said, that in consequence of the claim which had been set up by the chancellor of the exchequer on the part of the Crown, to the right of disposing of the money which had been, or was to be, paid by the government of France to this country, he thought it his duty to bring the subject before the House. He should bring on the question, certainly not as a mere theoretical point of law, but as a question of constitutional practice, and he should at once have named the day, if he had not wished to wait a reasonable time to enable ministers to take such steps as might render the discussion unnecessary. He should state what he considered would be such an acknowledgment as would be sufficient: it was not the forbearing to urge the claim in words, nor the appropriating merely the money to the public service, because the form in which that money was applied would constitute the acknowledgment of the right of parliament. The money received should be placed at the previous disposal, as well as being subject to the consequent control of parliament; and the same rules should be observed as to the issue of it, as to any other public money. He conceived he should betray his trust as a representative of the British nation in parliament, if he were satisfied with any other recantation of the claim which had been set up. The hon. gentleman said he should not at present fix any day for his motion.

rose to move for accounts, to which, he apprehended, no objection would be given; he meant, a return of all sums of money expended, and contracted to be expended for the improvement of Pall-Mall, opposite Carlton-house.

said, so far was he from objecting to give information upon this subject, that he felt much indebted to the hon. gentleman for affording him an opportunity to state that which, he trusted, would put an end to some misconceptions which had gone abroad upon this subject. With respect to information as to the money expended in the improvements opposite Carlton-house, it was impossible for him to give any, as the public office with which he was connected had nothing to do with that expenditure. He was aware that some alterations had taken place in the buildings opposite Carlton-house, from which, he apprehended, the misconception t0 which he eluded had arisen. These, however, were wholly attributable to the caprice of private individuals, and were in no respect connected with the general execution of the plan of the new street. He could assure the hon. gentleman, that the New-street act had been observed by the commissioners appointed to superintend its execution to the very letter, no deviation whatever having been made from the original plan. All they had done was to remove some houses in front of Carlton-house, and then let the ground to private individuals, at a ground rent; and he was happy to add, that such rents had been obtained, as fully corresponded with the estimate of the architect employed on the occasion in the course of a short time it was his intention to bring before the House the triennial report of the land revenue of the Crown, which was required by act of parliament, and in doing this he should follow the example of his predecessor, although not strictly required, by adding a full and accurate detail of all the improvements and alterations which had taken place, either in the New-street, Mary-le-bone Park, or in his majesty's woods and forests. There was no wish, in fact, to keep back any information on this subject.

, considering this explanation satisfactory, with the leave of the House, withdrew his motion.

wished to be informed, whether the report intended to be presented by the hon. gentleman would contain an account of the distribution of the sums of money received for crown land?

answered that the report would contain an account of every farthing received or disbursed, either in the New-street, Mary-le-bone Park, or his Majesty's woods and forests.

The motion was then withdrawn.

rose, pursuant to the notice he had given, to offer to the attention of the House a subject which he held it bound to take into its most serious consideration, by every principle of honour, justice, and strict political prudence;—he meant that political prudence, which, taking an enlarged view of our best interests, was alone worthy to govern the conduct of a great nation. He was sure, that in opening this question he should be spared the disagreeable necessity of calling on the House to follow him through any great length of detail, as that which he had to mention was too notorious, and had already operated too strongly on their feelings, to demand that he should press it much on them now. It would be necessary that he should endeavor, before he proceeded further, to correct some misrepresentations which had gone abroad, and which had had some effect on the minds of those whom he most respected, as he had learnt from a conversation which had taken place on the preceding evening in that House, to which an hon. friend of his who sat near him, had been a party. He was anxious to do this, that the principles on which he had taken up the question should not be misunderstood. However much the attention of Europe might be attracted to the present exalted situation of this country which to them might be an object of admiration, of envy and alarm—to whatever circumstances they might ascribe its present power, he held the advantage we now enjoyed to be more, much more, owing to our land having been made the rallying point of all good principles, to which all good men, suffering in a good cause, were led to fly for relief—to its having been made a place of refuge to which all who were oppressed might look for assistance, and not look in vain. To these things he ascribed our present greatness, more than to any thing else which his imagination or memory could suggest. Though some might ascribe it to the diplomatic talents of the noble lord opposite, and others trace it to the more unquestionable merits of our army and navy, yet he, though not denying, and God knows not undervaluing their services, was disposed to trace to still higher sources our present advantageous situation—to our free constitution to our free parliament, and to our free press., It was from the possession of these advantages that the truth could always be disseminated in this country. Our free press conveyed it to an inquiring and consequently to an enlightened people, and our free parliament (free at least its discussions), co-operated in the same labor. It was from these great advantages that he believed our high situation to be derived. That situation, however, it ought to be borne in mind, might be placed in jeopardy, by precipitate and ill timed interference with the affairs of other nations; and it would be no less in danger, if we universally abstained from interference, where this was demanded of us on principles of gratitude, justice and duty. But the most scandalous way in which our exalted situation might be lost was, by a wayward and capricious exercise of our interference, by using it at one time in behalf of a family with whom we were not necessarily connected, and by refusing it at another to those who had been cordially united with us, to establish that very power, the abuse of which subjected them to oppression. If there was one way of losing the high character we had gained more degrading than any other, it was unquestionably this. It was on this principle alone that he now came forward, and doing this, he was anxious to state, that he did not sacrifice one title of that opinion which he had formerly delivered on the injustice of interfering in certain cases with other nations, where this course had been decided upon by the English government. As strongly as he had ever done, he protested against our right to interfere with another nation, by dictating to it the form of government which it should adopt, or by imposing on a great people any king or family that it might be our wish to see reign over them. While he maintained his former opinions on these subjects, he would contend that a right to interfere might spring from other circumstances and it was on this principle that he should that night submit his motion to the House.

It could scarcely be necessary for him to remind those who heard him of the argument formerly held, when it was resolved by ministers to interfere with France. It was then asserted that we had no right to interfere with that nation, because she chose to be governed as a republic; that on this account we were not bound to interfere in behalf of those who had never been our allies; that this furnished no ground for the recall of our ambassador from France; or for breaking the peace which then subsisted between the two countries. These principles, at the commencement of the French revolution had been maintained on that side of the House from which he spoke, and these principles he still held sacred. So far was he from deviating from them, when he contended that the interference of this country with respect to Spain was now called for, that the opinion of that great man, now no more (Mr. Fox), guided him on this occasion, and the substance of his present motion was drawn, from the words which Mr. Fox had used when he last spoke in that House of the interference of this country in the affairs of France. The House would perceive that he referred to a conversation which had taken place about the end of December, 1792. Previous to this, in consequence of the conduct of the revolutionary government to- wards the royal family of France, lord Gower, our ambassador, had been recalled. A difference arose between the two countries, and the king's ministers declared France had no longer a government capable of maintaining the relations of peace and amity. Those who sat on the opposition side of the House at that time, contended, that whatever might be the faults of the French government, as it was then the government de facto, it ought not to have been treated in this manner. But when the proceedings of those persons who were members of it became so atrocious as to shock those who had at first been disposed to think favorably of them—when, having got the person of the king and others of the royal family into their possession, the catastrophe which ensued was but too distinctly foreseen; and no doubt was entertained of their intentions to sacrifice them—then, all men whose minds deserved any consideration, were shocked at the lengths to which the revolutionists were going, and the opponents of ministers were unanimous in their exertions to stop the evil which they all deplored. It was then that Mr. Fox had come down to the House with his friends, and vindicated the course which he had thought it his duty to pursue; he denied the propriety of lord Gower's recall, or rather he questioned the necessity of it, but he strongly expressed those feelings of horror and indignation with which the conduct of the revolutionists had inspired him. He, on that occasion, argued, that the recall of our ambassador, no one having been appointed in his place as an accredited minister from this country, must prove fatal to the cause of the royal family of France. If we had kept our ambassador, he contended, it would have been in our power to interpose our good offices in behalf of the unfortunate monarch, and have given weight to the declarations of England, which might have produced a strong feeling among the people, and which would probably even have had some effect on the convention. In this spirit, Mr. Fox proposed that a motion should be made, the object of which was to afford the House an opportunity of expressing those feelings of indignation and sorrow which necessarily grew out of the events which had recently occurred. This, it was hoped, might operate in favor of the royal family, and deter the persecutors from the consummation of their guilt. A motion for this purpose was made by Mr. Pitt, on the recommendation of Mr. Fox, for the correspondence which had taken place on the subject of the recall of Lord Gower. This gave all those who felt as Mr. Fox did, an opportunity of expressing their sentiments, and that right hon. gentleman expressed a hope that the debate would have a salutary effect; though he did not calculate on its proving the salvation of the Bourbons, yet he expected it would do some good. He however still felt, that an accredited agent from this country was wanting in France, to give force to the representations of this country, and to throw its whole weight into the scale with effect.

