Lords Sitting of 8 August 1848

MINUTES.
Took the Oaths.—The Lord Vernon.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Unlawful Oaths Acts (Ireland) (Continuance and Amendment); Turnpike Roads (Ireland); Militia Ballots Suspension.
2a Trustees Relief.
Reported.—Windsor Castle and Town Approaches Improvements; Paymaster's Offices Consolidation; Land Tax Commissioners' Names; Rum Duties; Naval Medical Supplemental Fund Society; Juvenile Offenders (Ireland).
3a and passed:—Edinburgh Police (Amendment and Consolidation of Acts and Police and Sanitary Improvement; Salmon Breed Preservation; Public Works (Ireland) (No. 2); Corn Markets (Ireland).

INTERFERENCE IN THE AFFAIRS OF SICILY.
LORD STANLEY, in rising to put the questions of which he had given notice, with respect to our relations with the King of the Two Sicilies, said, that perhaps it would be more consistent with the regularity of their Lordships' proceedings, as well as with their convenience, that he should conclude the few observations with which he had to trouble their Lordships, by making a specific Motion; and whilst he hoped to receive from Her Majesty's Ministers a direct answer to the questions he should put, it was not his intention to press his Motion for the production of correspondence, if there were any objection to that Motion on the part of Her Majesty's Government. When a question on this subject was put a few nights ago by a noble and learned Friend of his (Lord Brougham), who had left the House for the remainder of the Session, it was put without any previous notice being given to the noble Marquess; and the answer which was given by the noble Marquess was consequently given on the spur of the moment, and without any opportunity of consulting with his Colleagues on that occasion; but he thought their Lordships would be of opinion that the state in which the King of the Two Sicilies was placed, and the possible effect which the present condition of affairs might have on the maintenance of the peace of Europe, were of sufficient importance to warrant him in asking from Government—he would not say a more accurate, but—a more detailed exposition of the course which Her Majesty's Government had felt it their duty to pursue, and the policy they proposed to adopt. He need not remind their Lordships, that upon the
1194
whole of Italy, but more especially upon the kingdom of Naples and Sicily, the effect of the late successful revolution in France produced great and powerful results; and in consequence of the success of that revolution in France, there was a rising in Sicily against the authority of the King of Naples, which, for a time at least, was completely successful, and which resulted in the expulsion of the royal troops and the possession of the strong places, especially Palermo, by the insurgent forces. He hoped he need not on the present occasion, or on any occasion in the assembly which he had the honour of addressing, urge on their Lordships the importance of adhering to that maxim of international law which laid down not only as the policy but as the duty of every foreign State, namely, that in the event of a civil contest going on in another independent State—whether that contest were to exchange the existing dynasty throughout the whole of such State, or for the purpose of separating from the superior authority of the mother country some dependency—it was the paramount duty of all foreign countries, under such circumstances, to maintain a strict and most absolute neutrality, and to abstain from interference in such a struggle of a purely internal and domestic character. The Government of this country had upon almost every occasion recognised and acted upon that principle. Upon that principle we had uniformly abstained from any interference, and had sought rather to depress and discourage the manifestation of public feeling with regard to the sanguinary contests which had taken place between Russia and Poland. Upon this principle we had abstained from any intervention in the affairs of Austria, and the revolted Lombard provinces of that empire. On this same principle we had condemned the intervention of the Prussian Government in the affairs of Schleswig and Holstein. On this principle we took on ourselves to remonstrate, unitedly, with Charles Albert, against his invasion of the Lombard provinces; and upon this principle their Lordships would not forget that all parties united in expressing their cordial approbation of the answer which was given by the late head of the Provisional Government of France to that deputation of misguided men who sought to invite the sympathies of Fraance to that revolt which even at that time they were meditating in Ireland against the supreme authority in this country. And the name of Ireland

1195
reminded him, and must remind their Lordships, that, if there was any one country in the world with regard to which it was not only a duty, but a matter of essential interest, to discourage the doc-trine that any foreign State had a right to interfere in an internal struggle between a dependency and a governing country—to discourage the doctrine of the sympathy of professed insurrectionists and the interference of any consideration as to the merits or demerits of the dominant Power, or the just or unjust provocation which might have been given to the dependency—if there were any country in the world on whom it was incumbent to maintain in such matters the strict doctrine of non-interference with foreign nations—that country was England—England, with Ireland at its doors, in which there was a largo portion of the population who he regretted to say would at all times be too happy to obtain foreign aid for shaking off that which they had been erroneously taught to consider as the baneful domination of the mother country. At the time of the insurrection in Sicily it did so happen that our Minister at Naples was absent from his post. For the last ten or twelve years that gentleman had been enjoying in that luxurious capital a residence of extreme comfort, and as agreeable a sinecure as it was possible for any Minister to have an opportunity of conferring even on his nearest and most valued relative; and he (Lord Stanley) thought it was unfortunate that at this period, when the management of affairs at Naples required peculiar delicacy and judgment, it was found convenient and suitable to the interests of this country that the accredited Minister, who ought to be, he presumed, high in the confidence of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, should be absent from his post; and that that post, at the whole time when it was of importance, and at a time when it was of the greatest importance, should be occupied by an able but a young man, very inexperienced in diplomatic affairs, and not of that standing and station that would justify his managing the affairs in that country at so critical a juncture. It did so happen that, at that period of the Sicilian outbreak, the noble Earl whom he now saw opposite (the Earl of Minto), and who was at that time engaged in the roving commission with which he was entrusted by his Colleagues as Minister General to every State in the south of Europe, happened, in the discharge of the duties de-
