Sitting of 18 July 1832

MINUTES.
Papers ordered. On the Motion of Mr. PORTMAN, various Returns relative to the Court of Hustings, London, its Duties, Jurisdiction and Fees.—On the Motion of Colonel SIBTHORP, Accounts of Persons admitted into the public Hospitals afflicted with Cholera Morbus.
Bills. Read a third time:—Tithe prescription.—Read a second time:—General Registry; Tithes Composition (Ireland).
Petitions presented. By Mr. JOHN LUMLEY, from Nottingham;—by Mr. WILLIAM BROUGHAM, from St. Mary's, Rotherhithe; and by Mr. GEORGE VERNON, from Chesterfield,—against the Vagrants (Scotland and Ireland) Removal Bill.—By Mr. HOPE, from Cupar.—against the Factories Regulation Bill.—By Mr. MULLINS, from Castle Gregory; and by Mr. O'CONNELL, from Dublin County,—for the Abolition of Tithes.—By Mr. TENNYSON, from Dealers in Drugs, Drysalters, and Chemical Manufacturers,—against the Customs' Duties.

CASE OF SIR A. B. KING.
Mr. O'Connellasked if Government had taken the arbitration in the case of Sir Abraham Bradley King into consideration?
Lord Althorpsaid, that in moving the Order of the Day for the House resolving itself into a Committee of Supply, he wished to put a question to the right hon. Gentleman opposite. The House was aware that the case of Sir Abraham Bradley King had been referred to the arbitration of two persons by the late Government, but he understood that they nevertheless would not feel themselves bound by the decision of the arbitrators. Now he wished to know from the right hon. Gentleman if he considered that the late Govern-

519
ment would have been bound by the award, for if so he should consider himself bound by it?
Mr. Goulburnsaid, that at first, he had objected to the reference proposed, but had afterwards changed his opinion, and in agreeing to the arbitration, had appointed an officer belonging to the Government to watch its interests. In reply to the noble Lord, he had to say, that if he had remained in office, he should have felt himself bound by the decision of the arbitrators, and would have recommended the House to pay the sum specified.
Mr. O'Connellsaid, that Lord Leveson Gower had stated to him, that the Government was bound to pay the award, and that, if in office, he would have resigned if the payment was refused.
Sir Robert Peelsaid, the conduct of his noble friend would have been perfectly correct. The Government would have been bound by the decision.
Lord Althorp, though he originally entertained a different opinion, now thought that the present Government was bound in honour to abide by the decision of the arbitrators.

INNS OF COURT LAW STUDENTS.
Mr. D. W. Harvey, after referring to the subject of admission to the Inns of Court, which had formed a part of the discussion last night, wished to know if it would be necessary for him again to bring his motion in form before the House."
The Attorney Generalsaid, that it was within the power of the Crown to recommend to the Law Commissioners the consideration of the subject alluded to. He was confirmed in this opinion by that of his hon. and learned friend, the member for Huntingdon, who was at the head of that Commission. The discussion of yesterday would probably direct their attention to the subject, but if it should not, he had no hesitation in saying, that he should advise the matter to be recommended to their consideration.

CHOLERA MORBUS.
Colonel Sibthorpwished to know whether the right hon. Gentleman would have any objection to lay upon the Table the papers in his possession relative to the existence of Cholera?
Sir Robert Peelsaid, that there were rumours about town that the Cholera was becoming prevalent,
Mr. Poulett Thomson knewthat there were rumours of such a nature, but he was
520
happy to be able to say, that they were very much exaggerated. From the best accounts he had been able to obtain from the Central Board of Health, there were not more than from thirty to forty new cases daily throughout the whole of London and its neighbourhood, and that the deaths amounted from twenty to thirty. He had no objection to give the hon. Member past returns, but he thought that there would be no advantage in issuing daily bulletins, as if the cholera were really prevalent as a disease here. The result of such a publication would be, to put the whole trade of this country under restrictions with regard to the south of Europe; and he did not think that circumstances at all required such a sacrifice. Undoubtedly, if the port of London was in a state in which the cholera was at all prevalent, there would be an absolute necessity to state the fact to the world, but such was not the case. There were no cases in the hospital ship, or in the hospitals on the shores of the river. He had had communications, which showed that the cholera was in existence in some parts of the back portions of the Metropolis, but, that what was properly called the Port of London, was by no means under the influence of the cholera. If the hon. Gentleman wished, for his own satisfaction, to see the Returns, he would have no objection to shew them to him, but he could not consent to their being published.
Mr. Goulburnsaid, that the medical men in distant parts of the country complained that, from the want of this information, which the Board of Health and the Government alone could give, they were without that knowledge of the disease which might be communicated to them, and the want of which would leave them to make experiments that a knowledge of the disease would render unnecessary.
Mr. Poulett Thomsonsaid, that there was a publication called The Cholera Gazette, which he understood had a very extensive circulation, and which contained a statement of the cholera cases.
Mr. Goulburnthought, that would sufficiently remedy the evil of which he complained.
Colonel Sibthorpobserved, that there had appeared in the public papers a statement directly contrary to that made by the Board of Health. He hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would pay his best attention to the subject.

