HL Deb 16 April 1863 vol 170 cc178-94
THE EARL OF MALMESBURY

rose to inquire of Her Majesty's Government, What is the present state of the negotiations respecting the Crown of Greece and the cession of the Island and Fortress of Corfu to that country? The noble Earl said, be thought it was time that their Lordships should receive some information on the, subject of the negotiations with respect to the Greek throne. The last time that the House received any information on the subject was about two months ago. On the first night of the Session the noble Earl at the head of the Foreign Office then recounted to their Lordships the history of those negotiations, so far as the point at which be thought it right, in the name of Her Majesty's Government, to refuse the election of Prince Alfred. Since that time their Lordships had had no official information of what had taken place; but it had been stated by rumour, and in the public prints, that two very important events had followed that transaction. It appeared that upon the most proper refusal of Her Majesty's Government to accept that election they, in connection with the other Powers who signed the agreement with respect to the Greek throne, invited first His Majesty the King of Portugal, and secondly the head of the House of Coburg to accept the throne, but that both these personages had refused. He would make but one observation with reference to what took place with regard to his Royal Highness Prince Alfred. If, as we had been told since in another place, the candidature of his Royal Highness was permitted to go as far ns it did for political purposes, in order to thwart the rather unfair and unjustifiable claims of Russia, he did not think that that at all diminished the fault which the Government committed in acting most disrespectfully to a Prince of the Royal family by allowing him to stand for some time as apparently a real candidate for the throne of Greece, though in fact they were putting him forward as a sort of dummy or man of straw—an act which certainly was not respectful to the Crown. If they were justified in the commission of that act by the reasons which had been alleged in another place, they certainly were not justified in deceiving the Greek people, who, until their offer was refused, could not have imagined that their election would not have been accepted. For his own part, he thought that no political object could justify Her Majesty's Government either towards the Crown or people of this country, or towards the people of Greece, in adopting the line which they followed. He was not surprised that the crown of Greece should have been re fused by the two Royal personages whom he had named as having had the offer made to them, because it must be evident to every one that the Greeks, in conducting their revolution as they had done, had depreciated themselves in the public opinion of Europe. Unlike those great model revolutionists, the French, they expelled their King without being prepared with any one to succeed him. That was in itself a great mistake; but they made a still greater one when they confessed to Europe that among themselves they could find no one who was competent to fill the throne. In France there had, during the first half of this century, been eight different revolutions of dynasties or governments, giving an average of one every six years; but on all these occasions the French had in their eye a man ready to replace the one whom they expelled; and it was almost an act of insanity on the part of the Greeks to proceed as far as they did without having prepared for the result in this manner. Their conduct in this respect must influence the mind of any man to whom the throne might hereafter be offered. The refusal of the head of the House of Coburg, following that of the King of Portugal, brought the narrative of affairs up to the Easter recess; and up to that time he was pretty sure his statement was accurate. What had occurred during the Easter recess, and since, he could not state with so much confidence. Whilst, however, we were taking our annual rest, it appeared that Her Majesty's Government and the noble Earl opposite were not idle. He would mention to their Lordships what he had heard, and would then ask the noble Earl opposite if the rumours which had been current upon the subject were true. According to those rumours, it appeared, that subsequent to the refusal of the Duke of Saxe-Coburg, the noble Earl, anxious that his labours should not be in vain, and convinced that it was his especial duty to find a successor to the Greek throne, continued to stand at the door of the Foreign Office with the Almanach de Gotha in his hand, determined to find in that well-known volume the name of some one who would accept the vacant Crown. It was said that the noble Earl, after some reflection and some study of that well-known book, thought proper to advise the second son of Prince Christian of Denmark to accept the Greek throne. This would astonish no one, because all that was known of that Prince was to his advantage, and no objection whatever could be made to his dynastic position. It was further said that the noble Earl, having decided upon this young Prince as the best occupant for the throne of Greece, before receiving the assent of his father, or of the Court of Denmark, or of the Danish Minister in London, advised and authorized the Greeks to proclaim Prince William of Denmark as their Sovereign. He did not say that these were facts, but they had been put forth as such, and he wanted to know whether they were facts or not? If they were facts, he could only express his astonishment at the courage with which the noble Earl had exposed himself, if not to a positive refusal on the part of the Danish Government, at least to the imposition of conditions which must lead to further complications, and place this country in a somewhat undignified position. It was said that Prince Christian had raised great difficulties to allowing his son to ascend the throne of Greece; and not unnaturally so. The question was of great importance to the whole of Europe, and to this country especially; for they must remember that in 1852 it was with the greatest difficulty that the noble Viscount now at the head of the Government succeeded in inducing the great Powers of Europe to consent to an arrangement for settling the succession to the throne of Denmark. He (the Karl of Malmesbury) signed the treaty, and knew the difficulties that arose; and he knew that if that question were now re-opened, it would be still more difficult to arrive at a satisfactory settlement. Prince Christian had three sons; the eldest was not yet married. The second, Prince William, if he ascended the Greek throne, would doubtless be required either to embrace the Greek religion or to allow his children to be educated in that faith; but by so doing they would forfeit their right of succession to the Danish throne. Therefore, upon the failure of issue of the eldest son, there would only be the third son of Prince Christian standing between the recurrence to the state of affairs in 1852, and that, no doubt, was one point which pressed itself upon the consideration of the Danish Government. It was therefore incumbent upon the noble Earl to go cautiously to work in this matter, and not again to place the Greek people in the painful position of having their Crown refused. His first question to the noble Earl was, whether, having proposed to Prince Christian that his son should ascend the Greek throne, he consulted the Danish Government; whether they approved the measure; and whether, previously to such consultation, and obtaining such consent, he did not advise and authorize the Greek people to elect Prince William as their King.