He should not have gone so far into the history of these proceedings, but for what had occurred on a former night. Having gone so far, it might now be necessary for him to go still farther, to compare the circumstances of the interference which had been determined on then, with those under which a similar interference was called for now. Those for whom he now wished this country to interest itself were suffering patriots and our allies. They were now oppressed, for having struggled against the former oppressors of their country. The king, the queen, and the royal family of France, though in a deplorable state—a state which might well call forth sympathy—were still, unlike the Spanish patriots, wholly unconnected with this country. They had no claim on us from any bond of union which had subsisted between the two parties. Having been led to speak of precedents, he would adduce one or two more that would bear equally on the case in point. He would not go back to the period when Queen Elizabeth interfered in behalf of the Protestants in the Low Countries, nor would he dwell on the steps which were afterwards taken on the part of this country, to procure some amelioration of the situation of the Huguenots. These, as well as the efforts made by Oliver Cromwell in favor of the persecuted Protestants, must be fresh in the memory of the House, and these would abundantly bear him out in making the motion with which he purposed to conclude. But there was one better than all these—which it was impossible to get over—he alluded to the addresses unanimously voted on the subject of the foreign slave trade some years back. Both Houses had concurred in doing this: and if there was one point more delicate than another to be touched upon in our diplo- matic transactions with Spain, it was her colonies. When Oliver Cromwell, at the height of his prosperity and power attempted an interposition with Spain against the Inquisition, he was answered by the Spanish minister, that the king his master had two eyes; one was the Inquisition, and the other was the Spanish colonies. To which Oliver Cromwell answered, with vigor that might well he imitated in the present times, "Then I must trouble your master to put both his eyes out." Indeed, one might just as safely speak of an application to Spain to relieve the lot of the poor native Indians who work the mines of South America, as to request her to put an end to her share of the traffic in slaves. To ask Spain and Portugal to abandon the abominable slave trade, would touch them in almost as tender a point as it would be with ourselves, if the courts of Spain and Portugal were to send a mission to this country for the relief of their suffering Roman Catholic brethren in Ireland. It would touch pretty much in the same place. Yet, so strong were our feelings in behalf of that great and good cause of religion and policy, for which we ourselves had made some sacrifices, and had induced others to do the same, that the House voted addresses to the throne on the subject unanimously. He hoped that these addresses had been acted upon in their true spirit and meaning. Indeed, ministers had certainly shown that they had in several instances acted so. Those who thought fit to deny the right or the policy of our interference altogether, must, he presumed, undertake to distinguish between the various cases he had cited. The cases, for instance, of the king and royal family of France in 1792, with whom we had no political connation, and of the applications on behalf of the negroes, merely on the ground of humanity for fellow-men, most be shown to be distinct and different from an interposition in behalf of those whose assist. Acne we received during the war, with whom we treated, who jointly with us restored the monarchy, and who were now oppressed. Let it be shown how we were now so differently situated. It would be in the recollection of the House, that in the year 1809 (for it was unnecessary to refer to earlier dates) a treaty was concluded by this government with admiral Anodic, the minister commissioned from the authorities of Spain, nominally the ambassador of Ferdinand 7, but in fact the envoy of the Junta, receiving his instructions from that body, which exercised the functions of government as representatives of the people of Spain. By that treaty, formally ratified, this country solemnly bound itself never to make peace with France to the surrender of the royal rights of Ferdinand, or of whatever prince the Spanish nation might choose as his successor: on the other hand, the existing government of Spain stipulated that hostilities against France should never be terminated but with the consent of the allies, without separation of the interests of Spain and England. Affairs continued upon this footing for some time, with various fortunes to the arms of the contending powers, when a negotiation was entered into by marquis Wellesley, then British minister appointed to attend the Junta. To the documents that were prepared in consequence, and which had been subsequently published, it was not necessary to recall the attention of the House at length; probably they were still fresh in the recollection of many, for he would venture to affirm, that they formed one of the most memorable specimens of comprehensive views, of address and ability in negotiation, of eloquence of expression, and of ingenuity of reasoning, in the history of diplomacy: they recommended a system of enlarged and enlightened policy to the people of Spain, which justly demanded a warm and sincere tribute to the abilities and comprehension of the mind of the marquis Wellesley—qualities not always found among the statesmen of our day.

What, he would ask, was the great object of the able conductor of that negotiation? It might be stated almost in a single word—call a cortes. The noble marquis was not satisfied that the interests of the people of Spain should be confided to party and petty representation—a representation unknown to the Spanish constitution, and deserving to continue unknown. "Call a cortes," was his wise and urgent recommendation. "Do not be contented with less than a full and fair representation of the whole people. Call a cortes legally to take into its hands the reins of government, and to carry into effect reforms that are equally indispensable." The earnest recommendations of the marquis Wellesley produced the proper effect, and only a few months were allowed to elapse before the cortes was called, and regency was soon afterwards appointed.

The House would not fail to remark what was most important in this transaction, namely that the interference of the British government did not stop merely at procuring the assembly of the cortes; but, after what we had obtained for Spain, and for ourselves as connected with Spain, we required that certain individuals of our nomination should be chosen members of the executive regency. That regency was composed in the whole of five members, all of whom were chosen by the interposition of England: but more especially two individuals directly appointed on our part, both of whom were now under a sentence passed upon them by Ferdinand. Those two were now upon that black list made out by the king of Spain, to which he had had such frequent occasion with disgust to refer. The regency, so named by the cortes, that had been called on the suggestion of the British minister continued t0 act in the strictest alliance that could subsist between two nations; this country and Spain had but one common object, and their operations for its accomplishment were in common; the interests a Spain were the interests of England; and those interests were not compromised or sacrificed by the conduct of the cortes, while in their behalf the blood and treasure of this country were liberally expended. At that time the name of Ferdinand was used; but the Spanish authorities were in ignorance as to his fate, and, like the people of this country, might be said to be as careless as they were ignorant. Marquis Wellesley, in truth, conducted all the affairs of the Spanish nation, and had as much power over its destinies as the regency and the cortes united.