GOVERNORSHIP OF LONDONDERRY FORT.
Mr. Dawsonsaid, he wished to call the serious attention of the House to the subject of the salary paid to the Governor of Londonderry Fort for doing nothing whatever, and which money, he thought, might be appropriated to a purpose of public benefit. The motion which he intended to submit to the House on this subject was, "That an address be presented to his Majesty to release the Irish Society from that part of their charter, which obliges them to pay 200 l. a-year, and the rents of certain lands, to the Governor of Londonderry and Culmore forts, on condition of their applying those sums to the building of a stone bridge over the river Foyle, or any other improvement in that district." At present the Governor of Londonderry and Culmore Forts, who had really nothing to do, for the office was an entire sinecure, received his salary partly from the Crown, and partly from the Irish Society. He received 318 l. a-year of the public money by an annual vote of that House; 200 l. a-year from the Irish Society; and he was also invested by the Irish Society with the property of certain lands about Culmore, producing an annual income of from 600 l. to 700 l.; so that the whole of his income amounted to very nearly 1,200 l. a-year. He would now inform the House of the purpose for which the Irish Society had been empowered to grant these sums of money to the Governor of Londonderry Fort. This society existed in the town of Derry, and had been incorporated by charter in the time of James 2nd, and had been put in possession of almost the whole of Londonderry, with this condition, that they should manage their estates for the civilization and improvement of that part of the country. But besides the improvement and civilization of the country, King James had another object in view, and that was the Protection of the Protestants who had settled in the county of Londonderry; and he therefore appointed an officer, under the title of Governor of Londonderry and Culmore Forts, to watch over the safety of the Protestants, and directed the Irish Society to give him a stated yearly salary for the performance of that duty. But, whatever services this officer might have rendered to the inhabitants of Londonderry in former times, at present he undoubtedly did no service at all. The soldiers were not placed under his command, and he was never looked to by the people for any protection.
522
Such being the case he proposed to appropriate the money now paid to the holder of this sinecure office, to the purpose of defraying the expense of building a stone bridge over the river Foyle. At present, the only means of communication between the counties of Donegal, Tyrone, and Londonderry, was an old wooden bridge, for the privilege of passing over which very heavy tolls were exacted from the people; and he did not know of a greater benefit that could be conferred on the inhabitants of those counties, than the erection of a stone bridge, free of toll, without the expenditure of a single shilling of the public money. He could not imagine what objection could be made to the motion which he proposed, except that it might be urged, that the abolition of this sinecure would be taking away a means of rewarding such men as had distinguished themselves in the military service of their country. Though he admitted that there was some weight in this objection, still, as these funds had been given to the Irish Society for the specific purpose of introducing civilization and improvement into that part of Ireland, the people had a just right to expect that the money should be employed for the advantage and benefit of the district, in preference to being paid to any officer, however distinguished or meritorious. The noble Lord opposite (Lord Althorp) had pledged himself to the abolition of all sinecures, and he was now called upon, in fulfilment of his own pledge, to do away with this sinecure office; and the Government, who had expended vast sums of the public money in the improvement of the southern part of Ireland, were bound in fairness to assist in forwarding an undertaking which would prove highly advantageous to the northern part. The people of the north of Ireland were particularly entitled to the consideration of Government, for while the southern parts of Ireland had broken out into a state of insurrection, they had continued peaceable and obedient to the laws. He understood that it was intended to give the office of Governor of Londonderry Fort, which was now vacant, to an hon. and gallant Officer, a Member of that House (Sir J. Byng), and he most readily admitted that, if the office were to be continued, that hon. and gallant Officer fully deserved to receive such a reward. But he certainly did not expect that the hon. member for Middlesex would vote for the continuance of that sinecure. He did not know how the hon.

523
Member behind him (Mr. Hume) would vote; for he had confessed, that on the division on the Russian loan, he would vote that "black was white." But he supposed that he should have the support of the other hon. member for Middlesex (Mr. Byng), for he did not believe that that hon. Member had solicited Government to give this sinecure situation to his gallant relative.
Lord Althorpsaid, it was true that he had stated himself to be opposed to all useless sinecures: but he had never expressed an opinion that those offices which afforded the means of rewarding distinguished and meritorious military officers were useless sinecures. The granting of such situations to undeserving individuals was not certainly to be justified; but he thought that they were, when properly disposed of, most useful and beneficial. He had no doubt that the present Motion would be very popular with the Corporation of Derry. They would, no doubt, be highly pleased to be relieved from the payment which they were bound to make to the Governor of Londonderry Fort, but he thought that the House would be of opinion, when they recollected all the circumstances of the loan of money which was made to the Corporation of Derry for building a bridge over the river Foyle, that that Corporation had not any very strong claims on their consideration. He should hardly have believed it possible that the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Dawson) would, in his peculiar situation, have stood up in that House, and made the present proposition. The object of it was too clear to escape the notice of any person—it was to gain popularity in that part of Ireland; and he could not avoid again expressing his astonishment that the right hon. Gentleman should have put himself forward in the matter. It was not a public benefit that was sought to be obtained, but only the advantage of a particular district and town, and, in his opinion, it was impossible for the House to support the proposition.
Mr. Humehad heard with great regret the statement made by the noble Lord, that such places as the one under discussion ought not to be abolished. How could any reduction in the expenditure of the country be effected, unless the expenses of the military establishments were cut down? He thought it would be far more honourable for those officers who were entitled to rewards, to come before that House and receive them from the people,
524
instead of drawing incomes from sinecure offices. His vote on the question of the Russian loan had been commented upon by the right hon. Gentleman. He begged to inform the right hon. Gentleman that he voted against that motion, because he believed that it was brought forward from factious motives, and not from any desire to benefit the public.
Mr. Byngsaid, that the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Dawson) was quite right in stating that he had not applied to give this sinecure office to his brother; though, had he followed the right hon. Gentleman's advice, which he was not in the habit of doing, he should have made such an application; for the right hon. Gentleman had frequently told him, out of the House, that he would not be acting like a brother, if he did not try to get the situation for his hon. and gallant relative.
Mr. John Fanesupported the Motion. The hon. member for Middlesex, whom he had no wish to resemble, displayed his love of economy in the saving of sixpences, while the economy of saving millions was far above his care.
Mr. Alderman Venablescontended, that the bridge over the Foyle was an object of great importance, and said that he would vote for the Motion. He could assure the House that the Irish Society was disposed to do all in its power to promote the object for which it was instituted—the benefit of Ireland. The office in question ought, in his opinion, to be abolished.
Sir Henry Hardingerose for the purpose of supporting the same principle out of office which he had always maintained while in. He thought these offices ought to be maintained for the purpose of rewarding officers who had well served their country. He was not a little surprised at finding his right hon. friend (Mr. Dawson), who had always supported him in this principle through thick and thin while in office, now bringing forward a motion inconsistent with all his former votes. His right hon. friend had formerly declined to vote with the hon. member for Middlesex when he attacked these military rewards for past services, and he was sorry to see him now pursuing a course so inconsistent with his then conduct. He thought the suggestion of the hon. member for Middlesex, as to officers coming to that House for rewards very unconstitutional, for it at once took the power of rewarding merit out of the hands of the Crown. Besides, if they were to come to that House for

525
rewards, it would be opening a dour in endless intrigue to procure them by their interest with individual Members.
Motion negatived.