1196
volving on him, to be at Rome, and that, in consequence of his being at Rome, on the recommendation of the Chargé des Affaires at Naples, the noble Earl was invited to proceed to Naples, for the purpose of offering his assistance and advice. He (Lord Stanley) had distinctly stated that he believed the noble Earl was invited, and he stated it for this reason—because he was anxious to say that he altogether disclaimed any desire of passing any imputation or any blame on the noble Earl for his interference on that occasion—because he believed that that interference was not volunteered on his part, but that he was invited by the King of Naples, and at his request proceeded there. What passed between the noble Earl and the King of Naples, or what passed between the noble Earl and the revolted subjects of the King of Naples, between whom and their Sovereign the noble Earl undertook to mediate, it was not for him (Lord Stanley) to say, for the best of all reasons, because he was wholly ignorant. Whatever advice the noble Earl might have given to the one party or the other, he was afraid he would have to confess that that advice was received with as little effect in the case of Naples and Sicily as it had been tendered on other occasions; that although it was listened to with all the courtesy and respect due to himself and the situation he filled, yet that, for all practicable purposes, it was wholly disregarded by all parties. The result certainly was, that the mediation of the noble Earl was unsuccessful, the Neapolitan troops were driven out of the country; and that at all events temporary success was obtained by the Sicilians. Shortly after this period the insurrection in Sicily was followed up by an insurrection in Naples, and after some concessions made to the revolutionists by the King of Naples, there arose, in some way or other, a reaction in the country, and after a considerable effusion of blood the King obtained a partial success over the insurgents, the result of which had been that an agreement was come to, and terms entered into, between the Sovereign and what was popularly called the liberal party in the kingdom of Naples. But this disturbance in the kingdom of Naples put an end to every attempt for the reduction of the revolted people in Sicily. A Provisional Government was formed; and the question to which he wished to call the attention of the noble Lord opposite, and of Her Majesty's Government, bore on this, the interference or

1197
the non-interference of this country with regard to the form of government, or the individual to be placed at the head of the Government, which should be decided on by the people of Sicily. He apprehended that the period of the recognition of the independence of any revolted State must at all times be left to the discretion of foreign countries. As to friendly Powers, it might he laid down as a maxim that such recognition of a revolted portion of territory was on no account to take place so long as the Power itself intimated the intention of persevering in its design of reducing its subjects, and had practically at its command the means of effectually continuing the struggle. The recognition of any revolted State under such circumstances was an act of hostility towards the friendly country. It was stated that during the period which had elapsed after the royal forces had been expelled from Palermo, and whilst the discussion had been going on in the self-constituted Sicilian Assembly, there had been frequent communications between Her Majesty's Minister at Naples, acting, he presumed, on the part of the Government of this country, and the parties who, having so far carried on a successful revolt, were engaged in framing their new constitution, and adopting their new form of government. Of the precise effect and nature of those various communications he was not in a condition to speak; but if he might believe the information conveyed to him, and conveyed to him from sources as likely as any others to have a correct knowledge, it was stated that at a very recent period, and immediately before the final decision of the Assembly at Sicily to offer the Crown of the country to the son of the King of Sardinia, a communication was made on the part of the British Government, and that from the Embassy at Naples the Porcupine steamer was depatched, having on board of her a gentleman attached to the British Embassy at Naples, with the distinct intention of communicating with the heads of the revolted party there, and of intimating to them distinctly, that it was the pleasure of England that they should elect not a republican but a monarchical form of government; and that, as the head of that Government, they should select the son of the King of Sardinia. It was stated that the communication was effected through the medium of an attaché to the Embassy at Naples of the name of Pagan. That name, so far as he knew, was new in the
1198
diplomatic service of this country; but he supposed he was not erring much if, from the name, he inferred that the gentleman was a native of the sister country, and that he belonged to what was called the extreme Liberal party. That opinion had certainly some confirmation in the fact that, upon an examination of a very useful little work, Dodd's Parliamentary Companion, for the year 1847, he saw that a gentleman of the name of Fagan had been returned for the first time as Member for the city of Cork; and that this gentleman, in politics, was an avowed repealer and free-trader. He might be in error. [The Earl of MINTO: Very likely.] He admitted that he might be in error; but in his own mind he did trace some connexion between the election of that hon. Gentleman, as Member for the city of Cork, and the appointment of Mr. Fagan upon a diplomatic mission to Sicily. The mission, however, upon which that gentleman proceeded, was not affected by the question whether he belonged to a particular party. It was stated that Mr. Fagan distinctly communicated to the Assembly who were deliberating upon the affairs of Sicily, that it was the pleasure of England that the Duke of Genoa should be selected as the Sovereign of Sicily; and, failing that, they were not to look for the countenance or the protection of England in its endeavour to establish itself as an independent Power. The noble Marquess might have it in his power to give a distinct contradiction to this report, and he hoped he was; but he believed the noble Marquess was not in a condition to deny that, previously to that period, agents from Sicily had been received in this country: he did not mean to say they had been formally and officially received, but that they had been admitted to an interview with the noble Lord at the head of the Foreign Department—that they had communicated to the noble Lord their views and wishes with regard to the future constitution of Sicily—and that they had been informed by the noble Lord that England could not recognise Sicily as a republic, but that England would recognise Sicily as an independent monarchical Power, if a son of the King of Sardinia were elected king. He further believed it to be the case, for he stated it upon authority which would not be disputed, that a communication to that effect was made by direction of the noble Lord at the head of the Foreign Department, through Her Majesty's Ministers at Turin, to the King

