Vtliatts nub rorraingo in Valiant.

PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF THE WEEK.

House op COMMoss. Thursday, May 29. Greek Controversy ; Ruphzre with France; Ministerial Explanations—Committee of Supply—Chicory and other substi- tutes for Coffee : Mr. Anstey's Motion withdrawn—Votes for Naval Stores—Sttunp. duties (No. 2) Bill, read a second time—Alteration in Pleading Bill, considered in Committee—Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Bill, read a second time. Friday, May 24. Assessed Taxes; Mr. Blackstone's Motion to repeal the addi- tional ten per cent laid on in 1840, negatived by 130 to 65—Foreign Policy ; Mr. Baillie Cochrane's Strictures—Supply Votes : Park Improvements ; the Marble Arch ; the Houses of Parliament; Dublin Castle—Police Improvement (Scotland) Bill, read a third time—West India Appeals Bill, Alterations in Pleadings Bill, and Regis- tration of Deeds (Ireland) Bill, read a third time and passed—Convict Prisons Bill, passed through Committee—Mr. Henry Drtunmond's Real Property Transfer Bill; second reading put off for six months.

TIME- TABLE,

The Lords.

Hour of Hour of Meeting. Adjournment.

The Commons.

Hour of Hour of Meninx. Adjournment.

Monday No Sitting. Monday No Sitting.

Tuesday No Sitting. Tuesday No Sitting.

Wednesday No Sitting. Wednesday No Sitting.

Thursday No Sitting. Thursday 4s. ... (ma) 2h 30m Friday No Silting. Friday 12h 30m Sittings this Week, — this Semiou, ; Time, h m Sittings this Week, 2; Time ISis m ; m Session, 70; —5325 56m

this

THE GREEK CONTROVERSY Rurrtnte wrrn Fluxes.

The principal matter in the House of Commons, at its meeting on Thursday after the Whitsuntide recess, was the Ministerial explanation of our differences With Greece and France. The subject was first men- tioned by Sir JOHN WALSH ; who, observing that ho was not always quite happy in catching "the noble Lord's intentions or moaning," stated that he thought it had been intimated by him that the Committee on Supply should be taken that evening in order to afford an opportunity for discutsion on our foreign relations : did that arrangement refer to an ex- planation by Government, or was it intended that gentlemen on Sir John's side of the House should have the opportunity of raising a discus- sion on the extraordinary complications in which our foreign relations are placed ? Lord PALMERSTON replied—" It is my intention to make a statement this evening upon the subject to which the honourable Baronet has adverted, especially in reference to what paned upon a former coca- sn."

The motien was immeffiately put, that the House resolve itself into Committee of Supply •' sad. Lord PALMERSTON made his statement. 11e felt it a duty buatil to himself and the Reuse, in the first place to give some further explanatiouitr.referenne to his answer, on Thursday last week, to Mr. Milner Gibsoess question, whether there existed a perfectly good understanding between the Government of France and the Government of England in regard to the affairs of Greece. "I stated, as far as I remem- ber, that the French Ambassador had left London the day before.; that he had been charged by her Majesty's Government with explanations to be given to the Government of France ; that one of the objects of his return was to give explanations himself ; and I stated also that I hoped nothing would arise out of those matters to disturb the friendly relations subsisting between this country and France. Now, Sir, about that time there woo read in the French. Assembly the letter of General de In Hitte, that is not the word to use, because it admite of a double meaning,. but ordering back the French Ambassador—requiring him to return to France.' It had been thought by persons in that House and elsewhere, that in his answer he " endeavoured to suppress something which be ought to have stated." 'What passed was this. Differences had arisen between the Governments of France and England, " in consequence of the manner in which the affair had terminated between England and Greece." When M. Drouyn de Lhuys first communicated with him, Lord Pahnerston had not received the despatches from Athens. The French Minister came on Monday, and it was appointed he should enter into them next day. Accord- ingly, on Tuesday, "I went with bins at great length into the despatches I had received from Athena, which I read to him, and I also read to him the reports made by Mr. Wyse of what passed in Greece ; doing my best to ex- plain to him, according to our view of the matter, how the course adopted was one which ought not to give, justly, any ground of offence to the Go- vernment of France. Our conversation was long : the French Ambassador left me at rather a late hour saying that he should return the next day to continue the conversation. 'He came the next day (Wednesday). at twelve o'clock ; and I forget whether it was at the outset, or in the course of that conversation, which also lasted to a late hour, as honourable gentlemen will see by a reference to the account of it gfren by M. Drouyn de Lhuys, that he read to me the letter of General de hi Hine.. Of course, I could not concur with the opinions expressed in that letter as to the grounds upon which. the French Ambassador was ordered to return to Paris. When I spoke to M. Drouyn de Lhuys on the subject, he said—'I must go back. Tomorrow the papers will be presented to the Assembly; tomorrow, possibly, questions will be put on-the subject ; tomor- row there may be a .imon. It is my duty to be atiPans before the Chamber meets, in order to afford to my Government airy explanations they may wish to have from me.' I said, that I certainly concurred in the pro- priety of the course he meant to pursue, and that I would not press him to remain ; but I begged M. Dronyn de Lhuys to communicate to his Govern- ment, early the next morning, the substance of the explanations I had given him. I furnished him also with copies of some of Mr. Wyse's despatches; having marked especially those passages to which I wished the attention of the French Government to be called, and to which I had drawn his atten- tion; and I begged him not only to give his Government such explanations as, in the eepacity of their representative, he might think fit to give, but that he would also lay before them the detailed explanations I had had the honour of giving him." In this state of things, "I was justified in thinking that the explanations with which I had furnished M. Drouyn de Lhuya were of a nature calculated, if not to remove entirely the dissatisfaction the French Government felt, and in the spirit of which that letter was wriden„ atoll events greatly to modify that feeling, and to lead to further explanations."

