LORD STANLEYsaid, that since he had last adverted to this subject, information on the affairs of Greece had been received by the public, in an official shape, which threw rather more light than they had formerly had on the real nature of this case. He did not press for the premature production of the papers which the noble Marquess had promised on a former occasion; but he must say, that the postponement of those papers to a period when the events had ceased, and the public interest had subsided, was not the most convenient course to adopt. He saw in the French newspapers that the official correspondence between the different Ministers of England, France, Russia, and Greece, had been published at Paris, not indeed by the French Government, but still in such a shape as placed the whole of it before the public of France. He also saw that a conversation had taken place in the French Chamber of Deputies upon that correspondence; and it was there stated, that the mediation of France had been offered to this country on the differences in question, and that it had 615 been accepted by the English Government. He rejoiced that anything had occurred to put a stop to the hasty and injudicious proceedings which had been taken, without any justification, by our Minister and the British Admiral against the Government of Greece. He could not, however, help saying, that if the mediation of France had been accepted by our Government, England was placed in a situation the most humiliating, whilst France might well be proud of the exalted position which she occupied as one of the protecting Powers of Greece in accepting such a mediation; and although certainly the acceptance of the mediation was preferable to its rejection, he should have preferred that no occasion had been given for any reference whatever to France; still, when a mediation was tendered, he conceived the Government to be at liberty to accept it. He was sorry to find that the statements made in those official documents did certainly justify him in the declaration which he had made on a former night, that our Minister had used the unwarranted expression that, "he they just or be they unjust, our claims must be acceded to—and that his orders were so peremptory that he had no discretion to enter into any further discussion upon them." Now, if it were true that the mediation of France had been accepted, he rejoiced that it would put a stop to proceedings so inauspiciously commenced, and so likely to produce more aggravated violence hereafter. But the acceptance of that mediation now was grossly inconsistent with the refusal of the mediation previously offered, and with our insisting, at the point of the bayonet, or, he should rather say, on the roar of our cannon, upon immediate redress. The first question which he begged leave to put to the noble Marquess was, whether the mediation of France had been tendered to England, and had been accepted by the English Government? And the next was, whether that mediation, if it had been accepted, extended merely to the indemnity claimed for certain British subjects, or whether it extended further, to the still more important question as to the right of Greece or of the Ionian Republic to the possession of the islands adjoining them? The noble Marquess had stated, on a former evening, that there was a broad distinction between these two sets of claims; and the latter were not included in the categorical demand of our Minister, Sir Thomas Wyse. He wished also to be in- 616 formed whether any attempt would be made to take possession of the disputed islands before the mediation was concluded?
§ The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEhad no hesitation in answering the question of the noble Baron. In the first place, as to the production of the papers which he had promised on a former evening, he had the satisfaction of telling the noble Baron that no unnecessary delay—nay, more, that no necessary delay, would prevent their almost immediate delivery, and that in a few days they would be laid on the table of the House. The noble Lord, referring to the proceedings of a deliberative assembly in another country, asked whether this country had acquiesced in an offer of mediation made by the Government of France. He (the Marquess of Lansdowne) had to state that the Government of this country had received and acquiesced in the offer made by the French Government to interpose its good offices for the purpose of settling this question. Though the noble Earl opposite was as well aware as any man could be that there was some difference between the terms "mediation" and "good offices," he must inform the House that there was a still wider difference between the terms "mediation" and "arbitration." Her Majesty's Ministers took the interposition of the good offices of France in the same sense in which they had accepted it in the dispute which we had with the King of Naples some two or three years ago. The same offer of "good services" which we made to France some time ago, when there was a dispute between France and the United States, had been renewed to us. The interposition of our good services at that period had been attended with results satisfactory to all parties; and he said on the present, as he said on all occasions, that where the offer of such "good services" was made in a spirit of good faith, it was for the interest of England, and, indeed, of every other country, to accept it. No offer of "arbitration" had been made in this case, and none had been accepted. The noble Baron had expressed his regret that the offer of their good offices, when made by the French and Russian Ministers at Athens, had been rejected, although such offer had been subsequently accepted. There was this wide distinction between the offers: the first was not authorised by the Governments by which those Ministers were respectively accredited; neither did 617 those Ministers know whether their Governments would sanction the offer which they had respectively made. The British Minister at Athens was therefore justified, in his (the Marquess of Lansdowne's) opinion, in having declined that offer. The noble Baron had likewise asked whether our claim to the territorial possession of two islands was to he submitted to the good services of France? That question was not included in the offer and acceptance of the good services of France. It was a question which stood on totally different grounds, and which, as it was not included in the ultimatum proposed to the Greek Government, was excepted from the interposition of Franco. The nature of our pecuniary claims, and the amount of our pecuniary indemnity, were the only questions on which the "good offices" of France had been accepted.
