arrangements which were to be adopted for executing the functions now confined to the Lord Lieutenant, required most careful consideration, and no one had more right to recognise that truth than Her Majesty's Government. As to the plan of having an Under Secretary of State resident in Ireland, or a fourth Chief Secretary of State, that was entirely a matter for further consideration. He fully admitted that, though there might be a general assent to the abolition of the office of Lord Lieutenant, yet the manner in which that was to be accomplished, should be a matter of deliberation and most careful consideration. It was not proposed that the supreme authority which now dwelt in the Crown should be abandoned; for, though it might be true that the Lord Lieutenant acted upon his own authority, still that authority was delegated to him by the Crown, and, in point of fact, the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland constantly received instructions and directions from the Secretary of State for the Home Department on behalf of the Crown. Whatever authority, therefore, was vested in the Lord Lieutenant might be easily reposed in other hands. It was a settled principle of the Bill, that no authority which now appertained to the Crown, in respect to the government of Ireland, ought to be abandoned, or that a different mode of directing the application of military force should be resorted to, than that which had within the memory of their Lordships been resorted to in various parts of this kingdom. EARL FITZWILLIAM could scarcely vote for the resolutions, but must at the same time state that he did not think there would be very much time for the consideration of the Bill, inasmuch as, when it arrived before their Lordships, most of them would be engaged elsewhere. If what the Government wanted was, to fuse the authority in both countries into one, that measure would not be sufficient. It was not enough to say, in great changes of that kind, that there was no harm in it. The advocates of the change were bound to show its necessity, and he had not yet heard an argument to prove there would be any strong advantage in the mere abolition of the Lord Lieutenancy. A new Minister, living in Downing-street, never would be fit to govern Ireland. He never could acquire such accurate information as if he were on the spot, and would not be so good a judge of the actual state of the country :— Segniùs irritant animos demissa per aures, Quàm quæ sunt oculis subjecta fidelibus." If Government intended to carry out a complete and effectual change, and to fuse the administrations of both countries effectually, they should do away with the separate law courts, and make the courts in Ireland branches of the courts in England, the Irish Judges going circuit in England, and the English Judges going circuit in Ireland. That was a length to which Government was not prepared to go; but he was convinced it was the best way of attaining their object, though it might not meet much favour on either side of the Channel. LORD MONTEAGLE said, if the proposed measure tended to weaken the Government or the law in any part of the empire in which it was most important that the Government and the law should be strong, then he agreed with the noble Lords (Earl Fitzwilliam and the Duke of Wellington), that the Bill should not be entertained by their Lordships. But he put it seriously to their Lordships, whether the measure was one of that tendency. He wanted to have Ireland more distinctly represented in the government of this country than hitherto. In the legislation that had taken place with respect to Ireland, he saw a want of representation of that wisdom and that local knowledge which were embodied in the present and the late Lord Lieutenants of Ireland. If their Lordships contemplated the necessity of keeping up a small Castle establishment in Ireland, he took upon himself to say they would lose almost all the benefit which was expected from the proposed change, and they would continue in Ireland every possible inconvenience and objection which made the foundation of the proposed measure for Ireland. He asked their Lordships not to deliver the people of Ireland over to the government of a small unknown clique, which might be the Crown for the time being, or the Poor Law Commissioners, or any other body of gentlemen, who might constitute an unknown family, corresponding with Downing-street. What he wanted to know was, whether they would have a stronger Government in Ireland by the removal of the Lord Lieutenant, or a weaker one? He found upon the table of their Lordships' House a Bill, which stood for third reading that evening, entitled the Crime and Outrage Act Continuance (Ireland) Bill." The Bill had something of an Irish title, for it would seem to be a Bill for the continuance of crime and outrage in Ireland. Their Lordships would remember that, in 1847, when they were threatened with disturbances in Ireland, attention was called to the state of that country in the Speech from the Throne; and, in consequence of those threatened disturbances, an early Session of Parliament was called, and a Bill was introduced for the purpose of guarding against any disturbances that were likely to arise. It was, however, felt, when the measure came before Parliament, that its provisions were so stringent that it was permitted to be in operation for two years only. The Bill upon the table, and which stood for a third reading, proposed the continuance of the former Act for three or four years longer; and he found in every page of it that the immediate action of the Lord Lieutenant was required to carry it into operation. He did not object to the passing of the Bill, but, on the contrary, was of opinion that the Bill should not only be passed for four years, but that it ought to be made perpetual. But how, he would ask, was the Bill to act if the office of Lord Lieutenant was to be abolished? If