SUPPLY—MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES (IRELAND).
On the Motion of Lord Althorp, the House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply.
Mr. Spring Ricesaid, that he would propose no vote which was likely to occasion discussion.
Several votes were agreed to.
In moving that 8,807 l. as the charge of the office of Vice-Treasurer and Teller of the Exchequer in Ireland,
Mr. Spring Ricetook occasion to state, that the sum which had been due from Sir George Hill, the late Vice-Treasurer of Ireland, to the Government, had all been paid up.
On its being proposed to grant a sum of 24,937 l. to defray the expense of the police and watch establishment of the city of Dublin, for five quarters, from the 31st of December, 1831, to the 31st of March, 1833,
Mr. Humesaid, that in this grant was included the sum of 1,600 l., paid to the Recorder of Dublin, in addition to 1,200 l. paid him by the corporation of that city. As he understood that the Recorder was not bound to attend to his duties in person, he did not think the House was bound to pay him. He did not think the hon. Recorder could be in his place in that House, and discharge his duties as Recorder at the same time. He should therefore move, as an Amendment, that the gross sum be reduced by the amount of the sum paid to the Recorder.
Mr. Huntsupported the Amendment.
Lord Ingestriesaid, that his hon. colleague had not neglected any of his judicial duties in attending that House.
Mr. Cramptonwould not enter into the question, how far the duties of a Recorder were compatible with a seat in that House; but he would say, that the Amendment, if carried, would not effect the reduction of the salary of the Recorder, as that salary was paid under an Act of Parliament, which allocated it upon this grant.
Colonel Evanssupported the Amendment. It was impossible, he thought, that individuals who had important public business could attend to that while they were busy in Parliament.
Mr. Warburtonsuggested to his hon. friendly the member for Middlesex, to withdraw
526
the Amendment, and to move tomorrow for leave to bring in a bill to prevent the Recorder of Dublin from sitting in any future Parliament.
Mr. Humeagreed to withdraw his Amendment; but stated, that he would take an early opportunity again to bring the subject under the consideration of Parliament.
Original Motion carried.

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM—BILL FOR IRELAND—THIRD READING.
Mr. Stanleymoved the third reading of the Reform of Parliament (Ireland) Bill.
Bill read a third time.
Mr. Cramptonproposed two clauses, for the better regulating the mode of registration, which were agreed to, and added as riders to the Bill.
Mr. Mullinsmoved the addition to the first clause of a proviso to the following effect:—That the lessee claiming to register shall not be disqualified by reason of any abatement made by the lessor, of the amount of rent payable by the said lessee for the lands or tenements out of which he shall so claim to register, provided the rent payable by said lessee for said lands or tenements, after such abatement, shall not be less than a solvent and responsible tenant could afford at the time to pay for the same."
Mr. Cramptonassured the hon. Member that the Bill as it stood would effect all the purposes of his Amendment.
Amendment withdrawn.
Mr. Mullinsthen moved the insertion of a clause to the effect, "That joint occupiers of lands or tenements in counties, shall be entitled to vote in the election for counties, in case the clear yearly value of such lands or tenements shall be of such an amount as, when divided, shall give a beneficial interest of not less than 10 l. for each and every occupier."
Mr. Stanleyopposed the clause as uncalled-for and unnecessary. It was also much too important to introduce at that stage of the measure.
Mr. Mullinswished, that the laws which affected the 40 s. freeholders should be done away with, as they had been disfranchised.
Mr. Cramptonsuggested, that the best way for the hon. Member to accomplish his object was, to move to repeal the Act of 1823.
Mr. Ruthvensupported the Motion. He did not see why the restrictions laid on

527
the 40 s. freeholders should be extended by this Bill to other freeholders. His hon. friend had, he thought, no other alternative than to press his Motion.
Clause negatived.
Mr. Jephsonmoved a clause for the division of the larger counties into districts for polling.
Mr. Stanleyopposed the clause, which was, in fact, a species of new bill. He was convinced, that the additional legal agency which would be rendered necessary by the operation of the clause, would create more expense than would be incurred by bringing the voters immediately to the ordinary place for polling. It was assuredly too late, on the third reading of the Irish Reform Bill, to discuss the propriety of a clause which was at variance with the provisions of the English and Scotch Reform Bills.
Mr. Powersupported the clause, which would, in his opinion, have the effect of reducing the election expenses at least by one-third.
Colonel Percevalwas inclined to think that it would increase the expense, for if such facilities were given, not only the voters, but their friends and families, would proceed to the polling places before the election began, and stay there until it was finished.
Clause withdrawn.
On the Motion of Mr. Stanley, several verbal amendments were agreed to.
Mr. Leaderwished to change one word in the Bill, the word "ten" to the word "five," or, in other words, to make a 5l. qualification in boroughs instead of a 10 l. qualification. He had often heard Gentlemen express anxiety to know what was required to tranquillize Ireland. He had always stated in answer, that the two grand requisites were Parliamentary Reform and Church Reform. It behoved them, therefore, to make the Parliamentary Reform as complete as possible. The county qualification had been much improved by giving leasehold property its due weight. Under the present system, Ireland had 100 Members, and the sixty-four county Representatives were returned by a large constituent body, ten others were returned by cities having a popular constituency, and eight from open towns, which, with a member for the University, would make in all eighty-three Representatives returned to Parliament by the voice of the people. In truth, at the present moment, there were only seventeen boroughs
528
in Ireland to which it was necessary that Reform should be extended, and of these there was little doubt that popular exertion would have emancipated at least seven. With respect to the remaining ten nomination boroughs, there was no doubt that the proprietors would have gladly surrendered their monopoly on receiving 15,000 l. each, which was the standard of value fixed at the Union. He mentioned these circumstances to show how small was the boon which Ireland was to receive. She should not be put off by a miserable bit-by-bit Reform, if the people were to be satisfied, but the constituency of the towns should be so extended as to render the electoral body perfectly independent. If that result could not be obtained by the 10 l. qualification, the qualification should continue as it was settled by statute, in the cases of Newry, Downpatrick, Dungannon, and other places. He would take Belfast out of the number of boroughs, because its wealth and commercial importance gave it a sufficient constituency. But what were the circumstances of the other twenty-four towns? It appeared, by the official returns on the Table of the House, that they possessed a population exceeding 200,000 inhabitants, that the number of houses exceeds 32,000, and that the number of rate-payers was more than 18,000; and yet the whole of the constituency of these twenty-four towns would not, under the Bill, exceed 7,500. That was a mere mockery of Reform, which would never content the country; and of what value would be Reform if it did not inspire confidence and fill every heart with exultation and gratitude. Was it possible that these towns could possess an independent constituency when it was so limited? In Athlone, the number of electors would be 220; in Coleraine, 188; in Bandon, 240; in Portarlington, 185; in New Ross, 246: in Cashel, 200: in Mallow, 200; in Ennis, 250; in Downpatrick, 220; and in Dungannon, 210; making for ten towns a total of 2,159 electors. These were indisputable facts, and, under such circumstances, was it unreasonable to call for a 5l. constituency, in order to extend the suffrage? He would enter into no comparison besween the two countries; what was attainable in England could not be accomplished in Ireland; the one was a wealthy nation; and if the qualification was large, the means of the people were proportioned to the amount. The qualification proposed,

