we must prohibit a neighbour within the enclosure of a strong wall to light his pipe, for fear of our straw-built fabric; was any thing so contrary to reason, to justice, to good feeling, ever stated among men? He was sure, and he wished that truth could be conveyed to the ears of the monarchs who were allied against national liberty; he was sure, whatever differences might exist on questions of policy and measures of state, there was not a man within the walls of that house who could lay his hand on his heart and say that the motive of the Austrians was not this monstrous desire of preserving its own rottenness by destroying the purity of a neighbouring state. He concluded by expressing his ardent and confident hope that those who attempted to stop the tide of freedom and improvement, which had set in so strongly and so auspiciously, would themselves be overwhelmed in the torrent, and that the spirit which manifested so many auspicious indications of its soundness and strength, would fully accomplish its object, by renovating corrupted states, and establishing the liberty and security of nations.

Lord Ellenborough said, that having considered the speech of the noble earl (Liverpool) opposite, and the conduct of ministers, he was of a different opinion from the noble baron who had last spoken. He thought the circular not only justifiable but beneficial, He regretted that the authority of the noble lord had been given to a revolution brought about by the military. We ought to have protested against such a revolution, because a government esta

blished by the military had no security. Had there not been an extraordinary coincidence in the time of the revolution, and the return of the heir apparent from Sicily, who had been since at the head of the government? From this the noble lord contended that Naples did not continue under the same sovereign.

Lord Calthorpe thought that pledges and security ought to have been given at the conclusion of the war, and particular care taken to prevent such an interference as was now attempted by the allied powers.

Earl Grey, in reply, observed, that the course pursued by ministers upon the present unwarrantable enterprise against Naples had degraded the character of the nation, and had done more to destroy the first principles of the independence of nations, and the dearest interests of kingdoms, than any thing else within his memory or knowledge. The noble earl concluded by saying that in what he perceived to be the present temper of the house, he would not press his motion to a division.

Lord Ellenborough explained, and the question was then put and negatived.

to

House of Commons, Feb. 22.Sir James Macintosh rose make the motion, of which he had given notice on the subject of Naples, when he was interrupted by

Mr. Wynn, who requested precedence for one which he had on the paper, and which would not occupy any time. But the cries of "no" were loud and general; and

Sir James Macintosh immediately proceeded

proceeded with his motion. The great question which he had to submit to them, upon this subject, depended not upon the course of events, nor upon the chance of war. No; though the whole Neapolitan territories should be once more overrun by the barbarous hordes of the north though the modern tyrants of regions, which were in former ages the cradle of those rude warriors who desolated Italy, should once more pour their countless forces up to the Faro of Messina; neither circumstance would alter for one moment the motion he had to submit, nor throw one obstacle in his way while he explained its principles. On the contrary, he conceived that if the principles of national independence had been trampled under foot by one nation of Europe, the more it behoved the others to look with jealous anxiety to the safety and the preservation of their own inviolable rights. If wrong, aggravated by every species of injustice and assumption, had been triumphant in one case, the more was it incumbent upon that house to ascertain that this country had had no share in their disgraceful victory. If a war had been commenced, that either in its success or in its failure might, and would perhaps, involve all Europe in hostilities and anarchy, it was time that the house should inquire whether the ministers of this country had done their utmost to quench that first fatal spark, which else might kindle the most destructive conflagration. What might be the event of this aggression to Naples herself; what she might deserve, according to the degree of spirit and 1821.

