1823.] 



he felt it neoesfary to address sucli ar- 

 gnments as were most Jikely to be bene- 

 ficial to his country, and to the interests 

 of Europe. He had used every argument 

 which his experience in Spain could sug- 

 gest to dissuade tiie French government, 

 and the ministers of the allies, from inter- 

 fering in the affairs of Spain. He had not 

 felt it his duty to insult the sovereigns and 

 their ministers by introducing into the 

 discussions topics upon which he knew a 

 difference of opinion subsisted ;and he had 

 tlierefore urged those topics which, from 

 liis own personal influence and means of 

 information, were best calculated to pro- 

 duce an effect. He defended the dispatch 

 which he had transmitted to Madrid by 

 Lord Fitzroy Somerset, and maintained 

 that some change in the Spanish Consti. 

 tution was desirable. 



Earl Grey spoke to the following effect. 

 —Much as L deprecate the conduct of 

 France, sincerely as I deplore that the in- 

 terference of this country has not been di- 

 rected to a more important issue — and 

 deeply as I lament that the manner in 

 which our interference has been made, has 

 been that of wishing Spain to alter her 

 constitution — all that could possibly have 

 resulted from this negociation was the 

 mere preservation of neutrality on the 

 part of this country, at the same time that 

 France was committing an aggression upon 

 Spain. Vainly would the present power 

 hope to conquer that country, which had 

 not been conquered by Napoleon in all 

 his strength. But, come what woidd, this 

 was to be our consolation, that Great 

 Britain was to have nothing to do with it. 

 This country was not to maintain that 

 high and commanding attitude which her 

 power would entitle her to maintain. She 

 was to sit in idle neutrality till all those 

 principles which she had formerly de- 

 fended were destroyed. In the whole of 

 this negociation, there has been a dispo- 

 sition to make concessions in favour of 

 France, but at the same lime to withhold 

 every thing from Spain. I may refer to 

 the French army of observation — I may 

 ask whether any objection to its formation 

 was offered by this country? whether we 

 once asked if this army nught not have an 

 object ulterior to that of guarding the 

 French frontier? It was well known that 

 tliig army was kept, not for guarding 

 France, but for the purpose of encourag- 

 ing insurrection among the people of 

 Spain, and furnishing money for that pur- 

 pose. Yes, it was for this perfulious and 

 dlxgracefnl purpose. I hay, my lords, 

 that this is the fact, and that the nobln 

 duke must have kno»n that this army was 

 raised and emplojed for those pui poses. 

 Was it not well known that so eaily as the 

 7ih of June, before these negociations 

 were opnied, the French army on tiie 

 frontier of Spain had its name chnn^jed 



Puilic Affairs in April. 375 



from a cordon sunilaiTe, which It had first 

 professed to be, for the preventing of an 

 epidemic fever from spreading across the 

 Pyrenees, for that of an army of observa- 

 tion ? That it encouraged the disaffected 

 subjects of the Spauisii government — ad- 

 mitted them within its lines for protec- 

 tion — that they were regularly supplied 

 with money — and that an agent of theirs 

 had been received at Paris. The govern- 

 ment had this knowledge, and yet it 

 called upon Spain to make concessions, 

 while at the hand of France no demanj 

 was made. This is the state of the ques- 

 tion — the army of observation was not 

 placed there for the purposes or the de- 

 fence of France, but for fomenting insur- 

 rections in Spain. With regard again to 

 the negociations — the attempts at nego- 

 ciation he should call them — I feel war- 

 ranted in saying, that they had been for- 

 ward to show favour to France, and had 

 not done even justice to Spain; and when 

 I think of this I cannot but feel shame at 



the part which has been acted by this 

 country. France dared to exact from 

 Spain a change of her Constitution; and 

 what has been done by the ministry of this 

 country ? Why they have been all kind- 

 ness and politeness with the aggressor, and 

 they have consented to go to Spain and 

 ask her to alter the form of her govern- 

 ment, while they have made no such pro- 

 posal with regard to Fiance! 



The Marquess of Laiisilown complained 

 that many parts of the noble earl's (Lord 

 Harrowby's) speech were calculated to 

 put the question on grounds that were • 

 perfectly false, and paiticularly his con- 

 cluding remarks on the general state of 

 Europe. He regretted as nmcii as the 

 noble earl could, that opinions had been 

 adopted abroad, which if pushed to extre- 

 mity must bring down ruin and disgrace ; 

 but when he talked of preserving an ab- 

 solute neutrality, it was unfair to describe 

 the question as a question between mo- 

 narchy and democracy. It was a question 

 between independence and tyranny. Was 

 the noble earl prepared to contend that 

 there existed on the part of Spain a dis- 

 position to apply her democratic institu- 

 tions (if he would call them so) to other 

 countries by force ? No, it was not on 

 the part of Spain, nor on the side of de- 

 mocracy, that the world was threatened 

 with evils, but from the attempt to set 

 up a military tyranny in tlie heart of 

 Europe, to interfere with the inalienable 

 right of nations to be governed either 

 under a monarchical, or any other form 

 which they might prefer. 



The House proceeded to a division, in 

 which the numbers werr-— 

 Contents — FrescntjQG— Proxies, 4(5— 142. 

 Non-Con.— Present, y9 — Proxies, J 9 — 48. 

 Majority in favour of the Aiuendmenl, 94. 



On tlic same day Lord John Russell, 