1199
of Sardinia; and that a similar communication was made from the Foreign Office to Her Majesty's Consul at Palermo, Mr. Goodwin, who thought it his duty to lose no time in making the condition known upon which England would recognise the independence of Sicily. All this might be a fable; but, unless the noble Marquess was able to give it a distinct and positive contradiction, he (Lord Stanley) must hold that in point of policy it was an unjustifiable interference in the internal affairs of Naples and Sicily, and that to hold out any condition whatever as the price of the recognition of England of the independence of a revolted dependency of a foreign prince—and that prince our ally—was a violation of the law of nations, and contrary to all the principles of public faith. The first question, then, which he meant to ask was, whether any communications had been made by Her Majesty's Ministers, or by the authority of the Foreign Office, either directly or through the instrumentality of any of our Ministers or diplomatic agents in Italy or Sicily, with regard to the selection of a particular form of government in Sicily, or the election of a particular individual to be the head of that Government; or whether any intimation whatever had been made that the policy of England, as to the recognition of the independence of Sicily, would be guided by the course which the Sicilian Assembly might take upon that question—a question of purely internal policy? He had further heard another statement, which he hoped would be denied distinctly, which, if it were true, involved a more flagrant breach of neutrality, and even an act of hostility, than the subject he had just adverted to, It had been well known that for some time the King of Naples, in the exercise of his indisputable rights, having succeeded in arranging the affairs of his immediate dominions upon the continent of Italy, was making preparations to restore his authority in Sicily. In such a case this country had no right to inquire into the theoretical or practical abuses of the Government of Naples in Sicily; we had no right to ask whether the constitution of Naples was such as we approved in theory, or whether the Executive Administration was such as could be justified in practice. We had no right to inquire whether the Sicilians had just grounds to complain of oppression or injustice; and least of all had we any right to interfere in any efforts the King of Naples might think
1200
fit to make for the restoration of his authority over a portion of his revolted subjects. If our interference or mediation were asked for by both parties, and it could be made available for the purpose of preventing the unnecessary effusion of blood, he would not say a word against it; but unless application was so made for our mediation, our duty was plain, clear, and distinct—to remain wholly neutral between the contending parties. He wished, therefore, to ask Her Majesty's Government, whether they had practically recognised this principle; because it had been reported that whilst the King of Naples was preparing a force in the bay of Naples, for the reduction of Sicily to his authority, Her Majesty's fleet in the Mediterranean, in the execution of orders, had appeared in the bay of Naples, and had surrounded the fleet prepared by the King of Naples for the purpose of proceeding towards Sicily? It was true that no distinct intimation had been given of its being the intention of Her Majesty's fleet to prevent the ships of the King of Naples sailing towards Sicily; but the British fleet at this moment held so menacing a position with regard to the Neapolitan fleet, that their Lordships had a right to be informed as to the intention of its being so placed. Their Lordships had a right to know categorically whether the British Admiral had any instructions to prevent, or in any the slightest degree interfere with any, expedition which the King of Naples might send to re-establish his authority in Sicily; or whether the King of Naples would, so far as England was concerned, be left free to exercise his own pleasure in making those efforts which he might deem expedient for the object he had in view? But if the independence of Sicily had been recognised, he apprehended that this country had no right to insist upon conditions for its recognition. He had no hesitation in saying, however, that the state of affairs between Naples and Sicily was not such as to warrant the recognition of the independence of Sicily by this country. The struggle was not yet over; the war was still being carried on; success was doubtful. In this state of things the intervention of England, either by arms or moral influence, was unjustifiable. He had been told, and again he hoped the statement would be contradicted, that when the Assembly of Sicily elected the Duke of Genoa their Sovereign, the election was received by a salute from the British fleet, and that the

1201
same vessel, the Porcupine, which brought to Sicily the attaché from the British Embassy at Naples, also conveyed deputies from Palermo, charged with offering the crown to the Duke of Genoa—a crown which he, with great prudence, deemed it expedient to decline. The second question, therefore, which he desired to put was, whether instructions had been given to the Admiral commanding the Mediterranean fleet to interfere in the slightest degree with the free exercise of the authority of the King of Naples, by preventing him, if he thought fit, from sending a squadron to Sicily, to restore his authority there? He had no desire to call for the instructions to the Admiral, and he should content himself with moving—
"That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for Copies or Extracts of Correspondence between Her Majesty's Government and any of Her Majesty's Ministers or Consuls abroad, in reference to the Election of a Sovereign of Sicily."