LORD STANLEYobserved that no answer had been given to one of the questions which he had asked—whether, in the event of our territorial requisitions being refused, Her Majesty's Government would approve of any measures for taking forcible possession of the islands in dispute?
§ The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEhad no reason to believe that any such steps would be taken.
In reply to a question of Lord BROUGHAM, respecting the island of Cervi,
§ The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEsaid, that the question of territory was not raised in the categorical demand of Sir Thomas Wyse, and was purposely excluded from it.
LORD BROUGHAMwas afraid that there was no doubt as to the fact of our vessels having taken possession of some Greek ships of war.
§ The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEstated that there was no truth in the statement that ships of war had been seized by our cruisers; but that the Greek vessels were confined to a station in which they were under duress.
The EARL of ABERBEENagreed with his noble Friend near him in expressing his satisfaction that the mediation offered by the French Government for the settlement of this affair had been accepted, because it seemed to him the only means of extricating our Minister and Admiral from the situation, both highly embarrassing discreditable, in which they now found themselves placed. There was some little 618 inconsistency, however, in the statements which had been made, for the noble Marquess had now agreed to accept the mediation of France in the settlement of claims which last week he pronounced to be indisputable, and he had dropped the mediation of France with respect to that which he admitted was not certain—namely, the territorial question. We had also declared to Greece, that it was no longer a question of justice or injustice, but that the claims must be satisfied in twenty-four hours; yet we now not only admitted, and were ready to inquire ourselves whether the clauses were just or unjust, but we called upon France to examine and decide that question.
§ The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEIt is not an arbitration.
§ The EARL of ABERDEENwas aware that it was a mediation. He thought the Power that had most reason to complain of Her Majesty's Government was the Government of France. They professed to cultivate the most friendly relations with the French Government, and they did well; but what was the sort of understanding which existed between them? Had they communicated to the French Government their intention? Had the English Minister at Athens, or the English Admiral communicated to his French colleague their intention? Had Her Majesty's Government made such a communication to France, he could not doubt that that mediation might have been offered, and might have been accepted, in a very different manner, and with much better character, than after the unfortunate proceedings of violence which had taken place. For what was the result? This was a specimen of that policy which had so long had for its object to counteract French influence. They had now taught Greece to consider France as her protector and saviour against British violence, and they were contented to receive lessons of moderation and justice from republican and revolutionary France, with a "Bonaparte at her head." He must say he thought that was a position which it would have been well to have avoided, by that friendly communnication which France had a right to expect from us, before we undertook a measure of this violent description in a country with which she was so closely connected. The noble Marquess must know, as well as himself, the sensation which a proceeding of this kind must necessarily produce in France. 619 He must know perfectly well, that if this country had not accepted the mediation of France, in that case it would have been unavoidable that France should have placed herself in an attitude of direct hostility to this country, or else the French Government would have been shaken to its very foundations. Now, he said that was not the way to treat a Government with which you professed to be on the most intimate and friendly footing. Therefore, although the acceptance of the mediation was not only wise, but necessary, he thought it would have been highly desirable if that mediation had been accepted before any violence was accomplished; and he had not the least doubt that it would have been offered had the communication been made which France had a right to expect. There seemed to he some confusion or misunderstanding on the subject of the separation of the territorial claims. He found in the papers published at Athens that this claim was combined with the rest. The Greek Minister did not appear to make any distinction between the private demands for pecuniary compensation and the cession of territory. However, he took for granted that the