an advance of money for the ex. penses of an election; and most assuredly the interference of the latter in such circumstances, amounted to a gross breach of privilege. He could not observe such conduct, without expressing his astonishment at the improper lengths to which party-feeling was carrying the members of the present government.

Lord Althorp admitted, that a subscription had been raised, of which his right hon. friend being, as an individual, and not in his official character, appointed manager, he had as such, advanced money to persons who were engaged in supporting his own political opinions. It had been dis.. tinctly proved that the money had been raised by private subscription. He opposed the motion, because any reference of the matter to a committee would amount to an unjust censure.

Mr. O'Connell in reply said, that this was really a case in which from the unsatisfactory explanation which had been given, he was resolved to take the sense of the house, while he, at the same time, entreated them not to establish such a precedent, as that the treasury should enjoy impunity when detected in the very fact.

The amendment was carried by a majority of eighty.

On the 27th of June, Lord Brougham said that, with much reluctance, he felt it necessary to bring under the notice of their lordships a breach of privilege which, in other circumstances, he should most gladly have allowed to pass unnoticed. A case had been heard in that house when the learned judges were present, in which an appeal had been dismissed with costs. He was pub

licly charged in the Morning Post with having, in that instance, falsified the entries in their lordships' minutes; with having, after moving that the judgment below be affirmed, recorded by an entry in the journals of the house, that the proceedings had been only postponed. Now, the truth was, that the gentlemen, whose business it was to make these entries, made the one in question in the usual way. He gave no directions as to the mode in which it should be done. After judgment had been given, and until the amount of costs had been ascertained, the entry had been subjoined, that judgment was postponed.

Lord Wynford admitted that the paper alluded to was a gross breach of the privileges of the house; and earl Grey did not see how it was possible to refrain from taking steps to maintain their own dignity.

The marquess of Londonderry congratulated the noble and learned lord on the wool sack on having at last made the discovery, that the press could, by any possibility, be guilty of making attacks on the dignity of the house of Peers. He therefore cordially approved of the motion for calling the printer to

the bar.

The duke of Wellington acknowledged that he himself had been misled by the entry which had been made in the votes, that "judgment had been postponed," when, at the same time, he understood the decision to have been that the judgment of the court below be affirmed with costs. He left it to their lordships to say whether or not the party guilty of this breach of privilege might not have been misled in the same manner.

Lord Mansfield had certainly

laboured under a similar apprehension. Having read the speech of the noble lord on the woolsack, he entertained no doubt that the judgment of the court below had been affirmed, but on referring to the votes, he found that the consideration of the case had been postponed. The written minutes were, likewise, very different from the printed votes. He had no objection, however, to the declaration, that the publication was a breach of privilege.

After a few words from earl Grey; the motion was agreed to, and, in compliance with the orders of the house, the printer of the Morning Post appeared at the bar. He was briefly examined; and, a few remarks having been made by the duke of Wellington and lords Lyndhurst and Radnor, he was, on the motion of Lord Brougham, discharged; and a motion that the editor of the paper attend the house, agreed to.

On the 30th of June, Mr. Bittle stone, the editor of the paper, attended at the bar of the house of lords, and having made a statement in his own defence, was, after a

few observations from several of their lordships, remanded in custody. On the 1st of July, there was presented to the house a petition from Mr. Bittlestone, praying to be set at liberty, the consideration of which was deferred till next day, when after an admo◄ nition from the lord chancellor, he was discharged.

On the 24th of June, Colonel Williams brought under the notice of the house of Commons, as a breach of privilege the obstruction which he had met with, in his progress to parliament from the soldiers that lined the streets during the musical festival in Westminster abbey, He seriously complained of having been compelled to proceed to attend on his parliamentary duties through "a bristle of bayonets." He moved an address to the crown for the purpose of ascertaining whether or not it had been ordered that an opening should be left for members of parliament to enter the house. After a short conversation, however, the subject was dropped; and this ridiculous motion was withdrawn.

ΟΝ

N the 6th of May, the marquess of Londonderry brought under the notice of the House of Lords, the case of General sir J. Campbell imprisoned at Lisbon, by the Portuguese government. He would not, he said, have brought forward the case had it not been for the cruel treatment which that officer had met with at the hands of Don Pedro. He had been seized subsequently to his having ceased to be an officer in the service of Don Miguel, and had now been imprisoned for eight months. It was said that papers addressed by viscount Santarem to individuals in this country were found in his possession; but it did not appear that he was at all aware of the nature of these communications. An inquiry had indeed been instituted, but with the results of it he was not at all acquainted. Many British subjects were most unjustly treated by the authorities at Lisbon. He concluded with moving an humble address to his majesty to direct that there be laid before the house copies of despatches or correspondence with his majesty's secretary of state for the foreign department or by his majesty's ambassador at Lisbon, relating to the imprisonment in the

dungeons of St. Julian's, at Lisbon, of sir John Campbell, late an officer of the British army.

Lord Grey said, no doubt could be entertained, that sir J. Campbell was employed in the service of Don Miguel; for when he was taken prisoner there were found on his person papers from viscount Santarem, the minister of Don Miguel. On all the circumstances having been detailed to his majesty's advocate-general, his opinion was, that sir J. Campbell had no claim upon the British government. Representations, however, were made to the Portuguese government, which refused either to give him up unconditionally, or to release him on his parole. While, therefore, he denied that his majesty's ministers had been inattentive to the rights of British subjects, he had no objection to grant any papers that could be produced consistently with the interests of the public service.