energy she would display in her resistance; or what might be the issue of these tremendous preparations, he could not, of course, at this period determine. Undoubtedly, and he said it with a melancholy reluctance, upon all principles of human calculation, the chances were against that devoted country. They were in the favour of a political alliance and a disciplined army; and though our age had furnished, perhaps, the most illustrious examples recorded in history of the success of nations against armies-of popular enthusiasm against military power; yet the ordinary career of human events would not justify us in supposing any other issue, but that the fields, the forts, the towns of Naples would be too soon occupied by the army of the triple alliance. Whether the Neapolitans, who, in a perhaps doubtful policy, had thought fit to copy the constitution of the Spaniards, would wisely copy also the system of defence adopted by the Spaniards against the invading power of France; whether they would retire to their fastnesses, and their mountains; and from those inhospitable retreats wage the only kind of warfare which could efficiently protect a people so situated; these were matters. upon which he could not pretend to speak with any certainty. But this he affirmed with confidence, that no measures of an iniquitous policy-no seizure of fortressesno occupation of territories-no mischievous confederacy (of a nature like those which in all ages had been leagued against the assertors of their country's liberty, and of the rights of all mankind) -no perseverance in acts which

C

he thought of such a destructive tendency, should divert him from his position. The views he took of those proceedings would not be in the least degree altered, even if the Austrian army, after traversing the whole country, should plant its victorious standard at the extremity of the Peninsula of Italy. His great object was to obtain full, accurate, and satisfactory information with respect to the conduct of his majesty's ministers, in the negocia tions which had been entered into upon the commencement of this inauspicious proceeding. His majesty's government, as hon. members would well know, had lately issued a circular despatch, addressed to the British ministers at foreign courts, and occasioned by the conduct of the high allied powers at Troppau. That circular would save him (sir J. Macintosh) a great deal of argument, for it described the principles which the allied powers intended to apply to the case of Naples, so carefully, strongly, and clearly, that it left him nothing to observe upon this part of the subject. On the other hand, the circular of the allied powers stated the principles upon which those imperial commissioners for exercising the office of dictator of Europe were prepared to exert that immeasurable power, for the first time, with respect to the Neapolitans; who had not yet learned to acknowledge their newly-assumed, but sacred authority. This sacred trio had issued a circular, (which, it appeared, had been betrayed by a certain minister at Hamburgh,) in which they informed, not only their present subjects in

Europe-for that would have been nothing-but in which they published to their future subjects on what principles their future vassals, whether emperors, kings, landgraves, margraves, dukes, or potentates, or of whatever other denomination, might wear their crowns, or govern their states. These three sovereigns, who took upon themselves the lordship paramount of the whole of Europe

who treated monarchs as their vassals, and nations as their slaves, had arrived at a conclusion founded on that ancient and equitable maxim, that "might is right." They had issued, in the plenitude of a power newly usurped, but arrogantly vaunted, their mandate "for the better government of kingdoms." But, happily for the world, there were those who still had something left in the shape of that freedom which these despots would put down; who still spoke of a constitution, once so venerable in the eyes of all the world, and still so formidable, as it would seem, to those of the congress at Troppau; those who would deny the power so assumed, and check the aggressions thus begun. The house, and the whole country, however, owed them at least this debt of gratitude-that, in their very first act, these allies had not disguised their intentions; had not concealed their principles. Perhaps some explanation was here necessary, as respected the exposition which he had given of those intentions and principles. "Let not the house" (continued the hon. gent.) "look upon these words as mine--non meus hic sermo." He had quoted from their own declarations; he appealed to

the

the noble lord (Castlereagh) opposite; he appealed to the authority of the house itself; he appealed to his majesty's ministers who had so recently abandoned these triumvirs- these royal triumvirs, in a manner to which he (sir J. Macintosh) could add nothing. He thought he had shown that the intentions of this new dictatorship of Europe were tyrannical, odious, and flagitious. He should now revert to the circular of his majesty's government; and he would abridge the first paragraph of it, rather than detain the house too long by repeating it in detail; and in so doing he would omit those diplomatic formula which must be much more proper in such a letter than in a speech delivered in parliament. The paragraph amounted then to this-that the measures proposed by the allied powers were directly repugnant to the fundamental laws of this kingdom, directly subversive of the laws of this realm. They were, indeed, such as would render every man in Europe the subject or the slave of a royal triumvirate. The noble lord had denounced them so clearly and decidedly, as to make it impossible for him to strengthen the charge.

