted him in his struggle against the revolted chieftains, but there was something either in the character or the imperfect education of this man that made his mind a constant prey to suspicion, and his conduct in consequence a tissue of inconsistencies. According to the information he (Lord Beaumont) had received, Milosch was profoundly ignorant in every branch of learning, could neither read nor write, and had passed his early days as a tender of sheep or swine in the mountains of the province. In 1816 he suddenly conceived himself to be an object of suspicion to the Turks, and fled with precipitation to Austria, but again returned in the same year, joined the insurgents and, to make the inconsistency complete once more submitted to the Pasha of Belgrade, and by him was re-appointed agent and ober-neze. By the I energy of his character, however, and the assistance of the Turks, he succeeded in gradually destroying the local chiefs, and, before the year 1824 had reduced to obedience the greater portion of the Nahias or mountain districts. During the whole of this period Russia was silent, although as he had stated the people had revolted against their former ruler, chosen another chief, and continued till the year 1824 a kind of civil war between the Porte and Milosch on one hand, and the Neze and their followers on the other, the former wishing to secure to themselves the whole control in the government of the province, by means of centralization, and the other seeking to make the municipal government of each separate district as independent as possible. At the same time Milosch was amassing enormous wealth, and by the eagerness he displayed to increase his private fortune, gave great offence to many influential Servians. The firman sent to Belgrade in the year 1820, contained the draught of a constitution in accordance with the terms of the treaty of Bucharest, but Milosch evaded the execution of it, and first by intrigues with the Pasha of Belgrade, and then by sending agents to Constantinople deferred the promulgation of the Hatti Sheriff till 1825, when he called together the assembly of the nation, and proposed him-

1257
self as their hereditary prince and ruler. On this occasion also, Russia did not think herself called on to interfere, and yet the proceedings were exactly the same as on the late election of Kara-George. Although the convention of Ackerman took place in the following year (that was in 1826), and although the part taken by the people of Servian in the election of Miloch might be called revolutionary, Russia did not at that time say a single word as to the election of a ruler by the people of that province being an act of rebellion, nor did she call upon the Porte to annul the acknowledgement of the Vizier of Belgrade. There could be no doubt that as the convention of Ackerman took place the year after the election, that if Russia had thought it for her interest to interfere, and that she had at the same time a right to do so, she would not have hesitated. But what was the course she pursued? She betrayed her anxiety to interfere, but so far from claiming a right according to treaties to do so, she renewed her former declaration and again solemnly stated that the people had a right to elect their own chief, and that the propriety of the choice was a question solely concerning the Porte and its Servian subjects. Let the House hear what were the stipulations contained in the 5th article of the convention of Ackerman and the separate articles added to that treaty,
"The Sublime Porte desiring to give the Imperial Court of Russia a striking proof of its friendly disposition and of its scruplous attention to fulfil exactly the conditions of the treaty of Bucharest, will immediately put in execution all the terms of the eighth article of that treaty, which respects the Servian people, who having been ab antiquo subject and tributary to the Sublime Porte, ought on all occasions to experience the effects of its clemency and generosity. In consequence the Sublime Porte will regulate with the deputies of the Servian people the measures which may be considered the best calculated to insure the advantages stipulated in their favour and the enjoyment of which advantages will at the same time be a just recompense and the best guarantee of the continuance of that fidelity of which this people have given so many proofs to the Ottoman Empire. As a term of eighteen months is deemed requisite for the proceedings necessary to the completion of this object in conformity with the separate article added hereunto, and agreed on by the plenipotentiaries of the contracting powers, the said measure will be drawn up in concert with the Servian deputies at Constantinople, and set forth in full in a firman,
1258
clothed with the authority of the Haiti Sheriff, which firman shall be put into execution on the shortest possible delay, at the very latest within the aforesaid term of eighteen months, and shall moreover be communicated to the Imperial Court of Russia and thenceforth considered as an integral part of the present convention."