separation had been made now, at all events, whether it was so or not at the time of the demand being made by Sir Thomas Wyse. He was quite aware that the demand for the possession of the islands was one which might very fairly admit of much discussion; it was a very complicated subject, and one of extreme difficulty. He was at a loss to understand why the claim had been made for those two islands, because the question referred not to two but to twenty, there being a considerable number of others in precisely the same situation. He was happy to hear that this subject had been separated from the other demands. At the same time, it would be very satisfactory if the noble Marquess were enabled to say, from what he knew of the claims and the manner in which they have been met, that there was no danger of any forcible proceeding having been adopted with respect to these islands; for, if he was not much mistaken, the exaction of that part of the demand being entrusted to Sir W. Parker, it would be in his power, and as he had reason to believe, according to his instructions, to take possession of those islands without further application to the English Government.
§ The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEwould offer only one or two words in explanation 620 after what had fallen from the noble Earl. Had the observations just made not proceeded from a person so thoroughly conversant with all diplomatic practice as the noble Earl was, he should have supposed that the noble Earl was throughout confounding arbitration and good offices. In one of the speeches he had made, the noble Earl himself plainly adverted to that distinction, and, notwithstanding, both before and after having done so, he argued on the assumption that we were placing France in a situation to arbitrate between us and Greece. We had done no such thing. The noble Earl was perfectly aware that the acceptance of good offices from France was no acceptance of any arbitration, and amounted to nothing binding upon us. But the noble Earl said that was inconsistent with his (the Marquess of Lansdowne's) having stated on a former occasion that we had indisputable claims. Why, what he stated was, that we had indisputable claims to an amount of compensation; but it did not follow that the precise amount of compensation was not capable of being assessed and regulated by the good offices of a friendly Government. And it was precisely in that way, after having made assertions of being entitled to peculiar compensation, that this country had interfered on behalf of other countries, and that other countries had interfered in our behalf, not admitting, in the slightest degree, a doubt as existing in reference to the justice of the claim, but admitting the possibility of assistance being afforded by a third party towards settling the amount of the demand, and the extent of interference. The noble Earl thought there was some shame to this country in having accepted an offer from France. If, indeed, the offer of these good offices had been made in the spirit which the noble Earl had suggested, for which he had supplied reasons the most inconclusive in his mind, probably there would have been a difficulty in accepting that mediation, and Her Majesty's Government would not have had that advantage which the noble Earl stated they might now have. But fortunately the offer was made in a spirit totally opposed to the observations of the noble Earl; it came unaccompanied by that tone of complaint and of insolence which would have created a difficulty in accepting it. The offer was made in the most friendly spirit. It assumed nothing but the notoriety of the facts. Upon that notoriety it assumed it to be a misfortune that any 621 such facts had occurred; and offered to endeavour to put an end to any serious consequences arising from those facts. With reference to the territorial claim, orders had been issued on that subject totally different from those which applied only to the categorical demand; and those orders might or might not have been acted upon—he could not say; but, as he had already said, instructions had been sent out for suspending the operations of the fleet. He was obliged to the noble Earl for assuming we had something like a claim, on the part of the republic of the Ionian Islands, to the territory of the islands in question. His opinion to-night was in direct opposition to his opinion on a former night. He was glad to find that the noble Earl now admitted that we once had, and might have now, some claims to these islands. Whether the negotiations had been conducted in a manner consistent with the dignity of this country was a question he would leave to be decided by the papers which would be presented in a few days, although the noble Earl had thought it necessary to anticipate his conclusions by pronouncing an unqualified condemnation of the course pursued by Her Majesty's Government.