Of course he should not press the Motion if the papers could not be produced without inconvenience to the public service.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEsaid, that without going into details, he had no indisposition to give the noble Lord such information as was in his power, with regard to the nature and character of that alleged interference—if it could be called interference, but which, in fact, amounted to nothing more than the tender of an opinion on the part of this country—which had taken place during the differences that had unhappily prevailed for a considerable period between the King of Naples and a portion of his subjects. He was anxious, however, before stating the course taken by Her Majesty's Government, to remove the impression which seemed to exist upon the mind of the noble Lord, and which, perhaps, existed upon the minds of other noble Lords in that House, that there had been, in any part of these transactions, a desire to accomplish, or to assist in accomplishing, a separation of the two kingdoms of Naples and Sicily. In all the differences which had existed, he was happy to state that we had been, and he hoped we should long continue to be, in a state of amity with the King of Naples. Towards Sicily, though united to Naples, we had always stood in very peculiar relations connected with its existence and constitution. But, without adverting to those differences, Her Majesty's Government prescribed to themselves, in the first in-stance, the course of endeavouring to
1202
maintain, so far as friendly counsel and interposition went, the connexion between Naples and Sicily upon the footing it had hitherto stood. Long after the disturbances had commenced in Naples, and long after they had commenced in Sicily, the whole object of the course taken by Her Majesty's Government, both previous and subsequent to that mission to which the noble Lord had alluded in somewhat contemptuous terms, but which he (the Marquess of Lansdowne) thought had been most successful and important, was to maintain the relations between Naples and Sicily upon the same footing that had hitherto existed; and the whole object of the mission upon which his noble Friend (the Earl of Minto) was sent to Naples, among other States, but sent there only because solicited by the King of Naples himself, and not from any desire to force British interference or influence upon that kingdom—was to produce and promote the adoption of those healing measures upon which it was justly believed the only chance existed of maintaining those relations. Such was the object of the Queen's servants, and such the object of the British Minister, as instructed by those servants; and such was the object of his noble Friend (the Earl of Minto) when he went upon that mission. These counsels were tendered; and so far from being received with any thing like scorn or disapprobation, they were received in the spirit in which they were offered, namely, in the spirit of amity and good-will. Even at an advanced period of the negotiations, Her Majesty's Government had reason to hope that his first and favourite object would have been accomplished; and Naples, had she subscribed to certain conditions, might then have retained, and would have retained to this moment, her power over Sicily. There was a moment, he said, when this was very possible; but changes took place in the counsels of his Neapolitan Majesty's advisers which served to induce other ends and other objects than the arrangement which was all but completed. Subsequent events widened the breach between Sicily and Naples, and were followed by the almost complete success of the Sicilians' arms in their resistance to the Neapolitan authority; but certainly up to the last moment, when there appeared the slightest practical hope of maintaining the union complete, the advice, counsel and action—so far as it could be called action—of Her Majesty's

1203
Government, were directed to that object, and that object only. Undoubtedly it was not for want of any exertions on the part of the British Government, or for want of skill on the part of his noble Friend (the Earl of Minto), or of the noble Lord at the head of Foreign Affairs, that no such amicable conclusion had been come to. The noble Lord (Lord Stanley) having alluded in no very favourable terms to the absence of the noble Lord (Lord Napier) who was entrusted to represent the interests of this country at the Court of Naples from the seat of his embassy, he (the Marquess of Lansdowne) was glad to inform the noble Lord, that although it was undoubtedly true that Her Majesty's Minister was absent from Naples during these transactions, yet that that absence commenced long before these troubles took place; and he begged to assure the noble Lord that whenever he should come to see the whole of the papers and communications that had taken place in this matter, he would find that no country in the world had been represented with more ability, with more assiduity, or with more skill than this country had been, and was now, represented at Naples by Lord Napier. From the time when it became manifest that Sicily would no longer remain a part of the kingdom of Naples—in the sense which had previously obtained—the anxiety of Her Majesty's Government to favour the interest of the King of Naples did not cease on that account. The next stop which Her Majesty's Government was most anxious to use their influence in bringing about as a result of these transactions was, that a prince of the house of Naples should be chosen as the sovereign of that kingdom, which had become practically an independent Power. No effort was spared by his noble Friend to induce the Sicilians to make that choice. However, as events proceeded, it became manifest that the people of Sicily, combining as they did every branch and every order, from the aristocracy down to the lowest class of the population, were determined to maintain their independence, which determination they displayed with so much military skill and valour as to make their independence certain. And it appeared probable that the Sicilians would adopt republican rather than monarchical principles. Her Majesty's Government did not, however, withhold their counsel or advice; and that counsel and advice, he begged distinctly to assure the noble Lord,
