Inglis, Sir R. H. Perceval, Col. Plumptre, J. P. Waddington, II. TELLERS. Dungannon, Lord On the main question being again put, Colonel Sibthorp was determined to oppose it as long as he possibly could, and he therefore moved an adjournment. The House divided on the adjournment; HOUSE OF LORDS, Tuesday, July 10, 1838. MINUTES.] Bill. Read a second time: Dean Forests Petitions presented. By Lord GLENGALL, two, from Westmeath, against the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill.-By the Encroachments; and Dean Forests Mines. Earl of RIPON, from Tamar, to take into consideration the state of the Established Church in Upper Canada. By Lord SEGRAVE, from Medical Practitioners, for a re vision of the laws for regulating the Medical Profession. By the Duke of CLEVELAND, from a Public Meeting in the county of Durham, for Negro Emancipation. way minated his Berlin and Milan decrees, which, however, had led to a confirmation of the general doctrine for their illegality had long since been avowed and stigmatised. He should deplore extremely if this country ever, in the slightest degree, countenanced by her conduct such a system; for nothing could be more disparaging to her fame, nothing could more. tarnish her national character, nothing could be more calculated to compromise her real interests, or what, above all things, he should lament, nothing could be imagined more likely to shake the peace of Europe and of the world. As he was willing to avoid any lengthened statement or argument on the subject, he would state the three points on which he wished to receive information, which might readily be met by three short answers. If those answers were given in the he wished, it would preclude the necessity of his uttering another word on the subject. If his first question were answered in the negative, that question being, "Had any BLOCKADE OF THE SPANISH COAST.] such instructions or orders as he alluded Lord Brougham rose, pursuant to notice, to been issued ?"-if the answer No," to call the attention of their Lordships to was given to that question, then away certain Admiralty instructions or orders went one third of the points on which he which he understood had been issued, if desired information. If, then, his second not authorising the capture of Sardinian question were answered in the affirmative vessels, at all events framed for the pur-(supposing the first to be answered also in pose of preventing the access of such the affirmative, and it being admitted that vessels to the coast of Spain. He had, on such instructions or orders had gone forth), a former occasion, asked whether there that second question being, "Have you would be any objection, on the part of her made the regular and requisite notification Majesty's Government, to produce those of the issuing of these instructions to all instructions, and he was then told, that it neutral states and powers ?"-if that were would be more regular for him to make answered in the affirmative, then much of this motion. He was anxious, in the first what he wished to learn would be obtained. instance, to obtain the papers, if such But if both of these questions were anwere in existence, and to defer any state-swered in what he took to be the wrong ment on the subject until they were pro-way-if the first were answered in the duced. But, that having been refused, affirmative, and the second in the negahe was obliged to take the course which tive, so that it should appear, that although he now adopted. The subject, their such instructions were issued, yet that no Lordships must be aware, was one of ex-warning had been given to neutral powers, treme importance, as it was intimately then came his third question, "Can you connected with the law of nations. In produce the opinion of the adviser of the support of the doctrine, that all fictitious Crown on such matters, her Majesty's ador paper blockades were contrary to the vocate, that this conduct, on the part of law of nations, he had the concurrent the Government, is not a gross outrage authority of all the jurists and all the on, and a monstrous infraction of, the judges who had ever written or delivered law of nations?" If that third quest on an opinion on the subject. That had been were answered in the affirmative, then he held to be the true and sound doctrine by must decidedly say, that he was at issue all governments, with the exception of the with that high law authority. If he were Government of France, under Buonaparte, wrong-if the doctrine were now otherwise when intoxicated with power, he had ful- than he had stated it to be-then had the Viscount Melbourne declined answering the questions of the noble and learned Lord. law of nations undergone a total and | be totally unsafe for any vessel to go in or radical change, a new code had been out of the port so blockaded. That unestablished, and that which was formerly doubtedly was the law. But they would, acknowledged to be the law of nations perhaps, be told, that our orders in counwas no longer so. He was now in the cil proceeded on a different principlehands of the noble Lord at the head of that they constituted merely a paper and the Admiralty, who would answer or not fictitious blockade. The answer to that as seemed fit to him. was, that the necessity of the case called for them, and that their principle was never justified by us. The French Government had placed this country in a state of blockade by their Berlin and Milan decrees, and the orders in council which followed, had always been held by Sir William Scott as purely retaliatory measures. On the subject of blockade he begged to cite the opinion of Sir William Scott, which was to be found in the sixth volume of Sir Christopher Robinson's Admiralty Reports. Sir W. Scott distinctly said, "It is illegal, and no blockade, unless the belligerent has the means of draw Lord Brougham continued. When a noble Lord declined to answer questions of such a nature as he had propounded, it must be clear to the meanest apprehension, it must be evident to any one possessing even the smallest particle of capacity, that the refusal was given because those questions, if answered at all, must be answered in what he called the wrong way, and not in the way in which they