i

" It could not in the ordinary course oethings be expected by me that the letter of General de la Hitte would have been read to the French Assembly— (Loud cheering)—even before the Assembly was in possession of the docu‘- ments connected with the transactions to which that letter related. It tier- thinly never entered into my mind that such a course of proceeding would in any case be adopted. Now, entertaining that opinion, and believing it possible that at the very moment when I was giving my answer the French Minister might have been assigning to the Assembly, as a reason for the re- turn of M. Drouyn de Lhuya, simply that which was-one object of his early return,—namely, the giving of explanations, and the communication of those explanations to the Legislative Assembly ,—I would ask any man in this House who values the good understanding between this country and France, who has any just appreciation of the interests of this country and of the duty of a Minister, whether I should not have been guilty of the greatest indiscre- tion—of the most mischievous act—I will say of a culpable proceeding—if I had proclaimed that feeling on the part of the French Government -which had been expressed in their letter, but which, for all I knew, might at that mo- ment have ceased to exist ? Supposing the French Minister had given, as a reason for the return of M. Drouyn de Lhuys, the simple ground of explana- tions, what mischief should I not have done if I had proclaimed the other ground, and thus nailed and fastened the French Government tb a dissatis. faction which might at that moment bare been removed ? I am confident that I need no furtherjustification for the course I then pursued. It was in- dicative of an earnest desire to soften, if possible, anything like angry feel- ing on the part of the French Government."