they abolished the Lord Lieutenancy, he was at a loss to conceive how they could carry out the Bill. He would repeat again, that the issue which they had to decide was, whether the abolition of the office would strengthen the Executive Government of Ireland-whether it would tend to preserve increased order, and promote the enforcement of the law-whether it would give to the people of Ireland increased confidence in the Government, and a security that Irish interests would be made better known to, and would be more constantly forced upon, the Cabinet? He believed the abolition of the office of Lord Lieutenant would have a tendency to weaken the Executive, if care were not taken that it would not create an irresponsible system of government in that country. The EARL of RODEN could assure the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Londonderry) that there was a large portion of the population of Ireland who believed with him that any measure which was proposed for the abolition of the Lord Lieutenancy should be a complete measure, uniting all the interests of the two countries; and if it would not have that tendency, then it should not be proposed at all. At present they were not in a position to offer any opinion upon the Government Bill which had been introduced in the other House of Parliament; and he was sure it was not necessary for him to call the attention of the House and the country to the importance of the opinions which they had heard that night from the noble Duke (the Duke of Wellington); but he would ask whether there was not in that speech strong reasons for convincing Her Majesty's Government of the tremendous responsibility which they were incurring? He, for one, felt sensitively grateful to the noble Marquess who had opened the subject, and he believed it would be the means of obtaining a fair consideration of the Bill when it came before their Lordships. They all felt indebted to Lord Clarendon for what he had done during the late disturbances in Ireland; and when they had such an example before them, it was their duty to pause before they abolished the office of Lord Lieutenant. The EARL of GLENGALL said, the question they had to consider was, whether the abolition of the office of Lord Lieutenant would weaken the power of the Government of Ireland? If the office was abolished, then the Lord Mayor of Dublin would be the first officer in that city. They were all, no doubt, aware that in July, 1803, an insurrection took place in the streets of Dublin, and that the Government knew nothing of the fact until it took place; and such might be the case again. In 1803 the Lord Mayor was a loyal man; but let them suppose the case altered, and there was no Lord Lieutenant there, and that the Lord Mayor had to deal with a state of things similar to that of 1848, and that that Lord Mayor was a repealer? In 1848 it was not of the respectable inhabitants that the Lord Lieutenant was afraid, for the Lord Lieutenant had desired the respectable inhabitants to go home and defend their houses, or if they remained in the streets they would have to fight. It was unnecessary for him to tell them that all the respectable inhabitants took the advice of the Lord Lieutenant, and went home; but what had the Lord Mayor done? Why, he swore in 2,500 special constables, all of whom were repealers, and all of whom would have joined the insurgents in the event of any success. It was the Lord Mayor, and not Smith O'Brien, they were afraid of. Now under such circumstances, what were they to do if they had no Lord Lieutenant? There were men in Ireland at the present time as determined upon separation as ever they were in the time of Smith O'Brien. The Tenant Right Association was nothing | any admission to it an act of grace and more or less than a conspiracy to obtain favour. what Mr. O'Connell called the fixity of tenure, or, in other words, who wanted to take possession of the land. He was perfectly satisfied that unless they had some authority in Dublin it was not safe to leave the country in such a state. The MARQUESS of LONDONDERRY said, that as an humble Irish soldier who had always followed the opinions of the noble Duke, he would withdraw the resolutions, after the able and important speech which they had elicited from so high a quarter. He hoped that speech would have its proper effect in another place, and would not be lost on the head of Her Majesty's Government. If the Bill came before their Lordships with any indication of an attempt to force it with unnecessary haste, he would move for a commission of inquiry, in order that they might ascertain who were the authorities and what were the statements on which it was proposed to abolish the Lord Lieutenancy. Motion withdrawn. ACCOMMODATION FOR FOREIGN MINISTERS. The DUKE of WELLINGTON said, he felt an anxious desire upon all occa. sions that the Foreign Ministers in that House should receive the most convenient accommodation; he supported the Motion, and it was with particular satisfaction he heard the sentiment expressed by the noble Marquess when he proposed that their Lordships should retain in their own hands the power of enforcing the standing order which provided that the regulations respecting order in their House should be under the immediate direction of their Lordships, and none other. Report agreed to with an amendment, and ordered to be carried into effect. House adjourned till To-morrow. mmmmma HOUSE OF COMMONS, MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILLS.-1 Pirates' Head 3a Prussian Minister's Residence. The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE, in AFFAIRS OF GREECE-FOREIGN POLICY moving the consideration of the Report of -ADJOURNED DEBATE (THIRD NIGHT). the Select Committee on the subject of ac- SIR J. WALSH said, that one of the commodation to be afforded to Ambassa- advantages of his addressing the House at dors and Foreign Ministers in their Lord- so late a period of the discussion was, that ships' House during debates, said, it would he would be exempted from troubling them be unnecessary for him to repeat the ob- with a recapitulation of the facts of the servations which, regarding that subject, case. They had been gone over with so much had been made upon a former occasion. ability by others, and must be so comIt was recommended by the Committee, in pletely fixed in the minds of hon. Gentlemen, their report, which he now moved should that it would be quite unnecessary for him be considered, that the lower portions of the to refer to them except in the most inciPeers' gallery--those nearest to the stran- dental manner. Though he entirely disgers' gallery-should be set apart for the approved of the foreign policy of the noble reception of Foreign Ministers: this, he Lord the Foreign Secretary, and did not hoped, would afford them sufficient accom- conceal that he dissented both from the modation, and this to be the rule at pre- arguments and the conclusions at which he sent until it should be otherwise ordered had arrived the other night in his speech, by the House. It was his wish, and he yet he was ready to tender to him his doubted not it would be their Lordships' sense of unbounded admiration of that wish, to afford accommodation to strangers, speech, considered as an effort of Parliato those Foreign Ministers, and to another mentary and mental power. He had lisdescription of strangers, whom on all ac-tened to his speech with close and untired counts they desired to treat with peculiar attention, and he was anxious to offer to courtesy; but, at the same time, he should the House the result of some of those remove the addition of some words, in order flections that arose in his mind during its that the arrangements should not be con- delivery. The noble Lord began by comsidered permanent, and reserving to them-plaining that hon. Gentlemen on the Opposelves the power of regulating the proceed- sition side of the House coinciding in opinings of their own House, and of retaining ion with the noble Lord in another place, such power in their hands as would make who moved the resolution condemnatory of the policy of Her Majesty's Minister and it was one of those subjects on which for Foreign Affairs, had not thought it he was successful in eliciting the warmest their duty to propose a similar resolution and most enthusiastic cheers from Gentlein that House. The noble Lord consider- men who espoused his political opinions. ed that that should have been their course, The noble Lord pressed upon the considerand he censured them for not having done ation of the House the obligation and duty it. They certainly thought differently. imposed on the Government to afford proThey thought that two alternatives were tection to British subjects in every nation presented for adoption by Her Majesty's of the world; and, as it appeared to him, Government. They considered, in the they would constitute the British Governfirst place, that a great portion of the ad- ment not merely a court of appeal, but a ministration of the Government having sort of court of premiere instance, totally been stamped by a vote of censure on the setting aside the laws and tribunals of all part of one branch of the Legislature, the foreign States. No doctrine could be more Ministers would have felt it to be their dangerous, or could more infallibly lead to duty to tender their resignation; or, sec- collision with great States, or to aggressive ondly, they might have adopted the alter- movements on small ones. He would not native which was pursued in 1833, and advert to those exceptional cases which have met the resolution of the House of had been mentioned in the course of the Lords by a counter-resolution of the House debate, such as the law existing in China, of Commons, emanating either directly or the law in operation in Charleston, from themselves, or from some of their where a British subject was liable to be known supporters and friends. But it apprehended and imprisoned on his enterwould appear that in all human affairs, ing that port. Such cases were entirely and particularly in political affairs, there repugnant to the whole genius and spirit were always three courses open to accept- of the laws which regulated the communiance. The Government chose the third ties of European nations. But it did not course, which no hon. Member on the follow that, because there were those exOpposition side ever anticipated-Her Ma- ceptional cases, the English Government jesty's Ministers adopted the alternative were at liberty to set aside all the laws of doing nothing at all. They rested upon and tribunals of foreign States, when those their oars, and it was left to an hon. laws and tribunals were in perfect harand learned Member who was far from mony with the genius and spirit of the being habitually a supporter of the Go- laws and institutions of all other civilised vernment, and who had frequently express- communities. By adopting such a course ed his disapprobation of their foreign they would be violating the maxims of policy, to propose a vote of confidence in political and Christian morality. Did anythem. But that resolution did not meet body suppose that if any State in the the resolution of the House of Lords. It world were to come forward and demand evaded many of the principal points which of England that she should set aside her the resolution of the House of Lords laws and tribunals, that she would subraised. If the House should adopt the mit to the dictation of such foreign resolution of the hon. and learned Gen- Power? Then, it was equally unjust for tleman, it would not express any opinion England to attempt to trample upon the upon one point which Her Majesty's Go- rights and privileges of other nations, vernment had brought forward, and which however small and weak they might be. both the hon. and learned Gentleman and The noble Lord had favoured