The separate article was as follows:—
"The Sublime Porte in the sole intention of fulfilling faithfully the stipulations of article eight in the treaty of Bucharest, having previously permitted the Servian deputies at Constantinople to lay before it the demands of their countrymen on all the points most calculated to consolidate the security and welfare of the country, these deputies had in their memorial stated the wishes of the Servian people in respect of several subjects such as the liberty of exercising their religion, the choice of their chiefs, the independence of their internal administration, the reunion of the districts detached from Servia, the union of various taxes into one tribute, the concession to the Servians of the administration of the property belonging to Mahomedans, on condition of the payment of the revenue accruing from such property, together with the tribute to the Porte, the freedom of trade and their permission of Servian merchants to travel in the Ottoman States, with their own passports, the establishment of hospital schools and printing-presses, and lastly the prohibition of Mahomedans to establish themselves in Servia, excepting those who belong to the garrisons."
He entreated their Lordships to observe that there was a separate article with regard to the affairs of Servia, and another separate article regulating the future government of Moldavia and Wallachia, and did not this very circumstance of separating Servia from the other two principalities show that Russia did not then consider that she had the same right to interfere with the internal government of Servia as she undoubtedly had by treaties to interfere in the affairs of Moldavia and Wallachia. It appeared then both from the wording of the treaties he had read and the conduct of Russia on the occasion, that she acquiesced in the right set up by the people to elect their own chief, and have that election confirmed by the Porte alone: for the people on this occasion as on all former ones elected Milosch while the country was in a state that might well be called a state of revolution, and yet the elector was acknowledged to be valid provided the Porte confirmed it. It was not till the other day, not till fifteen years afterwards, not till the late election of Kara-George, that Russia in forwarding

1259
her own interest, thought it incumbent on her to interfere, and on the plea of discouraging revolutionary movements, informed the Porte that she could not acknowledge the prince. And yet it was on the article in the convention of Ackerman, which he had just read, that Russia grounded her present claims, it was on that article which chiefly went to confirm the stipulations of the treaty of Bucharest, and which Was again repeated and again confirmed by the treaty of Adrianople, that Russia now forsooth pretended she mainly relied. It should be recollected that from the period of the earliest of these treaties down to the ratification of the last both Tzerni George and Milosch after him again and again, proclaimed various forms of Government which might be called so many constitutions without once consulting Russia, and yet Russia never thought of complaining to the Porte of these violent changes in the internal government of that province. In 1828, war broke out between Russia and the Sublime Porte; the whole of Mr. Canning's policy was defeated and the engagements signed by Russia in the treaty of London, unscrupulously broken through. Unfortunately for the general interests of Europe and the civilized world, the western powers did not step forward to check the aggression of Russia but by a rash act of their admirals commanding in the Mediterranean considerably facilitated her advance. With ten line of battle-ships they attacked a Turkish squadron of three and called the result of this unequal engagement a victory. Had that small but brave fleet so unjustifiably destroyed by the allied powers been in the Black Sea during the siege of Varna, much of the mischief which afterwards ensued to Turkey would have been prevented, and perhaps the fatal treaty of Adrianople never have been signed. The feeble state of the Porte after the loss of its fleet was however, too tempting to Russia, who, in spite of her professions to the Court of St. James's invaded Turkey and when she had by successful intrigues and two bloody campaigns brought that power to her feet, unblushingly stipulated such advantageous terms for herself as materially to weaken Turkey and swell enormously her own agrandizement, notwithstanding the express terms of the treaty of London, and the repeated stipulations that,
1260
"The contracting powers will not seek in their arrangements any augmentation of territory, any exclusive influence, any commercial advantage for their subjects which the subjects of any other nation may not equally attain."
Before he (Lord Beaumont) pointed out the contradictions between the stipulations of the treaty of Adrianople and those of the treaty of London one of which he had just read; he would refer to an extract from the declaration of war issued by Russia in 1828. The declaration of war amongst other grievances set forth that,
"An amnesty was promised to the Servians, but instead, an invasion took place, and a dreadful massacre."