These explanations of his former reply introduced observations on the letter of General de la Hitte. "That letter charges her Majesty's Govern- ment, and me especially as the organ of that Government in these transac- tions, with having broken faith—I may say—with the Government of France, inasmuch as it asserts that, contrary to enga"ements, the negotia- tion of Baron Gros was put an end to by an act of Mr. Wyse, and that it was by suchdetermination that the coercive measures were renewed ; and it as- serts, moreover, that the negotiation was put an end to by Mr. Wyse on a point upon which he ought to have referred for further instructions to the British Government. It is my opinion that the papers which are already in the hands, I believe, of many Members—for I did my best to have them de- livered this morning—will show that the functions of Baron Gros were not suspended by any act of Mr. Wy.se,. but by the act of Baron Gros himself; that Mr. Wyse, so far from wishing Baron Gras's negotiation to be sus- pended, expressed a strong desire that it should be continued ; and that Mr. Wyse did not admit the validity of the grounds upon which Baron Gros thought himself by his instructions compelled to suspend his functions- Baron Gres's request to Mr. Wyse was, 'Refer to your Government for in- structions as to the point of difference which has arisen between us, and in the mean time continue in statu quo' • that is to say, Retain in your possession the vessels you have already detained, but abstain from seizing any more.' After Mr. Wyse had received the communi- cation from Baron Gros, intimating that his functions were suspended until further orders from France, which could not be received for an interval of at least three weeks, Mr. Wyse said—' If the Greek Go- vernment will send the sums which I think are just amounts of compensation to the persona for whom particular fixed sums have been required, and far the losses of Mr. Finlay, and of Mr. Pacifico so far as his furniture and household goods are concerned ; if the Greek Government will send 180,000 drachmas, accompanied a letter stating that amount to be in full satis- faction of all claims mentioned in my note of January 17, except the claims of Mr. Pacifico for losses resulting from the destruction or his documents, I will'—do what?—continue the statue quo ?—no, but will immediately release all the Greek merchantmen now under detention, and by that means set the commerce of Greece entirely free.' No doubt, that would have been a very advantageous arrangement for the Greek Government, providing it wee prepared to do that which from the commencement we had requinsd—to • Admit the principle of our demands. But that arrangement, be it remem- bered, wouldhave left for future discussion the terms of the letter of.apology for the insult offered to the British navy in the case of the boat of the Pan- tame ; it would have left for future discussion the arrangements connected :with the claims of Mr. Pacifico for the destruction of his Portuguese documents. Baron Gros replied.—` I bine notified to the Greek Government that I am no longer in official communication with them, and therefore I cannot make this proposal officially', but he intimated thatunofficially it should be made. This was on the 24th; and Baron Gros informed Mr. Wyse bsea private letter- that he thought the next day, the 25th, by five o'clock in the afternoon, Mr. Wyse would receive, the letter and the money from the Greek Government. Mr. Wyse suspended any resumption of coercive measures till after the time thus mentioned by Baron Groa, as that at which he would probably receive a communication from the Greek Government; and it was not until after five o'clock on the evening of the 25th—the communication of Baron Gros that he had suspended his functions rein g dated the 23d— that, not receiving the anticipated communication, Mr. Wyse made the an- nouncement that on the next morning coercive measures would be resumed. I think, then, we are justified in saying that it was not Mr. Wyse who pat an end to Baron Gros's negotiation, and that it was not Mr. Wyse who de- termined that coercive measures should be resumed; but that Mr. Wyse, whether rightly or wrongly, but rightly as I think, considered that Baron Gros had officially withdrawn himself from the negotiation, and that conse- quently the case had arisen it which coercive measures were necessarily and at once to be resumed.

" I think the French Government are entirely mistaken in supposing that there was, on the part of Mr. Wyse, any departure—at all events in inten- tion—I do not think, in fact—from the clear understanding which had ex- isted, ram bound to say, from the commencement, that it was to rest with Baron Gros, and not with Mr. Wyse, to determine when Baron Gros should cease to exercise his functions."

" Then the question arises—giving Mr. Wyse credit for being right in Iris opinion that Baron. Gros had himself withdrawn from the negotiation--whe- ther the point on which they differed was one on which it was inenmbent upon bk. Wyse to refer for further instructions to his Government, and, pending the receipt of those instructions, to maintain the status quo—the de- tention of the vessels which were already in our peesw, without making any further seizures." It was understood from t le very beginning, that we accepted the good offices of France to obtain by her friendly intervention.the satisfaction we had begun the endeavour to obtain by force : it is plain from the despatches of M. Drouyn de Lhuys—" published„I suppose, from authen- tic comes about to be presented to the French sAlly "—that the functions of Baron Gros were " not to interfere with the principle of the demands we made," nor with the amount of those sums which we fired in particular cases, but were " to be confined to a discussion- of the amount of those sums which were not fixed in our demands"; the payments to Mr. Finlay for land, and to M. Pacifico [not for personal injury, nor for the Portuguese claim, but] " for the losses he sustained by the sacking of his house, in fur- niture, goods, money, and other property.' Lord Palmerston supported this view of Baron Gras rale by quotations from the despatches of M. Drouyn de Lhuys. On the 16th February, M. Drouy-n de Lhuys said, " The ques- tions that are to be examined shall not implieete in principle the denial of the English claims " : on the 22d, he repeated this, and explained it by illustration; saying, " Thus it is laid down in principle, that. an indemnity is due to Mr. Finlay and M. Pacifico; itremains to settle what shall be the amount of that indemnity." On the 22d March, M. Drouyn de Lhuya, enu- merating the conditions of arrangement which might be accepted, used these words—" with the exception of his [M. Pacifico's] Portuguese elaims, which remain to be examined " ; words which distinctly show that " this portion of M. Pacifico's claims was entirely separate from the other." A misunder- Mending having shown itself at Athens, M. Drouyn de Lhuys corrected it thus-- " It would appear that M. Gros, on the faith of his correspondence from Paris, is persuaded that in case he himself should declare that his good offices have failed, and that he expects no result from their continuance, Admiral Parker would not have recourse to coercive measures without new orders from his Government. That is completely erroneous, and it is of great importance to rectify in that respect the opinion of our negotiator. In such hypothesis, the coercive measures woukl resume their course ipso facto, as I have had the honour of informing you on the 23d of February and 20th of March. If any difference of opinion should arise between M. Gros and Mr. Wyse on the question of knowing if the compromise which the negotia- tor proposes, relative to the only points which he will have to examine, is or is not acceptable, it is only then that Mr. Wyse and Admiral Parker will have to refer the subject to theirGovernment."