On this footing of intimate connation and identified interests, matters went on till near the end of 1813, or the opening of 1814, at which time the power of Buonaparté, which had spread itself over all: Europe, weakened by expansion, was tottering to its fall; at this juncture a negotiation was opened by him with Ferdinand, then in confinement at Valence; it was Conducted on his part by the duke of San Carlos, now high in office at the court of Spain. A treaty was concluded, by which Ferdinand 7 abandoned the cause of this country by abandoning the cause of his own. Buonaparté stipulated to withdraw his armies from Spain; and the king, on his part, undertook to give his most effective assistance to expel the victorious army of the duke of Wellington — that army which, after so much endurance, had finally obtained complete possession of the Spanish territory. At the time of the signature of the treaty, Ferdinand, it was true, was in duress; but the immediate consequence of the signature was, that the duress ceased; for such confidence had. Buonaparté in his new ally, that he inflicted upon Spain that last and greatest of the calamities he had procured for her by allowing Ferdinand once more to return to his native country.—When the king of Spain had thus obtained his release, did he do any thing to revoke the treaty made in duress at Valence? On the contrary, every act of his government had confirmed it; and when he passed the Pyrenees, instead of proceeding to Madrid, he shunned the capital of the existing government, and withdrew to Valencia, far from those who had been the real means of his restoration. Keeping aloof from the society of good men and of good patriots, after refusing to sign the constitution that had been framed by authorities legally constituted, and without doing a single act to revoke the treaty of Valence, but, on the contrary, acting up to its true spirit, he meditated only upon projects to get rid of the interference of the cortes and of the power of the regency, whom, together with Great Britain, he denounced, though in truth they had been the only means of the salvation of his devoted country. The cortes and the regency, on the other hand, firmly refused to consent to the terms of a treaty executed under duress; and why?—because England was the ally of Spain, and against England the blow was leveled; because admiral Anodic had entered into an engagement with Mr. Canning in 1809, by which Spain was precluded in good faith from the conclusion of any separate treaty with France, but more especially a treaty diametrically opposed to her happiness and interests. Adherence to the known constitution was the crime the cortes and the regency had committed in the eyes of their restored sovereign, and they became the objects of his hatred for observing a solemn alliance they had formed with England, which, but for this unfortunate event, might have produced the happiest consequences.

The same line of policy, however, ill suited the views of that man, of whom he (Mr. Brougham) had a right to assert that his whole conduct, from the beginning to the end of his confinement, evinced a determination to oppose the interests of his own nation and of England, and fully established, that the fundamental principle by which he was guided was, to break down that constitution which we had raised, and to tear asunder those bonds of friendship that had been knit between the two countries. It was much to be lamented, that though Ferdinand might have meditated, and even digested, this project in the recesses of his own mind, it had not been executed without British assistance; the fact indeed was indisputable, that, but for the aid he received from this country, he never could have carried his plan into execution. What representations, if any, were made by the British minister at Valencia, who gave Ferdinand the countenance of his presence, it was impossible that he (Mr. Brougham) could be informed. If any instructions were sent out from this government to our ambassador, desiring him not to omit every possible remonstrance against the proceedings of the king, the noble lord opposite must be acquainted with them, or at least copies would be found in his office; but he (Mr. B.) would venture to assert, that no such instructions had been given; and he would venture to add, that, had they been given, the House would have been spared the discussion of this painful subject. He was quite confident, that the co-operation on the part of the British envoy at the court of Ferdinand was most reluctantly given; but his appearance there seemed to give the acts of the king the countenance of England, and that countenance alone must have had a powerful influence in enabling Ferdinand to effectuate his purpose. But was this all? The troops dispatched against the cortes, whom we had convened, were actually in British pay, and the vanguard of Eliot's army was commanded by a British officer. They were led by general Whittingham, who at that time was a general in the Spanish service, and lieutenant-colonel in the service of England; he was the first to march upon Madrid, and to surround the town with his troops, while the rest of the army, with Ferdinand, advanced in the rear, or rather, with Ferdinand behind the rear of his army. The surrender of the cortes and of the regency was inevitable, and lists were soon put into the hands of the sovereign, by renegades from the cause of their country, of those who, having taken the most active part in its welfare, were become more especially the objects of his resentment. In these lists were included two out of five members of the regency, who, together with a number of the cortes, were soon disposed of in various dungeons, and other odious places of confinement. The pay of these soldiers was supplied out of the British treasury; but the co-operation of this country did not end there. By the returns upon the table of the House, it appeared, that more pay and more clothing had been sent out for the troops, to the extent of half a million. At the time they were presented, strong disapprobation was naturally expressed by various members, for he (Mr. B.) had not then the honour of a seat in parliament; and it was said in excues, that the accounts were not yet closed, and that the supply was only in fulfillment of a previous existing engagement. Did his majesty's ministers mean to state that they had no means of preventing it, and those they were bound to execute such a contract? Had it not been broken on the other side? What was become of the treaty of Valence, which Ferdinand had signed with the bitter enemy of England? Had this country stipulated to pay at all hazards, under all changes, even in the event of the sovereign of Spain becoming the enemy of Great Britain? Was it meant to be said that all contracts were to be reciprocal and mutual, but those which respected the payment of British money? On all other subjects the performance of a treaty by one party depended upon the observance of it by the other; but when it regarded the pecuniary resources of this country, which some persons, deemed so redundant, parliament was then told that there was no such thing as reciprocity.

After what had happened, both with respect to the treaty of Valence and the subsequent proceedings of Ferdinand on his return, more especially against the faithful allies of England, the cortes and the regency, the British ministry could not be justified in the disbursement of a single shilling. It was not, however, merely by the unobstructed stream of our money that we had shown our approbation of the conduct of Ferdinand. Soon after the capture of Madrid, general Whittingham was appointed by the king of Spain, a lieutenant-general, superseding all the older generals in the Spanish service. Next he was decorated with a Spanish order, and, in imitation of this liberality, the Prince Regent, under the advice of the noble lord opposite, had promoted general Whittingham to the distinguished station of one of his royal aides-de-camp; thus lifting him over the heads of about 140 senior officers. He begged to be understood as not disputing the services of general Whittingham, which had by no means been confined to the unhappy transaction of the capture of Madrid. He was aware that he had gained great honour in the battles of Barossa and Belen, and that he had been an active and successful partisan during the greater part of the Spanish campaigns. It was, however, most unfortunate that these achievements should be followed by the last event in which he had been concerned, and that he had thus made himself the tool and satellite of Ferdinand. It was due, however, to this distinguished officer to suppose, that he had not volume tardily become this instrument of oppression; for doubtless he had acted under instructions that left him no choice and no discretion. It was much to be regretted, that he had been selected to execute this plot, and that the rewards heaped upon him should have been conferred subsequent to his enterprise against the liberty and happiness of a nation—thus holding out to the world, that it was not for his services at Belen or Barossa that he was exalted; not for his long campaigns against the French armies, but for his short and too successful campaigns against the cortes and the regency.

By this simple detail of events in Spain, subsequent to the return of Ferdinand, Mr. Brougham thought he had distinctly shown that the measures of the king of Spain were leveled directly against the policy and interests of Great Britain; and consequently it could not be said, that by his motion he required an interference in matters foreign to our own interests. The projects of Ferdinand were executed by the cruel punishment of those who had fought for his crown, and whose cause we were bound to espouse, not only by good faith, but because we had been the means of exposing them to this unmerited persecution. It was unnecessary to enter into details, since it was well known that twenty-seven members of the cortes and two of the regency, besides many other individuals whose numbers could not be obtained in any parliamentary mode, who had filled high stations in life and had been zealous supporters of the patriotic cause, had become victims of the animosity of Ferdinand. After they had been immersed in dungeons for nineteen or twenty months, a special commission was ap- pointed, composed of persons, not taken from the ordinary tribunals of justice, but selected at the will and pleasure of the sovereign, for the trial and condemnation of the objects of his displeasure. After this irregular court had proceeded to judgment upon the offenders, the king thought fit to review all the sentences: thus declaring to the world, that even the creatures of his own selection had not acted with due subservience to his wishes. The punishments in general were not sufficiently severe, although some had been condemned to four years solitary confinement and others to various shorter periods, merely for adhering to the friendship they had professed for England, and for endeavoring in public assemblies to promote the welfare of their country. A poor tradesman, who had made himself obnoxious by his zeal, had received sentence for the severer punishment; and when it reached the ears of the king, "What!" said he, "only four years solitary confinement in a dungeon for a wretch who has made a speech on the popular side at a public meeting?" and instantly he took his pen, struck out the punishment affixed to this poor cripple, for such he was, and condemned him forthwith to be hanged [Hear, hear!].—This was a specimen of the legitimate proceeding of this legitimate monarch; but happily the mob, the very rabble and scum of Madrid, who, deluded by bigotry, and blinded by ignorance, had welcomed the return of Ferdinand, and rejoiced in his measures of cruelty (however unnatural and injurious the alliance between king and mob), rescued the unlucky victim, shocked at the wanton severity of the sentence. Surely no stronger case need be mentioned than that of the unhappy Arguelles—a man of education and accomplishments not to be exceeded, of virtue and patriotism not to be surpassed; who, from early predilection, having spent a portion of his youth in this country, felt a sincere friendship for England, and who, with unequalled eloquence, had advocated the cause of the people of Spain. He had been condemned to a punishment from which death would be a relief. Who, without indignation, could learn, that this finished gentleman, of high rank, and honour, who had voted in the cortes for the abolition of the slave trade and of the inquisition, had been sentenced to serve for life as a common soldier in the garrison of Cute—a pestilential dungeon fronting our fortress of Gibraltar?