§ The EARL of ABERDEENsaid, the noble Marquess had misrepresented what he had stated in relation to the islands. He admitted last week that there might be a good claim to them on the part of this country, but he deprecated the mode of exacting it by demanding a cession of the territory in four-and-twenty hours; and he also admitted now, because he was more fully informed as to the particulars, that the claim was a doubtful question. But he had no doubt whatever that it was a most unjustifiable proceeding to exact a cession of the islands twenty-four hours after the demand had been made. The noble Marquess formerly insinuated that he (the Earl of Aberdeen) had himself made a demand for the cession of these islands, and observed that he had changed his opinion with regard to our rights. The noble Marquess was completely mistaken in that respect. He had never made any such admission. Sir Edmund Lyon made the demand three or four weeks before he (the Earl of Aberdeen) had entered office, by virtue of instructions from his predecessor, about which he knew nothing. The noble Marquess, therefore, was not to consider that demand as one proceeding from his instructions, or that he entertained any such 622 opinion as that imputed to him. The noble Marquess must have been misled, he supposed, by information from the Foreign Office; but he could tell the noble Marquess there was more in that office than was "dreamt of in his philosophy." He recommended the noble Marquess, for it was not the first time he had found the caution necessary, to be upon his guard. There was a familiar from that office at his elbow (Lord Eddisbury) who would also do well to be cautious. Certainly he had given no such instructions as those the noble Marquess seemed to impute to him. But he was not quite at case on the subject of these islands, in consequence of what had fallen from the noble Marquess. The noble Marquess said the cession of that territory was no part of Sir Thomas Wyse's categorical demand, but that other instructions had been sent out respecting it, which might or might not have been acted upon. He (the Earl of Aberdeen) very much feared that it would turn out that those instructions left the admiral a latitude as to taking possession of the islands; and if that should be the case, the question would become very serious indeed. He had not insinuated that the offer of mediation from the French Government had been made in any other than a friendly manner, on account of the great difficulty and embarrassment in which this country was placed by what had occurred in Greece. He had only said that our policy had for years been professedly to counteract what was called French influence in Greece, and that we had now unadvisedly done that which must establish it in the heart of every Greek in the kingdom.
§ LORD EDDISBURYcould not sit still after what had just fallen from the noble Earl. Fortunately, no long time had elapsed since the last discussion on this question; and he appealed to all their Lordships who had hoard it whether the noble Earl had not distinctly stated that he had consulted the map which was an "annex" to the treaty signed by himself, and that so conclusive was that map on the question that he entertained no doubt that the Ionian States had no claim whatever to these islands. Further consideration, and further information, as the noble Earl himself confessed, had compelled him to modify his opinion; and he (Lord Eddisbury) hoped that further time and further investigation would compel him to modify it still more. The noble Earl had stated that regarding one of the islands, Cervi, 623 not Sapienza, there could be no doubt whatever, was included in that map in the Greek territories. [The Earl of ABERDEEN dissented.] He (Lord Eddisbury) was startled at that statement. He too had seen the map. The lino drawn upon it, which the noble Earl declared to be destructive of our claim, seemed to him to establish it beyond contradiction. The object of the line was merely to mark the difference between the Turkish and Greek possessions in the Archipelago. The present was not a question of interference with foreign countries, but a question of procuring justice for injured British subjects. It became their Lordships to see that no injury was done to British subjects in foreign countries with impunity. He regretted to find that on every occasion the noble Earl took up the cause of those who were, he would not say the enemies of Britain, but who were ready enough to encroach upon the rights of British subjects. It was not sufficient for the noble Earl to say that we were a great country, and that we ought not to bully small States. The noble Earl well knew, from his long experience, that the countries which refused justice for wrongs inflicted were generally small States; and that a great one would hesitate long before it committed an act of injustice; knowing that it must be responsible for such misconduct. The noble Earl himself had been engaged in enforcing justice from countries not larger not more powerful than Greece. Our present demands on Greece had no relation to that protectorate of it which we had undertaken to exercise in combination with France and Russia: but were simple demands for redress for injuries done to British subjects, to whom justice had been pertinaciously refused, and in the settlement of which England and Greece were alone concerned. It was most undesirable that a premature discussion of this kind should take place. The noble Earl had spoken contumeliously of the French Republic with a Buonaparte at its head; and of the French Government with its shaken foundations, if indeed it had any foundations; but he Lord Eddisbury) must say that it was a republic which had always acted honestly and fairly towards this country.