What, then, was the point upon which Baron Gras requested Mr. Wyse to refer for instructions to his Government, when Mr. Wyse refused, and when Baron Gros said, "I withdraw from the negotiation" ? Was it a point that the ne-gotiatorwas to determine, or not ? It has been shown that the only points he was to examine were the amounts for the losses of Mr. Fin- lay and M. Pacifico. But from the papers on the table it would seem, that the negotiation broke off not on these points, but upon the question whe- ther the Greek government was or was not to make an engagement, that it would not only examine the question as to the losses of M. Pacifico by the destruction of his Portuguese documents, but would engage to pay to him the amount of any loss he might be proved to have sustained by the destruction of those documents. On the 16th, Baron Gros had agreed to such an engagement, and also to the point that 150,000 draohmas "should be deposited as a pledge for the fulfilment of that engagement" : the only difference was as to the place where the security should be depo- sited—Mr. Wyse proposed the Bank of England or the Bank of France. Baron Gros had said he would further consider that question but after- wards, "for reasons which he was fully entitled to express, altered his opi- nion, retracted his proposal, and said he was satisfied 311. Pacifico's claims upon that head were not deserving of any serious consideration, and that all he wonld agree to would be that the English and Greek Governments should enter into an investigation, and Imply to Portugal to ascertain whe- ther K. Paeifieo had awry slain cm this recount. Now this was a negation of the principle of ono of our demands. Mr. Wyse could not agree to it. He could not agree to it even according to his original instructions, stall less in the face of detailed instructions sent to him ca the 25th of March." " He naturally said there was nothing to refer—that he could not refer for fur- ther instructions on a point which had been settled by the basis on which the good offices of France had been accepted, and also by instructions he bad recently received, which he showed to Baron Gros. Mr. Wyse read those instructions to M. Gros, and will read them again if you think fit; if there is anything you think doubtful I will explain it; but there are my instructions, And upon them I am bound to ad.' M. Gros, however, thought otherwise. Whether he was acting under the erroneous impression alluded to in the despatch of M. Drouyn de Lhuys to General In Hitte, I cannot say ;

but Baron Gros and Mr. Wyse differed in opinion, and upon that point mainly the negotiation broke off."

Another demand was made by Mr. Wyse on his own responsibility, which her Majesty's Government think he was right in urging. " Baron Gros originally proposed that the Greek ships should be restored with their cargoes in the very same eondition, or as nearly eo as possible, as when they were captured. Mr. Wyse as a counter-proposal, inserted a condition that the Greek Government should be answerable fur all the damages arising front the coercive measures. Objections were made to that ; and Baron Gros having withdrawn his proposal, Mr. Wyse also withdrew his. But Mr. Wyse having learned that the Greek Government was collecting statements of losses, with a view, as was reported to him, of bringing forward at some future time those claims as a set-of against the claim of this country upon Greece for the amount which has been paid for interest and sinking-l'nnd upon the guaran- teed loan, he thought it right to shut out any such demand, by an eugagemeut not imposing upon the Greek Government any pecuniary liability, but simply debarring them from putting forward themselves, or supporting on the part of others, any claim of that character : and I must say that, considering the importance of establishing a good understanding with Greece, I think it was quite right to insist upon that clause, to prevent that which would have given occasio naturally to a recurrenceof unfriendly, relations with Greece. Her Majed s Government would not—no British Government would—have ad- mitted the claim ; but the claim might have been pressed in a manner to disturb friendly relations with that country." But the main point upon which Baron Gros insisted, and upon which Mr. Wyse felt himself bound to resist, was whether the Greek Government should be liable to pay whatever might appear upon investigation to be due to Mr. Pacifico for the loss sustained by the destruction of the Portuguese documents. " We made no claim of the particular amount ; we did not pre- tend to say it would be Ii., or 1011 or 100/. ; but, be it ever so small or ever eo great, we thought that upon principle it was a claim the Greek Govern- ment were justly liable to make good ; and that was one of the principles of our original. demand, from which we never contemplated the possibility of our receding. Well, then, I think that General de Imffitte was under a very erroneous impression when he asserted in that letter that the negotiations were broken off by the act of Mr. Wyse terminating the mission of Baron Gros and broken off upon a paint on which Mr. Wyse ought to have referred to his Government."