529
however, was too high for Ireland, and the day of election would not be a day of exultation and joy to the people, who were precluded from becoming co-partners in the advantages of the Reform which had been obtained for the other partners of the empire. He moved, that the word "ten" be left out, and the word "five" inserted instead thereof.
Mr. Humeseconded the Amendment. An equally substantial Reform ought to be given to Ireland as well as England. The proposed amendment, looking to the circumstances of the two countries, would not do more than place Ireland on a level with England, and he, therefore, should support the Amendment.
Mr. Stanleysaid, that his Majesty's Ministers had proceeded in this instance, with regard to Ireland, precisely on the same principles as they had acted upon with regard to England and Scotland, in their respective Reform Bills. An uniform constituency was established throughout the three kingdoms, which was one of the great objects of the Reform measure. If the hon. Member had shown that the number of 10 l. householders in the towns of Ireland was smaller in proportion than in the towns of England, he would have established something of a case, though not a sufficient one to justify the House in departing from the uniform rule which had been applied to the whole empire. He had taken some pains to inquire, and he found that the number of 10 l. houses in the towns in Ireland, was as large as in the English boroughs. The assertion of the hon. Member who brought the question forward, that the Bill made no addition to the borough constituency of Ireland, was really monstrous; for every one knew that, at the present moment, the Irish boroughs possessed no constituency whatever. It was true, that in some of the boroughs, the constituency, under the Bill, would not be very large, but it would bear the same proportion to the whole number of houses as it did in England, and Scotland. He would prove that to the satisfaction of the House. The boroughs in schedule C of the English Bill possessed 142,000 10 l. houses out of 369,000, or about two in five. In the boroughs contained in schedule D, the number of 10 l. houses was 16,000 out of 60,000, or one in four. In the smaller places of England, the number of 10 l. houses was only 6,000 out of 29,700, or about one in four and a half; whilst, in
530
the small boroughs in Ireland, the number of 10 l. houses was 10,075 out of 32,500, or one in three. In this respect, therefore, Ireland possessed an advantage over England. In the larger places, however, the advantage which Ireland obtained was still more manifest. In Dublin, for instance, out of 19,000 houses, 16,000 would qualify their inhabitants to vote under this Bill. Could it then be said, that the Ministers had not done justice for Ireland? It was very easy for the hon. Member to talk of satisfying the people of Ireland. He would take upon himself to assert, that the main body of the people of Ireland would be satisfied with the measure proposed. They were bound to do justice, and to give fair play to Ireland; but when claims were made for Ireland which had not been conceded to England and Scotland, they would betray their duty if they were to yield to them. He opposed the Motion.
Mr. Huntsaid, that Ireland had been as fairly dealt with in this instance as England and Scotland.
Mr. Leaderstated, that he should not trouble the House by dividing.
Motion negatived.
Several other verbal amendments were then agreed to.
In answer to a question from Mr. Lefroy, with reference to the registration, so as to confer a right of voting for the University of Trinity College, Dublin,
Mr. Cramptonsaid, that under the statute, the Vice Chancellor possessed the power to appoint Commencements at any time he might think fit, for the purpose of conferring degrees so as to be in time to give a right to vote.
Mr. Jephsonsaid, that he much doubted the accuracy of this statement by the hon. Gentleman, the Solicitor General for Ireland, and, therefore, it was, that he thought that means should be taken in this measure to put the question beyond doubt.
Bill passed.

MINUTES.
Papers ordered. On the Motion of the Duke of RICHMOND, a Copy of the Rural Code of Haiti, with Translation of July, 1826.
Petitions presented. By Lord GRANTHAM, from the Clergy of Bedford,—against the Ministerial Plan of Education (Ireland).

BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.—(CASES OF MR. ALLISON AND MR. THORPE)
Lord Cadoganpresented a Petition from James Allison, stating that he was sorry for what he had done; that he had apologized to Mr. Wright, and prayed to be discharged.
The Marquess of Londonderry, on the understanding that an ample apology was made, with which Mr. Wright was satisfied, did not mean to oppose Mr. Allison's discharge. The petitioner had taken upon himself to state, in a manner which their Lordships must have remarked, that he had dared to pull a person by the nose in their Lordships' House. An ample apology was essential.
Lord Cadogan: The petition stated that an apology had been made, and that the petitioner was ready to apologize again. He moved that the petitioner be brought to the Bar, reprimanded by the Lord Chancellor, and discharged, paying his fees.—Agreed to.
Mr. Allisonwas brought to the Bar, reprimanded by the Lord Chancellor, and discharged.
The Lord Chancellorthen called the attention of the House to the other case of alleged Breach of Privilege, committed by Mr. Thorpe and Mr. Abbs, and observed, that upon consideration, he thought this a case in which their Lordships were not called upon to interfere. The printed statement, in which the alleged breach originated, was not any proceeding of the House, nor was it a document either laid, or to be laid before the House, but merely a private statement, circulated among individuals, in pursuance of a practice, which was, by many, considered as not very

505
regular. At the same time, he, as a professional man, cautioned both Thorpe and Abbs, against any further proceedings in this matter, for they would consider, that they were liable to be called upon to answer in the Court of King's Bench, and the consequence might be serious to them, with reference to their professional character.
The Marquess of Londonderryconcurred in this view of the case, and said that Mr. Wright had done nothing but what he was fully warranted in doing, for the interest of his clients, whose case he had conducted with great zeal and ability.
The Order for Mr. Thorpe to appear at the Bar discharged.