1204
was unaccompanied by anything like a threat, or the substance of a threat. Her Majesty's Government certainly did not think it advisable to interfere as to the form of government to be established in Sicily; but as far as their opinion was concerned, they gave it in favour of a monarchical rather than a republican form of government. In the present state of Europe he thought that that advice was sound for the Government of this country to give, and for the people of Sicily to receive. Assuming the people, of their own free choice, to determine on having a monarchical form of government, it then became most desirable that their sovereign should be elected from some of the princes of the Italian States, in order that the election should not be the cause of introducing princes of foreign extraction and foreign blood; which would have given rise probably to foreign interference, that would have been ultimately attended with further and more serious differences. Looking back, then, to the counsel which Her Majesty's Ministers had given, he now advisedly said that there was not any portion of it which he considered they had any reason to regret. The noble Lord was entirely mistaken as to the different events to which he had adverted. He was entirely wrong and misinformed when he supposed that a communication was made to the people of Sicily or the King of Sardinia that the Government of this country required the assurance that the Duke of Genoa should be elected as sovereign, or that they had annexed any sort of condition with reference to what would be the future conduct of this country in regard to Sicily as an independent State. All that this Government did say was, that when Sicily should constitute itself into a sovereign power, England would prefer a monarchical government, and to see a prince named as their sovereign who did not belong to a foreign State. The noble Marquess was then understood to say, that Admiral Parker had gone to the bay of Naples of his own accord, and that the movement of the British fleet had no reference to the transactions between Naples and Sicily.
LORD STANLEYhad no desire to press the Motion; but he confessed that the answers of the noble Marquess were by no means satisfactory, nor did he believe they afforded such an explanation of the views and principles of the Government upon this important question as their Lordships and the country had a right to expect. By

1205
the admission of the noble Marquess it appeared that the fact was, that at a period when the struggle between Naples and Sicily was not over, and when the King of Naples had not resigned the hope or the intention of effecting a restoration of his authority in Sicily, Her Majesty's Government felt it consistent with the duty they owed to a friendly State, to enter into communications with, and offer their advice to, its revolted subjects, as to the mode in which they should constitute themselves an independent Government. No conditions, said the noble Marquess, were affixed to the advice so given; but he had unequivocally stated that this country had informed Sicily that so soon as she had established a sovereign to rule over her newly-constituted independent State, this country would recognise her independence. This, in itself, was no small inducement, if it were not a condition, to proceed to the election of a sovereign. Neither had the noble Marquess denied that the Government had informed these revolted subjects of the King of Naples—for such they were, whatever they might be called—that the choice most gratifying in England would be an Italian prince, the son of the King of Sardinia. This avowed course of proceeding was inconsistent with the friendly feeling by which we professed to be animated towards all our Allies; it was inconsistent with the strict neutrality it was our interest and duty to maintain between a mother country and a revolted dependency. He had a right to ask Her Majesty's Government a question upon a point concerning which the answer of the noble Marquess had been most unsatisfactory, he was aware that Sir William Parker's fleet had appeared in the bay of Naples in consequence of a complaint against a Neapolitan vessel for having hoisted English colours. No doubt this was a proper matter for diplomatic explanations and correspondence; but it was wholly improper and menacing to permit the intervention of a powerful British squadron concerning it. The sole cause of the offence which had led to the appearance of a British fleet in the waters of the bay of Naples, was, that in the open sea a Neapolitan vessel chased a Sicilian vessel, and for the purpose of coming within distance she hoisted British colours; but previous to firing she lowered the British colours and hoisted the Neapolitan. No man would contend this was a matter to render necessary a menacing appearance and an overawing force. Their Lord-
1206
ships and the country had a right to know whether the Government still intended to maintain, under existing circumstances, a strict neutrality between the forces of his Majesty the King of Naples and the insurgent force of Sicily, and whether, in pursuance of that neutrality, they considered the British Admiral would be justified in offering any obstacle to the expedition which the King of Naples might think fit to equip out, and which it was notorious he had prepared, and which he was only intimidated from sending out of the bay of Naples by the presence of the British fleet.