Did not such relations of horror call aloud for interposition? And the question really was, whether this was the only case in which the British government ought not to interfere? He had already adverted to several precedents, but particularly to two directly in point, and which occurred at a time when we little mixed ourselves with the affairs of the continent. Now, the British government was in the habit of daily and hourly systematic interference; at the moment he was speaking, a British army was quartered in France, not to support a nation our ally—not to guard our peculiar interests—but for the purpose, as had been avowed by the noble lord himself, of maintaining on the throne a particular individual. To what extent our intermeddling spirit in that instance had been carried was well known, and if he were to assert that the whole police of France was under the control of the duke of Wellington, it would scarcely be an exaggeration; but, before his army quitted Paris, that the police of that capital was subject to his authority, no man could deny. Dispatches were daily received from thence, upon which the cabinet was summoned, and events that there occurred excited exactly the same interest among ministers, as if they had taken place in York or in Dublin. The only reason assigned for this interposition was, that a particular branch of the royal family might be kept on the throne, under the pretence that by such means the peace of Europe was secured. In the case he was now arguing, this government was bound by positive treaty to interfere, having, by its own measures, brought a number of persons into predicaments of danger. The only mode of affording them relief was, by exerting the influence this country possessed, and which had been ever effectual in a just and necessary cause. It was almost vain to anticipate objections: but it might be said, that by interference those now suffering might be exposed to capricious and sudden resentment. Such arguments ought not to be taken into consideration, nor in such a case ought allowances to be made for the waywardness of individuals. He entreated the House to weigh well the grounds he had laid for his motion, and the responsibility that belonged to the situation in which this country had placed her; to recollect that we had ourselves drawn down the vengeance of the sovereign upon his unhappy victims, and that by positive alliance we were bound not to desert their cause. He was anxious as much as possible to avoid offensive allusions, and any expressions that might bear the semblance of a wish to break the amity at present subsisting; but in negotiating with the minister of Ferdinand upon this subject, if the weight and influence of the government of this country were found insufficient, he did not say that menaces ought to be employed, for that was not the policy of any government; but other means might be found more prevailing. He did not even wish that Ferdinand should be reminded of the benefits conferred upon his kingdom, for that would suppose that he could feel gratitude; but a powerful motive for concession might be found in appealing to his apprehensions and prudence, of which he did not think him entirely destitute: he wished that the king of Spain should be reminded of what England had done upon former occasions, to the terror of his people, and destruction of his power—how often she had scattered, by a breath, the whole resources of his monarchy—bow she had reveled in the spoils of his richest colonies, and trampled with a triumphant foot upon the territories of old Spain, planting her victorious standard upon that impregnable rock within view of the prison of the miserable Arguelles. He might also be put in mind of what she had done in support of his ancestors, the Huguenots, and by her representatives in favor of the Negroes. Upon these facts he might be allowed to reflect, and upon a truth, which, from motives of delicacy, he (Mr. Brougham) would convey in the language of one of the old Spanish ministers, "that his majesty had but two enemies—the one the whole world; the other, his own ministers." Whether successful or defeated in the motion with which he should conclude, at least one benefit would result from this discussion—Ferdinand would be reminded that there was yet in the world one corner in which the truth might be fearlessly spoken; in which the oppressed might obtain justice from their oppressors; in which the crimes of princes might be arraigned; and that that corner was the Commons House of parliament of the British Empire. Mr. Brougham concluded by moving,

"That an humble address be presented to his royal highness the Prince Regent, entreating his royal highness to take into his gracious consideration the sufferings of the members of the late Spanish regency and tortes, and representing that the alliance at present subsisting between his royal highness and his catholic majesty affords the most favorable opportunity for interposing the good offices of Great Britain, in her behalf, with the weight that belongs to her, and to the sentiments of this House and of the people."

rose. He said, he was surprised at the extraordinary and novel nature of the hon. and learned gentleman's motion which had just been read. It did not point out any definite object: it stated no prayer that we should interfere in a forcible manner; and yet, upon the information that the hon. and learned gentleman possessed, no other species of interference could be at all appropriately recommended. If he meant merely that we should interpose our good offices with the government of Spain in behalf of that description of its subjects whose fate be commiserated, it was most extraordinary that he should propose the measure which he had brought forward, without knowing what had been already done, or ascertaining if more could be accomplished. If there had been any reason to suppose that his majesty's government had neglected any means in their power to reconcile the parties that unhappily divided Spain, or if any mode could be pointed out, in the spirit of peace, by which that reconciliation could have been effected, without awakening the national jealousies, or acting national independence, which had not occurred to them, there might have been some reason for some declaration of this House.

The noble lord said, he regarded the description of policy now proposed to the House as extremely unwise, and calculated to do much mischief, without the chance of producing any substantial benefit to those persons whose cause it professed to espouse. Sometimes individuals of the profession to which the hon. and learned gentleman belonged, injured their clients by an injudicious plea set up in their behalf, with the design of showing their own address, talents, or eloquence. The hon. and learned gentleman was far above any suspicion of this kind, and did not require displaying his acknowledged abilities by any such maneuver; but certainly, it would seem, that on the present occasion, he either had not evinced that acuteness which belonged to him, or was not friendly to the cause he professed to promote. Unless recourse to arms were recommended, unless we were to follow up our remonstrance's with actual hostilities, unless we were disposed to go all the length of opposing the sovereign of Spain in the government of his own dominions he never heard a speech more calculated to defeat its object. There never was speech delivered, in parliament more calculated to excite jealousy, more full of the materials of antipathy and inflammation, and, if there ever was any hope entertained that we could materially influence the sovereign of Spain, so as to induce him to entertain friendly sentiments towards the subjects with whom he was offended, more adapted to destroy it. Without possessing any documents on which to found his charge, without any correct information on the subject, the hon. and learned gentleman permitted himself to indulge in the most severe and general invectives against the monarch with whom we were in alliance—and with whom we were to use our good offices. He imputed to him the blackest treachery, the most deceitful policy, and the most hostile feelings, towards this country. He stated, that he signed the treaty of Valence from his own choice, without any compulsion on the part of Buonaparté; and that he not only agreed to its stipulations when in captivity, bat came into Spain to carry them into execution. The charge made against him was, that he accepted of English assistance, in order that he might be enabled to act against us, his friends and allies. Surely, nothing could be more calculated than assertions and accusations like these to commit the governments of the two countries, and to lead to open hostilities, rather than to produce such reciprocal sentiments of good will as would give a friendly recommendation its proper force and influence. The hon. and learned gentleman, he was persuaded, did not mean to recommend war, but the course he had pursued was the very opposite to any thing conciliatory.