He also wished further to ask whether Her Majesty's Government still had the intention of ceding the Ionian Islands, and especially the fortress of Corfu, to the Greek Government, according to the conditions which they appeared to have laid down? He would not argue the cession of Corfu from an English point of view, although no one could be more opposed to it than himself; but he contended that in the interests of the Greeks it was the very worst thing that could be done for them. The internal condition of Greece at present was very unfortunate; the land was uncultivated, no native industry appeared to thrive, commerce was decreasing every day, and, in fact, no country could be in a much worse condition. The only chance of improvement lay in Greece being a neu- tral State, peaceful not only in intention, but even in appearance, without army or navy to excite fears or jealousies. If she assumed that shape, she would obtain what she most needed for her future development, money; and money certainly would not be advanced to provide ships and soldiers. But if the fortress of Corfu was bestowed upon her, she would assume at once the character of a military Power, as she would have to keep a considerable garrison there in time of pence and a large one in time of war. He therefore wished, in the interest of the Greeks themselves, to ask whether the Government wished to confer this dangerous gift upon the Greek people?

EARL RUSSELL

said, he did not find fault with the noble Earl for asking his Questions, but must be excused from giving any answers at present upon some points which had been touched upon. There were some matters which were still under discussion, and which might be settled within a short time, as to which he must at present abstain from making any remarks. The noble Earl had referred to the condition of Greece, and had blamed Her Majesty's Government for having, as he assumed, made Prince Alfred a candidate for the Greek throne. What had really happened was this. The people of Greece declared that they would no longer continue under the Government of King Otho, and that the Bavarian dynasty should be excluded from the throne. They found fault with the Government of King Otho, and they acted as this country had acted about two centuries since. With that determination her Majesty's Government had nothing to do. They had frequently told King Otho that the manner in which he was governing Greece would probably lead to a catastrophe, and they had pointed out the same to the Court of Bavaria, and had recommended that some member of the family, possessed of the requisite influence, should be sent to Athens to warn the King of the dangers likely to arise from the prevailing discontent. That advice was not followed, and King Otho was expelled from his throne. The people of Greece had been very much blamed by the noble Earl for not having shown the same wisdom that the French had exhibited in their revolutions. He (Earl Russell) remembered, however, that in 1848 the French people deposed a King, for what fault it was difficult to point out, and declared a Re- public. But what had the Greeks done? They expressed, in the first place, their gratitude to the three protecting Powers; and, in the next place, they declared their determination to have a constitutional monarchy, and to preserve peace with all surrounding countries. Surely there was no want of wisdom in that course, supposing that they were right in excluding King Otho. Their next step was to elect an English Prince as their future Sovereign. His Royal Highness Prince Alfred became the choice of the Greek nation. The Russian Government then maintained that the Protocol of 1830 was in force Her Majesty's Government said, "Why should we not all three declare that neither Prince Alfred nor the Duke of Leuchtenberg, nor any member of the reigning family of France, can be elected to the throne of Greece? "For various reasons the Russian Government declined that proposition. Certainly it was not for Her Majesty's Government, who had no candidate, and who had not proposed Prince Alfred, to interfere in the election. They left the Greeks to take their own course; and the election of Prince Alfred served as a point of union among the Greeks, which preserved them from anarchy and disorder. It was a great benefit to them to have a Prince as to whose election they were unanimous. When the proper time came, Her Majesty's Government, in conjunction with the other protecting Powers, declared that the Protocol was in force, and that Prince Alfred could not accept the Crown