They had heard various imputations against the sect called the Carbonari; he would say nothing on the present occasion as to the justice with which they were made, he would defy any man to make a heavier charge against the Carbonari than the noble lord had thus brought against his allies. This royal and imperial triumvirate might deserve, and, no doubt, did deserve every thing which was said against them; but what could be a more severe reproba

tion than this paragraph expressed? He would even ask, whether every thing which was said, and rightly said, against Napoleon himself, was not comprised in those few words which contained the indictment so preferred by the noble lord against his late colleagues and friends assembled at the congress of Troppau? He was desirous that his conduct should in no respect be wanting in a proper courtesy to the noble lord, and would, therefore, abstain from making any making any observation which should call in question the accuracy or propriety of the language in which the circular letter was conceived; but he would say this, that one part in particular required explanation. Amidst the mysterious expressions to be found in that circular, one observed, that the first article of the noble lord's impeachment of his former friends was not so solemn. ly alleged; nor were the terms in which it was couched so definite and serious as he (sir J. Macintosh), whose legal habits had rendered this a matter of importance to his judgment, was accustomed to see employed on other occasions of impeachment. The allied powers, Prussia, Russia, and Austria, were here charged with having made a proposition to his majesty's ministers which was of a nature directly contrary to the fundamental laws of this kingdom. No explanation had yet been given upon this subject. If he was rightly informed, from the face of the document itself, the intention of this article of impeachment against prince Metternich was, that he had proposed to the ministers of England a system of interference which, "if reciprocally acted upon," would C 2

require

require his majesty, the king of Great Britain, or rather his majesty's ministers, to admit into this country foreign armies, with or without the consent of the parliament and the people. He understood the noble lord to assent to this proposition; but, if he was wrong, he begged that noble lord would, in some way, express that he (sir James Macintosh) was in error. If his lordship would not, either by word or sign, then he must go on with his speech, assuming that what he had stated was correct. (The honourable and learned gentleman paused for a few seconds.) As the noble lord would not assist him in sparing the time of the house, he must take it for granted that he was right. He thought that the principal one of those fundamental laws which the allied powers had proposed to his majesty's ministers to violate, was that trivial instrument called the bill of rights, which prohibited the introduction of foreign troops without the leave of parliament. And now he must take the liberty of bespeaking the attention of the house to this part of the impeachment against prince Metternich, which was so ably conducted by the noble lord. The case stood thus: prince Metternich, and the other ministers of the allied powers, had proposed to the government of Great Britain a system of measures, which would enable the present, or any future administration, to invite into this country an army, for instance, of 100,000 Cossacks, Croats, and Austrians. It was, in effect, a proposition for encamping a whole horde of Cossacks in Hyde-park, and for protecting the free and unbiassed deliberations of that house by an army of Germans and

Russians. He begged permission to offer some observations upon this matter. A measure, for the first time since the reign of Charles the second, had been proposed to his majesty's government by foreign courts, the object being no less than for this government to enter into a solemn agreement to receive mercenary armies from the Continent to dictate laws to the people of England. In cases of civil danger, or that which a bad minister might be pleased to call civil danger, such a proposition might possibly be entertained; but those foreign courts had the audacity to propose to ministers that they should admit into the kingdom foreign troops, without limit or restriction. When, he said, that such a case had not occurred since the reign of Charles the second, he should have added, that the present proceeding was in one respect, at least, infinitely more audacious than that other; for the mysterious communication which subsisted between Charles and Louis was involved, as such transactions should be, in darkness and obscurity. But, in the present occasion, this scandalous proposition was published in the face of all Europe, and intimation of it given to every minister in every court. In the face of Europe, Great Britain was required to receive foreign armies, to compose our domestic quarrels, and to preserve the national tranquillity. Now he should be ashamed of himself, and of those whom he had the honour of addressing-he should blush for his country and her parliament; he should disdain even the character of that honourable house itself, if he could imagine that there was a single Englishman among them.

whose