the House the noble Lord the Foreign Secretary had with a case exactly in point, and which pressed upon this House, namely, the de- entirely agreed with those pretensions gree and measure of obligation of the Go- which he would wish England to asvernment to afford protection to its sub- sume. The noble Lord said that a Roman jects in foreign parts, without regard to held himself free from indignity when he the laws and tribunals of foreign countries. could say, Civis Romanus Sum. It That most important question would, even was true that the Roman citizen was free, though the resolution of the hon. and but he was free in the midst of an enslaved learned Gentleman should be adopted, re- world. The Roman was free, but his stride main entirely undetermined by the House. was the stride of a conqueror, and his foot The noble Lord, however, entered at great was on the neck of all the subjugated nalength into that question. It was the tions of the earth. The Roman boasted first point to which he addressed himself, of his single and solitary privileges; but it was the Englishman's boast that he was the freest amongst the free. An Englishman felt that he had rights to support, but he also felt that there were rights belonging to others which he was bound to respect. When, therefore, the noble Lord advanced in this manner the privileges of England as against the small but independent States of the world, and assumed the character of a Roman citizen for Englishmen, he was arrogating for this country the position of being the arbitrary mistress of an enslaved world. The great policy of the noble Lord had been to establish constitutional governments in the various continental States of Europe. But what said the Earl of Minto with regard to Italy? It was the opinion of that nobleman that Italy was unfit for a representative government, and that any reforms effected in those States should be merely administrative reforms. No doubt, constitutional government was a great blessing, but in certain states of society it was totally inapplicable. With respect to the cases of outrage committed by the Greek Government on British subjects, after considering the acts set forth in the blue book with reference to the injuries done to the Ionians, he was of opinion that full regard had been paid to English subjects and English rights. But he could not help asking how it happened that, in the case of Stellio Sumachi, no reclamation was made on the Greek Government? If that case were well founded, it formed the strongest case demanding redress. No doubt he was tortured by the arbitrary application of force; and the noble Lord, according to the law of nations, and upon every ground, would have had the fullest right to press his case upon the Government of Greece. Then, the noble Lord was extremely eloquent upon the subject of the attack on the boat's crew of the Fantome, and dwelt with great animation on the insult offered to our national honour, and to the national flag. But what were the facts? It appeared that a son of the Vice-Consul had been dining on board, and was afterwards landed by a boat from the Fantome on an undefended part of the coast. Two persons landed, and were arrested and carried to the guardhouse, but, upon an explanation being given, they were immediately released with great civility by the authorities. There were two points he should like to have cleared up in reference to this case. First, were there any general regulations with regard to the landing from VOL. CXII. [THIRD SERIES.] boats from any ships on that part of the coast, and which this boat was at that moment transgressing; and, secondly, he should like to know whether there was any idea by the men when they made the arrest that the boat belonged to an English man-of-war at all? It appeared that the persons who landed were not in uniform, and there was nothing to denote that they belonged to a British ship of war. The Greek soldiers might, therefore, have been perfectly blameless in arresting them. They might only have acted in strict obedience to their orders. In that case the Greek Government could not have acceded to our demands for their punishment without being guilty of meanness and injustice. There was another portion of the explanation of the noble Lord upon this branch of the question which inspired him (Sir J. Walsh) with the most unfeigned astonishment. It was quite certain that no one could read the papers connected with this transaction without seeing that a very illfeeling did exist between the Consul, Mr. Macdonald, on the one side, and the authorities at Patras on the other. But what might have been the antecedent circumstances that might have created that state of things? The noble Lord told them there was a robber named Merenditi, who appeared to have been one of those brigand chiefs they had read of in the romances of their childhood, and so powerful that the Greek force was too weak or too little willing to oppose him, and that he obtained complete possession of Patras; but the noble Lord went on to tell them that the English Consul became the agent of an unworthy compromise with this robber-that the Consul was deputed and accepted the engagement to enter into a treaty with this Merenditi-it did not appear from the explanation of the noble Lord whether the Governor of Patras was or was not a party to it, but that Merenditi made his terms and effected the escape of himself and the brigands who formed his band under the flag of a British manof-war-that these felons and robbers, and probably murderers and assassins, found a sanctuary on the deck of a British ship-ofwar; and when the noble Lord spoke of the honour of the British flag, and was so acutely sensitive on that point, he (Sir J. Walsh) was surprised the noble Lord should not have visited with his reprobation an act calculated so deeply to tarnish it. As to the case of the boatmen of Salcina, the noble Lord seemed to insinuate R |