As the hon. and learned gentleman had entered largely into the subject of interference with foreign governments, he would trouble the House with a few observations on the proper kind of interference which the nation might exert, and which, in his opinion, might be justified. The hon. and learned gentleman had adverted to the influence which we, by the freedom of our discussions in parliament, and the unrestrained liberty of the press, exerted over the public opinion of Europe, and be admitted that nothing could be more beneficial to its various states than. Such influence. Nothing could contribute more to the welfare of Europe—nothing could dispense with more effect sound principles of justice, of moral policy, and of humanity—nothing could aid the cause of good government, toleration, and liberty, more than the deliberations of a British parliament. But we might deprive ourselves of the glory and the satisfaction of promoting the progress of good principles, and those, to whom they might extend, of the advantage they might derive from them, by an injudicious use of our influence, if we intermeddled in the affairs of other states without sufficient reason—if we assumed a power of deciding upon the measures that it was proper for them in all cases to pursue—if we inveighed against any deviation that we disapproved—or if we endeavored to direct their domestic policy, and interposed between a sovereign and his subjects upon the ground of anal-administration—if we acted in this manner, the parliament of Great Britain would be no longer instrumental in communicating a right tone of thinking and feeling to the world. While he allowed that we might thus destroy, to a certain extent, our great character—that the confidence reposed in us might be withdrawn by the doctrines delivered, and the measures recommended in this House, he was at the sometime, sensible that much latitude of discussion was necessary, in order that the full benefits of it might be enjoyed: and he would say to foreigners, that they must take us with our failings as well as our merits. He could not, however, disguise the fact, and he would consider himself as betraying his duty, if he did not declare in that assembly, that there had occurred instances of interference which had a tendency to deprive this country of all the advantages of its influence on the continent. He did not allude to any particular instances of recent date; but those who had been lately upon the continent, must have perceived, that there was a general disposition to impute to us an overbearing pride, an unwarrantable arrogance, and a haughty dictation in political matters, which, he was afraid, were imputed to us upon too good grounds, and which discussions like those of that night must aggravate. If we proceeded in such a manner as to justify these charges, the nations of the continent, on whom we had conferred so many benefits—with whom our character at present stood so high—would withdraw from us their confidence, their respect, and gratitude. Neither their pride, their honour, nor their feelings, could endure such conduct with regard to them.

The noble lord, after making some further observations on this subject, entered upon an examination of the precedents which the hon. and learned gentleman had adduced in support of the interference recommended in his proposed address. Adverting to the state of France in 1792, and the vote of the House of Commons that had been alluded to, he gave it as his opinion, that the residence of our ambassador would not have prevented the calamity that had happened. The national convention was proceeding with such violence, with such a disregard of every principle of moderation and justice, that no recommendation from us could have benefited the unfortunate monarch in whose behalf it might have been made. This he was not willing to admit; nor would he push the argument so far as to say that our interference was actually injurious. But it seemed a very illogical inference, that because our interference failed in that instance, it must be successful in another. He again repeated, that the furious anarchists who then afflicted France might, without our interference, have proceeded to imbrue their hands in the blood of their sovereign; but it surely was an unfavorable precedent to be adduced on the present occasion. The unfortunate royal family of France was sacrificed, notwithstanding our recommendations; and therefore we ought now to pursue a similar policy. The precedents which had been obtained from that part of our history which recorded our interference to support the Protestants of the Low Countries, and the Huguenots of France, were equally inapplicable. In supporting them against their persecutors, we were maintaining truly British interests. Our policy was guided by the conviction, that our own security, and liberties, and religion, dependent upon the union we formed with our Protestant allies, and not by any views of regulating the conduct of a government towards its subjects, where our own interests were not concerned. It was well known to all who were conversant with the history of these times, that the two systems of religion were then committed against each other, and that a regard to their maintenance or diffusion often guided the alliances and the counsels of states. This country then believed, that its prosperity, if not its existence, depended upon the support of Protestant interests in Europe, and that if the Protestants of the Netherlands and France were overpowered by the Catholics, we ourselves could not expect to enjoy securely our civil and religious rights. As the Catholics exerted themselves against us, without any regard to our national independence, our interference grew out of interference on their part which justified h. It grew out of the interference of the see of Rome; it was exerted to repel the most persevering aggressions of an implacable enemy. It was not thus a moral interposition upon general grounds; it was not an attempt to enforce our rules of right, or ideas of good government and toleration on sovereign states for their behoove; but for the legitimate purpose of warding off the dangers that threatened us, by assisting those from whom we expected assistance. The rule and maxims derived from the history of those times could not be applied to the present period. There was now nothing likes a religious war; there now appeared nothing like the deadly animosities that arose from conflicting creeds. In the present state of Europe there appeared no designs to persecute, or to form hostile plans for giving ascendancy to one system over another. There never was a time when religious animosities reined less in the councils of states; there never was a time when they were less embattled against each other than at the Congress of Vienna. There could be nothing more detrimental to the improvement, the liberties, and the happiness of mankind, than the renewal of the struggles between Catholicism and Protestantism which was lately attempted. There might have been reason to deplore the injudicious interference of some persons in this country, as there was a risk that those religious feelings, unfortunately alive in this country, might have caught fire. Nothing could be more unfounded than the statements upon which that interference was commenced and persisted in. The individuals in this country, who thought it necessary to offer assistance to their Protestant brethren in France, were led to propagate the most unfounded reports of the spirit that animated the government of that kingdom. They imputed to the mildest and most benevolent of sovereigns the most intolerant principles, and the most atrocious maxims of persecution. They imputed to him a design of recalling the edict of toleration, and of suppressing by the cruelest measures the Protestant creed. Nothing could be more untrue, than that either the government encou- raged persecution, or that it was widely spread. In the south of France there were feelings of political animosity, combined with religious differences existing, which led to some tumultuary and unjustifiable acts. The French government never abetted such proceedings. The disease of the public mind, the political and religious exasperation which reached this country in such exaggerated statements, had placed the people of these districts in opposition to each other for more than twenty-two years, and its origin had, of course, no connation with recent changes. The Protestants here, who watched over the interests of their foreign brethren, were not contented with finding persecution in one place, but acted as if they expected it over all France. They addressed their letters to all the districts, where, although credit was given them for their benevolent intentions, they were repudiated with expressions of displeasure and contradictions of the alleged facts upon which they proceeded. Even in the disturbed districts, the people regarded the interference of strangers as a calamity. He again repeated the fact, that the disturbances were confined to one quarter. In the other parts of the kingdom there was no respect paid to religious distinctions in civil transactions, or in the common intercourse of life. Protestant and Catholic met together in the same courts of justice; they appeared in the same ranks of the army together, without any consideration of their different systems of worship; and there perhaps was no country where, both by the people and the government, there was less indulgence of intolerant principles. They were therefore surprised, and felt indignant, that this country should suppose them divided, and insist upon lending them aid against their fellow citizens. They were satisfied with their government, and at peace with their countrymen, and deprecated nothing so much as foreign interference.

Another precedent in support of his present motion the hon. and learned gentleman drew from our proceedings with regard to the slave trade. The noble lord declared, that he thought this even less applicable than any of the former examples. The abolition of the slave trade was a great moral question that interested all nations, and in which the universal principles of humanity and justice were involved. It had no reference to the eternal arrangement of a particular state; it was a matter of general policy, which might be discussed and arranged with all. But even in this we did not interfere with Spain; for surely, to discuss with her the policy of a particular measure, and to propose conditions, or enter into stipulations for carrying such a measure into execution, manifested no interference with her internal regulations, with her administration of justice, or her conduct towards her own subjects. The precedents quoted by the hon. and learned gentleman, he thus thought, would not hear him out in the proposed address; but he was willing to allow, that if any thing could be done by friendly recommendation to the Spanish government, to appease the violence of parties, any thing to procure the object which the hon. and learned gentleman professed a desire to attain, without in the least attacking the independence of an allied state, there would have been no disposition on the part of the government to refuse their concurrence to effect it. He would not push matters too far. He agreed with the hon. and taught gentleman, that whatever might have been done by those whom he regarded as the English cortes, if we could by amicable means reconcile them to their existing government, and procure them release from their unfortunate situation, we might be disposed to exert ourselves in their behalf. But we could not take part with them against their sovereign; we could not dictate to him how he was to treat his subjects.