In the whole of this declaration of war there was no claim to interfere in the election of a ruler or the internal government of the province, and in the answer of the Sublime Porte to the declaration it was clearly shown that such was the then distinct interpretation of the treaty. In that document he found it stated,
"The imperial amnesty promised to the Servians for the part they took in the war with Russia was fully granted after the peace; and as a consequence of the natural clemency of his serene highness, particular concessions assured to them their welfare and their repose. The same nation afterwards disregarded the authority of the Sublime Porte and dared to revolt separately and by itself. As the Servians are the subjects of the Sublime Porte, and as the Ottoman government is entitled to treat them according to their conduct either by punishing or pardoning, the merited chastisement was inflicted and happiness restored to the country without the slightest injury to Russia, or infringement of the treaty of Bucharest. This affair of Servia, as well as other like points, distinct from treaties and even some events of smaller importance which ought to be classed under natural accidents always served as motives of complaints on the part of Russia and she never renounced her embarrassing proceedings. However, the Sublime Porte continued to regard her as a pacific friend, to pay attention to all affairs that could have possibly any analogy with the treaties concluded between the two states, and to observe scrupulously the rules of good understanding."
The plea, however, put forward by Russia was, that the articles of the treaty of Bucharest had not been fulfilled although sixteen years had elapsed without her presuming to make such a complaint, and war on no better ground than this shallow pretext was declared against the Porte. That war was brought to a

1261
termination as their Lordships well knew by the treaty of Adrianople. In the sixteenth article of that treaty the following reference was made to Servia,
"The circumstances which have occurred since the conclusion of the convention of Ackerman not having permitted the Sublime Porte to undertake immediately the execution of the clauses of the separate article relative to Servia and annexed to the fifth article of the said convention, the Sublime Porte engages in the most solemn manner to fulfil them without the least delay and with the most scrupulous exactness; and to proceed in particular to the immediate restitution of the six districts detached from Servia, so as to ensure for ever the tranquility and the welfare of that faithful and obedient nation. The firman confirmed by the hatti sheriff which shall order the execution of the aforesaid clauses; shall be delivered and communicated to the Imperial court of Russia within the period of a month from the date of the signature of the treaty of peace."
So much for this, the last of the three treaties between Russia and the Porte. It appeared then from the text of all three that Russia had hitherto never openly and avowedly interfered in the government of this province, and did not put in any claim to be consulted on the subject of the election of a Prince until the late election of Kara-Georgewitch. Her interference till the recent occasion was confined to intrigue. The Turks in the meantime evacuated Servia and handed over to Milosch the Dogano or Customs of Belgrade, who immediately levied 3 per cent ad valorum duty on all goods coming from the other Turkish provinces. In 1835 or 1836, however, Colonel Hodges was sent out as colonel by this country, and it is well known that he treated with Servia as a Turkish province enjoying an independent local administration. But no sooner was it known that colonel Hodges had been appointed consul-general at Belgrade, and that that functionary had been instructed by his government to endeavour to negotiate a commercial treaty with Prince Milosch, and that that ruler had been induced to listen to the proposals made to him by the British consul. No sooner was this known than Russia, who had hitherto been a strong supporter and sworn friend of Milosch began to change her conduct rowards that prince and by means of her numerous agents excite disturbances and discontent against his government. Alarmed by the renewed outbreak of the
1262
mountain districts and the murmurs of the overtaxed people Milosch applied to colonel Hodges for advice as to the best means of securing the tranquility of the country and obtaining for himself the title of hereditary prince. Colonel Hodges, without any mention of Russia, recommended the prince to make application to the Sultan as the only power which, had a voice in the question, for an extension of the privileges of the Servians, and a formal confirmation of his already assumed title of hereditary prince. Mahmoud was then on the throne of Turkey and to him commissioners were addressed. In addition to those who were deputed by Milosch, a Servian of high character and long resident at Constantinople was called into the council by order of the Sultan, who after hearing the application, and maturely considering the subject, forwarded to Belgrade a charter containing extended rights on the part of the people, and the nominal honor solicited by the prince. The firman however, gave little satisfaction, for through the instigation of Russia a general outbreak