AFFAIRS OF GREECE.
The Marquess of Londonderrysaid, it was with considerable embarrassment that he now proceeded to put the questions to the noble Earl (Grey), of which he had given notice, relative to the proceedings of our Government in regard to the affairs of Greece. He was apprehensive that he might fall under the displeasure of the noble Earl, in putting his questions, as he had often done on former occasions. Whenever he attempted to get information by means of questions, he had been told that he was irregular; that he was disorderly: and that he had made no motions, and entered upon discussions without motions, and that, in short, he was altogether irregular. This was the way in which he had been met, when he endeavoured to get information as to the state of public affairs. But he confessed, that it did seem to him, that he was warranted by what appeared on the Journals, to act as he had done, for he there found that it had been usual to put such questions, and that no one had availed himself more of that privilege than the noble Earl himself when' he was in opposition. There was this reason also for questioning the noble Earl, that there never was a government more sparing of the information it gave the Houses of Parliament. That might be, because they had so many weighty matters on their hands, such as their Reform Bills, and all the rest. He, however, had thought it his duty to make inquiries, and although the answers were not always as satisfactory as he could have wished them to be, yet he had gained some information for the public. He had addressed himself to the noble Earl on the subject of the Political Unions, and he had put questions to him, which induced the
506
noble Earl to state his opinion, that they were highly objectionable, and likely to be attended with great mischief; and the noble Earl said, that he hoped the good sense of the people of England would put them down. But these Political Unions were subversive of all good government, and the powers of Government ought to be exerted to put them down. He had questioned the noble Earl also, on the subjects of the proceedings in regard to Belgium, and on that subject he had fortunately gained some information for the public; and yet, even at this day, after all the Protocols that had passed on the subject, the matter appeared as far from being settled as over. Another advantage, which he had gained by his questions, was the disclaimer on the part of the noble Earl, of all participation or approbation of the vituperative remarks that had been made in another place, on the conduct of our ally, the emperor of Russia. He considered, that in calling forth this disclaimer he had done a great deal of service to the noble Earl himself, at a time when his noble relative was about to proceed to Russia. Had it not been for the observations which his questions had elicited from the noble Earl, there might have been some reason to fear that a cordon sanitaire would have been drawn round his mission, and all communication with the Russian authorities prevented. He stated this, merely to show, that however troublesome his questions might have appeared to the noble Earl, he had at least elicited some information by his inquiries. The object that he had in view by the inquiries which he was now about to make, was, to get some further information relative to the proceedings of Government in regard to the affairs of Greece. A rumour prevailed, and, indeed, it had been stated and admitted in another place, that the three Powers, Russia, France and England had made an arrangement, as to who was to be King of Greece, and as to the terms and conditions with which the appointment was to be accompanied. The noble Earl had a great fancy for making kings, and having made a king of Belgium, he was about to make a king of Greece. It had been stated and admitted, that a treaty had been entered into upon this subject, and that this country was to become a guarantee for the third of a loan of 60,000,000 francs, to be advanced to the new king; in other words, had engaged to pay 20,000,000 francs, for the matter would come to that. Taking it for granted, then, that there was

507
some such Convention entered into by the three Powers, he thought it highly desirable that the public should know whether the Convention was confined to the three Powers, or whether our ally, Austria, was a party to the Convention, or approved of it. He wished, therefore, to know from the noble Earl, whether Austria was a party to the treaty, or whether she approved of it; and he wished also to know what benefit Great Britain was to derive from it. It had been said, that it was desirable, with a view to the peace of the civilized world, that Greece should have a regular government; but he wished to know what benefit this country was to derive from setting up a king to reign in Greece, whether the people of Greece were satisfied with the arrangement or not? As for himself, he had always deprecated interference with the affairs of Greece, and had always thought that it would have been better if we had refrained from interference. But times might have altered. He did not know whether Greece was in a disturbed state; but when they had to pay up so large a sum as 1,800,000 l. in respect of the Russian Dutch Loan, he did not know why we should be saddled with so large an additional sum, for the benefit of this new fancy king. What benefit could this country derive from the arrangement, more especially if Austria was not a party to it? Why was not Austria a party to it? Austria, the only ally with whom we had no points to contest? But the noble Earl appeared to be ready to sacrifice every thing for his Belle Alliance with France, from which, perhaps, this country might suffer some damage. The noble Earl had abandoned Austria, Turkey, Portugal, Holland, and, in short, all the ancient allies of Great Britain; and his great endeavour appeared to be to undo all that his predecessors had done. How the project in regard to Belgium had turned out they all knew, and the country had a right to know every thing about this Grecian treaty. He wished to know what advantages the noble Earl expected the country to derive from this new arrangement? The noble Earl had been given to prophesy about the advantages to be derived from the changes that had taken place in Europe, but matters had not always turned out as he expected. In a speech made by the noble Earl, on occasion of the glorious revolution of July, the noble Earl had spoken in high terms of that revolution, and of the advantages to be derived
508
from it. The noble Earl said,—'My Lords, if revolution could be rendered necessary in any circumstances, it was rendered necessary by what I must call an unjustifiable attack on the liberties of the people. As an Englishman, owing the benefits which I at present enjoy to a similar measure, similarly provoked, I rejoice in the resistance of the people of France to the attack upon their liberties; and I rejoice in the character of their whole conduct, from the first moment when resistance became necessary to the expulsion of the reigning family. In such a cause resistance was necessary, was noble, and I cannot conceive a more heart-stirring scene, than that of a people, entering upon so holy a contest, with courage Worthy of the cause, and using victory, when achieved, with such unparalleled moderation.'* But what had been the result? Why the result was, that Paris was in a state of siege, that France was upon the point of being revolutionized again, and had been, ever since the event celebrated by the noble Earl, in a continual state of disturbance. He had not, therefore, any great confidence in the noble Earl's creation of kingdoms. He wished that the noble Earl had allowed Europe to remain in the situation in which it was, when he took up the reins of Government. Judging from what had happened, in regard to the interference with the affairs of Belgium, he anticipated no good from our interference with the affairs of Greece. He wished to know from the noble Earl, whether there was any objection to lay on their Lordships' Table copies of the Conferences in regard to the affairs of Greece, and a copy of the Treaty with Bavaria on this subject, and of the stipulations in regard to the Loan? In the noble Earl's speech, to which he had before alluded, the noble Earl had strongly advocated the propriety of acting on the principle of non-intervention. The noble Earl said—' No man can more regret than I do the separation of Flanders from Holland; and in this view I cannot disapprove of the intimation conveyed in his Majesty's Speech, if the mediation alluded to, be conducted in a proper manner, in concert with France, so as to effect a new and amicable settlement of the country. But I imagine that, after the excitement of the animosities which now actuate the inhabitants of the two countries, they cannot again be
* Hansard (third series), vol. i. p. 38.