The noble lord said, he could not but complain that the hon. and learned gentleman had proceeded to such allegations against government, without inquiring into the truth of them. His Majesty's ministers had never ceased to attend to the interest and the fate of the individuals whom his motion concerned, and he might say, that much could be done by an ally, in amicable communication and friendly remonstrance that could not be accomplished by agreeing to the present address. He would acknowledge that whatever difference of opinion might prevail between the government and the cortes, while that body exercised the legislative functions in Spain, that difference had not prevented his majesty's ministers from recommending them to the indulgence of their sovereign. It had been our object, as much as possible, to save one party from the rage of the other: and he could assure the hon. and learned gentleman, that if it were thought expedient to produce all communications that passed on the subject between the government of Great Britain and that of Spain, he would see that no negligence could be attributed to the former. He might claim some belief to his word when he said that, upon his honour, he was convinced our government had rather gone beyond than fallen short of the line of their duty in its zeal to serve the body of men so often alluded to. But when he declared that his majesty's ministers had acted in this manner, he must disclaim all the necessity which the hon. and learned gentleman would wish to impose upon them so to act. It was a little too much to hear from the hon. and taught gentleman, that the counsels of this country were identified with those of Spain, and that we were responsible for every thing that was done by them in the peninsular war. It was a mistake to suppose that they were guided by us, and that we should rescue the members of the cortes, because whatever they did was done by our direction or at our command. The hon. and learned gentleman had appealed to the correspondence of the marquis Wellesley, to show that the cortes was our institution; and that the Spanish authorities having acted under our control, should receive our protection. Nothing could be more unfortunate for the hon. and learned gentleman's argument than such a reference. The noble lord said, he was willing to allow that nobleman all credit for the ability he displayed in his proceedings in Spain; but so it happened, in opposition to the allegations of the hon. and learned gentleman, that the noble marquis never could bring the Spanish authorities to co-operate with the British. In 1809, when lord Wellington was in Estremadura, such a co-operation would have been of immense consequence to the common cause, but it could not be brought about. He allowed that the party called Liberals was an Anti. French party; that they magnanimously resolved to oppose the invaders of their country; that they persevered in their noble and heroic efforts, amid difficulties and dangers which would have appalled less exalted patriotism, and amid sacrifices which none but those actuated by the most generous principles could have made. As being an Anti-French party, they might be called a British party; in no other sense could that title be conferred upon them. If they were to be an English party in any other sense, or if the term was to be used which the hon. and learned gentleman had done of the English cortes, he protested against it. He could not state a better proof of the inapplicability of this name, than their opposition to our views in a most important period of the war. At the time when the duke of Wellington was about to entrench his army behind the lines of Torres Vedas, that great officer had thought that he would be wanting in his duty, if he did not, before having recourse to this position, endeavor to fix himself in some point within the Spanish frontier. For this purpose, the point which he chose was Cadiz, and through the cortes he was refused admission to it. This single instance from among many was enough to disprove what the hon. and learned gentleman had said as to the influence of British councils in the cortes of Seville.

As to the conduct of the Spanish monarch towards the cortes, the hon. and learned gentleman's view was contrary to the whole history of that kingdom, when he supposed that the crown had never so far trenched upon the power of the cortes. The transactions in Spain afforded a memorable lesson to those who wished to correct partial imperfections, by the total subversion of an established system; the cortes thought that they would best effect their purpose by overturning the entire ancient system of the kingdom, and especially by merging the whole class of the nobility and clergy in the third estate according to the example of the Jacobins of France. It was to this that most of the calamities of Spain were to be attributed. At the same time he concurred with the hon. and learned gentleman in thinking, that there were many illustrious members of the carts who formed exceptions to the general character of that body; and that there was no man more sensible of the false steps taken by them, than the distinguished individual whom the hon. and learned gentleman had mentioned. The extremes to which the cortes had proceeded naturally caused a very violent re-action, and the consequence of the great swing which the Spanish government had taken in the direction of Jacobinism under their management, was, that now, under its sovereign, it had taken as violent a swing in the direction of despotism. It might be supposed that during the government of the cortes, whom the hon. and learned gentleman had described as so implicitly under British influence, none of those enormities had taken place in Spain which was now so much reprobated. But the very contrary was the case. Many of the enormities which had lately been perpetrated must be attributed to what was done by the cortes, and the prevalence of that party among them called the Liberals, who, though in a military point of view, an Anti-French party, were politically a French party of the very worst description. They had declared that they would not admit Ferdinand's right to the throne, unless he put his seal to the principles which they laid down, and amongst the rest, to that of the sovereignty being in the people. The Liberals were a perfectly Jacobin cal party in point of principle. He had no wish to recriminate on the hon. and learned gentleman; but really it was something very new, to hear from the other side of the House so much in praise of the cortes, when it was recollected, that from that very quarter it had been the practice to overwhelm them with every opprobrious epithet—with contumely and scorn. Such was the kind of language which the gentlemen on the other side of the House were in the habit of holding towards these very cortes;—all their acts had been scouted at—their efforts for the emancipation of their country had been mocked—they had been called a set of Don Quixote's fighting against wind-mills. These were the tributes of applause and respect which the cortes had been in the habit of receiving from the other side of the House. But when he non-was obliged to state the question against the cortes, he wished to estimate fairly the difficulties and faults on all sides; though there certainly was no reason why they should be saddled with all the difficulties to which the proceedings of the cortes had led. Nothing was more glorious and distinguished in the Spanish character than the devotion with which they gave themselves up to their country in the contest for expelling the invader. But then, to describe them as lending themselves to us—to say that Spain had lent herself to us was quite contrary to the fact. Spain denied herself to us; and here was to be seen the difference in this respect between the conduct of Spain and Portugal. The latter gave her wholly up to us in expelling the French, and the consequence was that she was freed. Spain never had done so, but had contributed to her own liberation by her free spirit.