Lord Palmerston concluded with remarks propitiatory to the French GO- vernment, and deprecatory of premature discussion to the Members of the House. need not, I sin sure, say that this circumstance—that any dif- ferenee of opinion of this kind has arisen between the Government of France and the Government of England—must be a source of the most pain- fill regret to her Majesty's Government. I hope I have mid nothing—I am sore it was not my intention to say anything, which could tend either to in- crease the misunderstanding or to oppose the slightest obstacle to its retnovel. I am not without hopes, that upon a question of this sort, where clearly there could have been no intention on the part of the British Government in the slightest degree to offer an affront, or to be wanting in respect to the Go- vernment of a friendly power--I cannot divest myself of the hope that the discussion going on between the two Governments may end in a manner that will be satisfactory and honouruble to both. Sorry, I am sure, I should be, if anything I should my should throw any difficulty in the way of each an adjustment, and I should hope, if these things are made the subject of debate in this House before it is known how the discussion may terminate, that no honourable Member, whatever his opinions may be, would express them in a manner calculated to have a prejudicial effect upon the discussion. It is the anxious desire of her Majesty's Government to cal- tivate the most friendly relations with France. It is immaterial to us who are the men of whom the Government of France is composed ; we have no business to inquire into that, or to meddle with it—they are the Government that is, and it is with the Government that is that we are in communiention and negotiation. Aud, as I have said, I cannot but believe that, whatever the opinion of the Government of France may be as to the matter nt issue, at least they will do us the justice to think, that whatever ground of com- plaint they may fancy themselves to have, they have no ground of complaint against us for any want of good intentions towards them, or any deficiency in that friendly feeling which it would be the duty of her Majesty's Govern- ment, or of any Government that may succeed it, to entertain towards the Government and nation of France." (Much cheering.) Sir Joan WALSH claimed the privilege of briefly adverting to the ex- planation now given.

He made the most ample allowance for the desire to put away everything that might have a tendency to disturb friendly relations, and leave it per- fectly open to the French Government to adopt language the most favour- able to the maintenance of those friendly relations : but still Lord Palmer- ston had very much strained the statement made last week. It was scarce acting with ingenuousness towards the House, in the face of General de la Hitte's despatch, to declare so broadly that there was nothing to disturb the friendly relations between the two countries. (Loud cries of "Hear, beer !") Lord PALMRRSTON—" That I trusted nothing would arise out of the cir- cumstances to disturb the friendly relations between the two countries." Sir Joan Waren—It is obvious that we have had no time to peruse the bulky volume just placed in our bands—to collate dates and compare details and statements. The noble Lord has clung to the French alliance as the key- stone of hispollee; but that keystone he has contrived, somehow or other, to pick out himselt. "I fear that he has placed himself in a position of such antagonism with that of the French Government, that he will be a bar to the resumption of friendly relations between the two countries—between the communities of which there is at present no hostility, but feelings very friendly. It is impossible that this tacit hostility—tins kind of neutral hostility, hostility in heart and spirit--shonld pervade so large a portion of the Continent without at last breaking out somewhere. Let us show that we bring no spirit of party to the question, but a determination to treat it with caution, deliberation, and impartiality." (Cheers.) Lord MAHON rose to lament the great delay that had taken place in producing the documents necessary to understand the case; but to pro- test against being drawn into discussion or giving any opinion, when the document& upon which an opinion must be founded "have practically speaking not yet been delivered to us."

Mr &crime agreed that the time had not arrived for complete disens- sion, though it had completely arrived for alienation and estrangement.