509
united but by means the most vicious and unjust, and by an utter disregard of the principle on which it is the duty of every country to act—that is, the principle of non-interference,'* That was the language the noble Earl had then used, yet had the noble Earl interfered almost more than any other minister whom this country had ever seen, in the affairs of other countries. If the noble Earl wished that his questions should be put on the Journals of the House, he would make a regular motion; but he would prefer it if the noble Earl would please to answer his questions, without calling upon him to make a formal motion. The country at present, was certainly in a most melancholy state, both with respect to the condition of Ireland, and with respect to our relations with foreign countries; and it would be necessary that new abilities and new energies should be infused into the conduct of our Government before matters could be brought into order and properly arranged.
Earl Grey: The noble Earl had, as usual, thought proper to preface his present inquiries by a statement of the grounds on which he had been induced to put questions on former occasions, and of the good effects which had resulted from putting these questions, and the noble Earl had complained that on these occasions he had not met with all the courtesy to which he thought himself entitled. He should be sorry, on any occasion, not to treat the noble Earl, or any other noble Lord, with that courtesy which was due to one Member of that House from another, but he had frequently complained that the noble Earl had introduced discussions, on various subjects, without bringing forward any motion; and had asked for explanations which, consistently with a due regard to the public interest, could not be given. These complaints he deemed himself well warranted in making, and he might, without any undue want of courtesy, repeat them on the present occasion. But in venturing to state his opinion as to these irregularities, he hoped that he had abstained from making any offensive personal reflections on any one. It was not his intention to follow the noble Earl through all those topics to which he had thought proper to call their Lordships' attention. The noble Earl had, as usual, deviated from his immediate object, and made
* Hansard (third series), vol. i. p. 40.
510
various observations about Belgium, and Austria, and France, and Turkey, and Portugal, and Holland, and had ended with Ireland. The noble Earl said, that it would have been better if he (Earl Grey) had left Europe in the same state in which he had found it. But the noble Earl ought to have recollected, that at the time when he came into office the revolution in France had taken place, and the de facto separation of Belgium from Holland had happened, or at least had gone so far that it was obviously next to impossible to re-unite them. The Ministers might or might not have acted wisely in regard to these matters, but the evils did in fact exist at the time when they came into office, and ought not, therefore, to be laid to their account. The noble Earl had alluded to a speech of his on the subject of the late French Involution, and talked of the prophecies contained in it. Now he was not aware that in the speech there was a word of prophecy, but he had given his opinion of that great revolution, and nothing more. Whether that opinion was right or wrong, or whether it were wise or prudent to have openly expressed that opinion at the time, were questions on which he did not mean then to enter, he had, however, expressed no sentiment on that occasion, of which he was at present in the least ashamed, and he said no word which he was at all disposed to deny. Such was his opinion then, whether right or wrong, or whether it was wise or prudent to express it, and such was his opinion now. With respect to Greece, which was the subject to which he understood the noble Earl's question more particularly to refer, the noble Earl said, that he (Earl Grey) was very fond of making Kings; be that as it might, with regard to Greece, at least, the example had been set him, and he had only done as had been done before. There was one sentiment uttered by the noble Earl, in which he was disposed to agree with him. The noble Earl had said, that he had deprecated interference in the affairs of Greece from the beginning. That was his (Earl Grey's) opinion, and he had said so at the time. But the interference took place, and the consequence was war with our Turkish ally, the destruction of the Turkish fleet, and the separation of Greece from Turkey. That interference might have been wise, or it might not, but as far as the present Ministers were concerned, they were forced to look at