against the existing government was preparing, and the dissatisfaction which had for some time prevailed in the mountains was fast extending to the rest of the province, chiefly in consequence of the reported wealth of Milosch's private treasure, and the increased taxation of the Nahias. From the moment Colonel Hodges won the ear of Milosch, Russia set every engine at work to overthrow the government of that prince. Her agents induced the senate to charge him with selling the public property for his own advantage, and the people were induced to demand that he should be called to account for the money. Milosch declared the senate in a state of revolt; they declared the sales he had made void; he flies to Timlin, and wishes to have the advice of Austria; the Russian agents feed the insurrection and interrupt the negotiation of Colonel Hodges. Milosch returns to Belgrade and commences a civil war. The senate and people triumph and endeavour to bring the prince to trial. Finding the difficulties of this government increasing, and alarmed for his private fortune, he proposed to abdicate on condition he were allowed to retain the immense wealth he had accumulated. The senate were obstinate in their demand for an inquiry, and it was not till after much exertion on

1263
the part of the foreign consuls and strange vacillation on the side of Milosch that the people consented that their former ruler should not be called to account for the state of the public revenue during the period of his administration. With this assurance and the conviction that he was unable to overcome the difficulties that surrounded him, he at last with reluctance, but with some show of dignity abdicated in favour of his son. The son succeeded to the hereditary title which had been promised Milosch as prince of Servia, but the public discontent was not allayed by the change of rulers, nor the civil war put an end to by the new state of things. He would undertake to say that no one who attended to the affairs of the East doubted at present but that Russia herself had originally excited this revolt against the Obrenowitch family, and was the author of the confusion into which the province was thrown; for although prince Milosch had formerly been a favourite of Russia, and even been subservient to her ambitious views, yet no sooner was he suspected of listening to Colonel Hodges, and disconnecting himself from the aggressive designs of the court of St. Petersburg, than that power set every engine at work to increase the revolt against him, and determined, at any risk for the time, to overthrow his government. The people, however, were not satisfied with the mere change from Milosch to Milen or Michael, for they saw in the sons the continuation of the misgovernment of the father, and rose in revolt against them for the self-same reasons as they had driven prince Milosch from the country. Michael and his mother fled from the capital; the people proceeded to exercise what they considered to be their undoubted right under the constitution granted to the province by a Hatti Sheriff and firman of the Porte, and in general assembly elected Kara-Georgewitch their future ruler and prince. The vizier of Belgrade was cognizant of the proceedings, and after the usual delay the sublime Porte acknowledged the prince and confirmed his election, declaring it to be in conformity with the constitution of the province, and in fulfilment of the treaties with the emperor. The Divan were aware that Michael and his mother princess Loubitza had assisted the revolt in Bulgaria, and had been suspected of offering to join openly with the insurgents. This circumstance made the interest of the Porte
1264
coincide with the popular choice, and perhaps was a motive for the immediate acknowledgment of the newly elected Prince. In conformity with the treaty of Adrianople, however, the Porte informed Russia of the change in the government of Servia. He knew not what construction Russia chose to put on this proceeding, nor what instructions she gave to her Minister at Constantinople, but this he knew, that neglecting all international law she forthwith sent an agent of her own into Servia, there to investigate the internal proceedings of an independent state, and on receiving his report directed that agent to state his complaints without consulting any other Power, to the Divan. Now he would venture to say, that a greater or more direct insult than this was never offered to an independent state, and he could not conceive any act that could be a more gross or positive violation of the treaties of Bucharest, Ackerman, and Adrianople, under which treaties she alone could or did set up a right to be informed of what had passed in Servia. Although then Georgewitch was elected by the peo3ple according to the constitution of the province, and although the validity of his election was acknowledged by the Divan and confirmed by the Porte, Russia demanded that the election should be set aside, and this demand was made by that Power in such an overbearing manner as to show to the world that Turkey was under the control of Russia and must act in conformity with the dictates of the Czar. It was supposed that the other European powers would have protested against such a gross violation of the rights of an independent state, or that Austria and England at least would have come forward in conformity with their repeated declarations to maintain the integrity of the Turkish Empire, and by firmness on their part induce Russia to abstain from her lawless interference. Most strange however to say, Austria which every one knew was so deeply interested in preventing the continued interference of Russia in the Turkish provinces of the Danube, seemed to lead the way in the abandonment of the Porte, and was the first to give itself up to the designs of Russia. He could assign no other reason for this strange proceeding on the part of Austria than that of fear that this amelioration in the government of Servia would lead to an extensive emigration of the Servian