of Greece. With that decision, at least, the noble Earl (the Earl of Malmesbury) did not find fault, though he seemed to find fault with the tranquillity and good order that prevailed among the Greek people. What was the next step? Her Majesty's Ministers, having been compelled to reject the wishes of the Greek people, felt themselves bound in some degree, in order to prevent possible evils, in consultation with the other protecting Powers, to endeavour to obtain for the Greeks a Prince attached to constitutional government; for it was a benefit both for Greece and Europe that the Greeks should maintain their principle in favour of a constitutional monarchy, and of the preservation of peace with neighbouring States That object being advantageous both to Greece and Europe, Her Majesty's Government could hardly be wrong in endeavouring to satisfy the wish of the Greeks, and to find a Prince whom they might accept. As the noble Earl had rightly supposed, there was some difficulty in effecting this object. In more than one instance Her Majesty's Government were unsuccessful in their efforts to find a Prince willing to ascend the Greek throne. In the mean while Her Majesty's Envoy, specially sent to Greece in reference to this matter, declared there was danger every day lest disorder should break out in some part of the country. There was one party in particular, with exalted notions, gaining an ascendancy, and there was a risk that that party might declare against a constitutional monarchy and against the policy of preserving peace with the neighbouring countries, he believed that the Powers of Europe, generally, would have been sorry to see that result. He did not think it was a matter of indifference to this country whether the Greek revolution should terminate fortunately for the Greek people in giving them a free Government, or unfortunately in becoming a source of trouble to this country, Turkey, and other States. When it was suggested that Prince William, the second son of Prince Christian of Denmark, might accept the Crown of Greece, he (Earl Russell) directed the British Ministerat Copenhagen to ask whether the King of Denmark would give his sanction to the arrangement; and he was told, that if Prince Christian and his son had no objection, the King of Denmark would not oppose the election. He then communicated with the Greek Government; but what the particular communications were he could not now state, because the negotiations were not yet at an end. However, as soon as they should be concluded, all the correspondence would be produced, and their Lordships would then be able to judge whether he had done anything undignified on the part of the Government, or anything unbecoming a Minister of a free country, anxious for the welfare of Greece and the preservation of peace. The Government of Greece, on being told that the King of Denmark would not oppose any objection if Prince Christian and his son chose to accept the offer of the throne of Greece, communicated that intelligence to the Assembly; and then all the Members of the Assembly, to the surprise, he believed, of the Greek Government, stood up and by acclamation unanimously declared Prince William of Denmark King. That, at all events, confirmed the opinion of the noble Earl, that the nomination of Prince William was not a bad one. With regard to the terms on which Prince Christian and his son might accept the offer of the throne of Greece, those were mutters to be settled between them and the deputation representing the National Assembly of Greece, and also the three protecting Powers who signed the Treaty of 1832, and who had guaranteed the independence of Greece; and he did hope that the result of the negotiations would be that the Greeks would be rewarded for all their excellent conduct for many months past, and for having, during the whole of that time, acted in a spirit of constitutionalism. He entirely agreed with the noble Earl in thinking that it was not the interest of Greece to maintain a large army, with the view of taking a great part in the affairs of Europe. He believed her happiness would depend on abstaining from any acts of aggression, and that the sentiment now prevalent among Greeks was that by improving their laws, their agriculture, and by mending their financial system, they might obtain a degree of prosperity not otherwise to be hoped for. He had only to add that the choice of Prince William of Denmark was cordially supported by the Emperor of the French, and would, he had no doubt, receive the assent of all the protecting Powers.