The Duke of Wellington confessed, that he had always viewed the case of sir J. Campbell with jealousy, in consequence of his having served in contravention of the foreign enlistment bill. It was simply the circumstance of his having been taken with despatches on his person that justi

fied his detention. As he had not been detected, however, in the commission of any offence against the Portuguese government, he ought to have been carried before the judicial officer appointed to take cognizance of offences committed by British subjects. He had a right to claim that he should not suffer a more severe measure of punishment than any other British subject in similar circumstances. It would be found that he had been differently dealt with. Lord Wynford, on the other hand, could not admit that sir J. Campbell had acted in contravention of the foreign enlistment bill. He had not served as a soldier for pay, but as a volunteer. No sooner had he ascertained that an accredited minister was sent from this government to Portugal than he resolved to return to England, and he was on the high seas, under the protection of the British flag, when he was taken prisoner. This was contrary to the laws of nations. It had been said that the port, which the vessel was leaving, was blockaded; the vessel, however, in question was allowed to proceed on her voyage after the apprehension of sir J. Campbell.

On the 5th of August the House of Lords was again engaged in considering the foreign relations of the country, on a motion of the marquess of Londonderry, who complained that, by partial measures, and incomplete and temporary arrangements, ministers had departed so far from the state of things as settled in the years 1814 and 1815, that the peace of Europe was seriously endangered. foreign policy with regard to Belgian affairs had, notwithstanding our protocols, been a signal failure; and, in consequence of VOL. LXXVI.

Our

dilatory and protracted negotiations, had terminated in a wasteful expenditure of treasure and blood. Ancona and Algiers had been occupied by the French; and as to our relations with Russia, there had been on the part of government a want of courtesy and conciliation towards that power which was altogether incomprehensible. We had not had even an ambassador at St. Petersburg since August 1832. He would not now discuss the state of affairs between Russia and Turkey; but he must say, that if England was justified in taking a distinct line as to Belgium, without regard to the treaties of Vienna and Paris, Russia might, on the same principle, be justified in taking a particular line of policy in relation to Turkey without those previous communications, which, under other circumstances, Great Britain would have had a right to expect. The interest, likewise, which, without direct interference, we had unnecessarily displayed for the Poles, could not fail to alienate Russia, and disturb the good understanding which had formerly existed between the two countries. The revolutionary spirit, too, which was spreading throughout England, must have shaken the confidence which Austria and Russia had reposed in the stability of our monarchy; and to compensate for the loss of these three great European powers, we had adopted don Pedro, king Leopold, king Otho, the propagandists in Germany, and the liberals of Belgium. He could conceive nothing more unjustifiable than our conduct towards Portugal. We were solemnly pledged to neutrality, and yet we had interfered to exterminate

[Y]

war.

a party, who, trusting to that pledge, had been encouraged to persevere in the contest. By pursuing the course which we had hitherto followed, we should, ere long, find ourselves involved in inextricable difficulties with the European powers. Having, likewise, recognized the queen of Spain, he wished to know whether we were bound by treaty to commit ourselves along with her majesty to the chance of an interminable He complained, too, of the augmented expenditure of secret service money, which had increased during a period of profound peace, and in the space of two years, had exceeded by 14,000l. the amount of the same branch of expenditure during two years of the duke of Wellington's administration. The secret service money amounted to no less a sum than eighty or ninety thousand pounds. He moved, that an address be presented to his majesty, praying that he would be graciously pleased to give directions that there be laid before the house copies or extracts of correspondence or information relating to negotiations for concluding a treaty between his majesty, the queen regent of Spain, Louis Philippe, king of the French, and the Duke of Braganza, signed in London on the 22nd of April 1834.

Lord Melbourne observed, that as to a violation of the Portuguese territory having been allowed by this country, it ought to be recollected that the claimant of the Spanish throne was within the confines of that territory; so that intervention on the part of the Spanish government became necessary, and it was the duty of Great Britain to provide that such intervention should be made b

treaty, so that it might go no further than was necessary to accomplish the object. The constituted authorities of Spain had declared themselves in favour of the queen, and his majesty had been advised to recognize the object of their choice. He would have no objection to the production of the papers required, were it not that the feelings and opinions of other sovereigns were materially connected with them. The production of papers could not serve to illustrate the circumstances attending the treaty in question, as the grounds on which it rested were already known, and as it had been successful in accomplishing the object in view. For these reasons he met the motion with a direct negative.

The duke of Wellington was of opinion that, if ever there was a measure adopted inconsistent with the policy of Great Britain, the late treaty was that one. It had always been the system of a British government to maintain the two countries of the peninsula in independence of each other and of France, and the effect of this treaty was, to frustrate both of these objects. It led to a perpetual and not merely a casual interference of foreign armies in the internal affairs of both countries. This was at variance with our former policy and practice. Spain was actually prohibited, in the reign of Ferdinand, by this country, from sending troops into Portugal, to assist don Miguel. Now, it appeared that the invasion of Portugal by a Spanish army took place six months before this treaty was signed; and, although it had for its object the expulsion of don Carlos, it had not been ratified till he and don Miguel had both quitted Portugal. It