The EARL of MINTO: It was understood that a Neapolitan steamer had hoisted the British colours, not in the main sea, but in the waters of Corfu, for the purpose of deceiving a vessel which had assumed the character of a merchant ship, but on board of which it was ascertained were embarked a large number of Sicilian refugees from Calabria. They were brought over to Naples, and the admiral demanded access to those persons to know the cause of complaint. That access was refused; and from what had taken place, it did appear to him (Lord Minto) that there was sufficient, and more than sufficient, ground to justify a peremptory demand of an explanation. The admiral very naturally and properly judged for himself under the circumstances; and on this occasion, as on every other occasion, he was perfectly certain that the judgment of that most distinguished officer would be found to be characterised by prudence and firmness. He begged to say one word on another matter. The noble Lord seemed to think that he (Lord Minto) had proceeded somewhat officiously to Sicily.
LORD STANLEY: Quite the reverse distinctly stated that your Lordship went under the direct invitation of the King of Naples.
The EARL of MINTOcontinued to say, that he went to Sicily, not merely in consequence of an invitation, but of a pressing and urgent request made to him by the King of Naples. The noble Lord seemed to think that he (Lord Minto) had interfered rather unnecessarily in the matter; but he begged to say that he had felt most unwilling to interfere at all, and that it was only at the instance and most earnest entreaty of the Neapolitan Government, and of the Sovereign in particular, that he had been induced to undertake the mission. He would say no more on this subject, ex-

1207
cept that his object throughout had been, if possible, to maintain the connexion between the two kingdoms; but that he felt that that connexion ought not to rest solely with the Neapolitan Government, who had offered terms which they shortly afterwards withdrew from. He agreed with the noble Lord as to the general principle of non-interference; but, at the same time, he could not agree in thinking that there were no circumstances in the previous connexion between this country and Sicily, which imposed upon England very serious obligations towards that country; and, on a fitting occasion, he should be perfectly prepared to enter fully into this question—at the present moment he could not do so, as it would be necessary to produce documents which at this moment it would be extremely improper to produce.
The DUKE of ARGYLLsaid, he rose merely to express his deep regret that Her Majesty's Government had so hastily and at so early a period thought it indispensable to announce its recognition of the independence of Sicily. He was not one of those who objected to this country countenancing those who were struggling for that constitutional liberty which England had so long enjoyed, nor did he forget the peculiar relations between this country and Sicily to which the noble Earl had referred; but at the same time he could not help feeling that the true interests of Italy lay in consolidating, not in dividing, its power. He had no doubt but that it had been the earnest desire of Her Majesty's Government to maintain the connexion between the two countries of Naples, and Sicily in the first instance; but he must express his deep regret that Her Majesty's Government should at so early a period have concluded that it was impossible that that connexion could be re-established, because he could not help feeling that such an intimation on the part of Great Britain must have the effect of determining for ever that separation.
EARL GREYthought it was somewhat premature on the part of the noble Duke, before he had seen the documents, or was fully acquainted with the circumstances of the case, to express so decided an opinion on it.
The DUKE of ARGYLL: I merely expressed my regret.
EARL GREYsaid, he could reiterate the assurance of his noble Friend the President of the Council, that it had been
1208
the anxious desire of Her Majesty's Government to maintain the connexion between the two parts of the kingdom of the Two Sicilies. He entirely concurred with the noble Duke, that consolidation, and not division, would be for the interest of that part of the world; but at the same time it should be recollected, that that matter depended on circumstances, and that the subject was one which could not be discussed until the House had such full information on the transaction as would enable them to form a correct judgment upon it. When the time arrived at which the reasonableness of these proceedings could be fairly discussed, and when the Government could, consistently with their duty, produce all the information that they possessed on the subject, he had no doubt whatever but that they would be able to show that they had not acted in this matter without due cause. At present, however, they all laboured under a great disadvantage in discussing the subject, as Her Majesty's Government could not state, without injury to the public interests, what their justification was for the policy which they had pursued. Whenever this subject could be brought before their Lordships in such a manner as that the opinion of the House could be fairly pronounced upon it, then, he had no doubt that such a case would be made out as completely to justify all that the Government had done.