511
the circumstances as they found them, and endeavour to provide a government for Greece, and to place that country in such a situation as to enable it to preserve peace within its own dominions, and through preserving peace at home, taking away motives and pretexts for breaking the general peace of the civilized world. It was with that view he presumed that the late Government had agreed with the other Powers to place Prince Leopold of Saxe Cobourg on the throne of Greece. It was obvious, then, that if a sovereign was now to be provided for Greece, he must be furnished with the same pecuniary means as were to have been afforded to Prince Leopold in case he had accepted the throne of Greece, and it was only just that Great Britain should now, as then, guarantee one-third of the same sum of 60,000,000 of francs. That was felt to be necessary at the time when the Grecian throne was offered to Prince Leopold, and if so, it was not the less necessary now. The noble Earl had evinced, on various occasions, that he was a diligent reader of the journals of the day, and he therefore must have been aware that the affairs of Greece had fallen into a lamentable state of confusion and anarchy, threatening all those consequences which the past interference was undertaken to prevent; and then the question came to be, whether, considering all the circumstances, it was not the duty of the Government of this country still to rescue Greece from that situation, if possible. The Ministers did think that they ought to endeavour to provide a government for Greece, and he had no hesitation in stating that the choice of the three Powers had fallen on Prince Otho of Bavaria, who had been spoken of in the time of former Ministers. He had no hesitation in stating that a Convention had been entered into on that subject, and that it was correct that a Treaty had been agreed to, containing a stipulation for guaranteeing pecuniary aid to the amount mentioned. By the Treaty, if sanctioned by Parliament, Government had agreed to guarantee the payment of the third part of the 60,000,000 of francs; the other Powers guaranteeing the payment of the rest. Whether that was justifiable or not would be proper matter for discussion when the Treaty and the documents relating to it should be laid on the Table, and the subject brought regularly and properly under consideration. On that subject he need
512
say nothing more at present, than that every possible security had been taken against eventual loss. If peace and good order should be restored to Greece, the revenues of that country were amply sufficient to pay the interest of the debt and the sinking fund for the liquidation of the principal. There was, therefore, very little reason to apprehend any eventual loss, unless anarchy and confusion should continue to prevail in Greece. The question was simply this—whether this country was not bound in justice, considering all the circumstances, to endeavour to establish a government in Greece? Whether the original interference was right or wrong it was in vain now to discuss. However laudable and excellent in themselves the feelings might be which prompted the interference, such feelings did not always form sufficient ground for political measures. The interference, however, had taken place, and was almost universally applauded by all classes; and it did therefore appear to be the duty of this country to rescue the affairs of Greece from the present anarchy and confusion, and attempt to establish a regular government in that country. Did the noble Earl think, that after the stipulations that had been made with regard to Prince Leopold, any other terms could have been adopted on the present occasion, without leaving Greece a prey to anarchy and confusion? He would only add, that the Protocol of the Treaty would be produced, and laid before Parliament, as the Government could not act upon it without the sanction of Parliament; he answered, therefore, that this protocol would be produced; that it would have been produced before, had it not been desirable that all the documents relating to the Treaty should be laid before Parliament at the same time. More he need not say till the papers should be laid before their Lordships; but in the mean time he begged leave to say, that this was no new policy introduced by the present Government.
The Earl of Aberdeenwished to make a few observations on the answers which the noble Earl had given. It was true that the late Ministry had made up its mind to propose some arrangement on this subject; but in order to judge correctly of their conduct, it was necessary to see the course of the proceedings, and to attend to all the circumstances connected with it. He at present gave no opinion

513
as to the treaty in question. The best time for that would be when the nature of the stipulations, the security, and the whole subject should come regularly before them. It did not, however, by any means follow, that the present arrangement was good, merely because a similar arrangement had been made before. With respect to the pecuniary aid to be allowed to Prince Leopold, that Prince had lost no time in applying to his illustrious friend for pecuniary assistance, and his noble friend had answered, Great Britain would not afford any pecuniary assistance. But it had been agreed that it was necessary that the Prince should be supported by a military force from some foreign country, and it was soon felt that to furnish a British force for this purpose would be liable to strong and well-founded objections. It was felt, that it would be inconvenient to send a British force to act with French and Russian troops in this service, and it was resolved that a loan should be negotiated to enable the Prince to provide Swiss troops, or the troops of some other foreign country; and it was proposed to guarantee a loan for this purpose to the amount of 500,000 l. This, however, was objected to on the part of the late Government, but before the matter had been finally decided upon, the Prince went to Paris, and there agreed with France and Russia for a loan of 60,000,000 of francs, which the three Powers were to guarantee each to the extent of a third. On these terms the Prince insisted, and on his intimating that he would not accept the government of Greece without this sum, and when his adhesion to the agreement was found absolutely to depend upon the concurrence of the Government of this country in these terms, the Ministers most reluctantly assented, in order to deprive the Prince of any pretext for refusing to fulfil his part of the arrangement. They therefore declared their intention, but there was no treaty, and no stipulation: and he had little doubt, even then, that Prince Leopold would find some other opportunity of breaking off the negotiation. These suspicions were unfortunately well founded, and the letter of Count Capo d'Istria afforded the Prince the pretext which he wanted; of that he immediately availed himself, and the Ministers were deprived of the advantage of placing one who might be considered as a British Prince on the throne of Greece. But after these transactions
514
with Prince Leopold, they had declared that they were perfectly clear of the whole affair, and that they would give no pecuniary assistance in any arrangement that might be subsequently adopted, unless the prince to be chosen to fill the throne of Greece should be completely and entirely satisfactory to Great Britain. He could not consider that the choice of Prince Otho of Bavaria was satisfactory. The former Ministers had made no proposal with respect to him, for he was at that time a minor, not more than fourteen years of age, and it was considered that if he were appointed, he would for some time require constant superintendence. The minority of the Prince must necessarily perpetuate the interference of the three great Powers; an interference, the advantage of discontinuing which as soon as possible must be generally acknowledged. One objection to Prince Otho, therefore, was his youth. Another was, that he was a Catholic. That appeared to his Majesty's late Government to be a circumstance very injurious. Their Lordships were, perhaps, aware that only about a fifth, or a sixth of the population of Greece were Roman Catholics. Their Lordships were also perhaps aware, that the hostility of the Greek Church to the Roman Catholics was greater than its hostility to Turks or to Jews. It was, therefore, the opinion of his Majesty's late Government, that the circumstance of Prince Otho's being a Catholic was one which much increased the objection to his being selected. Being a Catholic, he could not without endangering his salvation, in the opinion of all Catholics, change to Protestantism, and it was evident that his religion would be opposed to that of the great majority of his subjects. He professed himself at a loss to understand why his Majesty's Government had not settled this question eighteen months ago. They were now, however, about to send this Prince, still a minor, to Greece. How, under such circumstances, the Government of that country was to be conducted, he knew not; but it was manifest that it must be by a continued interference on the part of the three great Powers, an interference which, he repeated, was deprecated on all sides, and ought to be terminated as soon as possible.
Earl Greycould have wished that the noble Earl had manifested the same abstinence in relation to other parts of the question, as he had displayed with respect