The noble Lord, in his able and masterly address, had not in any way im- pugned the opposite case of the French Government. With much pains he had shown how he narrowed and contracted the original intervention' first from arbitration to mediation, and then from mediation to good offices with a pedantry unworthy of a great nation ; how he therein exhibited distrust of France ; and how that negotiation, which he opened by abusing the French Minister, M. Thouvenel, he wound up by abusing the French Envoy, M. Gros. "It appears to me that there are only two modes of solving the question, satisfactory to Prance. One is the retirement of the noble Lord from office. It is, Lam aware, almost absurd to expect that The noble Lord is necessary to Europe, to which he is odious. ("Hear, hear 1" turd laughter.) I tnkeit to be true that, as far as the balance of power is concerned, Great Britain is

necessary to the world ; in the present state of parties in Great Britain the Whigs are necessary to govern -, and it is undeniable that the noble Lord is necessary to the Whigs ; and therefore it is hopeless to look for his resigna- tion of office. The second solution is to do to Greece the benefit, to do to France the courtesy, to do to England the justice, of fulfilling an engage- ment to which our honour has been so seletiinly pledged."

Mr. lIzzav DRUMMOND thought that the explanations of the Foreign Secretary's statement of last week—which had not been interpreted by some persons as it ought to have been—were satisfactory : but he wished that there were not in Ministers such a desperate desire to fight.

There is much truth in the old saying, " When a man is determined to marry or fight, it's hard to prevent him." As the great Mr. Grattan once ob- served—" Every one sides with the weaker party. You may sometimes see

a deformed little dwarf attack and kick the shins of a giant ; and when the giant properly boxes his ears, all the bystanders will sympathize and cry, Well done, little one ! ' I am willing to admit that it was necessary to send a fleet to exact a sum from Greece; but the moment a great power like

France offered mediation, true policy, as much as real dignity, re- quired that Ministers should put the question entirely out of their own hands, and give France a carte blanche to deal with the matter as she pleased. Unfortunately, the papers on the table show that there is a general opinion among foreign powers that we have instigated every rebellion that has oc- curred—though we have always left the rebels in the lurch at last : the re- sult is that we have not a friend in Europe. The noble Lord went out of his way to offend and insult the Spanish Government, when in his profession of peace and amity he paraded a name that he knew was odious to it. If two gentlemen quarrel about their servant, every feeling of delicacy and honour would prevent them, on making peace, from reintroducing the servant's name. "If the House do not decidedly say that they will have peace with

France, cost what it may cost—(" Oh, oh !" from the " .Financial Reformers" and "Friends of Peace")—Oh ! I am not a member of the Peace Society (Great laughter.) I don't say there should be no war ; but I have great con- tempt for thepot valour which would rush into a war without counting the cost, and would then come back here whining and crying out for diminished

armaments, to be followed again by complaints of crippled commerce and starved manufactures. Let us understand what we are about. We are going

to war, not with France alone, but with Austria and Russia secretly backing her ; and we must look very sharp if after the despatches which have been received this day, America is not found behind them." Mr. DISRAELI recommended the House not to ratify with too ready a cheer Lord Mahon's position that it should not presume to give an opi- nion on any foreign transaction till the papers relating to it should bo laid before the House.

The House refrained from discussing the Italian question under a similar delicacy : after the session was over the desired papers made their appear-

since in three huge folio volumes : " I venture to say, that if the gentlemen who have read those ponderous tomes, digested their contents, and made them- selves masters of the subject, would walk into the lobby, they would compose the smallest minority that ever assembled in that hall." (Cheers and laughter.)

For the life of him, he could not understand why Lord Palmerston's speech- " described as an able and masterly statement' —was not made before the House adjourned for the holydays. If that statement is expected, according to the expectation—the silent expectation—of gentlemen opposite,. to remove the inconveniences which have been recently so painfully felt, it is much

to be regretted that it was delayed a week. The noble Lord had explained— "and I am ready to admit, satisfactorily "—the answer which he gave to a quistion put to him on Thursday last; but another noble Lord, at the head

_of the Govern,ment, had not yet explained the remarkable reserve and equi-

vocal colouring which characterized the replies that he gave to interrogatories addressed to him. This was not the occasion for a discussion of the affairs of