There was one pregnant fact on this subject to which he would call the attention of the House. Among the cortes existed a determined disposition to withdraw from the duke of Wellington the command of the national troops which had been given to him by a deliberate and solemn act of the state? The consequence of this disposition was, that the matter came to this calamitous issue, that the duke of Wellington was forced, in the very middle of a campaign, to declare, that if the authority which had been solemnly confided to him was not fully continued, he would abandon the command of the Spanish army altogether, and contend with the French with only the British troops. And this cortes represented to be completely influenced by the British government, and emphatically called, by the hon. and taught gentleman the British cortes, resolved to continue the command in the duke of Wellington by only the small majority of six votes! He pitied sincerely the misfortunes to which these ill-fated men were now exposed, but truth compelled him to state, that on the question of continuing the duke of Wellington in the command of the Spanish army, the minority who voted against it was composed entirely of Liberals. It was among that part of the Spanish people who were the least enlightened in the principles of the French revolution—it was in the higher orders, the nobility and the clergy, that the British found the most powerful assistance in conducting the war for the expulsion of the French. Ministers had interfered in behalf of those unfortunate individuals to the fullest extent in which they could possibly have been justified; and the system. Of interference was acted upon up to this day—not merely by representations through our ambassador. Sir Henry Wellesley, knowing how the British government felt upon the subject, had interfered in every possible way; nay, he had gone so far as to deny all pecuniary aid, unless measures of a less rigorous nature were adopted towards the individuals in question, and unless some reasonable expectation was held out to Spain, that the promise which the king had made of giving to the people a free government, should be fulfilled. The hon. and learned gentleman was completely mistaken if he supposed that it was by means of British money that the Spanish monarch had been enabled to proceed to such enormities. So far was this from being the case, that the only sum which had been advanced to him by the British government between the beginning of April, 1814 (when he left Valence to return to Spain), and December, was four thousand dollars; and this small sum had been advanced by the authority of our ambassador, to defray the mere table expenses of the king: nay it had been advanced upon the suggestion of one of the Liberals. All pecuniary aid from this country was refused until positive information was given on two points. First as to the measures adopted towards the proscribed individuals; and secondly, as to the promise of a free government, held out in the king's proclamation. As to what had been said of the conduct of one individual, general Whittingham, he thought it impossible that it could be of any importance, as he was placed in such a situation as to be of course obliged to obey his orders. But he would tell the hon. and taught gentleman what the British ambassador had done. The ambassador declared, that the duke of Wellington would never lend himself to any such purpose as that which the Spanish monarch had in view. At the same time, the ambassador repeated his advice to the king, to accept the constitution which had been proposed to him, with all its faults, reserving to himself the power of altering it. The hon. and learned gentleman had described this monarch (before whom he would have the Prince Regent to appear, if not as a suppliant, at least with a menace of war)—as acting all along, from the time that he had entered Spain, upon the treaty of Valence. Yet Ferdinand had all along protested against and disavowed that treaty. If the hon. and learned gentleman meant to say, that Ferdinand had gone into Spain with the deliberate intention of overthrowing the cortes, he would state in contradiction to this, and on the authority of sir Henry Wellesley, that Ferdinand came into Spain with the determined purpose of accepting the constitution; and it was only when he found what the real state of the nation was, and that the constitution would not be congenial to the feelings of the people of Spain, that he had determined not to accept it.

To refer again to the part which the cortes had taken in the liberation of Spain, the maintenance of the particular constitution which they framed—the merging of the nobility in the third estate, and the degradation of the church, had, dur- ing the whole contest, been hanging a dead weight upon the nation, and had greatly counteracted all its efforts. When the king returned, and examined the feelings of the nation, he found himself surrounded by the whole impulse of national feeling against the constitution. While this feeling was operating, a great deputation of the cortes waited upon him, praying his majesty not to accept that constitution which the majority of the same cortes had declared it would be a forfeiture of the crown to reject. To give one small instance of the great popularity of Ferdinand, he might state, that on his way to Madrid, his carriage was drawn from Harangues (thirty miles) by the people. When the constitution of the cortes was destroyed by him, there was not a murmur in Spain; for, in fact, the people were more attached to some of those peculiarities in their ancient constitution which we thought defects, than the people of this country to the most perfect part of our free constitution. Enough had passed in the world within the last thirty years to prove, that in order to amend defects, the way was not to proceed by overturning the whole fabric. For his own part, he should always regret that the king of Spain had not the means, after his return, of carrying into effect the declaration of the 4th of May, as it contained all the principles of a just and free government. He hoped, however, that it might yet be affected. But if there was any thing calculated to place at an interminable distance the period when this desirable event should take place, it was this country taking the part of any one faction in that nation against the other. We were too much disposed to magnify the evil of the moment. This was not the only period in which there had been similar occurrences in Spain. Even if the authority of the cortes were now to be re-established, he was afraid this would not purge Spain from enormities. Many of the acts of the cortes had been of the cruel kind—abhorrent to all humanity. Of this he would mention some instances. The two first that occurred to him were the cases of generals Paradox and Abysmal. The latter of these brave officers, because he had written a pamphlet against the cortes, had been by them cast into prison, and afterwards, without any trial, banished for ever from Spain. When the government of Castile remonstrated on this case, the whole were put into custody, and, without any sort of trial, except by five of the cortes appointed by itself, were sentenced to be imprisoned and banished. General Palafox died in a dungeon in Minorca, where he was confined by the cortes. Besides these, the bishop of Orense, than whom there was not a more pure and excellent character, having been a member of the cortes, and refusing to sign the paper in which that body stated the doctrine of the sovereignty of the people, he was immediately displaced from his bishopric, and was forced to take refuge in Portugal to save his life. These were the acts of the cortes, and showed what was the boasted purity in the administration of affairs evinced by this body, who, forsooth, were said to have acted under British influence, and were thus called (surely for the first time) the British cortes! If the British government had not interposed with the government of Spain, he could understand that a lesson of generosity might have been taught by parliament. But if the case had been so, any member in bringing the matter before the House would, he thought, have proceeded differently from the course adopted by the hon. and learned gentleman. When, however, a minister of the Crown stated to parliament that the British government had interfered, and that the four great powers of Europe had instructed their ministers at the court of Spain to interfere, to as great an extent as was consistent with propriety—[Loud cries of Hear, hear! from all sides of the Housed]—if the House were now to lend itself to such a purpose as that intended by the hon. and learned gentleman, it would only prevent any chance of success.

Considering the motion as an unwarrantable one in point of policy, and seeing that the hon. and learned gentleman had not taken the pains to inquire what had been done; considering, too, that the motion would disqualify government from future interference with success, he conjured the House not to take a false step on this occasion. They were now on the eve of perhaps the most important discussion that had ever been entered on in that House—a discussion involving the general relations of the country with the other powers of Europe. At this moment, therefore, there was nothing more important than to Preserve that character and influence which the country had with those other powers. There was a spirit of dignity throughout Europe that would not bear that political lessons should be overbearingly taught by us; they ought to transpire only through the wisdom of our councils. If we began to assume a dictatorial function towards other powers, we should become an object of deserved hatred. The mind of man could not devise a mode of interference more calculated utterly to ruin the unfortunate persons in whose behalf it was intended. On these and on all the grounds he had stated, he never found himself called upon to give a more decided negative to any motion than he did to the present.

expressed his opinion, that this country was in justice and honour bound to interfere in behalf of the Spanish patriots, whose sufferings in a great measure arose from their connation with, and friendship for this country. In answer to the charge of precipitancy which had been made against the present motion, he should only observe, that many months had elapsed since the patriotic members of the cortes had been visited with such signal vengeance. It was, he remarked, a fact generally understood, that at the present moment, there were in the prisons of Madrid 1,200 victims incarcerated, and 500 in those of Cadiz, suffering, for the most part, in consequence of their patriotism and attachment to us, their former allies. He had heard, for the first time, of the interference of government in the councils of Ferdinand, and he thought that when this interposition was backed by the opinion of parliament, the most salutary consequences would be the result. The duke of Wellington had on one occasion interfered for a meritorious and distinguished individual. He did not indeed require his release from persecution, but demanded his trial according to the laws of Spain; this request was complied with, and the party liberated. If similar applications were repeated, the same beneficial effects would doubtless be the consequence.

, on the authority of letters, which he had received from the most respectable characters in Spain, expressed his conviction, that the people of this country were quite mistaken as to the state of affairs in that nation. There was neither a more popular monarch in Europe, nor one to whom his subjects were more devotedly attached than Ferdinand. The alderman was of opinion that the noble lord's statement proved that ministers had done all that it was possible to do, and that any attempt to urge them to further interposition must be attended with dangerous consequences.

declared, that it had not been his intention to address the House on this question, but he could not remain silent after listening to the doctrine of the hon. alderman. To judge by his language, he seemed to think that because ministers had interposed; those who sat on his side of the House ought not to be allowed to make any observations, or to open their mouths at all. But was it not true that Spain was laboring under the most shameful tyranny ever heard of in ancient or modern times? The hon. alderman's doctrine was not his own; he had taken it from the noble lord, now the political leader and idol of the other side; and in one respect he was glad of it, on account of his known sentiments of conciliation towards Ireland. That noble lord had on the first night of the session rebuked his hon. and distinguished friend (Mr. Brougham) for his animadversions on the conduct of that usurper and detestable monster, Ferdinand the seventh. But the noble lord had not been able to stop the mouth of his hon. friend, no, nor the mouths of others. Did they suppose that the noble lord, or any minister among them, could stop the mouth or change the sentiments of any on his side of the House? They might dictate to foreign kings, princes, and emperors, but they should not dictate to them who were free citizens, the representatives of the nation, and who were superior to all their corrupt machinations. That was the only assembly now in the world where kings and princes might learn what was thought of them; and he knew personally, that in every corner of the continent the reports of the proceedings in that House were sought after with the greatest avidity. The noble lord might tell them, if he pleased that enough had been done; but he was happy that the public voice was raised against the iniquitous conduct of that iniquitous monster, Ferdinand of Spain. Would not every man who loved freedom be glad to see him hurled from his ill-gotten and blood-stained throne? Never, he trusted, would this country spill another drop of blood, or spends another shilling in his defense. No, we had been too long duped; we had exalted our renown in arms and in diplomacy by the exertions of the noble lord on the continent; but what were the fruits?