The noble Karl had referred to the Ionian Islands; and though, no doubt, the noble Earl was well informed on that subject, he spoke very much like a person not so well informed. The noble Earl spoke of Corfu as if it were one of Her Majesty's colonial possessions, which the Ministers were about to make a cession of, together with the strong fortress. Now, the noble Earl knows very well, that in 1815 the powers of Europe, in constituting the Republic of the Ionian Island, declared it to be a free republic, to be governed by a Constitution, of which republic the King of Great Britain should be the protecting Power. Therefore, the Ionian Islands were in no sense a possession belonging to Her Majesty, nor was it intended by the Powers that they should be. He had always understood, from those acquainted with the diplomacy of the time, that the circumstance of those Islands being placed under the protectorate of Great Britain arose somewhat in the following way. It was proposed, as a thing that would not he disagreeable to Austria, that Austria should have the Ionian Islands; but Count Capo d'Istria, who had great influence with the Emperor of Russia, said, "I wish to see these Greek islands have a Greek nationality and speak the Greek language; and as Great Britain is a free country, I wish them to be under her protection, because Great Britain can foster and maintain free institutions, which the Government of Austria would not." Great Britain, therefore, undertook the charge and trust of those islands. He used the word "trust," because, if Great Britain said, "We will convert these islands into a colony of our own," she would not have performed the duty which had been confided to her to discharge. Well, in course of time a revolution took place in Greece, and three of the great Powers combined to make Greece an independent kingdom. From that time there had been agitation in the Ionian Islands, and a party, at all events, had said, "Now, that there is a Greek kingdom, why should not our Islands be united to that kingdom?" It would not be becoming the British Government, provided the Ionian people wished to be united to Greece, to thwart that wish, and force them to remain under our protectorate. What Her Majesty's Government, therefore, proposed was to ask the Ionian Islands formally, whether they wished to be united to Greece; and if they formally declared they wished it, and the Greek kingdom having been settled, then to call together the representatives of those Powers who made the treaty which gave the protectorate to Great Britain, and ask them to frame a new treaty by which the Ionian Islands should be allowed to form a part of Greece. Of course, if the islands were united to Greece, the fortress of Corfu, being part of those islands, would not be retained for the sole purpose of having the fortress in the hands of England. If this country proposed to keep Corfu, the Court of Greece and the people of the Ionian Islands would protest against it. If the people of the islands were united to Greece, it would be for them to decide whether the fortress of Corfu should be maintained, he thought their best plan would be to destroy the fortifications, and to devote themselves to maritime and commercial pursuits; and in that case the Ionian Islands would be a valuable acquisition to the Greek kingdom. He must say he felt, if Her Majesty's Government, in the recommendations they had made, should have contributed to the peace, happiness, and freedom of Greece—if the people, with their great talents, should take occasion to develop those talents — if their maritime and commercial pursuits were so successful as to make them rich and prosperous, Her Majesty's Government would have reason to rejoice that, through their instrumentality in some respect at least, there was another free and happy nation in the world emulating the example and admiring the institutions of this country.