1265
population from some of its own provinces into the Turkish states, and at the same time to create an impatience amongst those who remained to throw off the Austrian yoke. These were the only grounds he could allege for Prince Metternich having recommended the Porte to yield to the demands of Russia. But although Austria had thus acted, although Austria who had been so loud in her professions of friendship towards the Sultan was the first to abandon him in the hour of need, it was still expected that England would not allow this encroachment, but would exert her powerful influence to protect the independence of the Ottoman Empire. It was hoped that some portion of that energy which had so recently characterised the proceedings of the Foreign Office, in maintaining the authority of the Sultan against a powerful but revolted Pasha, would still preside in the councils of Downing-street. But if the information which had reached him were correct, there was no ground to entertain such a hope, for timidity had succeeded to what might have been called by some rashness, and little reliance could in future be placed on the boasted protection of England. According to the German papers England has followed in the footsteps of Austria, and this country, which so short a time since was almost ready to go to war to maintain the integrity of the Ottoman empire, now abandoned her without a struggle to the mercy of Russia. He had been informed, and from the high quarter from which the information came, he believed it to be true, that France to the last moment was willing to uphold the rights of the Sultan and the integrity of his empire, provided that England would stand by her side, and unite her influence with hers in protesting against the conduct of Russia towards the Porte; nor was it till England had abandoned the straight forward line of policy which lay open before her, that France sent instructions to her ambassador to advise the Reis-Effendi to submit, and thus avoid being again separated and alone in respect to the other European powers. He would not detain their Lordships by referring at greater length to what was passed, but merely add, that on a careful review of all that had taken place, he not only could not find anything in the treaties of Bucharest, Ackerman, or Adrianople to justify in any way the late proceedings of
1266
Russia, but it seemed clear to him that that power had by those proceedings directly violated the stipulations of the treaties of London and of July, and seriously compromised the interest of England and France in the East. It showed above all that Russia was determined at any risk to secure to herself the paramount influence in the Turkish provinces on the Danube, and at all treaties with Turkey in respect to those provinces or the navigation of that river would be treated by her as vain and no longer binding. Nay, she went still further: she seemed determined that Turkey should not make a single appointment in those provinces, without having first consulted her, and she wished to make it evident to the world that the Sultan could not appoint a Pasha to Belgrade without the approval of St. Petersburgh. Such a monstrous proceeding as the dismissal of Kamil Pasha, such conduct on the part of one state towards the officers of another, was contrary to every principle of justice and rule of international law, for Russia had no more right to interfere in the appointment of the Pasha of Belgrade than she had to be consulted in the nomination of the Viceroy of Ireland, the Governor-general of India, or the Lord High Commissioner of the Ionian Islands. He must again remind their Lordships that the case of Servia was altogether distinct from that of Moldavia and Wallachia. It should be recollected that the latter two principalities were under the joint protectorate of Russia and Turkey, while Servia was always treated as an integral part of the Ottoman empire, and he therefore regarded this last attempt of Russia to gain paramount influence at Belgrade, not as a mere interference in the affairs of a single province, but as another blow aimed at the independence of the Porte, and another exertion to overthrow the balance of power in Europe. But, now, as to future prospects. Suppose, after England had thus abandoned the Sublime Porte—after Austria had sacrificed her own best interests—after the Divan had most unwillingly acceded to the demands of Russia, the people of Servia were to act as they had done before and declare that they had only exercised their undoubted rights which had been promulgated by a Hatti-sheriff, and confirmed by a treaty: that they had chosen a certain person as their ruler, and that they were determined to abide by the

1267