The EARL of MALMESBURYsaid, that the second question of his noble Friend (Lord Stanley) had not yet been answered by any Member of Her Majesty's Government. He begged therefore to ask Her Majesty's Government a plain question in plain English, namely, was it intended that Admiral Parker should interfere with any expedition which His Neapolitan Majesty might at present attempt to send against his revolted subjects in the island of Sicily?
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEwas understood to decline giving an answer, on the ground that it would not be conducive to the public interest to do so.
Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

MR. LABOUCHERE'S LETTER TO THE IRISH MAGISTRACY.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE, in moving that the Corn Markets (Ireland) Bill be read a Third Time, said, that he wished to take that opportunity of referring to a complaint made by a noble and learned

1209
Lord not now present (Lord Brougham), some evenings ago, of a letter written by Mr. Labouchere when Secretary for Ireland, in which it was alleged that he had announced to the people of Ireland their right to carry arms, he had since then had an opportunity of referring to that letter, and he felt justified now in stating that the noble and learned Lord had been misinformed about the purport of the letter in question. At the time the noble and learned Lord spoke, he (Lord Lansdowne) had only a very general recollection of the contents of that letter; but since then he had referred to the letter itself, and found that it was not at all liable to the censure which had been directed against it. He held a copy of the letter in his hand. He would not trouble their Lordships with reading it, unless their Lordships wished him to do so; but he would state that its object was to explain, for the information of the magistracy of Ireland, the law with respect to the carrying of arms; to show that, although the people had a perfect right to carry arms, they were not entitled to carry them for illegal objects; and to instruct the magistrates how to act in the case of those who were found doing so. Undoubtedly, towards the close of the letter there did occur a passage with respect to the right of the people to carry arms; but not in such a way as to intimate to the people of Ireland—that which they perfectly knew at the time—that it was their right to carry them for legal objects: but the aim of the whole paragraph was to convey to the magistrates of Ireland the assurance that Mr. Labouchere and the Government of Ireland were determined not to allow the right of carrying arms to be abused for illegal purposes; and that the magistrates might depend upon deriving every assistance from the Government in preventing such an abuse of it. It was quite true, that some short time after that letter was published, a placard was stuck up in the streets of Dublin, containing a short extract from it, respecting the right of the people to carry arms—not only without giving the rest of the letter, but without giving the remaining words of the paragraph from which the extract was taken. At the top of the placard there was placed a representation of the arms of the Lord Lieutenant, with the view of giving it the appearance of an official notification by order of his Excellency, that every Irishman had a right to carry arms, as if this had been a privilege manifestly
1210
new, and notified for the first time to the Irish people! He hoped his right hon. Friend in those circumstances would stand acquitted in the eyes of their Lordships, and in the eyes of the public, of having done so monstrous and foolish an act as to go out of his way for the purpose of telling the people of Ireland that they might carry arms.

TITLES OF ROMAN CATHOLIC PRELATES.
LORD REDESDALErose to move—
"For a Copy of a Despatch, dated Downing-street, 20th November, 1847, relating to the Titles by which Prelates of the Roman Catholic Church in the Colonies are in future to be addressed in all official Communications."
The circular had been addressed by the noble Lord, he believed, to the Governors of the Australian Colonies, and he was induced to call their Lordships' attention to it, in consequence of the erroneous impression to which it was calculated to give rise with regard to the proceedings of the Legislature on the subject to which it referred, and because there was a feeling of delicacy entertained on the part of some in taking the oath of abjuration in that House and elsewhere, on account of a supposed alteration in the position in which this country stood towards the Pope and those who acknowledge obedience to him. [The noble Lord read the despatch, which stated that his (Earl Grey's) attention had been called by the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland to the fact of the Roman Catholic prelates in the colony not having their rank acknowledged in the same manner as in Ireland, and that as the Legislature had in the Charitable Bequests Act formally recognised them, by allowing the Roman Catholic Archbishops and Bishops to take rank immediately after the Archbishops and Bishops of the Established Church, it was the desire of Her Majesty's Government that the rule should be conformed to in future in all official communications addressed by the Colonial Governors to Roman Catholic prelates.] There could be no doubt but that the letter had been written in great haste, and that the error was an unintentional one; but still the fact should be known, that in that Act there was not a single clause having the slightest reference whatever to Roman Catholic prelates and their position in Ireland, or in the colonics. The Act merely authorised the appointment of a Commission, to include the Master of the Rolls, the Lord

1211
Chief Baron, the Judge of the Prerogative Court, and ten other persons, five of whom were to be Roman Catholics. In the Commission two Roman Catholic Archbishops were placed next after the two Archbishops of the Established Church; but every one knew that the manner in which persons were placed on such occasions had no reference whatever to their rank. An instance of this was afforded in the Treasury, where the First Lord was often a commoner, while junior Lords might he persons of much higher rank. The fact was, that if all the Protestants had been placed first on the Commission, and all the Roman Catholics last, it would he impossible for any of the latter ever to have a chance of occupying the chair at their meetings; and it was in order to make a fair distribution of the chance of filling the chair, that the arrangement of the names on the Commission had been settled. This subject was one that had been scarcely sufficiently attended to. If the title of "Grace" were to be given to Roman Catholic Archbishops in the colonies, where they had themselves no archbishops, it was clear that the Roman Catholic prelates would he able to take precedence of the Protestant bishops, and in fact of all other persons, as he doubted if even a Governor, who was not a viceroy, could have precedence. In this country Archbishops had precedence merely from their primacy. Thus the Primate of all England took precedence of the Lord Chancellor; but the Lord Chancellor had precedence over the Primate of England. Again, if the rank of Roman Catholic prelates was to be allowed in all cases, he would wish to know what precedence would he given to a Cardinal or to a Legate, as there were no such titles in the Established Church; and yet the words in the despatch were, "the rank to which their dignity in their own Church entitles them?" He thought that the noble Earl would see that there were points in that despatch which required reconsideration; and he begged, therefore, to move for its production in the words of his notice.