THE EARL OF DERBY

My Lords, the noble Earl (Earl Russell) has certainly entered into the discussion of the points to which my noble Friend referred; but he has, with considerable ingenuity, avoided giving any answer to the Question that my noble Friend put to him, which affected the position of the noble Earl himself—namely, with regard to the manner in which he has performed his duties. The noble Earl argued as if my noble Friend had complained that Her Majesty's Government, after refusing to allow Prince Alfred to accept the throne of Greece—a course in which my noble Friend said, and I entirely agree, that the Government were perfectly justified—he argued as if my noble Friend had blamed the Government for having afterwards endeavoured to find some Prince among the reigning Houses of Europe to accept the throne, who might meet with the sanction, and answer the requirements, of the Greek people. Nothing was further from the purpose of my noble Friend. He did not say that the Government were liable to any objection on that head. What my noble Friend did sny—and justly, I believe—was that, from first to last, Her Majesty's Government had played fast and loose with the people of Greece, and had led them to entertain expectations of that upon which it was afterwards found impossible to act. I will not enter into the motives of Her Majesty's Government in hesitating so long before they announced that the candidature of Prince Alfred was out of the question; but I believe certainly that Her Majesty's Government had made up their minds upon the subject at a very early period, and they may think that they gained a political object by playing off Prince Alfred's candidature against that of the Duke of Leuchtenberg. But I must say that I was astonished to hear the Secretary' of State for Foreign Affairs declare that in keeping the Greeks in a state of uncertainty as to their future position, and that upon a question of vital importance, he conferred great advantage upon them. The noble Earl said that this long period of uncertainty had been of great advantage to the Greek people, by giving them the means of being united upon one subject, and that that kept them from dangers which they might otherwise have fallen into. Is the noble Earl really of the opinion, that in the throes of a revolution and in the utmost uncertainty as to the future, it is for the benefit of that country that that uncertainty should be prolonged as long as possible; and that a country which was friendly should hold out—or, at all events, should not discourage—expectations that it was known would lead to disappointment; and that a friendly Government pursued a course which was consistent with the duty they owed to the Greek people when they allowed thorn to pursue an ignis faluus, which could only lead them into error and might lead them hopelessly astray? If the noble Earl thinks that that evinces friendship towards a country in great difficulty, I can only say he has most extraordinary notions of the duty of a British Secretary of State. My noble Friend (the Earl of Malmesbury) did not complain that Her Majesty's Government asked, first the King of Portugal, the Duke of Coburg, and afterwards Prince William to offer themselves for the election of the Greek people; on the contrary, it might be a true act of genuine friendship to try to find the Greeks a king rather than to keep them in uncertainty for weeks; but my noble Friend did object to this—that, according to common report, the noble Earl, on more than one occasion, repeated the error into which, I think, he fell, though he seems to think it a masterstroke of policy, in tampering with the feelings of the people of Greece and in leading them to be over-sanguine as to the acceptance of the throne by the Princes whom he recommended. Now, with regard to the candidature of Prince William of Denmark, I believe that he is a Prince very estimable in his private personal character, and that his acceptance of the throne would be an advantage to Greece. But there is this question not lightly to be passed over—whether it would be equally advantageous to Denmark and to England itself—would it be of service in avoiding complications in European affairs—that one of the three heirs of Denmark, the succession to which throne had been settled not without infinite trouble, should accept another throne, which might preclude him from succeeding to the throne of Denmark in the event of his elder brother dying without issue. With every respect for the Prince himself and for the family to which he belongs, I must say that placing upon the throne of Greece, under present, circumstances, a young man of eighteen, surrounded by perfect strangers, and by those who have their own objects to serve, is an experiment of no inconsiderable risk. If that illustrious Prince decides to accept the throne of Greece. I believe that it will be accepted by one who, except with regard to his youth, will be likely to fulfil the wishes entertained and to carry on the government in the spirit of constitutional liberty. My noble Friend asked whether, with regard to Prince William, the noble Earl repeated his mistake on former occasions in leading the Greek people to believe that by the influence and advice of England a sovereign had been found, when, in point of fact, the negotiations had not arrived at such a period as to authorize him to make that declaration to the Greeks. The question is, whether he instructed Mr. Elliot to advise the people to accept the candidature of Prince William, and whether when he gave those instructions to Mr. Elliot and that advice, he had previously ascertained, beyond possibility of doubt, that the King of Denmark himself, and