electionߞthey had a right to choose their chief, and they would maintain that right. Under such circumstances, what would this country do? Would we allow Russia, as on a former occasion, to send 50,000 men across the Pruth, and under pretext of enforcing the orders of the Sultan, advance into the province of Servia. Would this country allow Russia to act as it did on the first advance of Mahomet Ali into Asia Minor? if it did, Russia would gain the footing she desired, and obtain all the advantages she had so long aimed at. If, on the contrary, we interfered to prevent her advance, we must first retrace the steps we are now taking. He knew not what defence the noble Earl would set up, or on what ground he could justify the step he had taken. He might be told, that Russia did not wish for warߞcertainly not; he believed Russia did not wish for war when she was allowed thus to act, for she gained twenty times more by her negotiations and her diplomacy than she could ever gain by battles or by war. For his own part he should not be sorry to see a war arise between Russia and the Porte, for, if that were the case, the latter power would have a chance of obtaining some support from other nations, but the stealthy paces it now makes towards its object scarcely awake the suspicion or jealousy of neighbouring states. Europe should remember with what fidelity Turkey had ever adhered to her treaties, and this country should not forget how firm a friend she had ever been to us. Her name was synonymous with good faith, and she had ever declined to interfere in the affairs of other nations. Our word had been again and again pledged to this our most faithful ally, and our honour was interested in now redeeming our pledge, Under these circumstances, and in consequence of the rumours now in circulation, he thought Parliament was entitled to know the nature of the instructions sent to our Minister at Constantinople, and also the line of conduct that Minister had, previous to receiving his instructions, adopted; whether, in the first instance, encouragement had not been held out to the Porte to resist the demands of Russia, and afterwards a different course adopted most reluctantly by the English Ambassador in consequence of the special instruction he received. He cast no blame on Sir Stratford Canning; the conduct of that diplomatist had, he understood, been
1268
such as to make the Turks both love and respect him, but while they loved the man they could neither respect nor admire the policy adopted by his country. For the numerous reasons he had detailed to their Lordships, he thought they ought to be put in full possession of the facts, and with this view he moved a humble address for copies of the instructions sent to our Ambassador at Constantinople, and all correspondence between him and the Foreign-office, regarding recent events in Servia.
The Earl of Aberdeenwas ready to admit it was scarcely possible for any great political change to take place in any quarter of the world without in some degree more or less, affecting the interests of this country. It was, therefore, quite excusable to inquire into any change which had taken place suddenly in a foreign country. In reference to the Servian revolt, it was at first a matter of suspense whether Prince Michael or Prince Alexander should be the chief ruler of the semi-barbarous province of Servia—a province with which this country had little or no communication or commerce, and in which probably not another Englishman beyond her Majesty's consul would be found. But, as the condition of this province might affect the Turkish Government, the importance of this view of the question fully justified the attention which had been bestowed on it. He did not propose to follow the steps of the noble Lord who had made the motion, and enter upon any lengthened detail of the history of the affairs of this province. Enough for the purpose it would be to say, that in the month of September last, a revolt took place, the ruling prince of Servia was deposed, and a youth at that time living in obscurity was placed on the throne. On the occasion of this revolt, the consuls of the European powers including our own consul, united to protest against the illegality, violence, and corrupt proceedings accompanying this event. Her Majesty's Government did not entirely approve of the conduct of our consul-general, it appearing to them that he had gone beyond the province of his duty in pronouncing an opinion upon an internal revolution in a province with which this country had no particular concern. Her Majesty's Government suggested to the consul-general that in taking such an active part as he had, they were of opinion he had to that extent exceeded his duty. But if the

1269