Greece, but he had observed some singular omissions in the "masterly statement "—omissions not in harmony with that frank and explicit bearing which is duo from the Ministry to the House of Commons, which with the least willingness of any popular assembly in Europe obtrudes itself by discussion on the diplomatic relations of its Government. No one believes that the powerful armament of Great Britain was brought into the Mediterranean to support the ludicrous and suspicious claims of Don Paci-

fico : there was some great cause for a great demonstration of the power of Great Britain last year in the Mediterranean Sea. There were disturbances

in a dependency of ours—" in a Greek state under our protection." When . it was announced that a "self-willed and headstrong" Minister, and a "most rash and arbitrary " Minister, were about to cooperate with each other in the same part of the globe—when the Colonial Secretary was med-

dling in Ionia, and immediately. after helping the Foreign Secretary in Attica—the result of such a joint action prepared one for extraor-

dinary action : probably at a future day we shall discover that the

disastrous consequences which ire now deplore were produced by those two stars crossing each other. (Cheers and laughter.) But who would have supposed, while the noble Lord was pouring out interesting details

about the doings of third-rate diplomatists in a 'fourth-rate state, that the noble Lord himself and the Ambassador of France were negotiating in the capital of Great Britain ? And, considering that Russia is a chief power of the world, and deeply interested in these affairs, it would have been satisfactory if the masterly speech had remembered the existence of Russia, and added to the hopes that a cordial understanding with France will be reestablished, hopes that a cordial understanding with Russia will not be endangered. If, after a week's cramming, such principal and salient points are omitted, how satis- factory must the case be accounted ? To do him justice, the noble Lord's expressions, studiously excluding France from any arbitration or mediation

of the dispute, seem never to have been equivocal ; the French Government could never have been deceived ; from the first they must have seen, in his language, manner, and demeanour, his extreme unwillingness that they should interfere. If there be any proceeding in diplomacy more dangerous than another, it is that of allowing third parties to exercise " good offices," which invest with no authority and incur no responsibility. Lord Normanby himself writes—" From General de In Hitte's constant -language, I do not believe that he would have continued the good offices of France had he believed that they could have the termination they have now received." And, however you split hairs and explain phrases, that is the cream of the case. One day we rise and are told that her Majesty's Plenipotentiary has been kicked out of Madrid; at another time we hear that the Austrian Ambas- °sector has disappeared from London ; then suddenly the French Ambassador is recalled ; a few months ago the waters of the Hellespont were disturbed, and even the Turkish Ambassador was in a very nervous state ; in addition to this, no one 'mows where the Russian Ambassador is. Remembering these

things, and that her Majesty's Government have been in a series of diplo-

matic scrapes from the first moment of their taking office, we have yet had the consolation of reflecting that our powerful neighbour in the West has remained on good terms with us ; and that, whatever differences have arisen between Great Britain and the other powers of Europe, the French people have remained the cordial ally of England. But, when the noble Lord finds that ho has sacrificed this sole compensation for all the other mischiefs of his diplomacy, although it is seven o'clock, do let him get up like a man and give US some assurance that we have one ally left." Lord Joust RUSSELL saw in the series of errors which characterized Mr. Disraeli's speech one of the greatest proofs of the _wisdom of Lord Mahon's advice.

The convention between the French Ambassador and Lord Palmerston was made on the 18th of April, and on the 23d Baron Gros had already made the announcement which in Mr. Wyse's opinion put an end to the negotiation of