EARL GREYsaid, there could he no possible objection to the production of the circular to which the noble Lord alluded. It was perfectly true that the Bequests Act did not expressly recognise the rank of Roman Catholic prelates; and that, in writing the despatch, he had undoubtedly taken somewhat hastily the expression used in the letter of his noble Friend the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland to him on the
1212
subject; but at the same time it should not be forgotten that since the Bequests Act the rank of the Roman Catholic prelates in Ireland had been recognised by the preceding as well as by the present Government; and that the fact of their not having been recognised also in the colonies had given very great dissatisfaction. Therefore, though the language of the circular was, to a certain degree, inaccurate, it was at the same time substantially correct. In the Commission authorised by the Bequests Act, and which had been afterwards laid before Parliament, and not objected to, the titles of the two Roman Catholic Archbishops were distinctly recognised as "our trusty and well-beloved Archbishop Crolly," and "our trusty and well-beloved Archbishop Daniel Murray." But further than that, he found their rank distinctly introduced into an Act of Parliament, and though it was a private Act, still it was no less an Act of the Legislature on that account. In the Dublin Cemeteries Act, he found a Roman Catholic Archbishop styled "The Most Reverend Archbishop Murray;" and in the same Act, which was passed in 1846, Dr. Murray was styled "His Grace." It should be recollected, besides, that the despatch did not give a rank, but merely recognised a rank already recognised by law. He believed it was an unfortunate circumstance that the title of "my Lord" should be given to bishops, either of their own or of the Roman Catholic Church. He believed that the title was first given to them as Peers in Parliament; and it was well known that in Scotland the bishops had never assumed that title. In some colonies the English Church was no more established than the Roman Catholic; and in many of the colonies the Roman Catholics formed the great majority of the population, as, for instance, in the Mauritius; and it appeared to him that it would he contrary to all justice and reason that in such cases the title accorded to the prelates of the one religion, should not be given also to those the other. As he said before, however, the despatch did not confer a rank, but merely recognised a rank already admitted. He was convinced that the recognition of the Roman Catholic prelates in the colonies, was a measure consistent with sound policy, He did not know that he had any farther observations to offer, except to say that he was not aware that any complaint had been made, or that any difficulty had arisen on this subject.
LORD STANLEYsaid, he thought the noble Earl would have taken a better course if he had frankly and distinctly admitted that the despatch was founded in error. The noble Earl had misrepresented in his despatch—unintentionally no doubt—that "the Act of Parliament had recognised the rank of Roman Catholic prelates," and in the next place, that "it was the duty of Her Majesty's Government to conform to the rule laid down by the Legislature." Now, the fact was, that no such acknowledgment had been made, and no such rule laid down. There was no justification either in the Act of Parliament, or in the Commission, for the statement made by the noble Earl in his despatch. There was not one word in the Act with regard to the prelates of the Roman Catholic Church, nor a word in the Commission about precedence to be given to them. Her Majesty, in the exercise of the prerogative which undoubtedly belonged to her, gave precedence in her letters to certain prelates of the Roman Catholic Church, but to none others; and even these took no rank whatever out of the doors of that Commission; while either in or out of the doors of the Commission, no other Roman Catholic prelate whatever could have the slightest precedence or position with regard to rank. The two allegations of the noble Lord, therefore, fell to the ground; and the real motive for placing the two Roman Catholic prelates in that position in the Commission had been truly stated by his noble Friend behind him. They were placed there, not because they were prelates, but because they were Roman Catholic Commissioners, and because Her Majesty wished to give to the Commissioners of both persuasions an equal chance of presiding at their meetings.
Motion agreed to.
House adjourned.