accounts which had come to this country of the conduct of the parties who had arrived at power in Servia were correct, then it would appear that the greatest apprehensions were to be entertained for the tranquillity of the country and the safety of the people. He was unacquainted with the gentlemen who filled the office of consul-general for this country; but he had no doubt the Gentleman was of liberal opinions, and would be but little inclined to take any decided part against the freedom and privileges of a people amongst whom he was especially placed. Nothing could exceed the state of horror of the Servian people, from the excesses which had been committed by those who had arrived at power. The noble Lord had distinctly referred to the revolt as an effect resulting from the attempt of a free people to exercise their just right to elect their chief; but so far from this being correct, the revolt was the effect of a corrupt bargain with the Pacha of Belgrade, and two or three ambitious Servian chiefs. The revolt possessed no character of a patriotic or national movement; and so far was he from entertaining the apprehensions expressed by the noble Lord opposite, that Russia would move 50,000 men into Servia, he had very little doubt that in a short time we should see the youth at the head of the Government but too happy to make his escape from that people over whom he now reigned. So much then for the character of the revolt which had just taken place in Servia. In September, when the revolt took place, it was attributed—as every event which happened in that quarter of Europe was attributed—to Russian influence. Half the papers in Europe referred to it as an evidence of the dexterity and skill with which Russia contrived to bring about that state of things which was to lead to the dismemberment of the Turkish empire, and they proceeded to say, that in fact the newly-elected prince was but a puppet of Russia. It turned out, however, that Russia was altogether opposed to the proceedings. The noble Lord accused Russia of improper interference with the Servian privileges; but until very recently, it was equally believed and asserted by these with whom the noble Lord was in communication that the whole of the changes were the act of Russia. The Russian Government had, it was true, thought it right to interfere to a certain extent, and be would state to the House how far Russia had interfered. By
1270
the treaties of Bucharest in 1812, of Ackermann in 1826, and of Adrianople in 1829, there could be no doubt that the existence and qualified independence of Servia were secured entirely by the interference of Russia. Among the stipulations which Russia extorted from Turkey was one that the Servian people should have the free election of their chiefs. Now, the manner in which the revolt bad taken place, by a corrupt compromise with the Turkish Governor of Belgrade, gave Russia a right to interfere; for this was not a free election, but it was a mere bargain with a Turkish Pacha, and wholly divested of the character of a free election. But all the Russian Emperor wanted was, what he had a right to demand—that a free election take place. If Servia chose to elect the very man now on the throne, Russia would make no objection. Russia would support this man to the exclusion of every other, provided the Servian people determined upon freely choosing him for their chief. Or Russia, on the other hand, would give her support to any other one whom the Servians chose to select. It could, therefore, hardly be said, that what had been done by Russia was a strained exercise of her power, under those existing treaties, which conferred on her the right to secure by interference the free election of a sovereign for Servia. The noble Lord had found fault with her Majesty's Government for the part they had taken in the affair. He should be very glad to hear what the noble Lord thought the Government ought to have done. We had no motives for interfering. We were no parties to these treaties between Russia and the Porte. No question affecting the honour of this country was concerned in the interpretation of these treaties. We had no further concern with them than as they formed part of the public affairs of Europe, unless anything should take place under them to interfere with the independence of the Turkish empire, or with the general interests of Europe, which would call upon us to interfere in the interpretation of these treaties. He apprehended, that if England had stipulated with the Porte such treaties as those to which the noble Lord had referred, and an event of this kind had taken place, and we bad thought proper to interfere, in order to secure the due execution of such treaties, we should not have tolerated the interference of any other power in the interpretation of those treaties—that we should hare fixed our own in-

1271
terpretation upon them, and have exacted from the Porte that which we considered the due fulfilment of the conditions. Had we not, in fact, seen something of that nature only very recently? Had we not ourselves, in consequence of an engagement, not of the solemn nature of a treaty, but an engagement on the part of the Turkish government to the British ambassador at Constantinople, that certain privileges should be afforded to the people of Syria,—had we not for this last year and a half been engaged in compelling the Turkish government to fulfil that engagement, and only, at last, but recently succeeded in obtaining the conditions that we exacted—those conditions bearing upon the internal government of the province, the destitution of one chief and the appointment of another. All this interference in the internal government of the province undoubtedly this country never would have thought of exercising, and never would have been justified in exercising, had it not been that, under the engagements of the Turkish government, British agents had given promises which it was incumbent on the honour and good faith of this country to see fulfilled. All that Russia had demanded in consequence of the treaties made between