Baron Gros altogether. Where was the necessity that it should be explained that this convention did not conclude the business ? It is complained that the negotiation was concluded at Athens—not here : why that was the in- tention from first to last ; the negotiator was sent to Athens, and the first thing he agreed to was that the ne,gotiation should be conducted there. Lord John was anxious to explain the explanation he made last week. " Having been engaged in public business on Friday and having attended a Se- lect Committee of the House until three o'clock, I 'had not read the despatch which was read by General de in Hitte to the French Assembly. I had seen a general statement in the newspapers that the Minister of Foreign Affairs had read a despatch for the withdrawal of M. Drouyn de Lhuys, but I had not read the despatch. But what I had read was a despatch of Lord Nor- manby, giving an account of his communication with General de In Hitte; and when the honourable gentleman asked me the question which he put, I stated the purport of that despatch—that, in consequence of the displeasure felt by the French Government with respect to the affairs of Greece, they had thought it right to recall their Ambassador. That was my statement, made in perfect conformity with the representations which had been made to us. But I went on to say that the French Minister of Foreign Affairs had stated to the Marquis of Normanby that the return of M. Drouyn de Lhuys should be considered as natural, since, having been sent here especially to settle the affairs of Greece, and the negotiations having failed, his mission had reached its termination. Now, it is right I should state, that by a despatearh received today fromthe Marquis! of Normanby, it appears that while the - 74t - quis says he has a recollection that these were the terms used by General de In Hitte the French Minister of Foreign Affairs, let that in consequence of Lord Normanby having stated that these events might affect his position in Paris, the words may have been used out of civility and kindness to him. Gene- ral de la Hitte does not, it appears, recollect having used these terms ; and the Marquis of Normanby says, that being the case, he certainly cannot hold the French Minister of Foreign Affairs to words which he does not recollect having employed. Now, not being aware that the statement I made was one which General de la Hitte would not bear out, and having given it as the Marquis of Normanby stated it—whether it was a statement that went in any way to explain the termination of M. Drouyn de Lhuys's mission or not—it was a matter for which I was not responsible. I wished to state that the French Government had, from displeasure with the conduct of Eng- land, recalled their Ambassador from this country, yet that there had been words used by the French Minister of Foreign Affairs from the nature of which we did not think the matter so serious as that circumstance might have led us to suppose. With respect to any other statement of mine, I can only say, that I answered the questions asked of me to the best of my judgment. When the honourable Member for Radnorshire (Sir John Walsh) asked whether we had a copy of the despatch recalling the French Ambas- sador, that being the actual purport of his question, I answered that we had not a copy of that despatch; but in answer to a question put by another hon- ourable gentleman, I stated that the despatch had been read. Therefore I say, Sir, that the statement I made the other evening to the House was a statement of the whole truth, so far as I was then aware of it." Maintaining that it is not at all true; as a general maxim, that "good offices" may not be of great service in international differences, Lord John quoted the successful interposition.of such good offices by France in our sulphur quarrel with Naples, and by ourselves in the French quarrel with Mexico. He exonerated Lord Palmerston by adopting the chief responsibility of his acts. "In any discussion that may hereafter take place in this House, I shall be happy to take my full share of responsibility along with my noble friend who has conducted these negotiations; because, though he was the organ of the Government, i and in full possession of the sentiments of the Go- vernment on the matters n question, yet I, as the head of that Government, avow and consider myself to be mainly responsible for the course which has been pursued." Like his colleague, he concluded with words of conciliation to the French Government. " If there is any explanation we can make to the French Go- vernment, consistent with the honour and the interests of England, that may remove the unhappy misunderstanding that exists, and restore to a state of harmony the relations between the two countries, there is no effort that her Majesty's Government will not make to accomplish that desirable object. I trust, notwithstanding the taunts of the honourable Membet for Buckingham- shire, that we shall have credit for cordiality and sincerityin that wish. I do not think any circumstance, since I have filled the situation which I now hold in public affairs, has given me so much pain as this unhappy difference with the Government of France. There has been more than one occasion on which—I do not wish to enter into details—we have shown a wish to consult the interests of the Government of France, when, I will not say the interests of England, but the popular feeling of England, was a good deal against the proceedings of the French Government; because it was our wish to show for- bearance to a Government which we desired to see strong and powerful, and whose existence and strength we conceived to be necessary to the permanent peace and prosperity of Europe." (Cheers.)

SUPPLY.

The House of Commons spent some time in Committee of Supply on Thursday ; and Sir FnAtrcis BARING took some Naval votes, though not with a silent assent. Mr. COBDEN tried to defer the first vote, 883,999/. for naval stores, because Mr. Hume had an amendment upon it, and was absent : but the vote passed. Sir WILLIAM Motzswoirrn tried to reduce the vote for new works-339,2391.—to 140,0001. ; condemning the works at Keyham and powder-magazine at Bull's Point. There was some talk ; Mr. COBDEN concurring with Sir William Molesworth ; but the amend- ment was withdrawn. On the vote of 175,6981. for miscellaneous ser- vices, including capture of piratical vessels, Mr. COBDEN expressed his censure of Sir James Brooke's battues, and his doubt whether there were any pirates at all. Mr. Danstraoxn imputed the attacks on Sir James to a disappointed and anonymous slanderer ; and the Arroinniv-GENE- BAL threw out the hint that it was his advice alone which had prevented Sir James from instituting a criminal prosecution against those who ac- cused him of engagement in mercantile transactions. Vote carried, by 145 to 20.

COFFEE AND CRIOORY.

Mr. ANSTEY was obliged to withdraw his motion directing Government to prosecute persons who adulterate excisable coffee with roasted vegetable substitutes. Sir CHAsitzs WOOD opposed the motion mainly on these grounds,—that chicory (though he did not like it) is innocent ; and that Government cannot prosecute all adulteraters. "Caveat emptor " ; all " milk " is not cow's milk, nor are all loaves wheaten bread.