Prince Christian on the part of his son, would consent to accept the throne? That is the plain and simple question put by my noble Friend. I do not ask what the precise state of the negotiations is at this time. It is not the duty of Parliament to make that inquiry, but it is our right to inquire under what circumstances the noble Earl the Secretary for Foreign Affairs advised the people of Greece that the crown of Greece should be offered to the Prince of Denmark. Yet that was the question which the noble Earl and studiously avoided answering. My noble Friend asked whether it is still the intention of Her Majesty's Government to act upon the plan they have announced, of surrendering the Ionian Islands under certain circumstances to Greece. I do not know what ground the noble Earl has for supposing that my noble Friend is not perfectly aware that these islands are not colonies or possessions of this country. My noble Friend is perfectly aware that they were placed under the protectorate of this country, not for the benefit of the people themselves merely, but also in the common interest of Europe. It is idle, moreover, to say that because the Ionian Islands are formed into an independent republic, under the protectorate of England, that this country has no influence or interest in the matter. Is it of no importance to England, in n military or naval point of view, whether the Ionian Islands belong to us or to some other Power? I will not enter upon a general discussion as to the propriety or expediency of the surrender or cession of the whole or any of these Islands, but the noble Earl must be aware that such surrender or cession cannot be made without the consent of the other Powers. [Earl RUSSELL: That is what I said.] But what reason has the noble Earl for supposing that the Powers of Europe have altered their minds, and have come to the conclusion that it is desirable that the Protectorate of England should cease, and that the Ionian Islands should be handed over to the infant kingdom of Greece? I believe that, in reply to a question in another place, the noble Viscount at the head of the Government stated that there has been no communication with Austria on this subject. Considering the interest which Austria has in this question it argues no great amount of statesmanship or prudence to give up the Protectorate or to declare an intention to apply for the sanction to do so from the other Powers, unless Her Majesty's Government had ascertained that they were not likely to meet with an insuperable difficulty. The statement was no doubt literally and technically correct that no correspondence has taken place with the Government of Austria; yet the noble Viscount's answer caused some surprise, and an hon. and learned Member (Mr. Roebuck) said he had listened to it with considerable astonishment, because he was at Vienna at the time, and had seen the despatch addressed by the Austrian Minister of Foreign Affairs to the Austrian Minister in this country. The noble Earl (Earl Russell) will not deny that there was such a despatch, and it was admitted by the noble Viscount in another place, in what he might call cross-examination, that there was such a despatch, but that it was not a "correspondence," because, although the despatch was read to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, it was not left with him. However, by the confession of the Government it is now clear that there was a despatch communicated by the Austrian Government, through the Austrian Ambassador, conveying the disapprobation with which Austria would view the cession of the Protectorate of the Ionian Islands. I confess I have (lie gravest doubts as to the policy of this cession, and I doubt whether, apart from English interests, it will be for the benefit of freedom, and whether it will further that constitutional system of Go- vernment contended for by the noble Earl. I am afraid this act will rather introduce an element of great turbulence and danger into the kingdom of Greece, threatening great complications, and favourable to aggressions on the neighbouring Powers. I see no impossibility in the separation of Corfu from the other islands. There is a great and manifest difference between these islands, because Corfu is a fortress of no inconsiderable strength, which we hold by the general consent of Europe, and it is not unimportant that England should continue to hold that fortress and harbour. Corfu, moreover, is in no sense connected with Greece. Two-thirds of the inhabitants are not of Greek, but Venetian origin. The nearest point of Corfu is seventy miles from Greece; but this excitable population are within one mile from the coast of Thessaly, which belongs to the very Power the Ionian Islands are most desirous of invading and attacking. These considerations ought to be borne in mind, because, when the Government proposes to reconstitute the kingdom of Greece, it is most important that the people of that country should be encouraged to adapt themselves to peaceable pursuits, to increase and develop their resources, and to raise themselves from the deplorable position in which they are now sunk, to that of a small but respectable kingdom. I cannot help thinking that Her Majesty's Government have acted with lightness and rashness in their dealings with the Greek people, both on the subject of the election of their Sovereign and the premature announcement of their intention to surrender the Protectorate of the Ionian Islands without first communicating with the other Powers who are parties to the Treaty of Vienna. I cannot say that, in my opinion, the noble Earl has cither on one point or the other satisfactorily answered the questions of my noble Friend.