her and the Porte was that they should be fulfilled by a fair election taking place in the province of Servia, instead of the scandalous transaction which he had already described to their Lordships from the accounts given by her Majesty's consul on the spot, during the whole transaction. But even if we entertained any doubt about the precise stipulations, and the effect of the stipulations of these treaties to which we were no parties,—but if we had entertained doubts, and had thought that the interpretation put upon them by Russia, and the right claimed under them was wrong, he should like to know what was the course which, as men of common sense and common prudence, we ought to have followed under such a supposition? Why, of course, in the first instance, we should naturally look to the power, which, of all others, was most interested in the condition of Servia as a neighbouring state, possessing a population of a similar character, and in every view called upon to exercise an interest far beyond that which this country could possibly have. What was the course taken by Austria? Austria, with strong motives—and, give him leave to say, with friendship and good-will
1272
towards the Turkish empire quite as sincere as it is possible for this country to entertain, and therefore not liable to all those suspicions which the noble Lord has thrown upon every proceeding upon the part of Russia—the course which Austria took, as judge of this affair, was to support, unequivocally and decidedly, the pretensions of Russia upon this subject, and to counsel the Turkish government, without delay, to acquiesce, and to do justice to the demands of Russia, and to fulfil the engagements existing under the treaties to which he had alluded. Without having the same direct interest in the question, but merely exercising the general inspection which belongs to all great European powers-Prussia gave the same advice. What was this country to do? Even if we had entertained, which he was not at all about to express, any different opinion as to the just pretensions of Russia under the treaties—if we had entertained a perfectly different opinion, and had thought that the encroachments and attacks which the noble Lord-described, were of the character which the noble Lord stated, still, he must say, that after all it might be a question of prudence how far this country could feel justified in taking any course diametrically opposed to that which had been decidedly adopted by the powers most interested, and the powers also best disposed to the support of the Turkish empire. Therefore, it did appear to her Majesty's Government that, in order to put an end, as speedily as possible, to those complications which might arise from this question being protracted, to act in concert with the Austrian government was that which was the most judicious policy for this country to pursue, and one which was likely to secure the peace of Europe. The noble Lord referred to opinions which he supposes to be entertained by her Majesty's ambassador at Constantinople. He did not know to what the noble Lord alluded. Undoubtedly Sir Stratford Canning always expressed the warmest interest in the support of the Turkish empire, and he has done his utmost to give all the advice which his situation enabled him to do, and he must say that if the Turkish Government had followed the wise and prudent advice which they received from Sir Stratford Canning they would not have been in the difficult position in which they are placed at this moment, and in which they have been recently placed; for although we have not recevied any intelligence from

1273
her Majesty's ambassador upon the result of this matter, I believe it is true, and there is no doubt of the fact, that the Turkish Government did acquiesce in the demands of Russia, and that a new election of the Prince of Servia will take place in consequence, but he had not the least apprehension of all those alarming incidents to which the noble Lord had referred as to any invasion, or any movement of that description. He thought there was no chance of anything of the kind, for the excesses committed by those who have recently been in power in that country were such, that there is not the least doubt that the change will be welcomed by the great body of the people themselves, and that no such circumstances as those to which the noble Lord refers are likely to take place. He did not feel that the noble Lord had at all made out any just ground for calling for the instructions given to her Majesty's ambassador, or for the other papers to which the noble Lord referred, and not having received any official and authentic account of that which has taken place, he felt it incumbent on him to object to the motion.
Lord Beaumont, in reply, observed, that he did not consider the present subject, and the case of Syria, as at all analogous. Russia separated from the other powers and interfered alone. According to our own treaties we were bound to interfere. He had great doubts about the submission of the Divan to these new proposals. He begged to repudiate all such communications as the noble Earl implied that he had received. He had his information from a German court and the Servian court, and from no other source. He had no wish to press his motion in opposition to her Majesty's Government and would withdraw it.
Motion withdrawn.
Their Lordships adjourned.