§ The EARL of ABERDEENmust say one word to their Lordships by way of explanation. He thanked the noble Baron for the reference which he had just made to the map, though he scarcely knew what to say in answer to his remarks, except it 624 were to repeat, verbatim, everything which he had said last week. He had not seen the map since the year 1830, but from his copy it appeared that the isle of Cervi was given to the Greek kingdom. He admitted that it was so given without any previous examination and inquiry, but with a conviction that, as it was so near the Greek shore, it must belong to Greece. He thought, however, that that point was now open to discussion.
§ LORD EDDISBURYreminded the House that, in the opinion of the noble Earl himself, that which was positive the other clay was not positive now. He insisted that strong objections had been made from time to time against the Greek occupation of these islands.
§ LORD COLCHESTERobserved, that from the time when the Ionian Islands were first constituted independent States, he had always considered all the islands on the coast of Greece, and between the Morea and the Ionian Islands, to belong to the Ionian Republic. The whole question, however, hinged upon another; and that was, whether they had belonged to Venice and had been ceded by her to the Ionian Islands? He had nearly been called upon to take a very decisive course as to these islands when he was in command of a British vessel on the coast of Greece, during the time of Ibrahim Pasha's invasion of Greece. He believed them to belong to the Ionian Islands, and was prepared to occupy them as such had they been seized by the Turks.
LORD BROUGHAMobserved, that there was a party in this case to whom he thought that only scanty justice had been done in this discussion. That was M. Londos, the Greek Minister, who had drawn up a most dignified and touching statement relative to the treatment of his country in this matter; a statement which he considered worthy of the heroic and illustrious ancestors from whom he was descended. M. Londos appeared to have taken a very different view of our demands from that taken by his noble Friend opposite. He drew no distinction between our claims for territory and our claims for money. That was owing to the way in which his friend Sir T. Wyse had put forward our demand. On receiving our demand, M. Londos applied to the French Minister for his intercession on behalf of the Greeks; and to that application the French Minister at once acceded. M. Londos also applied to the Russian Minister, but the Russian Minister did not 625 accede to his application; on the contrary, he sent to St. Petersburgh for instructions. Could anybody doubt that the Court of St. Petersburgh would be but too happy to give its Ministers instructions to comply with the application of the Greek Minister, and to encourage him to offer his "good services" also? The palate of the Court of Russia was especially gratified with the taste of a Mediterranean island, and doubtless she would support any measure which had the remotest tendency to produce for her that gratification. He did not see how we could refuse the good services of Russia after we had accepted those of France. He thought that such a measure as the taking the ships of Greece into our custody was calculated to lead to much greater evil than that which it was intended to avert.
§ VISCOUNT CANNINGhad also examined the map which was annexed to the treaty of Lord Aberdeen. It contained a line marking the boundary of Greece, so far as regarded Greece and Turkey. That line passed to the east of all the islands given to Greece by the treaty of 1830, and came to the Morea. It was then prolonged eastward, from Cerigo to Greece. There could be no doubt in the mind of any reasonable man that it was intended to give the island of Cervi to Greece, and not to Cerigo. If that point were to be decided by the map, the island of Cervi belonged to Greece, and not to the Ionian Islands.
§ Subject at an end.