ought to be answered. This being perfectly evident to him, he should assume,ing an arch round the mouth of the port, 1st, that some such instructions as he had referred to had been issued; 2nd, that no warning had been given to foreign powers (for if such warning had been given, it was easy to produce it); and last, that no opinion of any law authority was to be cited for this total violation of, or total change and alteration in, the most fundamental principles of the law of nations. Now, in the argument he was about to raise, he would first assume, that we were at war, he would take it for granted that we stood in the posture of belligerent, that we were parties to a conflict, that we took part with one side, and were at war with the other, and, therefore, that we were justified in claiming and exercising all belligerent rights. He would first ask, then, whether the authority which we had exercised was or was not one of those rights? The case was a very short one, it lay within a very narrow compass. If there were one principle of the law of nations better established than another, it was this namely, that no belligerent could blockade the port of another belligerent for the purpose of preventing the access, the free ingress and egress, of all neutral nations to such port, unless that belligerent had a force stationed on the coast amply sufficient to prevent the entrance of those neutral powers-a force not only perfectly efficient, but constantly sustained in point of time, so that, at no part of the circle, there should be any way to escape the blockade, and that it would -- and effectually securing it." Now, why should such a master of the law talk about "drawing an arch," and not a circle, round the port? That was explained afterwards; because, " if one point or iota of that arch failed, if the prevention were not perfect and complete, the whole blockade was useless, and crumbled to nothing." It was also necessary, to perfect a blockade, that there should be, not only an efficient force, but that there must be, in point of time, a stay and continuance of that force in the neighbourhood of the place blockaded. He would ask, had they, in this instance, any such arch marked out? There was nothing of the kind. The blockade extended from the Pyrenees to the gut of Gibraltar. Those instructions directed the stoppage of vessels laden with warlike stores on the coast of Valencia as well as of Catalonia. Had they a force afloat in those seas sufficient to maintain such a blockade? He apprehended not. If, therefore, they even were belligerents, the blockade, according to the doctrine laid down by Sir W. Scott, was illegal. In 1689, after the Revolution, when this country was in alliance with Holland, we entered into a treaty with that power, by which it was directed that vessels carrying stores to any of the ports of France, should be seized by British or Dutch cruisers, and made prize of. This was acted on for some time; but, on the 15th of March, 1693, two northern powers (Denmark and Sweden) entered into a counter treaty, protest case ? were these confidential orders kept back from the neutral powers? Why were not the Sardinians, why were not the Dutch (for it was levelled at them), made acquainted with this order? Why was that ing against the course adopted by Great it became a matter of public notoriety, Britain and Holland, and binding them-the instant an attempt was made to carry selves to take efficient steps for their it into execution. But why, he wished mutual protection. Vattel and other to know, for he must assume the fact, great authorities on the law of nations supported their view of the case, and what was the consequence? Why, the representations of those powers produced the desired effect. Great Britain and Holland yielded at once to the re-knowledge withheld from them? They presentations made to them. They with- were, in consequence of their ignorance, drew their notice, and made reparation induced to freight vessels with stores, for to the injured parties. Now, it was wor- no human imagination could ever suppose thy of remark, that we were then at war that orders and instructions of such a dewith France-Holland was at war with scription could emanate from any mortal France, and, of course, every right apper-being who had ever presided over the Adtaining to a belligerent power then be-miralty or had occupied a seat at the longed to us. But even in that state and board. So it was, however; individuals posture of affairs we admitted, that in rewere induced to freight vessels with stores, sorting to such a measure we had done they fared forth, they crossed the seas, wrong. But how were we situated in this only to reap disappointment when they We were no belligerents, and approached their destination. He must therefore had not a shadow of ground for express his satisfaction that no accident this proceeding. Was it ever before known should have happened in consequence of or heard of, that because a state wished those instructions during the last two well to one of two hostile parties, was in years. But, notwithstanding, these inalliance with one of them, but not at war structions were an aggression upon neuwith the other-was it ever before heard tral rights, which violated the law of naof, that in such a state of things they were tions, and put in jeopardy the peace both authorized to issue an order to prevent a of this country and of Europe. These neutral power from entering the ports of were the reasons, thus shortly stated, the country where the contest was going which would make him deeply lament on? Since the law of nations was first that the question which he had ventured established amongst civilized men- to ask should be unsatisfactorily answered. amongst whom alone it was known-such For these reasons he rejoiced that an opa monstrous, such a preposterous pro-portunity was given them of arresting the ceeding, was never before heard of. The Government in this bad course, when noble Earl (Minto) was not well pleased otherwise it might be too late to interfere, when, on a former occasion, a noble Lord except for the sake of precedent. These introduced this subject. The noble Earl were the reasons which made him apprecould not conceive where the