Little better than general bankruptcy and distress, as would be made more manifest on Monday sunlight, when there was to be a call of the House, though he hoped some indulgence would be shown to his hon. countrymen, of whom many had actually no money to enable them to come over. In England the landlord contrived to obtain one-fourth of his rents, but in Ireland he could get nothing.

said, from the information he had received respecting the former government and coatis of Spain, he could deny that there was any hostility of the Liberals against this country. There might have been some points on which a difference of opinion prevailed, but there was no general hostility ever manifested on the part of that body. This information he relied on, it having been communicated to him by an officer from that country. Their co-operation with us in the campaign against the common enemy had been so material to the result, that we owed to them a debt of gratitude. He hoped that the House would take into their serious consideration the state of those unfortunate individuals now confined in dungeons, and associated with the lowest of society. The conduct pursued in Spain brought back to our View those times which the good and the enlightened now contemplated with horror. In respect to the interference of his Majesty's government, he hoped it might have done well, but any recommendation on their part was not likely to be strengthened by the orders which had been bestowed upon the Spanish monarch, because those honours might have induced him to suppose, that his government would be supported by that of Great Britain. The hon. gentleman was also of opinion, that if. Interference, like that exercised by the duke of Wellington for his friend, had been resorted to on the behalf of the other sufferers; much amelioration for them might have been procured.

said, that in reply he should trouble the House with but a very few words. He was ready to admit, that he was taken by surprise in hearing the declaration of the noble lord that this country had interfered, that his Majesty's government had instructed our minister at the court of Spain, in favor of those unfortunate individuals. How was it possible for him to divine this conduct of the government? The motion he now made had been put off from time to time, and yet the noble lord had preserved a complete silence upon the subject, and it was not likely that he (Mr. Brougham) should imagine, that this silence was intended to signify that Steps had been taken to accomplish that which was the object of the present motion. It appeared as if the noble lord had studiously preserved silence upon emery occasion when this subject had been mentioned, with a view to entrap the motion before the House, and by surprise to give the information in a triumphant manner. But certainly the noble lord's triumph was greatly diminished, when we called to our recollection the proceedings which had taken place since the 14th of May 1814. Since that period these deputies and members of the regency were still in damp and darksome dungeons. For two months, until the 5th July at least, these miseries still accompanied them. On the 5th July a treaty of alliance had been made with the government of Spain, and although there was interference almost about every thing, yet there was no interference in behalf of these deputies and members of the regency. After this it was that the garter was sent to decorate King Ferdinand. But down to last December, during a period of twenty months, nothing had been done; for instead of opening the doors of their dungeons and setting these unhappy men at liberty, the monarch of Spain ordered that they should be tried by a special commission, and then being displeased with the decision of these commissioners, he proceeded to try and punish them himself, With all these events before him, the hon. and learned gentleman said he might be excused for supposing that nothing had been done on the part of the government of this country. This was the first time he had been made acquainted with their conduct, and he had no doubt of the instructions given, and the conduct attributed to our minister, sir Henry Wellesley. At the same time, under all these circumstances, he was anxious to know at what period this interference had been made, for if it occurred before December last, it would then be clear that it had not had the desired effect, and he should still persist in the object of his motion. If the endeavor to relieve these sufferers had been made since December, be shall; be disposed to withdraw his motion, and to wait for the result. He should guide himself by the answer which the noble lord might return.

felt called upon to any a few words, in consequence of the declaration which had been made by the hon. and learned gentleman, that the course pursued by government with respect to Spain had been kept secret from parliament till his noble friend had now stated it, and as it were taken the House by surprise. It must be in the recollection of the House, that in the course of the last session, he (Mr. Pole) had more than once distinctly stated, in reply to observations made by an hon. member now no more (Mr. Whitbread), that from the moment sir Henry Wellesley had met the king of Spain at Valencia, he had left nothing untried to persuade him to accept the constitution and to treat the Liberals with mildness, and that the ministers had used every effort to induce the Spanish government to ameliorate the condition of the people. He was, therefore, surprised that the hon. and learned gentleman should have been ignorant of the course pursued; for although he had not a seat in the House last year, yet one would have thought it barely possible that his friends who sat around him should not have informed him of what had passed. The Liberals themselves were conscious that all that was possible had been attempted in their cause, and it was so notorious, both in Spain and in this country, that he was astonished the hon. and learned gentleman should not have informed himself of the fact before he had brought forward his motion. He would add that it was the opinion of sir Henry Wellesley, that the language used in this country, and the attempts made in this House to degrade king Ferdinand, were in a great measure the cause that the case of the Liberals had not been listened to as it would have been had he been left to himself. He also thought that our merchants and residents suffered materially from it. Not a post, said sir Henry Wellesley, arrived in Spain, without bringing papers full of inflammatory and abusive paragraphs against Ferdinand; in consequence of which our merchants and residents were greatly impeded and injured in their concerns. With respect to the motion, the hon. and learned gentleman might dispose of it according to his own pleasure; but he had that night received a lesson—[Cries of Order, order!]. He did not mean the expression in an offensive way, but the information he had received from his noble friend, would show him that he ought to have considered what might have been done, before he made to the House a motion like the present.

hoped, that the right hon. gentleman would, in future, learn to express himself in words that would convey his real meaning, and not use a language implying sentiments contrary to his intentions. With respect to the lesson he was supposed to have learned, it was this that his majesty's ministers had spent twenty months in useless interference. The only alteration that knowledge would have occasioned, had he possessed it before, would have been an increase of force in the wording of his motion.

could not but repeat, that if the interposition of his majesty's ministers had not been attended with all the success that might have been wished, the intervention of the House, so far from doing good, might only produce ulterior mischief.

said, that if he thought the course of negotiation which ministers were now pursuing was at all likely to produce a beneficial result, he should certainly advise his hon. and learned friend to withdraw his motion; but there appeared to be a disposition to force the House to a division, rather than to give that clear and necessary information which his hon. and learned friend had requested. He begged the House to consider, that the manner in which the Liberals had been treated seemed to have roused the same feelings of indignation in his majesty's ministers as had been expressed by gentlemen on that side of the House. If the government of England, and the three other great powers, had made representations which had not been attended to, then it was not too much to ask the noble lord, whether he did not want some assistance. It might be alleged that any further interference would be extremely improper; but if all the attempts of those great powers had proved entirely useless, then a fifth power, the commons of England, should not be deterred from expressing their opinions.

saw that the right hon. gentleman had only risen to extricate his hon. and learned friend from the difficulties into which he had fallen; but he was fully convinced that the right hon. gentleman would greatly embarrass the attempts of ministers by supporting the present motion.

could not understand what the noble lord meant by the difficulties of his hon. and learned friend. In his opinion, there had been no reply whatever to the argumentative part of his speech; and, indeed, no person had attempted to answer it, except the worthy alderman. (A laugh.)

The House then divided: Yeas, 42; Nose, 123. Majority against the motion, 81.