EARL GRANVILLE

said, he entirely differed from the noble Earl in thinking that the answer given by his noble Friend the Foreign Secretary to the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Malmesbury) was unsatisfactory on both points to which he had referred. The noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) charged his noble Friend with having lured on the Greeks with the hope that Prince Alfred would accept the throne. Now, he denied that his noble Friend had given any encouragement to the Greeks to suppose that there was any chance of Prince Alfred's accepting the throne of Greece. With regard to the announce- ments which had been made to the Greeks from time to time, it would really appear from the tone of noble Lords opposite as if the whole thing ought to have been settled and the arrangements perfectly "cut and dried," without any sort of negotiation either with Princes who might be candidates for the vacant throne, or with the Greeks themselves. It was impossible not to make communications to the Greeks, to keep them informed to a certain extent of the progress of events, and with a view of ascertaining whether a Prince likely, in the opinion of the European Governments, to be a useful ruler, such as the Duke of Saxe-Coburg, would be acceptable to them. At one time negotiations with the Duke assumed a favourable form; and no doubt, if it had not been for the very strong feeling exhibited by his own people and his own Chambers, the result might have been different. The noble Earl opposite objected to the candidature of the young Prince of Denmark on the ground that under possible circumstances there would be no Prince capable of succeeding to the Danish throne. Considering that there were in existence three heirs male, all young men, he thought that an objection of a very trivial character. The noble Earl (the Earl of Malmesbury) said that the French never revolted without having some one ready to put on the throne.

THE EARL OF MALMESBURY

I did not say to put on the throne; I said without some Frenchman to put at their head.

EARL GRANVILLE

said, he did not remember the name of the particular Frenchman towards whom the eyes of the French nation turned at the epoch of the Great Revolution, though after many years a man of surprising genius succeeded in rendering himself conspicuous. In 1848, if the views of the majority of intelligent Frenchmen had been collected, the last idea which would have presented itself to them would have been the accession of the present Emperor. The noble Earl asked whether our Minister at Athens had not been instructed to inform the Greeks of the candidature of the Prince of Denmark before any intimation was received from the Court of Denmark that such a choice would be unobjectionable. To that question he would give the answer which had been given by the noble Earl—that he did not make any such communication till he had received the necessary information from the Court of Denmark.

THE EARL OF MALMESBURY

Did he receive the consent of the King of Denmark?

EARL GEANVILLE

He received information that the King of Denmark had no objection to the candidature.

THE EARL OF MALMESBURY

Previous to any communication made to the Greeks?

EARL GRANVILLE

Previous to his intimation to the Greeks through Mr. Elliot.

LORD CHELMSFORD

That is a direct answer.

EARL GRANVILLE

said, it was direct, and, he hoped, satisfactory to the noble Lords opposite. With regard to the Ionian Islands, he was surprised at the criticism which the course taken by Her Majesty's Government had excited. To him it appeared the most obvious course possible. And as to the distinction which had been drawn between giving up the Islands and giving up the fortress of Corfu, did his noble Friends opposite really believe that the great Powers of Europe would have sanctioned any arrangement by which Islands which did not belong to them would be given up, while they retained permanently for their own purposes the island and fortress of Corfu? He felt sure that to such a proposal all the great European Powers would seriously and indignantly have objected. Notwithstanding what had been said about the facility of conducting the arrangements between the Prince of Denmark and his future subjects, he thought Her Majesty's Government, in leaving the details to be arranged by the parties themselves, had taken the most friendly, most prudent, and dignified course. He could not help thinking that the feeling which had been shown towards Her Majesty's Government by the Greeks throughout these negotiations, as well as the marks of personal respect exhibited towards Her Majesty's family, proved that the attitude of the Government was not for one moment mistaken in the peninsula. On the other hand, both Greeks and Ionians were sure to feel very acutely the tone of disparagement which had been adopted by the only two noble Lords who had spoken on the opposite side of the House. He joined most sincerely in the wish, which had been expressed by his noble Friend, that Her Majesty's Government might ultimately have the credit of establishing the permanent prosperity of a country which had shown, since its most peaceful revolution, unstained by crime, great moderation and great prudence in all its political relations.

THE EARL OF MALMESBURY

said, he did not desire to call for any detailed account of negotiations which, in the present state of affairs, the noble Earl thought he could not produce with due regard to the public service. He understood, from the reply of the noble Earl who had just sat down, that communications were not made by the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to the Greek Government regarding the candidature of the Prince of Denmark until he had ascertained that the King of Denmark had no objection to such a proceeding.

EARL RUSSELL

I think what I stated was, that the King of Denmark consented; and that if Prince Christian and his son should consent, we had no objection.