noble Lord hensive that mischief would still happen had procured his information on a matter unless these instructions were revoked. which was of a purely confidential charac- He would suppose a case. He did not He wished the order had been of a know what ramifications of treaties might private and confidential nature, as private exist between the Italian and German and confidential as the Oxford and Cam-states: The parties who had entered into bridge libels which were mentioned last night. It ought to have been so confidential as never to have left the desk; such an abortion ought never to have seen the light. But it was something new to hear of a confidential order, addressed to the captain of a frigate, not to be opened until he arrived at a certain degree of longitude and latitude, but to be acted on immediately. Why, the moment the order was notified to the captain of a frigate, with 500 or 600 men on board, it became a matter of notoriety to every one of them ter. the quadruple alliance, to which he himself had been a party, had never dreamt of any thing in the slightest degree resembling any interference with neutral states; so far from that, one party to the treaty, the King of the French, bound himself to prevent any arms or ammunition being furnished to Don Carlos from the French territory, but not one word was said about stopping any neutral powers from giving their assistance to Don Carlos. He would just put this case; it was a known truth, that certain Powers were not parties to the of nations. A defensive alliance did not lead to the great national felony of war, and no one had a right to complain, because the aggressor only was injured. The fate of this motion rested with their Lordships, but he certainly thought that unless strong reasons were shown against the production of these instructions they ought to be laid before their Lordships. He should therefore move quadripartite alliance. He never yet saw | Austria and Sardinia in viridi observantiâ, the case of a treaty on which other Powers What if that were the case? What, if he looked with a jealous eye in which that knew it to be true that there was a defentreaty did not give rise to other treaties. sive alliance between Austria and Sardinia, Nations, like individuals, acted in the which bound Austria to make common spirit of Mr. Burke's aphorism-"When cause with Sardinia in any case in which bad men combine, good men must asso- Sardinia was involved in war. It was posciate." The Powers who did not unite sible that that treaty had been made since with us in forming the quadripartite alli- those instructions were issued, but their ance naturally looked upon that as a com- production would at once put a stop to bination for bad purposes, and said, "We any surmise about the date. He must must associate for our legitimate pur- say, that according to the law of nations poses;" from which reasons he argued, Austria was perfectly justified in entering that it was eminently probable that some into a defensive alliance with Sardinia. treaties had arisen out of the quadripartite An offensive alliance was another thing. alliance. He would suppose Sardinia to An offensive alliance was an aggression be a weak state; but no-he would not in itself; it led to war, and was therefore suppose Sardinia to be weak, for he re- abhorred by the law of nations. But demembered that when he had urged the fensive alliances were objects of peculiar noble Lord to put a stop to the slave trade, favour with that law; they threw the and had pointed to the manner in which shield of the strong over the weak, and Portugal connived at that iniquitous traf-were therefore highly favoured by the law fic, the noble Lord's answer was, "Oh, we must not interfere with Portugal; we could immediately put a stop to the slave trade if we chose, but Portugal is under our protection, and is a weak power; nothing could be so indelicate as such a proceeding; but if it had been France, or Prussia, or Austria, or Russia, it would have been a different thing." This was a line of policy closely approximating to the conduct of a sovereign of the house of Bourbon, in the southern part of the Peninsula, who was distinguished by all that firmness of character which seemed an hereditary qualification of that illustrious house, and who being one day out hunting was observed to change colour and run away as fast as he could from some small animal, a dog or something of the kind, which happened to come through a gap in the hedge. Some surprise being expressed at this unusual exhibition, his Majesty replied with great energy and emphasis, "Oh, if it had been a lion, you should have seen what a reception I would have given him." Just so, her Majesty's Government could not think of coercing a poor little thing like Portugal; but if it had been Russia, or France, or Austria, or Prussia, then indeed we should have seen what they would have done. Therefore he had no right to assume that Sardinia was a weak power. But he would suppose a case. He would suppose, that Sardinia had put herself under the protection of Austria. He would suppose, that a defensive alliance subsisted between her Majesty, praying that she would be gra"That an humble address be presented to ciously pleased to direct that there be laid before this House copies of any orders issued by the Admiralty touching any warning or prohibition against an entrance into the Spanish ports by Sardinian or other vessels; and of any warning or notification addressed to neutral Powers accordingly." Viscount Melbourne said, that in answer to the question of the noble and learned Lord, on the former occasion, when the noble and learned Lord stated, that he requested him to make this motion, he begged to observe, that what he meant to say was, that he could not produce the papers referring to this matter, unless they were called for by the House, but he denied, that he recommended the noble and learned Lord, to move for these papers, or gave him to understand, that they would be produced on such a motion being made. What he said, was with the view of leading the noble and learned Lord to the conclusion, that the more he considered the subject, that the more calm deliberation he gave to it, the more he would |