515
to the guarantee for a loan to the new sovereignty of Greece. If there wanted anything to show the inconvenience of discussions like the present, it was to be found in the conduct of the noble Earl, who had very inappositely gone into all the objections to the selection of Prince Otho. It would not be proper for him (Earl Grey) to take that occasion to go into the motives that had determined the choice of the allies. The noble Earl opposite would not deny the difficulty of the subject; it would seem that the late Ministry felt all its difficulties, and had not been able to fall on any plan, as far as he was aware, after Prince Leopold had declined the sovereignty of Greece, to place a monarch on the throne of that country, though a considerable time elapsed between Prince Leopold's refusal and their own retirement from office. He did not deny, that there might be objections and difficulties as to the present selection—the minority of the Prince was one difficulty—but the question was, whether, in a choice of difficulties, Government had not taken the best course. He must express his deep regret that the noble Earl could not abstain from throwing out a reflection against an illustrious personage, now at the head of the Government of a neighbouring nation—a reflection, too, which he would take upon himself to say was equally unmerited and unjust. The noble Earl said, that it mattered not whether the difficulty relating to pecuniary succours had been overcome or not, because he thought Prince Leopold would easily find other modes of escaping from his engagement. He could take upon himself to state, from some knowledge of the facts, but more from personal knowledge of the character of the distinguished individual alluded to, that it was impossible he should have so acted. It would appear rather an extraordinary ground of vindication, if the noble Earl should now say, that when he and his noble colleagues agreed to the pecuniary guarantee, they did so because they were sure it would be rejected. The noble Earl said, that the pecuniary guarantee was to be in lieu of military assistance; but, if he recollected right, it was in order to raise funds for the general aid and establishment of the new Government. Further, if he did not quite forget, this was not a mere proposal, as the noble Earl now wished to have it believed, but there were actually articles agreed on as to the particulars of the loan. He also thought, that the limitation of the loan to military succours
516
had been objected to, and that it was allowed that it should be applied generally to the support of the Government, which was, indeed, only reasonable. He had merely to add, that, when the treaty came under consideration, he should be prepared to argue, that assistance was more required at present, in behalf of any government to be formed in Greece, than it was when the noble Earl and his friends consented to grant it.
The Marquess of Londonderryobserved, that the noble Earl had not said whether Austria was a party to the treaty. He must even express his intention of opposing the guarantee, whenever the subject should be brought under the consideration of the House.
The Duke of Wellingtonadmitted, that the late Government did acquiesce in a guarantee for a pecuniary loan to Greece, on its being made a sine qua non by Prince Leopold; but added, that at the time this was done, a notion was entertained that the Prince would not accept the appointment which he had consented to take, and which, indeed, he had previously expressed himself anxious to obtain. A further correspondence took place as to the loan, and when Ministers had agreed to his terms. Prince Leopold produced a letter from Capo d'Istrias, and upon its contents refused the office. He had no wish to throw any imputation on the Prince, but there were the papers for anybody to read, and convince himself of the fact now stated. The late Ministers were no parties to the selection of Prince Otho; on the contrary, he was a person to whose appointment they had objected, as appeared on the face of the protocols, and the objection on the ground of his minority existed at the present moment, though not to such an extent as it did, a year and a-half having elapsed since it was first made. He objected to the arrangement, because the interests of this country were essentially altered in the Mediterranean. His Majesty had essential duties to perform in the Adriatic. When he saw France remaining in possession of Algiers, notwithstanding the provisions of a treaty, and when he saw what was done at Ancona, he must say, that the interests of this country had been grossly neglected in that quarter.
The Earl of Haddingtondid not mean to enter into the question of a sovereign for Greece, for the discussion of which he was not qualified; and if he were, that did not appear to him to be a fit time to discuss it.

517
He would confine himself to one topic, which had been incidentally introduced. However they differed on other points, noble Lords on both sides of the House had concurred in condemning the policy which dictated the original interference with the affairs of Greece. He had waited in the hope that some member of Mr. Canning's Administration would have vindicated his memory from that charge. But as that had not been done, he rose to say, that, in his humble opinion, if ever there was an interference justified by considerations of sound policy and humanity, it was the interference with the affairs of Greece embodied in the Treaty of the 6th of July, 1827; and that if there still existed any hope of a final and satisfactory arrangement of the affairs of Greece, that hope owed its existence to the interference to which he had adverted.
Viscount Goderichdid not think he could be fairly charged with a dereliction of duty, or an omission of respect for the memory of Mr. Canning, because he had not risen to vindicate the policy of that lamented statesman, at a moment when the question as to the policy of the Treaty of the 6th of July was not before the House. At a proper time and occasion, he should be always ready to defend the policy of that treaty, and he had frequently declared his willingness to do so. No fault could be found with his noble friend at the head of the Government, for stating that he had disapproved of the interference originally, it being necessary to his argument to mention the fact.
Earl Greysaid, with regard to the state of things in the Mediterranean, that would be a proper subject for discussion when the question came fairly before the House; but it could not be expected that he should enter into it at that time. He might observe, however, with respect to any inconvenience supposed to result from the occupation of Algiers by the French, that the fault was not attributable to the present Government. But probably noble Lords would find that there existed no foundation for their fears. They had heard, that a French army once in Belgium would never retire; but noble Lords were mistaken—it did retire. The noble Duke said, that the French had entered into an engagement to evacuate Algiers [the Duke of Wellington expressed his dissent], he certainly understood the noble Duke to say, that France remained in possession of Algiers, notwithstanding the provisions of a treaty. He certainly had not been able
518
to find any engagement, or treaty, to evacuate Algiers in an authentic form. If such a document existed, he would thank the noble Duke to point it out. As to Greece, whatever might be the inconveniences of interference, now that we had commenced, the evil would be much greater if we abandoned further interference, and allowed the matter to fall into the hands of some other country.
The Duke of Wellingtonexplained, that he had said, that the French government had entered into certain engagements on taking possession of Algiers, which engagements it had not since performed. The news of the taking of Algiers arrived a few days after the Paris Revolution, and the late Government had no opportunity of requiring the fulfilment of the engagements, but that there were such engagements to us and other Powers he could prove.
The Earl of Aberdeenadded, that the French revolutionary government had agreed to fulfil those engagements.